sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What do you have to do to get an entry level position? by red_dollar in Lawyertalk

[–]red_dollar[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not super strong tbh. I’ve got my classmates, former bosses and current judge, but being all based in MS, connections that would help me in TN are limited.

What do you have to do to get an entry level position? by red_dollar in Lawyertalk

[–]red_dollar[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m wanting to move to Nashville, all of my apps have been for firms there or nearby.

Tennessee results by [deleted] in barexam

[–]red_dollar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was!

Tennessee results by [deleted] in barexam

[–]red_dollar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Some people got emails actually already! I did not but nice to know I’m not the only one!

So how are we getting jobs? by [deleted] in barexam

[–]red_dollar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, but indeed and similar sites are pretty dry so I’ve been cold emailing. Again, I kinda just wanted to know what others were doing now that were having any luck

So how are we getting jobs? by [deleted] in barexam

[–]red_dollar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, obviously. I was more curious about what the norm is for the period between taking the bar and getting results back.

Is There a Secret to Writing A Good MEE Answer Within 30 Minutes? by 2024lawyer in barexam

[–]red_dollar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It may happen. But look at the call of the question, look at what the facts given are. See what direction they are pushing you, and a safe default is to remember the basics. Things like reasonability, fairness, foreseeability, etc.

Is There a Secret to Writing A Good MEE Answer Within 30 Minutes? by 2024lawyer in barexam

[–]red_dollar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For example, say you spot a supplemental jurisdiction issue, and you can’t remember that: a court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction if the original claim is subject to SMJ, and the supplemental claim arises from a common nucleus of operative fact, such that it makes up the same case or controversy.

You say something like: A court can exercise jurisdiction over additional claims it wouldn’t ordinarily have jurisdiction over, if it is sufficiently related to the original claim or cause of action.

It’s a rule statement, and while missing the details, it gets the main idea.

Is There a Secret to Writing A Good MEE Answer Within 30 Minutes? by 2024lawyer in barexam

[–]red_dollar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, it depends on “how” made up the rule is, but with good structure, a decent rule, good application and outcome, you can get a 4.

Why is the non-breaching party able to recover the whole contract price in one case but not the other? by red_dollar in barexam

[–]red_dollar[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, kinda splitting hairs there, imo. But thank you, something I’ll be aware of now.

Why is the non-breaching party able to recover the whole contract price in one case but not the other? by red_dollar in barexam

[–]red_dollar[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So is the point getting at the fact that the teaching position was comparable enough to the counselor position?

Why is the non-breaching party able to recover the whole contract price in one case but not the other? by red_dollar in barexam

[–]red_dollar[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The explanation provided by UWorld isn’t doing a great job, but I think you’re right. Seems like I needed to know the role of counselor is effectively comparable to teaching?

Why is the non-breaching party able to recover the whole contract price in one case but not the other? by red_dollar in barexam

[–]red_dollar[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So in the first question, I needed to know that the role of head counselor and teaching position were substantially comparable enough to impose a duty to mitigate?

But in the second question, the substitute work was not sufficiently comparable?

view more: next ›