Friday, July 27, 2012

A Post Mortem ...

... will be forthcoming. 

I've not done a proper post mortem in a while, but I've had a few requests so I'll resurrect that practice.

Give me a day or two.  

36 comments:

Jonathan L. Kramer, Esq. said...

Looking forward to it.

Anonymous said...

that would be so helpful.

thanks!

Anonymous said...

wise pooBah post-mortems are the best. poobah Is the best blogGer around and i Candidly wait with bAited breath for bff grand "super blogman" poobah's paTented candid gppm.

Anonymous said...

Is it larceny or embezzlement? What about the rule that one must move the thing with the contemporaneous intent to deprive? Is the larceny requiring knowing the ownership? Who is the owner by the way? Is ownership determined when the chattel is actually delivered to the beneficiary? Are both larceny and embezzlement requiring only the knowledge that the possession belongs to another? Because modern statute includes these two and false pretenses, do we have to discuss all? Based on common sense, this is a larceny as if I asks somebody to deliver something and he did not do it is a larceny rather than embezzlement unless the person and I have very close relationship like business purpose with trust. But the fact that he changed his mind and he got two, the book and gun, and he only delivered the book may be construed as fraudulent conversion. Does the fact that we do not know the true owner, except the possessor, affect the outcome?

Anonymous said...

The call said THEFT. All of those crimes merged into THEFT. They wanted actus reus/mens reus/causation/damages. That's why his intent was such a huge deal. It wouldn't matter if it were embezzlement or larceny, or even false pretenses- it's all still THEFT.

Anonymous said...

i think all bar talk is Funny. post-bar, why do yoU do this to yourself. Coronas w/ gp would be a better use of your time. acKnowledge that.

torturinG yourself before you find out whether you Pass is not cool.

Can we all agree to give it A resT until november?

Anonymous said...

Big CAT miss GP Cat. Bar is over and GP pass without Big Cat Outlines although Big Cat graciously offered to provide such. Once GP Cat passes furry socialist adventure begins!!

Anonymous said...

Someone please shut that idiot up. I wasn't given outlines because the jerk was "resting". WTF?

Please GP. Make the idiot go away.

Anonymous said...

ugh, I looked it up and it looks like it's embezzlement. The guy was an employee of the church, I just wrote on larceny and said it wasn't embezzlement hope that wasn's a killer. I also concluded the gun and his statement came in.

K said...

Hey. Hope this bar works out for you. I have a question re the MBE. I'm planning to take a second bar exam in a new state and its been 5yrs since I've studied for one. The MBE study books I have are tests from 2007. I will probably get some other ones but I was wondering if you've noticed any changes in the MBE questions since you first took the exam. Just wondering if there's any new techniques/tricks I should be on the look out for. Thanks for any help :)

K said...

Also, have you ever used baroutlines.com? I need to learn the law for a new state and I don't know where to get reliable outlines/material. I'm totally unwilling to pay for Barbri and craigslist has ONE posting for the books. Any advice on which online service to go with? thanks.

Scalia Fan said...

GP:

As it concerns the coming post-mortem...Let us all just hope that it will be the last one you ever feel compelled to prepare..

Tim

Anonymous said...

Big Cat no like Scalia Fan. Bad politics. Scalia Cat not have furry socialist karma. Think Scalia Cat is mean doggie of court.

Ginsberg Cat is furry momma cat that brings big cat warm milk.

Read Big Cat outlines! Learn more.

Anonymous said...

For the Crim Law essay regarding the church employee:

I analyzed both embezzlement and larceny and said he might could be found guilty of either or both, but I leaned toward a definite of larceny, possibly of embezzlement because embezzlement is tricky for me. I always associate it with money. Not sure if that's right, but it's my final answer.

Anonymous said...

4:21

Big Cat says you nailed it!

Anonymous said...

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1391

Not sure if the post was received...

On Civ Pro ques, since that was a foreign Canadian Corp and I believe the facts stated the company was not incorp in the US nor was its Principal place of business in the US, can it be sued in any federal district court, meaning State A? - Or does the minimum contacts and long arm argument rule this line of thinking out? If this... then that.... or was there a definite answer?

Anonymous said...

It is an embezzlement. I wrote it is a larceny as at first glance it seems to be a mere custody. But PMBR outline says normally if the employee has the property it is a custody except when the third party gives it to the employee. Also, the contmeporaneousness requirement says the asportation must occur when the intent to deprive exists.

Anonymous said...

First time bar taker just trying to see others thoughts on the exam (thanks for the posts!). One question: Who is Big Cat? I don't get it.

Anonymous said...

I think they were trying to get at the common law difference between larceny and embezzlement whereby a lower echelon employee cannot be convicted of embezzlement because they are not seen as having the right to possess the item. Also in the larceny analysis I believe it was an issue of intent to deprive at the time of dispossession. So I raised both embezzlement and larceny.

Anonymous said...

Ugh, so it was embezzlement they wanted after I looked it up. I also left out cy pres doctrine on the wills one, I just said it lapsed??

Anonymous said...

Disagree. They said he was charged with Theft. They didn't ask you what he could be guilty of. You needed actus reus/mens reus/causation/damages. If you raised embezzlement and larceny along with that, you're fine. Same outcome. But if you didn't mention those exact words, you weren't wrong. Modernly (including California), "Theft" encompasses all of those crimes. Intent was the big issue here....

Anonymous said...

Cy Pres does not apply to wills, unless there is a pour over will creating a charitable trust, which there was not.

karla said...

This is going to be such a loooooooong wait. I hope when we pass we can network to each other and get business that way we recuperate all the money invested in this thing. just saying.
Karla Legg

Karla said...

but who is thinking about money now?! can't help to make all kinds of plans, sorry

Anonymous said...

Ah good no cy pres thanks, someone wrote that in the all4jds he did a list of all the issues
bardude yes agree karla!

Anonymous said...

I would appreciate your responces on the following question?



I passed the February CBX. I filed my Moral character application in June.So far I haven't heard anything from the Bar. I was planning to wait to get my license and start looking for job but now I'm thinking is that a waste of time? Should I start applying for jobs and explain I'm waiting for my license?



I would appreciate your input or experiense.



Currently I work as an Assistant controller for a company the last 4 years and my salary is 60 K. Spoke with the owner and he wants to open a legal department but I dislike some of his ways of doing business so I don't know if I want to stay with him.



Regards

Anonymous said...

where is the post-mortem?

don't make me sic the big cat on you!

Anonymous said...

Big Cat has a post mortem on his blog.

Anonymous said...

I think Jonathon L. Kramer Esq. is big cat. He kind of looks like a large feline.

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:31:

Moral character review takes about six months so if you've passed the MPRE and everything's in order you should be eligible for swearing in around Xmas. If I were you, I would hold off on craigslist until then.

Do you have anything in your background to worry about? If you do, did you disclose it?

It's all about disclosure. I personally know a felon who disclosed, passed moral character and is now an attorney.

Anonymous said...

We want post-mortem!! I hereby declare that i will follow either Big Cat's blog or GP's blog based solely on who posts first.

Anonymous said...

Big cat can have as many as nine post-mortems to match with sheer number of lives.....

Anonymous said...

Jonathan Kramer, Esq., is not the big cat, he is more affectionately known as the Big Puma. Presumptively a cousin of Big Cat!

Anonymous said...

Kitties -

This is the real big cat. Per the earlier instructions from my chief of staff, please stop posting on Poobah Cat's blogosphere. One day when Poobah Cat passes the bar Big Cat and Poobah Cat will start blogosphere of furry bar exam awesomeness and socialism on the interweb and then you can post, but until then please review my outlines and instructions and only post on my blog.

Thank you for your time and attention. Please treat Poobah Cat with the same level of respect as you treat Big Cat's Chief of Staff, which means you can talk to him but no high fives or posting on his blog. Only exception is if Poobah Cat allows Big Cat to make a furry guest post.

Love and socialism to all - meow meow rarrw!

-Big Cat

Anonymous said...

This is crazy. How long does it take to get a post-mortem? This blog sucks. I hope your time management on the essays and pt's is better than your time management on this blog.

Anonymous said...

www.barexam101.com has it. But it only wrote about larceny and said that it is not larceny. No embezzlement discussion. The website has a disclaimer. Anybody feel unsecured and started study like Sean recommended?