bridging the writing gap between law school & the bar exam ...
BAR/BRI of minnesota students :: winter 2006
simulated exam :: mpt
Copyright (c) 2005-2006 Write2Pass. All Rights Reserved.
mpt :: score distribution
mpt :: top 5 common mistakes
1. cite: While citations are not
necessary, they are encouraged when there are several different rules,
statutes and cases given to you in the library. (Remember that the
MPT can include authorities that are not relevant, so applicants simply
do not want to include every legal authority contained in the library.)
2. quote: Applicants are encouraged to incorporate specific language
from the pertinent legal authority. Doing so serves two major purposes.
First, it shows the examiners that applicants have determined the
important language in the law, rule or case. Second, incorporating
specific language bolsters the arguments and conclusions reached by
applicants.
3. heading format: The examiners provided applicants with
an instruction sheet that sets out the format to be used for the heading
for each arguments. Applicants must strictly adhere to these instructions.
4. follow instructions: The examiners also provided applicants with
instructions regarding the format of the brief, including express
directions not to include a summary of facts. Many applicants started
their brief with a lengthy introduction. While the instructions did
not explicitly prohibit an introduction, it is likely that examiners
would categorize the introduction as a summary of facts. Applicants
should be aware of other expressed instructions given by the examiners.
5. organization: If the task memo does not provide applicants with
an organizational approach, applicants should organize their legal
analysis document issue by issue if it is objective, or argument by
argument if it is persuasive. Here, applicants should have examined
the issues surrounding Ripka and Fusco separately. Applicants who
examined these two individuals together typically had incomplete discussions
as they tried to discuss issues that were common to both of them.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
mpt :: average scores
evidence :: 3.2 (out of 7)
This page has been created by Tommy Sangchompuphen for the benefit of students enrolled in the Winter 2006 administration of the BAR/BRI of Minnesota review course. Please direct all comments and questions regarding this site to Tommy Sangchompuphen at tommys@write2pass.com.
score
percentage