Anyone know where I can get a good CIV PRO MBE outline? I am about to destroy the monitor. I keep getting Civ Pro MBEs wrong. Other than SMJ, PJ, improper venue, summary judgement, I basically got all other civ pro mbes wrong, especially Erie, appeal and jury. Apparently, my outline got problem.

So, I have done questions for every subject (40 ish). But civil procedure is really low. Whereas every other subject is like 55 to 65. Like so far (first 10), like 15%. Can anyone recommend anything? I did really bad on the last exam (only beating 10%).... so with me only failing by 1 point...if I can get this to 50%... I sound in a great position to pass. Right?!

I love some advice on how to improve

Using adapti bar now.

I’ve heard 60% on every subject can lead sons to pass. So I’d be so close if it wasn’t this one subject...

Themis practice sessions seem impossibly difficult. Even after drilling difficult areas I can't seem to crack the 60% mark.

Any recommendations for resources to help/quiz with issue spotting?

I have access to Quimbee, Glannon/Emmanuel/etc. through school, and CALI. Any free resources would be helpful, too.

hey guys, just looking for clarification on this rule. Rule 15.02 of the rules of civil procedure in Ontario.

my questions are;

a) is this just a normal request that can be done via e-mail? Or should I make a more formal request?

b) what would the title of this letter be? a request for notice of lawyer?

Thank you for your time and help.

The rule is copy pasted below;

Notice of Authority to Commence Proceeding

Request for Notice by Lawyer

15.02 (1) A person who is served with an originating process may deliver a request that the lawyer who is named in the originating process as the lawyer for the plaintiff or applicant deliver a notice declaring whether he or she commenced or authorized the commencement of the proceeding or whether his or her client authorized the commencement of the proceeding. O. Reg. 427/01, s. 9; O. Reg. 575/07, s. 1.

9,000 US Marines Defy Pentagon's Mandate; Federal Judge Blocks Mandate in 10 States | Facts Matter - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljuDG0YeTMs

I have a civ pro I midterm coming up and as I sat down to outline for it I realized I have no idea where to begin. I feel like this one is different in that for my contracts outline I simply listed cases and the holding from them. This feels different because from my understanding its just a jumble of rules. Maybe it's just my professor but we have gone over little to no cases to actually demonstrate these rules outside of a few landmark cases like Iqbal and Walmart v. Dukes. Any advice for an overwhelmed 1L?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSZtCgCHktE

Texas’s new abortion law gives standing to anyone to ANYONE who want’s to sue someone getting an abortion or assisting someone getting an abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected. Giving anyone standing, whether they have been personally affected or not, is a huge departure from existing civil standing precedent. Here’s exactly what’s happening!

But later I came across sections related to plaints (which I came to know as being the "bedrock of the suit"). To me, both plaint and pleading seem indistinguishable. Can someone please explain to me how the one is different from the other?

Wtf was that. The most ridiculously specific civil procedure questions ive seen.

Also that 100 question test as a whole felt ridiculous. There was so many vague questions and assumptions you had to take to reach some of the answers like did Barbri specifically pick the BS questions?

I’m a 1L and I’m really having a hard time with the subject and I heard that it’s originally being taught for 2-3L students

Any reviews on the book will be highly appreciated, thanks!

The Concept

This is basically a formalized version of Am I the Asshole. The purpose is to resolve conflicts by allowing people to say how they were wronged, present their case, and receive an apology. If the parties are unable to come to an understanding. Then the court rules who is at fault. The goal here is to give wronged parties an acknowledgment that they were wronged and to do some slight public shaming to those who commit wrongs if they can't admit it and apologize. People are not labeled douchebags unless they are repeat offenders. Instead they are found guilty of an act of douchebaggery on a given occasion. We all do things wrong occasionally, and the goal is not to label people as being bad for one mistake.

The Court of General Douchbaggery Structure and Procedure

The court sits at regular intervals such as once every three months or once a month depending on demand in a public meeting space such as a town hall or park. Matters for the court to consider are presented to town officials on a form in the time leading up to the next court sitting. The person filing the form is the accuser.

The Parties: The accuser and the accused are their own advocates. There are no lawyers involved.

• The accuser must be present at the time the court convenes for the case to go forward.
• The accused must be notified and given the chance to appear. If unable to appear, they may ask for a delay until the next sitting. If they do not request extension or if the adjudicators find that they have requested too many (if more than 1), the accused may be tried in absentia.

The Adjudicators: these act as both the judge and jury.

• When the court meets, a town official chooses, at random, an odd number of people in attendance to act as adjudicators.
• A party may request the replacement of an adjudicator if there is a conflict.

The Procedure:

• Before the proceedings can start, the parties must be given the option to work out their differences in private with a volunteer mediator for a few minutes. If the parties cannot resolve their issues, the proceedings begin in public.
• First the accuser is given a short time to present their allegations uninterrupted (3-5 minutes).
• Next the the accused is given equal time to apologize or respond.
• The adjudicators can then decide whether to give the accuser more time if the accused made any allegations of their own during their time.
• The adjudicators can ask questions of the parties, hear further witness

There is literally zero material on the Internet or I am not looking hard enough. There's only this one paragraph on it and that's it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merger_doctrine_(civil_procedure). Can someone please help me, I badly need help.

Request

Hi all - does anyone have any helpful materials/suggestions to learn Virginia Civil Procedure? I am enrolled in Barbri but I found the videos and associated lecture notes/CMR to be way too much to digest for a first review of the topic (I know I should learn as much of it as possible prior to the exam, but I am looking to get the basics before diving more into the weeds). For example, an overview of Virginia Civl Procedure would be helpful. I have looked at the Barbri overview, but it is entirely lacking in any detail whatsoever and is completely unhelpful. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSZtCgCHktE

Texas’s new abortion law gives standing to anyone to ANYONE who want’s to sue someone getting an abortion or assisting someone getting an abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected. Giving anyone standing, whether they have been personally affected or not, is a huge departure from existing civil standing precedent. Here’s exactly what’s happening!