Here are the Florida essay subjects:
Trusts with a Professional Responsibility
Constitutional Law and Real Property - Ad Volorem Taxes, Homestead, Creditors, Tenants by the Entirety
Contracts, Conveyance of Real Property, Easement, Warranties and Damages.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Q1 was the FL Con Law question. It also had to do with Real Property Conveyancing; i.e., the life estate and the remainder to the charity. Also, Family Law (post-nuptial agreement and waiver) and Wills issues (equivocation with the name of nephew and charity in the devise). The homestead question dealt with portability, for the most part. Pretty straightforward.
ReplyDeleteQ2 was the Contracts Question. It also had a Torts issue (duty to disclose material defect; the "as is" disclaimer was ineffective). I also discussed Equities, particularly the availability of specific performance, rescission, and punitive damages. Predominantly, it dealt with Conveyancing, Warranty Deeds, and Easements. I thought the question was a little more subtle, but still a fair question.
Q3 was the Trusts Question. I felt it was the hardest, and I spent the most time on it. I had a Family Law/Civ Pro issue (child support judgment being personal or quasi in rem), PR issue with the contingency fee, PR issue with doing a contingency fee for both parties (since the interests of the brother and sister may not be aligned), Tort issue with breach of duty to reasonably diversify, and Wills issue with the resulting trust.
Overall, challenging, but doable.
Thanks for the expanded version of the exam. I hope you did well.
ReplyDeleteQ1 - Mostly homestead issue. John Holmes and Luisa Holmes - JH owned 160 acres outside municipality, 140 on one side of road, 20 on the other - "contiguous" acreage issue. LH had previously signed postnup waiving claims to property - no facts there were any children of the marriage or anything at all about circumstances around the postnup. Then JH made K for sale of 160 acres - wants to buy 1/2 acre inside municipality. JH concerned that State will impose ad valorem taxes. JH wants to devise the new 1/2 acre to Canadian nephew and remainder to charity. Possible PR issue because JH wants attorney's help with the sale??
ReplyDeleteQ2 - Buyer purchased home from seller. Plots: Neighbor's lot, Buyer's lot, sellers lot. Seller previously lived on lot he sold to buyer and then moved to adjoining lot. Easement underground - disclosed in K: sewage line connecting to city line (or something). Seller gives special warranty deed and reserving right to create "a sewage line" for his land. After buyer moves in, "periodical" sewage problems. Apparently, problems have been there since installation - which occurred in Seller's time of ownership. Examiners gave facts about neighbor being a jerk - not letting buyer repair etc., but the call of Q specially said limit answer to rights/claims b/w seller and buyer.
Q3 - straightforward regurgitating trusts - widow Susan has $1 mil life insurance policy she wants her brother Thomas to use after her death to provide income for her son/daughter. No issues in validity - meat of problem was trustee duties and termination of trust. Trust/Will substitute formalities. Spendthrift provision - interesting discretion provision allowing T to add beneficiaries. Also son's ex-wife wants to attach to son's assets to pay for her boyfriends boat. Then T made investment that isn't paying out yet, but is supposed to pay later - so son/daughter can ratify or sue for surcharge. They stuck in assignments in there - via son's ex-wife wanting to assign her rights to son's interest to her creditors. Then finally, contingency fee issue & if Trustee can be personally held liable for attorney fees as well as other costs.
FL MC Q's
At least three specific corporation questions about when/how/if to have special meetings. A few on limited partnerships and duties. Also acts that bind partnerships. Procedure/Evidence were relatively straightforward - some were tricky for no reason - expert testimony was tested frequently.
Thanks - it sound doable, for sure.
ReplyDeletewhat was the easement issue if we were only limited to the cause of actions against the buyer?
ReplyDeleteYes, definitely answer the call of the question. However, if you see an issue in the question, you need to mention it. Why would the bar examiners refer to it if they wanted you to ignore it?
ReplyDeletePerhaps to see if you paid attention to the call of the question and the RELEVANT issues. I think they refer to it as obfuscation.
ReplyDeleteThank you for allowing me to post a comment in your site.
ReplyDeleteMaking your own essays is hard when you don't know what topic you must choose. Yet letting your imagination to pick a topic for your dessertation would be a better choice.
bestessays.com