California Bar exam nostalgia

Write, I tell myself. Write something. Write anything. No one reads this blog anyhow.

     The California Bar ended today. It's been two years since I took the bar, and I'm starting to feel nostalgic? My friend's boyfriend is taking it this year, so it seems more real to me than it did last year. Last year was too soon for me to feel any nostalgia about the bar. It was just this terrible thing that happened to me once. The memories have dulled, and now it doesn't seem that bad? (I am seriously questioning my own memories. Did I imagine how terrible it was?)

      By far the worst part about the bar was the possibility of failing. During bar prep classes, urban legends began to surface. Everyone knows someone who went to Harvard/Yale/Stanford who failed. The word failed is delivered in the most ominous way possible by the storyteller while the rapt listener chugged some more Red Bull, grabbed a highlighter, and furiously attacked the Conviser guide. What about that guy who suffered a minor concussion and still passed? The legends span both sides of the extremes.

     What made studying so difficult was the fact that no one knew how much was enough. You're never done studying. It's impossible to master all 16 or so topics, so you try to learn maybe 70% of each topic, or maybe master 11 and hope that the 5 that you don't know don't come up. I think I tried to master all the topics in three months. That was prob not the best strategy for my health, but it made me feel better going into the exam.

     I miss the comraderie of having a ton of friends going through the same hell. I miss making up stupid acronyms and teaching them to each other. I miss spending way too much time in coffee shops, not really getting much work done, then coming home and actually doing work. That summer just flew by, just like this one. The end of summer always feels a little sad to me, because it seems like we steamroll right into the new year, and all these changes start to unfurl.

    I guess all this nostalgia isn't really for the bar exam itself, but for that part of my life that ended with the bar exam.  

that time plaintiff's counsel walked away with no money

I was scheduled for a trial which was supposed to start today. It was pushed back to next week-ish. Plaintiff's lawyer kept calling with lower demands until finally, today, he was willing to just give up and dismiss the case with prejudice and our client doesn't have to pay a penny! Say what? Not very common, but this is the second time I've seen it at my firm. 

I'm a real person now

I celebrated my work anniversary two weeks ago. I've been a second-year ever since I started getting paid like a second-year, but I never really stopped to think about it until now. There was a barrage of work, which thankfully let up recently, so now that the dust has settled, I can type some words of reflection.

I spent most of my first year prepping for arbitration on a big case. We actually went to arbitration, which was exciting to see. My first year of practice was mainly spent just learning how to do things. It's true that you don't really learn the mechanics of practicing law in law school. We practiced writing memos and briefs, but I never learned all the possible pleadings and how to use them. Legal strategy never came up either. That's the exciting part, picturing the ways a case can go, but I wonder if the novelty will wear off.

The most valuable thing I learned this past year was how to write a clean brief. In law school, all our prompts kind of had a close universe of facts. In practice, the universe of facts ends up being closed after awhile, but at first, there are just so many facts out there for the culling. It's a challenge not to get lost in the thicket, but when you're around experienced, talented attorneys, you get to see how they keep their head straight when so many things are going on.

I've been to court a bunch of times for hearings, getting used to being addressed as "Counselor." I still kind of hate suits, but my most recent purchase actually feels comfortable to me now. I love running into friends in court; it's happened quite a bit. I was really nervous before a hearing, but having my friend around before having to go in front of the judge for oral arguments soothed my nerves. (I won that one btw. Woot.) I'm still trying to figure out where I want my career to go---working on that 5-year plan. So far though, everything seems to be falling into place.

Trial mode

The days past so quickly now. Remember when I described my mental state as one of captivity? I'm doing a mental sprint. My work day starts at 6 PM now. That's when we all reconvene for the day and start prepping for tomorrow's trial. We have to get exhibits ready, witnesses ready to go, make sure witnesses and experts are flown in. There are a ton of moving pieces, all the time, and it's pretty cool to watch everything unfold. I heard I missed some fireworks today with one of our witnesses. I'm still a bit incredulous that I get to experience this pretty early on in my career.

Do I need to take all the bar classes?

If it's not a requirement for your school, bar classes are not necessary in order to pass the CA Bar. Your test prep company will cover all the basics.

I didn't take community property or First Amendment. My friend didn't take crim pro. We both passed on the first try. 

The only bar class we all agree that you should take is evidence. The rules are complicated, and you have to learn the California distinctions on top of the FRE. I saved a lot of time studying, because I knew most of the evidence rules prior to starting test prep.

Ooh, that can't be good

At my interview this morning, behind closed doors, an associate told me, "I've got $50K in the bank and the minute my one year mark hits, I am out of here."

I guess on the bright side, Trojans look out for each other. In analyzing my situation, my co-worker put it best when he said, "It'll be nice to get it, but you won't be that disappointed if you don't."

Bar exam, Day 1

Belongings have been reduced to what can fit inside a see-through plastic bag.

We were told we had to be seated by 8:20. We started our test at 9:45. The proctor misread "pencil" and several other words. She took long pauses. She kept telling us to be quiet.

I took out an earplug at one point and heard a great big clattering of keys, much louder than the tapping during my final exams.

Nothing but the screen for 3 hours.

Brief break of sunlight.

Fingerprinted ourselves. Screen for 3 hours.

Sat through another 30 minutes of instructions from the lady who cannot read. Seriously, the other testing room left 40 minutes before we did. Where are the evals when you need them?

tick tock

What's that bar exam? $500+ and you can't even guarantee a clock in the exam room?

Matching watches of doom---$10 at Target, bar-approved. Analog watches smaller than 4 inch by 4 inch.

It's kind of the equivalent to ending your summer with matching friendship bracelets.

can I put my own spin on this?

I love this story, because according to Newsweek, the scene didn't end there!

"The cameras cut off as she fell to the ground. But the scene didn’t end there. An eyewitness saw Wendi back on her feet, grab the pie plate, and shove it right back into the face of her husband’s attacker, who later described the “rage” in her eyes. As police dragged him away, she pummeled him with punches..."

The various news outlets that ran this story kept referring to her as a "loyal wife" and "fiercely protective" of her husband. Can we just give this woman kudos for being a bad bitch? She is a 6 foot tall lady! She grew up on mainland China where her parents were "devout Communists." She later went to Yale for her MBA. Everything about her so far says, "Fear me." (at least to me anyway)

If I were her, I wouldn't be thinking, "I must perform my marital duties." In my imagination, it went a little something like this: "Oh hell no, this is a parliamentary hearing. Where is security? Look at this joker, a shaving cream pie? Unarmed? I can take you." That's when she smoothed her pink blazer, rose to full height and watched the fear in his eyes as she not only pied him, but pummeled him with punches in a room full of people. You don't mess with someone like that.

So come on news outlets, this is a powerful woman. We can handle this nowadays right? Don't play down her strength by talking about her loyalty as a wife.

***

Oh yeah, let's put this through the cursory bar analysis. There's a possibility for a tort suit.

Pieman's claim against Wendi

Battery. Battery is when there is an offensive contact and the person who made the contact had a specific or general intent to make such contact. Specific intent is when the person's goal was to bring about the eventual consequence and general intent is when a person is substantially certain the consequence will occur.

Here, we have a clear case of battery, because Wendy: grabbed the guy's head, slapped him, threw a pie at him, and "pummeled" him. She had the specific intent, because she seemed pretty mad at him for trying to throw a pie at her husband. Her goal was probably to make contact with the guy's head and body and use the pie to make contact with his head or body.

Damages are presumed when there is an intentional tort. He can try to recover for compensatory damages (personal injury in this case), nominal damages, and punitive damages to punish Wendi for her malicious act.

Assault. Assault usually goes hand in hand with battery. A person is liable for assault when she causes reasonable apprehension of imminent offensive contact in another. She must have had specific or general intent to cause the apprehension.

In this case, Wendi lunged at Pieman more than once. A reasonable person would have perceived these actions and understood them to be attacks or threats of imminent harm. Wendy performed the act and probably knew with substantial certainty that her actions will cause someone to think that he was about to be attacked. Thus, we have general intent which is enough for a prima facie case of assault.

Wendy's defense

Defense of others. A person is privileged to use the same amount of force to defend another as she is allowed to use to defend herself. She must reasonably believe the other person has the right to to defend himself and must use reasonable force.

Reasonable belief that the other person had the privilege of self-defense. Rupert was not the initial attacker. He had the right to use force in self-defense. Wendy had a reasonable belief that Rupert would have been able to use force, because she was present at the meeting. She saw someone run up to Rupert and reasonably believed that the person was about to attack him. She had the right to defend him.

Reasonable force. However, the pummeling was probably not reasonable. The subsequent pie in the face may not be reasonable. Wendi could have used reasonable force necessary to defend Rupert, which means that her initial actions, grabbing Pieman's hand and hitting him, were probably reasonable in this circumstance. They were enough to thwart the pie in the face and the slap would deter him from proceeding further. However, she did not need to throw the pie in his face and pummel him after the attack was over and he was restrained by the police.

Because Wendi went beyond the scope of a reasonable amount of force to defend against an attack, she may be liable to Pieman for damages.

I've hit a wall

4 days left. Pray for mojo.

So you want a pre-nup.

"She was supposed to buy ya shorty Tyco with ya money
She went to the doctor got lipo with ya money
She walkin' around lookin' like Michael with ya money
Shoulda' got that insured, GEICO for ya moneeey(your money)
If you ain't no punk holla' we want pre-nup
WE WANT PRE-NUP!, yeah
It's something that you need to have
'Cause when she leave yo' ass she gon' leave with half
18 years, 18 years
And on her 18th birthday, he found out it wasn't his?"

What up Kanye, I'mma let you finish...as soon I do a quick legal analysis.

Issue

You've got people in the club hollering they want pre-nups. Is it something that you need to have? Is it going to prevent her from "leaving with half?" You seem to have two issues: 1) You don't want to pay child support and 2) You don't want your spouse walking off with your assets.

Rules

California is a community property state. This means that any property acquired during marriage is presumptively property of both spouses. This includes salary and wages earned by either spouse. Is that what you meant when you said she's going to leave with half? You're right, in CA, she gets to leave with her half of what you earned just as you get to leave with half of what she earned. This is the default rule.

You can contract around the default rule with a pre-marital or pre-nuptial agreement. You can agree to just about anything in a pre-nuptial agreement. For example, you can agree that each party's salary and wages will remain separate property. You can also limit spousal support or have your spouse waive it entirely. The sky's limit! Or is it??

You cannot limit either party's contribution to furnish child support, which leads us to our first issue.

Child support obligations

Sorry Kanye, she is going to walk around looking like Michael with your money whether or not you have a pre-nup. You can't contract around child support.

But what if it wasn't yours? Well, any child born to a married couple is presumed to be the biological child of that couple. A married man may bring a suit to establish paternity, but the window on this is narrow. After two years, you can no longer initiate a paternity suit. I guess it doesn't matter in this scenario anyway, because your spouse isn't going to tell you until he turns 18.

Right to half the assets

This is a right that you can contract around. You can both agree that your respective salaries will remain separate property. You can both waive the right to spousal support.

However, you still have to be careful! You can't foist a piece of paper and expect your lady friend to sign on the dotted line. The agreement will be invalid if she was not represented by independent counsel and given at least 7 days to sign OR she was not fully informed of all the terms in the writing (she'll have to sign a separate document acknowledging this) and given at least 7 days to sign.

Additionally, the court can later decide that the waiver of spousal support is unenforceable. If the agreement, at the time of enforcement (not the time that it was made), was so unfair that to enforce it would be unconscionable, the court will not give it any effect. You may still have to pay child support after paying fancy lawyers for drawing up a pre-nup due to changed circumstances.

Conclusion

Pre-nup, is it a good thing to have? Sure.

Is it going to solve that mess you've described? Only half. ;)

putting on makeup to study makes me feel human

Picture courtesy of the phone Kevin gave me that I don't know how to use yet.

you've got 99 problems and misunderstanding the law is one

Most of my friends who've been to karaoke with me know: 1) I only rap and 2) 99 problems is one of my go-to songs, because of the legal references in the 2nd verse.

Hov, I know that you haven't passed the bar (and neither have I), but you know a little bit. Are the cops really illegally searching your shit?

Let's put this through a cursory crim pro analysis.

"My glove compartment is locked."

Excellent. Locking something shows that you have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the area to be searched. Generally, the police cannot search without probable cause and the lack of a search warrant is presumptively lack of probable cause. Also, telling him this impliedly negates consent.

However, you are in an automobile and the police had reasonable suspicion to pull you over. (You were doing 55 in a 54.) They have a right to ask you to step out of the car and according to the Terry stop-and-frisk doctrine, if you are unsecured (this means they haven't put you in handcuffs or placed you in the squad car), they CAN look in your passenger side to prevent destruction of evidence or if they think you are dangerous. (which the officer probably does b/c he thinks you are carrying a weapon)

Your trunk

The police can also search your trunk (and any containers within it) whether or not it's locked if they have probable cause to believe that there may be evidence of a crime or contraband in the car. Remember what we said before about the presumption of lack of probable cause if no search warrant? This doesn't apply to automobiles due to the "lower expectation of privacy" in a vehicle and the fact that the car is readily mobile ( you can take off with the contraband and evidence at any time--thus it's more of emergency enabling them to search right away).

So, through a very cursory bar level analysis, they probably had the right to search both.

Annnnd this is what I do all day.

you know you've been studying too long

when legalese seeps into everyday conversation.

Kevin: You're not talking very much.

me: You talk. I'm not responsible for propounding a series of interrogatories designed to make you talk.

catching up with pictures

The downside to studying for the bar is that I get extra cautious. More than once, I thought to myself, dang, better not defame anyone on the blog. I am going to regret staying up to make this post tomorrow. Oh well, on with it.

What have I been up to?

Graduation!

I don't have very many pictures from graduation, since I forgot my camera in my car. I've been getting bits and pieces from friends and my parents. Here are two of my faves:

We're missing one.

Waiting for our names to be called. Nghiem, Nguyen, Nguyen, Nguyen. Overrepresented this year.

Engagements!

This is my lovely cousin who has been in a relationship with the same guy since high school. Two degrees later (for her anyway), they finally had the big traditional Vietnamese engagement party. Here she is in an ao dai. Perfection.

First one out of my group of college friends to get engaged. The cup says Bride, in case you couldn't tell. I know, with that little tidbit, it's like you're right there witnessing the joy.

She's amazing as well. Law review, teaching fellow, heading off to a big white shoe firm for the summer. The good ones do get taken first.

In unrelated news, I finally redeemed some rewards points from the school's research system to get a tripod. Hopefully this will spare you from any more of my self-taken shots, but then that just means you'll be subjected to awkward posing.

Until next time!

I have no life

me (to Kevin, via webcam): You can't leave to watch Hulu!

Kevin: Okay, you entertain me then. Tell me a story.

me: Hrmm. (pulls out Barbri practice exam) Art and Bill agree to kidnap Vickie. . . .

Kevin: Thumbs down. Change channel.

Blame it on the Economy

The meeting with my Career Counselor was downright depressing. She asked me what I was doing in terms of networking. Umm, nothing? Collecting business cards? Making small talk with people that I probably won't see again? She told me that networking sucks, but I just have to suck it up and do it. Two hours later, wandering through Century City mall, I thought, alright, fine. I'll make an Excel sheet with every person I've ever met. FINE. Is that what it takes to be a winner? Do I even want to be a winner??

You know I never thought I'd be in this position. Everything in my life has been pretty linear. Now graduation is around the corner. Everyone is so excited for me and I am just like: 0_0 As much as I would like to blame it on the tough economy, I have to something instead of assuming that a job will turn up. It was good that I had that terrible meeting.

Although, I won't forget that she suggested I join South Asian Bar Association and then I pointed out that South Asia = Iran, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, etc. She's Vietnamese too. I hate it when my own people make that mistake (which thankfully is not very often). Until my next emo post friends.