Thursday, June 02, 2005

right will take you places yeah maybe to the beach

Today I calculated that my percentage on the practice MBE tests has gone up to a whopping 73%. That's not earth-shattering by any means, but it's enough to make me a lawyer. Provided of course that the MBE consists entirely of torts quetions and they are all like, really easy.

Because so far I'm still working in the "introductory" level problems. Now I realize that there are more advanced problems available to work with in these 11 Bar review tomes that would probably better prepare me to take the actual MBE, but the BarBri paced program sheet says to be doing introductory problems. And among Bar review students, the paced program is afforded a quasi-scriptural level of preeminence. You do what it says and you shut up about it.

Some of the intro level problems are humorous because they are so absurdly easy. Let's have a look.

Problem 51 involves Scott chasing after a kid named Roman, who was throwing snowballs at his bay windows. When Scott goes outside, Roman runs off and jumps over the fence into the yard of Tim. Roman hurts himself when he falls into Tim's yard because he falls on a birdbath and then gets eaten by a Rottweiler. So the question reads:

Tim brings an action against Scott for trespass. If Scott prevails, it will most likely be because:

(b) Scott did not enter Tim's land.

Uhhh.... duh.

Let's look at question 53. This question has some children playing on some dirt mounds next to an airfield that has been closed down for construction. A plane flying nearby has electronic failure and makes an emergency landing on the airstrip. The question reads;

The electrical system defect rendered the aircraft very difficult to control, and as Luke made his landing he was unable to avoid striking Sally, who had been pushed onto the land field while playing on the mounds..."

If Sally brings an action for personal injuries against Luke, what is Luke's best defense?

Ok, what? Sally got hit by an airplane. How exactly does one survive getting run over by an airplane? I refuse to answer this question on the grounds that it is patently ridiculous. Also, consider the timing of this incident: If Sally were pushed into the path of the plane at just the right time for it to run over her and her adamantium-coated skeleton, this presumes that these children continued to play king-of-the-mountain and decided to completely ignore the spectacle of an airplane careening down for a crash landing 4 feet away from them. Again - patently ridiculous.

There was also a question about a guy who was riding a motorcycle getting shot with a stray arrow. If you survive something like that, don't even bother with a lawsuit. Your luck reserves have been tapped dry.

And of course, my favorite: Two guys are out hunting. One guy shoots at an endangered condor with his hunting rifle, misses, and the stray bullet hits a game warden IN THE HEAD. So this guy, who got shot IN THE HEAD is suing for damage to his eye. Double-u tee eff? Was the guy hunting condor with a Nerf rifle? Again - patently ridiculous.

Well, I must return to my studies. Apparently, the Bar exam covers more than just Torts. Which is lame. Because Community Property questions are so boring.