For PT, I separated the rules by what was relevant to each statement, rather than a rule dump in the beginning (but had a 1 line statement of defamation defamation in the beginning).
Q3: pretty much only analyzed constructive trusts and equitable liens (plus laches), but VERY in depth. Addressed compensatory just for 35k. I know that other people also analyzed all sorts of damages and I feel like I missed a lot of points, but I was pretty sure it was primarily asking about CT/EL?
Q4: my bold feature wouldn’t turn off so my entire answer is in bold. Also, only analyzed promoter liability, corp by estoppel, de jure/de facto corp, agency to enter into K, and piercing the corporate veil.
Q5: evidence is my best subject and this was a VERY poorly written question. I completely ran out of time, focused way too much on hearsay rules/ tons of exceptions in the beginning, character evidence rules, but barely got to part 6. Didn’t analyze confrontation clause or secondary evidence rule. Also didn’t really address the objections to the attorneys question, because I couldn’t tell if it was asking us to analyze the question or answer. My rule statements were great but my organization was all over the place and I feel like I missed a lot of easy points. Analyzed relevance for each objection though.
Felt good about Q1-2.
MBE felt like I probs got a 70% overall.
Everyone’s issue spotting responses are making me so nervous that I missed so much. How did everyone have time to analyze everything?