From what I understand, original jurisdiction is that these cases need to be heard for the first time in the SC. But the answer explanation said that district courts can hear actions falling under the SC's original jurisdiction?
I'm having trouble understanding how the future interest can be an executory interest, I though it was the possibility of reverter. The conveyance also doesn't have the language for a fee simple subject to executory interest (i think), and even then, the answer says it's a FSD.
Also, how would this not violate RAP? I thought if the niece dies, there's still a possibility of the daughter not having heirs. I may also really be misunderstanding RAP.
I haven't gotten a single BER question correct. I don't understand when it applies and when it doesn't, it feels like the rule changes with every question (i know that's not the case, it just feels that way). Thank you!
I have no idea how the call of subquestion 3 relates to impeachment (as described in the model answer). Like I didn't understand what was even being asked or what rule is being tested.
Would this not be assessed in a Rule 104 preliminary hearing under a preponderance of the evidence standard?
So as the title says, I've been slacking on the MPT. With three and a half weeks to go, what should I prioritize to get a 4 on the MPT?
I need help understanding the elements for issue preclusion. The Barbri guide gives me five elements, but one of the essays in the Barbri essay book only discusses four.
From what I understand, the elements are:
Same issue from Case 1
Actually litigated the issue in Case 1
Final, valid judgment on the merits in Case 1, and
Essential to the judgment in Case 1
Did the rules change or am I missing something? Thank you!