Final Examination

The final exam will consist of two parts.  First will be a one-hour essay exam.  It will be followed by an two-hour multiple choice part.

The exam is closed book. 

For the essay part, those who hand-write exams will be limited to FOUR page sides.  You will not use blue books, but will use special lined pages handed out by the proctors.  You may place only one line of text on each printed line and should only write on the lines.  Do NOT write on the back.  This is enough space to fully answer the question in complete and grammatical sentences, especially if you plan your answer before you begin to write.  Remember, your focus should be on quality, not quantity.
 
Laptop users are limited to 1200 words.  In Word, go to “tools”, then select “word count”—it will tell you how many words you have used.
 
The essay part is usually a single fact pattern.  I then will ask one or more questions about the fact pattern.  For example:
    1.  Was the will properly executed?
    2.  Is there a basis for contesting it?
    3.  Did the gift to Bob lapse?
See some of the sample essay questions and model answers on this website.  I wrote the model answer, incidentally.  You should look carefully at how it is constructed, because it will help you structure your own essay answer.

The key to a good essay is to always use IRAC.  Be sure to identify the issue clearly.  Then state the rule.  Be sure to state the rule clearly:
1.    The first issue is whether Jane's will is valid.  A will can be either holographic or attested.  A holographic will must be signed by the testator and the material provisions must be in the testator's handwriting.  In this case... [analysis here, followed by conclusion]

What you do not want to do is incorporate the rule into the analysis
 2.   The first issue is whether Jane's will is valid.  A will can be either holographic or attested.  This is not a valid holographic will because the material provisions are not in the testator's handwriting...

The problem with the above is that I cannot tell if you know the rule.  I give separate points for stating the issue, the rule, doing the analysis, and sometimes for the conclusion.  The answer in (2)  would get some points, but not as much as (1), which clearly states the rule.

The other problem with the answer in (2) is that it "short-circuits" the analysis.  Judges do this all the time in judicial opinions ("We need not discuss the first and second elements of the cause of action because the plaintiff clearly loses on the third").  Don't do this on an exam.  State the rule and then go through the analysis for each part of it, even if it is brief:
3.  [after stating issue and rule]  Here, the will was signed by the testator as "Jane E. Smith," so the first element is clearly met.  The problem is the second element: whether the material provisions are in her handwriting...

When you do the analysis, be sure to analyze and do not just give me the arguments of the parties.  In other words, do not do this:
4.  Bob will argue that appointing an executor is not material.  Betty will argue that it is material because it has an effect on how her estate is probated.

Much better is something like the following:

5.  A provision is "material" if  it has an effect on the how the estate is probated.   Although appointing an executor usually does not have much of an effect on how the assets are distributed, the executor guides the estate through probate, so this provision is probably material.  As a result, Jane had a valid holographic will.

Notice that the example in (5) also has a nice conclusion.

As to the multiple choice, you should obviously read the question carefully.   Try not to "overread" it, however, by imagining scenarios that are possible but are not in the question.  So, to provide a simple example, if the question states that John died leaving behind a daughter, stepson, and sister, you can assume that a spouse, if any, is dead or irrelevant.  The failure to mention a spouse means one does not exist, or should be treated as nonexisting; it does not make the question ambiguous as to whether there is a surviving spouse.

The best multiple-choice strategy, in my opinion, is to first eliminate any wrong answers.  That will usually leave you with one choice, if you're lucky, or maybe two.  If two, choose the best answer.

You will be given a chance to point out ambiguities on a separate piece of paper. Sometimes there are ambiguities, but usually what seems to be an ambiguity actually results from not reading the question carefully, or from making assumptions that are not justified by the question.