Studicata 2.0 Product Review & Discount Code

For those who are unfamiliar with Studicata or Studicata as a supplement, click here to learn more about Studicata and its various supplemental uses and features. The attack outlines and essay templates are still available for purchase, but this particular post is dedicated to Studicata’s new 6-week self-study program.
What is included? A copy of Emmanuel’s MBE strategies & tactics, the Studicata Battle Plan, which familiarizes examinees with the UBE, Studicata itself, and introduces a flexible prospective study schedule as well as a look at some of their test frequency data. Students also receive the Studicata Attack outlines, organized by area and accompanied by a frequency meter based on their research; condensed “Quicksheets” for last-minute review or to expedite review; access to Studicata’s quickly expanding video library and the ability to add to this library through weekly “Q&A” videos; access to a private facebook group with other examinees and law students through attorney’s; access to printable and Quizlet-App flashcards; finally, examinees receive 4 full MBE practice exams with detailed explanatory answers as to why an answer choice is correct as well as why the other 3 choices are incorrect. Finally, Studicata provides access to SEVERAL practice MEE essays and links to where an examinee can procure more, as well as various links to the NCBE study aid store or website and even to other bar exam supplement programs. This last component is what makes Studicata stand out – it truly is a product that is aimed at seeing examinees succeed.

Note that I call the schedule in the battle plan a “flexible, prospective” study schedule. The reason for this is that Studicata has a hierarchy of “Rules of Engagement” for their program, and the first and paramount among these is to do what is best for YOU, the examinee.
This may simply be my opinion or preference, but I happen to like that this program is built on and their “rules of engagement” premised on doing – first and foremost – what is good for the examinee using their product. I have found some traditional and some supplemental programs to be far too rigid in structure, almost assuming that their method of studying is THE method one should use for preparation or learning. I have also seen and heard of programs becoming overwhelming to the point that people are often seeking alternatives that conform more to their study style or simply do not make them feel overwhelmed.
Ok, but what is the cost? The Studicata self-study program is designed for 6 weeks and costs a mere $497.00. I say “mere,” because that is not only a fraction of a traditional bar prep company, or a fraction of some competitor programs, but – for perspective – it is also a fraction of whatever the cost of the device you are reading this review on, whether it be your phone, a tablet, or a laptop.
But I already bought an Emmanuel/Studicata! Have an Emmanuel that you do not want to purchase a second time? Studicata thought of that. Simply enter the coupon code “REMOVE” at checkout to deduct the price of the Emmanuel from your overall purchase.

IF YOU HAVE ALREADY PURCHASED STUDICATA AND WANT TO UPGRADE TO THE NEW PROGRAM: send an email to info@studicata.com and you may upgrade to their new system, less the cost of your original purchase.
What do I like about it? Many, many things. I have found their videos, which are really bonus content (after a fashion) to be clear and concise. I am a sucker for color-coding and find frequency analysis to be helpful and – in my experience – on point with those areas that your lecturer’s are saying to “hang a star,” next to or to focus on because they will be “heavily tested,” such as negligence in Torts. Real quick, Studicata does negligence the way negligence should be done (in my opinion) – that simple. But on top of all that, you get attack outlines that are substantially shorter that traditional bar prep outlines and yet manage to clear away the clutter and explain things in a clearer, more concise way. Furthermore, the essay templates are very, very good and I know firsthand that I am far from the only person who thinks so. For those who may not know, the Essay Templates are fill-in-the-blank style and also are phrased in a simple manner that – where applicable – you can literally draw a flow chart or visual aid from what you are reading.
The Bottom Line: Studicata as a company now offers functions as a self-study system, and continues to sell their most popular and well-reviewed products separately as supplements. It is affordable, the staff have put a great many hours into the products themselves and frequency analysis, and it can turn what is normally a rigid and difficult experience into one that can conform to study habits and methods that you know work for YOU, rather than a program that is rigid, overwhelming, or both. Hence my high recommendation.*
I thought I read this because you had a discount code..? Truth. My discount code is here and please feel free to see and hear more about the new studicata program for yourself with Michael, the Co-founder of Studicata here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USB6fuxDWoo&feature=youtu.be

If you have further questions about studicata, I would be happy to answer them to the best of my ability. However, I am neither an agent of nor staff member at Studicata, and would therefore encourage you to use their homepage chat function or contact e-mail for any substantive questions.

*I highly recommend this product, whether an examinee opts to take the supplemental route or go for the full self-study system, but I urge examinees not to wait until the week before the exam to buy the product. This goes for ANY product.

Survey Results & Takeaways

For the 10-day period from the period of June 18th thru the last response which (I believe) was yesterday, June 28th.survey1

Takeaway 1: As you can see, you should not be panicking that you aren’t at a certain percentage by today, the vast majority of your peers are in the same boat – over 77% of them, if you want to go by this survey. Yes, I am aware the smaller the sample size the greater the margin of error, but working with the best data I have available, it certainly seems that the trend at the moment is 20-60%, which is a fair distance from the magic number or target percentage your program suggested.

survey2

Takeaway 2: In terms of the MBE, which are also fair game for the MEE, 50% of people that answered the survey found that property is the MBE topic they fear most, and that is understandable given the breadth of the topic. Somewhat surprisingly (at least, to me) Constitutional Law is 2nd and Evidence 3rd, suggesting those are the topics that I should focus on but also that – again, temporarily forgetting the margin of error – examinees can focus their studies on to score points in relation to other examinees, AND…

Takeaway 3: that you are not alone in how you feel. I can’t attempt to predict more without further data, such as if it is mortgages and the land sale contract type issues, auction/foreclosure stuff, covenants, servitudes, and easements, etc.

survey3

I think this one speaks for itself, but it is interesting to note that this question does not directly correlate with data on percentage complete of a bar prep program. But shake out those nerves and carry on bar preppers – it’s essentially the home stretch.

Tips, Tricks, Strategies, and Examples

Hello Examinees!

Due to requests, I decided to post some of my memory devices for various areas of law. I will endeavor to continue adding additional topics and subtopics, but for now I figured I would post what I have.

Criminal Law:S_64271a8f-750a-4912-b35e-acdb873ef200SELRES_64271a8f-750a-4912-b35e-acdb873e
For criminal law, I focused on intent because not only can you list out crimes by memorizing the different categories of intent, but you know which defenses can apply to a crime in light of its intent requirement.
SPECIFIC INTENT: Specific Intent crimes are a CATS BAFFFLER (note the extra ‘f’). Conspiracy, ATtempt, Solicitation (the inchoate crimes), and Burglary, Assault, Forgery, False pretenses, First degree murder, Larceny, Embezzlement, Robbery.
GENERAL INTENT: “I learned General Intent Crimes in My KRIB. Manslaughter, Kidnapping, Rape, false Imprisonment, and Battery.

Evidence:
This may look familiar, as my law school professor and some supplements and at least one bar prep program use it but here we go:
Hearsay EXCLUSIONS (no unavailability required) “I Learned Hearsay Exclusions on PBJ PAPERS.” Learned: learned treatise; PBJ = public records, business records, judgements of prior convictions; PAPERS: Present sense impression, Ancient documents, Past physical condition [for med diagnosis or treatment], Excited utterance, Recorded recollection and State of mind (present state of mind).
NOTE: If it works better for you just PBJ PAPERS or vice versa, but while it is not heavily tested for some reason it seemed for class and bar prep one extra one that is tacked on is learned treatise so that is why I made it into that sentence. There are other exclusions which do not require unavailability but I’m assuming/from my experience are scarcely tested like vital statistics and family records under the same provision [FRE 803].
Hearsay Eexemptions: “HE Packs A Powerful Punch” (Hearsay Exemptions: Prior inconsistent statement, Admissions*, prior consistent statement, and prior statement of ID;
*on admissions: ‘admissions run on C-JAVA’ or alternatively ‘admissions run on Coffee & JAVA [Co-conspirator, Judicial, (And) Vicarious Admissions].
Non-Hearsay uses of out of court statements that are valid LIKE Me – Independent Legal significance (the order of the L and I are reversed but it never hurt me), Knowledge of listener, Effect on listener, and [state of] Mind (or Mental state).

Torts: Here I used analogies (Harry Potter, specifically the Chamber of Secrets)
Assault: Ron assaulted Draco even though Ron suffered the harm and was the initial aggressor because [Draco’s] words are inadequate provocation and thus by casting the Slug-Vomiting charm, Ron put Draco in imminent apprehension of bodily harm.
Battery: Draco could have battered and would have battered Harry but for the fact that they were in a dueling club amidst a dangerous climate in the school, so consent is implied at the very least.
Transferred Intent: One could further argue that Justin Finch-Flechy was also assaulted by Draco via the snake he conjured because there was intent which was transferred (i.e. transferred intent applies to assault) and Draco’s action put Justin in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact and thus Justin can recover nominal but in same cases punitive damages. However, a court could rule either way depending on whether they find that Justin’s presence at the dueling club constituted implied consent.
Then if you want to have some fun, pretend one of them won their claim or that instead, Justin or Draco’s parents sued Lockhart and Snape for negligence. Look to the standard/duty owed in the situation and whether it was breached, the cause of the injuries (but-for and proximate causation), and the injury at issue (damages!).

I hope people find some of these to be helpful and at the very least demonstrate some of the alternative and suggested methods of memorizing the law. Any feedback is welcome!

Study hard!