PCCE Paralegal common mistakes
PCCE Paralegal · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Counting a litigation deadline by including the day the triggering event occurred, then failing to roll the deadline forward when it lands on a Saturday, Sunday, or court holiday.
Candidates memorize a number of days (e.g., '30 days to respond') but drop the two mechanical steps that surround it; inclusive counting is a natural default when counting on fingers or a calendar, and weekend/holiday rules feel like trivia rather than part of the computation.
What to do instead
Use a written three-line template every time: (1) trigger date and how it is defined, (2) exclude the trigger day and count forward, (3) if the last day is a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday, move to the next business day. Enter both the trigger date and the computed date on the calendar, and double-check whether the rule counts calendar or court days.
Answering a summary judgment question with a motion-to-dismiss standard (or vice versa) - e.g., saying summary judgment is granted when the complaint fails to state a claim, or that dismissal is proper because there is no genuine dispute of material fact.
Both motions test the sufficiency of the other side's case, are taught in the same unit, and share vocabulary ('fails,' 'insufficient,' 'no dispute'), so the standards blur under time pressure.
What to do instead
Before answering, write the question the motion asks: a motion to dismiss asks 'does the pleading allege enough facts to be plausible?' while summary judgment asks 'does the record, viewed in the nonmovant's favor, show a genuine dispute of material fact?' Attach each motion to its source rule and its evidence source (pleadings only vs. discovery record) in your notes.
Analyzing a contract for services, construction, insurance, or a lease of real property under UCC Article 2, importing merchant rules, the perfect tender rule, or the firm-offer rule into a common-law deal.
Study outlines present the UCC as the default framework, and many fact patterns involve a business selling something, which looks like a sale of goods on the surface.
What to do instead
Run a threshold test before any analysis: what is the predominant purpose of the contract? Goods only → UCC Article 2; services, real estate, or intangible rights → common law. Note in the margin which body of law governs and cross out inapplicable rules before writing the answer.
Stating that acceptance is effective on dispatch in a case where the offer required receipt, or where the offer was an option contract, or where the acceptance was of an offer to buy land.
The mailbox rule is taught as 'the rule' for acceptance, and its exceptions are presented as a footnote; candidates also forget that the rule is a default gap-filler the offeror can displace.
What to do instead
Treat the mailbox rule as a default that applies only if the offer does not specify receipt and the contract is not an option. Read the offer language first ('only upon receipt,' 'notice of acceptance must be received'), then check the option/land exceptions, and only then apply dispatch.
Assuming that members of an LLC are personally liable for the entity's debts the way general partners are, or assuming any single member can bind the LLC without checking its management structure.
The partnership and corporation units are studied first, so the default liability rule ('partners are personally liable') bleeds into LLC analysis, and 'member' sounds like 'partner.' Authority questions are also skipped because candidates focus only on liability.
What to do instead
Memorize two separate defaults for LLCs: (1) members are not personally liable for LLC obligations absent veil-piercing or a personal guarantee; (2) authority to bind depends on whether the LLC is member-managed (members are agents) or manager-managed (managers are agents; members generally are not). Check the operating agreement and the state's statute before concluding.
Using 'beyond a reasonable doubt' as the standard for a probable cause determination, a suppression hearing, or a preliminary hearing, or using 'probable cause' to describe the State's trial burden.
Criminal procedure is taught as a sequence of many hearings, and the standards ladder is compressed into one memorable phrase ('beyond a reasonable doubt'), which then gets attached to every stage.
What to do instead
Build a ladder and check the stage before answering: reasonable suspicion (investigatory stop) → probable cause (arrest, search warrant, bindover) → preponderance (most pretrial suppression issues) → clear and convincing (some civil-commitment and special settings) → beyond a reasonable doubt (trial conviction). Label the stage in the question, then pick the rung.
Listing a life insurance policy with a named beneficiary, a jointly held bank account, or a payable-on-death account as part of the probate estate that passes under the will.
Candidates organize the estate around the will, and everything the decedent owned feels like it 'goes through probate'; beneficiary-designation and survivorship mechanics are taught separately and are easy to forget under a fact pattern.
What to do instead
Build an asset inventory before answering, with a column for transfer mechanism: probate (sole name, no beneficiary), joint tenancy/survivorship, beneficiary designation (life insurance, retirement, TOD/POD), or trust. Only the first column passes under the will or by intestacy; check each asset against that column explicitly.
Applying the custody statute (UCCJEA) to a child support or spousal support question, or citing the support statute (UIFSA) to decide which state has jurisdiction over custody.
Both are uniform acts with similar acronyms and both are about interstate family cases, so they are memorized as a single 'interstate family law' blob.
What to do instead
Attach a keyword to each: UCCJEA = Custody (continuing exclusive jurisdiction, home state, emergency jurisdiction); UIFSA = Support (one continuing exclusive order, income withholding, registration). Read the relief requested in the question, pick the act by that keyword, then apply it.
Concluding that a quitclaim deed carries the same warranties as a warranty deed, or that a deed is invalid because it was never recorded.
Recording is taught as the dramatic step that 'protects' the buyer, and the word 'deed' is treated as one instrument rather than a family of instruments with different covenants.
What to do instead
Separate the two questions. (1) Which deed? Quitclaim = no covenants; special warranty = grantor's acts only; general warranty = all six covenants. (2) Recording affects priority against later purchasers, not validity between grantor and grantee - delivery and acceptance make a deed effective. Answer validity and priority as distinct issues.
Saying that res ipsa loquitur shifts the burden of proof to the defendant so the plaintiff wins unless the defendant disproves negligence.
Candidates correctly recall that res ipsa helps a plaintiff who has no direct evidence and overstate it into a burden-shifting or presumption rule; the distinction between an inference and a burden shift is subtle.
What to do instead
State res ipsa as: the plaintiff must still prove the elements (exclusive control, otherwise-accountable accident, no plaintiff contribution), and if successful the jury may infer negligence. The burden of persuasion never leaves the plaintiff; the defendant may simply offer a non-negligent explanation.