Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby 98234872348 » Mon Apr 12, 2010 6:07 pm

Just wrote a Con Law essay, no clue whether my efforts were at all meritorious, it's certainly not like any other exam I've written, but, it was in response to the following prompt, which I believe justifies the deviation from a normal law school exam:
Write a critical comparative analysis of the opinions in Brown and Rodriguez and either Grutter or Parents Involved. Hate life. :evil:

User avatar
mikeytwoshoes
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:45 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby mikeytwoshoes » Mon Apr 12, 2010 11:21 pm

disco_barred wrote:Re: Twombly and Iqbal - nobody knows what they mean. Not professors, not law students. Not district court judges applying them, not court of appeals judges reviewing them. Probably not the justices who wrote them.

You can string together a few defensible statements about the cases, but putting it to practice makes the whole mess collapse. The rule is basically "Sufficiently implausible claims will be dismissed prior to discovery, especially when discovery will be costly." Unfortunately, everyone would HATE that rule, so twombly and iqbal not only never say what is written in the prior sentence but often try to say the exact opposite. Still, if whatever you pretend twombly and iqbal mean has the end result of "sufficiently implausible claims will be dismissed prior to discovery, especially when discovery will be costly" then the obtuseness of the opinions will likely make it impossible to prove you wrong.

It's almost sad but this post is going in my outline almost verbatim.

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby prezidentv8 » Fri Apr 16, 2010 11:31 am

betasteve wrote:Just heard that in the multiple choice questions on my con law exam, there are gems such as "Who didn't write an opinion in CASE X?"

FML


To this I say: WTFH!?

Alyosha
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:34 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby Alyosha » Fri Apr 16, 2010 8:23 pm

It's friday night, and I'm sitting here studying contracts. I will be studying contracts all weekend, while all my non-law school friends go to the beach or to a local jazz festival. Anyone else feel like life is just passing you by while you are in law school, especially during exams?

User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby 98234872348 » Fri Apr 16, 2010 8:28 pm

Alyosha wrote:It's friday night, and I'm sitting here studying contracts. I will be studying contracts all weekend, while all my non-law school friends go to the beach or to a local jazz festival. Anyone else feel like life is just passing you by while you are in law school, especially during exams?

I am in the alternative study area because our library is lame and closes at 730 on Fridays, but yes, I get this general feeling and I am not a fan.

User avatar
mikeytwoshoes
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:45 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby mikeytwoshoes » Fri Apr 16, 2010 8:47 pm

mistergoft wrote:
Alyosha wrote:It's friday night, and I'm sitting here studying contracts. I will be studying contracts all weekend, while all my non-law school friends go to the beach or to a local jazz festival. Anyone else feel like life is just passing you by while you are in law school, especially during exams?

I am in the alternative study area because our library is lame and closes at 730 on Fridays, but yes, I get this general feeling and I am not a fan.

Cardozo?

User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby 98234872348 » Fri Apr 16, 2010 8:58 pm

mikeytwoshoes wrote:
mistergoft wrote:
Alyosha wrote:It's friday night, and I'm sitting here studying contracts. I will be studying contracts all weekend, while all my non-law school friends go to the beach or to a local jazz festival. Anyone else feel like life is just passing you by while you are in law school, especially during exams?

I am in the alternative study area because our library is lame and closes at 730 on Fridays, but yes, I get this general feeling and I am not a fan.

Cardozo?

UF.

engineer
Posts: 278
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 3:51 am

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby engineer » Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:40 pm

I CANNOT AFFORD TO BE WASTING TIME ON HERE I NEED TO STUDY BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.

If I read another word of Chemerinsky, my head is going to explode. Seriously. Fuck this justiciability shit....why can't we all just smoke up and be friends? Seriously, courts should mandate that each party smoke an eighth, negotiate, and if they're not hugging and whatnot by the end of it, then it goes to court. Who's with me?

User avatar
mac.empress
Posts: 302
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby mac.empress » Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:26 pm

Alyosha wrote:It's friday night, and I'm sitting here studying contracts. I will be studying contracts all weekend, while all my non-law school friends go to the beach or to a local jazz festival. Anyone else feel like life is just passing you by while you are in law school, especially during exams?


I went on strike last night. I'm morally opposed to being in the library on a Friday night and I just didn't feel like doing that last night.

So I went to a club and had fun. Slight hangover but now I'm revved to go back to work on some Nuisance and Rylands.

I NEED the breaks.

User avatar
jp0094
Posts: 121
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 6:21 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby jp0094 » Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:20 pm

Outlining conlaw, chemerinsky's hornbook worth its weight in gold atm.

Also, fuck property, seriously.

User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby 98234872348 » Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:35 pm

jp0094 wrote:Outlining conlaw, chemerinsky's hornbook worth its weight in gold atm.

Also, fuck property, seriously.

TBH, I find Chemerinsky's hornbook to be good but it doesn't really go as in depth as I would like it to, but it might just be that because my casebook also happens to be written by Chemerinsky that I've essentially already heard all he has to say about most issues.

User avatar
macattaq
Posts: 441
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 1:46 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby macattaq » Sat Apr 17, 2010 3:24 pm

Quick question: transfer of rights clause in a mortgage. What is it? I think it enables the lender to transfer their rights in the mortgage to another party, but I'm not sure.

User avatar
Grad_Student
Posts: 367
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 3:20 am

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby Grad_Student » Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:11 pm

HAHA bitches!

User avatar
seespotrun
Posts: 2395
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby seespotrun » Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:51 pm

Anyone else feel like they were way more prepared at this point in the 1st semester vs. now? Maybe it's gunner anxiety getting the best of me, but I'm starting get nervous. :oops:

User avatar
mikeytwoshoes
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:45 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby mikeytwoshoes » Sun Apr 18, 2010 9:31 pm

What's the difference between "common nucleus of operative fact" and "same transaction or occurrence?" Other than CNOF applying to Supplemental Jx and STO applying to joinder, I'm thinking that STO indicates one point in time whereas CNOF could involve a series of events. Does that make sense?

Dman
Posts: 112
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:28 am

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby Dman » Sun Apr 18, 2010 9:37 pm

mikeytwoshoes wrote:What's the difference between "common nucleus of operative fact" and "same transaction or occurrence?" Other than CNOF applying to Supplemental Jx and STO applying to joinder, I'm thinking that STO indicates one point in time whereas CNOF could involve a series of events. Does that make sense?


They are pretty much indistinguishable. Schwartz ( two car accidents 10 days apart) is the prime example of equal elasticity of the same transaction test.

User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby 98234872348 » Sun Apr 18, 2010 9:47 pm

mikeytwoshoes wrote:What's the difference between "common nucleus of operative fact" and "same transaction or occurrence?" Other than CNOF applying to Supplemental Jx and STO applying to joinder, I'm thinking that STO indicates one point in time whereas CNOF could involve a series of events. Does that make sense?

My prof said that these tests are effectively exactly the same. There are certain rules that utilize the STO test in reference to a series of events (see: rule 20(a)(1)(A) or (a)(2)(A)).

Esc
Posts: 724
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:09 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby Esc » Sat Apr 24, 2010 8:55 pm

betasteve wrote:Wickard v. Filburn: Stupidest fucking case ever.


still not nearly as stupid as Iqbal.

User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby 98234872348 » Sat Apr 24, 2010 8:59 pm

betasteve wrote:Wickard v. Filburn: Stupidest fucking case ever.

I am so sick of Con Law I can't wait to kill this exam and eschew this subject for at least a semester or two...

270910
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 9:51 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby 270910 » Sat Apr 24, 2010 9:15 pm

betasteve wrote:Wickard v. Filburn: Stupidest fucking case ever.


What don't you like about it? I mean, it's not hard to find a path to criticizing the expansive commerce clause jurisprudence, I'm just curious if there's something particular about Wickard that pisses you off :P

engineer
Posts: 278
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 3:51 am

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby engineer » Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:14 am

My first final is on Monday, and I'm in overdrive.

See y'all at Columbia next fall.

270910
Posts: 2437
Joined: Thu May 21, 2009 9:51 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby 270910 » Sun Apr 25, 2010 7:48 am

engineer wrote:I'm contemplating sending an EA application to GULC, but I don't think my grades were high enough this semester, since one class brought me down to roughly top third at a school in the 40s-60s.


engineer wrote:See y'all at Columbia next fall.


-.-

engineer
Posts: 278
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 3:51 am

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby engineer » Sun Apr 25, 2010 10:41 am

disco_barred wrote:
engineer wrote:I'm contemplating sending an EA application to GULC, but I don't think my grades were high enough this semester, since one class brought me down to roughly top third at a school in the 40s-60s.


engineer wrote:See y'all at Columbia next fall.


-.-


As of last semester, my grades weren't high enough for GULC EA, but I've put in considerably more effort this semester, and I'm hoping to see some sort of improvement. While I may not be Columbia-bound, it's fine to set my goals high.

aIm FoR tHe MoOn bCuZ iF U mIsS uR sTiLl AmOnG tHe StArS**** LoLoLoL <3.14

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby vanwinkle » Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:44 pm

betasteve wrote:Probably the fact that someone can't grow their own wheat for personal consumption because of a conclusory and speculative justification that in the aggregate, this will impact something they should be regulating anyway.

In an exam context, just think about it this way: At least it's easy to apply! Does this affect commerce in the aggregate? Then it's covered under the Commece Clause! The end!

Esc wrote:still not nearly as stupid as Iqbal.

+1

Esc
Posts: 724
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:09 pm

Re: Spring 2010 Exam Prep Rant Thread

Postby Esc » Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:49 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
betasteve wrote:Probably the fact that someone can't grow their own wheat for personal consumption because of a conclusory and speculative justification that in the aggregate, this will impact something they should be regulating anyway.

In an exam context, just think about it this way: At least it's easy to apply! Does this affect commerce in the aggregate? Then it's covered under the Commece Clause! The end!


Don't forget the triad of confusion - Lopez, Morrison, and Raich.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: axel.foley, CharlieAvocado, ididntwantsalmon, Rich29, Stubbazubba and 14 guests