Top Law Schools

just finished my bluebooking quiz--it went super well..am stoked.

party party!

and by party I mean time to outline for civ pro

Big lulz. Had a big GChat argument today over the Tice case, where the judge said that the two defendants were both negligent and placed the burden of proof on them instead of the plaintiff. It drove one girl insane.

Hurray for burden shifting!

lol i actually have to read tice for tomorrow. prolly should get on that.

traehekat wrote:lol i actually have to read tice for tomorrow. prolly should get on that.

it's a decent enough case.

one of the few where i actually side with the plaintiff.

All this summer job talk is pretty overwhelming.

goodolgil wrote:All this summer job talk is pretty overwhelming.

wow we're so not there yet..I've been to a few events prepping for it but I feel like nobody in my section is even thinking about summer jobs yet.

on a side note..unofficial poll: I am making a table with FRCP rules--debating whether I should put them in order or put them as they were covered in class? For ex, we did rule 8(a) and then went to rule 12(b), then 11, and then returned to the rest of rules 8 and 9. verses just going 8..9...10..11...12

how would you organize?

goosey wrote:

goodolgil wrote:All this summer job talk is pretty overwhelming.

wow we're so not there yet..I've been to a few events prepping for it but I feel like nobody in my section is even thinking about summer jobs yet.

on a side note..unofficial poll: I am making a table with FRCP rules--debating whether I should put them in order or put them as they were covered in class? For ex, we did rule 8(a) and then went to rule 12(b), then 11, and then returned to the rest of rules 8 and 9. verses just going 8..9...10..11...12

how would you organize?

not familiar with the FRCP, sorry =-(...

On a side, side note...I wish the 3rd restatement of torts could have waiting to have been published...Now our torts prof is assigning us some from each justifying it with the 3rd will probably be used in the future, but courts have currently adopted the 2nd. Leave me a bit jumbled as far as how to answer questions come finals (all the old exams answer keys are all 2nd restatements of course).

bmontminy wrote:

goosey wrote:

goodolgil wrote:All this summer job talk is pretty overwhelming.

wow we're so not there yet..I've been to a few events prepping for it but I feel like nobody in my section is even thinking about summer jobs yet.

on a side note..unofficial poll: I am making a table with FRCP rules--debating whether I should put them in order or put them as they were covered in class? For ex, we did rule 8(a) and then went to rule 12(b), then 11, and then returned to the rest of rules 8 and 9. verses just going 8..9...10..11...12

how would you organize?

not familiar with the FRCP, sorry =-(...

On a side, side note...I wish the 3rd restatement of torts could have waiting to have been published...Now our torts prof is assigning us some from each justifying it with the 3rd will probably be used in the future, but courts have currently adopted the 2nd. Leave me a bit jumbled as far as how to answer questions come finals (all the old exams answer keys are all 2nd restatements of course).

are you going to read the restatement? I was considering reading parts to help me understand but dont want to waste time. thoughts??

goosey wrote:

bmontminy wrote:

goosey wrote:

goodolgil wrote:All this summer job talk is pretty overwhelming.

wow we're so not there yet..I've been to a few events prepping for it but I feel like nobody in my section is even thinking about summer jobs yet.

on a side note..unofficial poll: I am making a table with FRCP rules--debating whether I should put them in order or put them as they were covered in class? For ex, we did rule 8(a) and then went to rule 12(b), then 11, and then returned to the rest of rules 8 and 9. verses just going 8..9...10..11...12

how would you organize?

not familiar with the FRCP, sorry =-(...

On a side, side note...I wish the 3rd restatement of torts could have waiting to have been published...Now our torts prof is assigning us some from each justifying it with the 3rd will probably be used in the future, but courts have currently adopted the 2nd. Leave me a bit jumbled as far as how to answer questions come finals (all the old exams answer keys are all 2nd restatements of course).

are you going to read the restatement? I was considering reading parts to help me understand but dont want to waste time. thoughts??

Our professor assigns specific sections with every corresponding syllabus section, so it is not so much an option for me =-/.....That being said unless there is another way you are learning the black letter law, the Restatements really are a necessity imo.

frcp= federal rules of civil procedure


and regarding the restatement, our textbook has the relevant sections, but sometimes I feel like I want to get further clarification. Will look into this.

I wouldn't go out and buy the book...there will be lots of sections that are useless. But you CAN pull em up for free of of Westlaw/LexisNexis...Hopefully the sections in your book have all the relevant illustrations as well as simply the rules and comments.

goodolgil wrote:All this summer job talk is pretty overwhelming.

The next two weeks are really the only point I'm a little worried about, stress-wise. Open memo + the start of job search + lots of make up class. Nothing crazy, but much more stress than anything we've been doing thus far. Thankfully, memo is due 11.11 and we're done with LRW.

Very few folks here are outlining yet. People seem to be making choices about which classes they are content with getting a "Pass" and which ones they are shooting for "Honors" in.

Last, but not least, studying for 4 substantive finals is going to be a bitch.

Kretzy wrote: Last, but not least, studying for 4 substantive finals is going to be a bitch.

This. I really feel like i'm in just 1 class too many right now.

Kretzy wrote:Last, but not least, studying for 4 substantive finals is going to be a bitch.

Try 5.

delBarco wrote:

Kretzy wrote: Last, but not least, studying for 4 substantive finals is going to be a bitch.

This. I really feel like i'm in just 1 class too many right now.

no kidding. i am tremendously envious of the lucky bastards that are only in 3 substantive classes + lrw. doing this + OGI next year + any extracurricular is probably insane.

kalvano wrote:

Kretzy wrote:Last, but not least, studying for 4 substantive finals is going to be a bitch.

Try 5.

3 of my 4 are closed book beat that!

I thought I would jump on this thread to rant a little about legal writing.....

If knowing how to write well is so freakin important, make it worth more than 1 credit!!!

I just finished writing a complete draft of my final memo. It has taken me an insane amount of time (probably 20 hours so far), and I anticipate many hours of revision. All for 1 freakin credit. wtf.

oh man i am working on my closed memo right now. i was previously ranting about how i was using a promising theory and the prof closed it off because she only wanted other theories used. i just stumbled across another theory that would be a better, easier way to attack the subject than what the prof wants, but i know that pursuing it too heavily will be a complete waste of time. my ocd is being agitated. plus i really don't want to do it the way she wants me to...goddamn it's gonna be so much work that way.

I haven't spent much time with supplements thus far this semester, but I skipped a lot of reading last week in civ pro. So, I'm burning through the cases just to get a sense of them and reading the E&E to make sure I pulled the rules out correctly. This is the first time I've cracked the E&E.

Suffice to say, all the hype is worth it. The fucking thing almost brought me to tears (well, it was either that or the extra hot chili I was shitting out while reading the chapter on supplemental jurisdiction). Srsly, I want to get Joseph Glannon's fucking autograph.

TTH wrote:I haven't spent much time with supplements thus far this semester, but I skipped a lot of reading last week in civ pro. So, I'm burning through the cases just to get a sense of them and reading the E&E to make sure I pulled the rules out correctly. This is the first time I've cracked the E&E.

Suffice to say, all the hype is worth it. The fucking thing almost brought me to tears (well, it was either that or the extra hot chili I was shitting out while reading the chapter on supplemental jurisdiction). Srsly, I want to get Joseph Glannon's fucking autograph.

Likewise, the E&E for Torts has been invaluable. E&E CivPro will be insta-purchase when that time comes. Although as far as supps have gone, nothing has quite measured up to the usefulness of Chemerinsky. It's almost unfair to call it a supplement when my casebook has pretty much been holding that duty.

Helmholtz wrote:

TTH wrote:I haven't spent much time with supplements thus far this semester, but I skipped a lot of reading last week in civ pro. So, I'm burning through the cases just to get a sense of them and reading the E&E to make sure I pulled the rules out correctly. This is the first time I've cracked the E&E.

Suffice to say, all the hype is worth it. The fucking thing almost brought me to tears (well, it was either that or the extra hot chili I was shitting out while reading the chapter on supplemental jurisdiction). Srsly, I want to get Joseph Glannon's fucking autograph.

Likewise, the E&E for Torts has been invaluable. E&E CivPro will be insta-purchase when that time comes. Although as far as supps have gone, nothing has quite measured up to the usefulness of Chemerinsky. It's almost unfair to call it a supplement when my casebook has pretty much been holding that duty.

Good to know Chemerinsky will be there when I need it. It's pretty damned cruel to make you guys start off with conlaw, though.

TTH wrote:

Helmholtz wrote:

TTH wrote:I haven't spent much time with supplements thus far this semester, but I skipped a lot of reading last week in civ pro. So, I'm burning through the cases just to get a sense of them and reading the E&E to make sure I pulled the rules out correctly. This is the first time I've cracked the E&E.

Suffice to say, all the hype is worth it. The fucking thing almost brought me to tears (well, it was either that or the extra hot chili I was shitting out while reading the chapter on supplemental jurisdiction). Srsly, I want to get Joseph Glannon's fucking autograph.

Likewise, the E&E for Torts has been invaluable. E&E CivPro will be insta-purchase when that time comes. Although as far as supps have gone, nothing has quite measured up to the usefulness of Chemerinsky. It's almost unfair to call it a supplement when my casebook has pretty much been holding that duty.

Good to know Chemerinsky will be there when I need it. It's pretty damned cruel to make you guys start off with conlaw, though.

True, but after looking on here at all the people who are not blessed with only 3 substantive courses and ungraded LRW, things could be much, much worse. It's really not that bad. I enjoy the policy perspective the class provides after having torts and property rules ground into my head the rest of the day.

Yeah, four substantive law classes plus graded LR is a crock of shit, but it will all be worth it since my school is positioned to catapult me securely into that thriving BIGOHIOLAW scene. Oh wait...

ps. Con law and property? Ecch. At least torts is easy.

TTH wrote:Yeah, four substantive law classes plus graded LR is a crock of shit, but it will all be worth it since my school is positioned to catapult me securely into that thriving BIGOHIOLAW scene. Oh wait...

ps. Con law and property? Ecch. At least torts is easy.

There must be substantial BIGOHIOLAW - the state doesn't have eleven law schools for nothing, right? amiright?

Helmholtz wrote:

TTH wrote:Good to know Chemerinsky will be there when I need it. It's pretty damned cruel to make you guys start off with conlaw, though.

True, but after looking on here at all the people who are not blessed with only 3 substantive courses and ungraded LRW, things could be much, much worse. It's really not that bad. I enjoy the policy perspective the class provides after having torts and property rules ground into my head the rest of the day.

Heh, where are you at that you're getting con, torts and property? At NYU I have, as far as traditional 1L doctrinal courses go, the complete opposite of your schedule (contracts, civ pro, and crim). Curious to know which other schools deviate from the norm a bit.