How to cite a case on an exam if I forgot its name? Forum

[Gamecubesupreme]

Let's say I want to cite the principle in Hamer vs. Sidway where the judges made the point that a promisee can experience detriment as long as he/she gives up his/her right to do something, even if that action is something he/she would not have wanted to do anyway, how would I do it if I suddenly forgot the case's name and I didn't put it down on my outline?

Would it be okay if I simply went "one of the cases made the point that..."?

[Veyron]

Let's say I want to cite the principle in Hamer vs. Sidway where the judges made the point that a promisee can experience detriment as long as he/she gives up his/her right to do something, even if that action is something he/she would not have wanted to do anyway, how would I do it if I suddenly forgot the case's name and I didn't put it down on my outline?

Would it be okay if I simply went "one of the cases made the point that..."?

Depends on the prof. Some just want the rule and fuck where you got it from.

[TobiasFunke]

.

[Always Credited]

Just alluding to it in some manner, like "the case with Gateway and the shrinkwrap terms" will probably be enough if you nail a specific rule related to it, such as the Easterbrook rule, and just want a case around to give your discussion some context. It probably isn't necessary though...and if it trips you up at all, leave it out and just apply law to facts.

[reverendt]

Don't worry about citing cases on the exam. Just state the rule.
The only exams you'll probably have to remember some case names for are civ pro and con law.

[GeePee]

If your professor really wants cases, then you can allude to the important facts of the case- "an uncle promised his nephew money in exchange for not drinking, smoking or gambling." Otherwise, just use the rule (a gift is not gratuitous if it should reasonably induce forbearance and does so, forbearance is valid consideration in a K).

This is probably more useful when citing more obscure cases with rules that are muddled and harder to state, or cases which clarify a preexisting rule. On the other hand, professors that love the restatement will probably require you to cite sections by number. Just knowing that something is said in the restatement is probably not enough.

[shadow.]

.

[GeePee]

What about citing generally to the case after writing the rule?

e.g. "If the difference between MP and KP is inadequate because the seller is a lost volume seller, then under UCC 2-708(2) the seller could receive its profits. This was the case in Neri v. Retail Marine Corp."

Would citing to Neri yield extra points or is the UCC all that's needed?

Depends on your professor. Might get you a little, might get you nothing. But getting the rule and the restatement/UCC section is probably good enough for most of the points. Even then, I'd just go [sentence] (Neri v. Retail Marine).

[beach_terror]

Totally unrelated, but someone in my section asked if we needed to cite in Bluebook form on our exams.

[Lawl Shcool]

I just did: Rule blah blah blah. (Case name).

If I couldn't remember the name exactly I would put down an important fact that made it standout, ex: (Contract for not drinking case).

I also didn't fill in the case names and such until the very end when I had time to go through my answer quickly and fill stuff in. Time is 100x better spent on analysis.

Pro tip: Bolded / Underlined header instead of issue sentence.