dailygrind wrote:i'm told abraham = amazing prof but straight b+ for like everyone in the class. while that would be nice because it frees you up to study for other classes and still get a b+, it would be annoying if you were naturally gifted at torts but couldn't make it over b+, or if it was ur last ditch attempt to get a good grade or something.
He is amazing, but it does take something special to get out of the heart of the curve. (The actual number for B+'s is about 2/3 of the class.) As far as the "naturally good at torts" thing goes, though, it's important to know how Abraham's class works. The entire 3.5-hour exam is one page long. He's not concerned with whether you can spot a zillion issues and apply statutes or whatever. He assumes you can do that, and considers it not much different than undergrad work. He cares whether you can throw down analytically. Why should the law be a certain way? What policy/value choices are we making if we declare this or that to be someone's duty? What are we declaring about property rights when we declare something a nuisance, and what are we further deciding by deciding to remedy the situation by, alternatively, an award of damages or an injunction? What about economic factors? And so on, and so on, and so on. Most students just don't impress him/insult his intelligence enough to sway him from giving them B+'s.