1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread Forum

[stayway]

--ImageRemoved--

mens rea section of my rape outline

[uwb09]

did anyone not take a humongous amount of notes? I've never been a big fan of constant note taking, and people here are like "how are you preparing without notes?" Its not like I haven't taken any notes, but I found no need to write down 75% of the stuff that was said in class. . .

I hand write notes, and for torts I took about 10-15 pages, mainly because torts prof wrote down on the board exactly how she wanted us to outline a tort on the exam, so that was basically all my notes were

Contracts I didn't take a single note, professor uses the crappy powerpoint method, so I just downloaded her slides every other week and merged them into outline

Civil Procedure I have about 5 pages, mostly being sure to note which cases/rules the professor would focus on the most in class, and copy down any diagrams he drew on the board

Criminal Law I took the most notes (20ish pages hand written) in, mostly because professor doesn't really care about MPC and Common law, his class is almost exclusively on how he wants you to use facts to interpret statutes, you can't really get that anywhere but from his lectures, and he explains crap EXTREMELY well. He's also a really engaging professor, so I actually paid attention from start to finish, unlike other classes

[dailygrind]

i feel my sanity slipping away. i want to chase after it, tell it not to leave me, that this time things will be different, that i'll nurture it and respect it. but i'm busy.

[SmittenMitten]

i feel my sanity slipping away. i want to chase after it, tell it not to leave me, that this time things will be different, that i'll nurture it and respect it. but i'm busy.

+1

[savagecheater]

Bizarre question -

There's been so much talk of 'applying law to facts'; every answer I've seen for hypos (and my own apparently) follow this formula. Students are dissuaded from applying facts to law - how would you even do this?

I ask only because I want to make sure I do the former rather than the latter and can make a clear distinction.

Anyone have an example?

[beach_terror]

Bizarre question -

There's been so much talk of 'applying law to facts'; every answer I've seen for hypos (and my own apparently) follow this formula. Students are dissuaded from applying facts to law - how would you even do this?

I ask only because I want to make sure I do the former rather than the latter and can make a clear distinction.

Anyone have an example?

huh?

[ChattTNdt]

Bizarre question -

There's been so much talk of 'applying law to facts'; every answer I've seen for hypos (and my own apparently) follow this formula. Students are dissuaded from applying facts to law - how would you even do this?

I ask only because I want to make sure I do the former rather than the latter and can make a clear distinction.

Anyone have an example?

When people say "apply law to facts," I don't think they mean as opposed to "applying facts to law"...

You take the law... and apply it to the facts...

[uwb09]

Bizarre question -

There's been so much talk of 'applying law to facts'; every answer I've seen for hypos (and my own apparently) follow this formula. Students are dissuaded from applying facts to law - how would you even do this?

I ask only because I want to make sure I do the former rather than the latter and can make a clear distinction.

Anyone have an example?

See Talon's or Arrow's "how to succeed" threads, and the sample answers they give in their posts, to see how to do it right

[Gamecubesupreme]

Bizarre question -

There's been so much talk of 'applying law to facts'; every answer I've seen for hypos (and my own apparently) follow this formula. Students are dissuaded from applying facts to law - how would you even do this?

I ask only because I want to make sure I do the former rather than the latter and can make a clear distinction.

Anyone have an example?

Contract hypo:

A and B always go shopping every Sunday. One week, B didn't go shopping with A. So A sues B for breach of contract. Does A have an enforceable K?

Not applying fact:

Issue is whether the two had mutual assent. Restatement says mutual assent is needed for there to be an enforceable K. Thus A and B does not have an enforceable K because there is no mutual assent.

Applying Fact:

Issue is whether the two had mutual assent. Restatement says mutual assent is needed for there to be an enforceable K. Just because A and B go shopping every Sunday does not mean they have an objective understanding that there exists a contract of shopping every Sunday. Thus A and B does not have an enforceable K because there is no mutual assent.

Yes, it's a simplified and shitty hypo, but you get the idea.

Oh, and my Applying Fact answer would probably only be a B. An "A" answer would include a counter-argument why there actually is mutual assent between A and B.

[gwuorbust]

Bizarre question -

There's been so much talk of 'applying law to facts'; every answer I've seen for hypos (and my own apparently) follow this formula. Students are dissuaded from applying facts to law - how would you even do this?

I ask only because I want to make sure I do the former rather than the latter and can make a clear distinction.

Anyone have an example?

Contract hypo:

A and B always go shopping every Sunday. One week, B didn't go shopping with A. So A sues B for breach of contract. Does A have an enforceable K?

Not applying fact:

Issue is whether the two had mutual assent. Restatement says mutual assent is needed for there to be an enforceable K. Thus A and B does not have an enforceable K because there is no mutual assent.

Applying Fact:

Issue is whether the two had mutual assent. Restatement says mutual assent is needed for there to be an enforceable K. Just because A and B go shopping every Sunday does not mean they have an objective understanding that there exists a contract of shopping every Sunday. Thus A and B does not have an enforceable K because there is no mutual assent.

Yes, it's a simplified and shitty hypo, but you get the idea.

Oh, and my Applying Fact answer would probably only be a B. An "A" answer would include a counter-argument why there actually is mutual assent between A and B.

see, what has got me concerned is that: Isn't everyone going to do this? And if they are, idk how my answer is going to be much better or worse than theirs. I've application of facts to lawl, use counter arguments, etc. down (at least I think I do). But doesn't everyone else?

Or are they too busy studying flash cards to realize that memorizing black letter lawl is not going to help. . .

[beach_terror]

There are so many facts that can be applied to law on exams, it takes some serious practice to learn to incorporate all of them and stay within the question time limits. Also, a lot of people try to "stretch" the law to argue that certain requirements are met, and in doing miss counter-arguments a lot - which is a beefy part of analysis. This is just based on what I've seen thus far.

[Gamecubesupreme]

see, what has got me concerned is that: Isn't everyone going to do this? And if they are, idk how my answer is going to be much better or worse than theirs. I've application of facts to lawl, use counter arguments, etc. down (at least I think I do). But doesn't everyone else?

Or are they too busy studying flash cards to realize that memorizing black letter lawl is not going to help. . .

One of the best advice I received in law school is this:

Don't give a SHIT what other people are or might be doing. Stop worrying about others and just do what you're suppose to do. Chances are, many people will panic on the exam and either run out of time or purge everything they know about a rule. That is the main reason why they don't do well on exams. There isn't anything else to the process of acing a final exam other then do what your prof wants. If she wants IRAC, give her IRAC. If she wants policy arguments, give her that. Nothing else matters.

[gwuorbust]

see, what has got me concerned is that: Isn't everyone going to do this? And if they are, idk how my answer is going to be much better or worse than theirs. I've application of facts to lawl, use counter arguments, etc. down (at least I think I do). But doesn't everyone else?

Or are they too busy studying flash cards to realize that memorizing black letter lawl is not going to help. . .

One of the best advice I received in law school is this:

Don't give a SHIT what other people are or might be doing. Stop worrying about others and just do what you're suppose to do. Chances are, many people will panic on the exam and either run out of time or purge everything they know about a rule. That is the main reason why they don't do well on exams. There isn't anything else to the process of acing a final exam other then do what your prof wants. If she wants IRAC, give her IRAC. If she wants policy arguments, give her that. Nothing else matters.

I know, but it seems hard to believe that it can really be that easy and that all my classmates are going to miss most of what matters. . .

[nygrrrl]

i feel my sanity slipping away. i want to chase after it, tell it not to leave me, that this time things will be different, that i'll nurture it and respect it. but i'm busy.

[Gamecubesupreme]

see, what has got me concerned is that: Isn't everyone going to do this? And if they are, idk how my answer is going to be much better or worse than theirs. I've application of facts to lawl, use counter arguments, etc. down (at least I think I do). But doesn't everyone else?

Or are they too busy studying flash cards to realize that memorizing black letter lawl is not going to help. . .

One of the best advice I received in law school is this:

Don't give a SHIT what other people are or might be doing. Stop worrying about others and just do what you're suppose to do. Chances are, many people will panic on the exam and either run out of time or purge everything they know about a rule. That is the main reason why they don't do well on exams. There isn't anything else to the process of acing a final exam other then do what your prof wants. If she wants IRAC, give her IRAC. If she wants policy arguments, give her that. Nothing else matters.

I know, but it seems hard to believe that it can really be that easy and that all my classmates are going to miss most of what matters. . .

You obviously have no idea how easy it is to suffer an anxiety attack on the exam. You also underestimate how hard your professor can make the fact pattern to be. It's most likely never going to be as easy as the hypo I gave out.

[keg411]

see, what has got me concerned is that: Isn't everyone going to do this? And if they are, idk how my answer is going to be much better or worse than theirs. I've application of facts to lawl, use counter arguments, etc. down (at least I think I do). But doesn't everyone else?

Or are they too busy studying flash cards to realize that memorizing black letter lawl is not going to help. . .

One of the best advice I received in law school is this:

Don't give a SHIT what other people are or might be doing. Stop worrying about others and just do what you're suppose to do. Chances are, many people will panic on the exam and either run out of time or purge everything they know about a rule. That is the main reason why they don't do well on exams. There isn't anything else to the process of acing a final exam other then do what your prof wants. If she wants IRAC, give her IRAC. If she wants policy arguments, give her that. Nothing else matters.

I know, but it seems hard to believe that it can really be that easy and that all my classmates are going to miss most of what matters. . .

Or maybe you'll be the one to miss most of what matters (or just organize things in a convoluted way)... I've been writing some PT's and when you read the model answers it seems a lot easier than it actually is.

[kalvano]

see, what has got me concerned is that: Isn't everyone going to do this? And if they are, idk how my answer is going to be much better or worse than theirs. I've application of facts to lawl, use counter arguments, etc. down (at least I think I do). But doesn't everyone else?

Or are they too busy studying flash cards to realize that memorizing black letter lawl is not going to help. . .

One of the best advice I received in law school is this:

Don't give a SHIT what other people are or might be doing. Stop worrying about others and just do what you're suppose to do. Chances are, many people will panic on the exam and either run out of time or purge everything they know about a rule. That is the main reason why they don't do well on exams. There isn't anything else to the process of acing a final exam other then do what your prof wants. If she wants IRAC, give her IRAC. If she wants policy arguments, give her that. Nothing else matters.

I know, but it seems hard to believe that it can really be that easy and that all my classmates are going to miss most of what matters. . .

From my mentor -

Ignore what other people are doing. Do what works for you. If you learned best one way in undergrad, use that to learn here.

Practice exams. Do several. Argue both sides.

Outline for yourself. Making = learning.


She's on law review.

[uwb09]

see, what has got me concerned is that: Isn't everyone going to do this? And if they are, idk how my answer is going to be much better or worse than theirs. I've application of facts to lawl, use counter arguments, etc. down (at least I think I do). But doesn't everyone else?

Or are they too busy studying flash cards to realize that memorizing black letter lawl is not going to help. . .

One of the best advice I received in law school is this:

Don't give a SHIT what other people are or might be doing. Stop worrying about others and just do what you're suppose to do. Chances are, many people will panic on the exam and either run out of time or purge everything they know about a rule. That is the main reason why they don't do well on exams. There isn't anything else to the process of acing a final exam other then do what your prof wants. If she wants IRAC, give her IRAC. If she wants policy arguments, give her that. Nothing else matters.

I know, but it seems hard to believe that it can really be that easy and that all my classmates are going to miss most of what matters. . .

You obviously have no idea how easy it is to suffer an anxiety attack on the exam. You also underestimate how hard your professor can make the fact pattern to be. It's most likely never going to be as easy as the hypo I gave out.

This, my criminal law prof told us that his final last year, the highest score was like 75% of the possible points, and the median score was around 40%. If a professor is doing it right, there is no way in hell to get anywhere near a perfect point score on a law exam, and that fact alone will separate the curve

also, you'd be surprised how many people have brain-lapses on exam (myself included) and will forget little things, that others won't, it has a way of working itself out

as stated, just do the best you can do, use what you've learned, use what works best for you, and learn to move on

[kalvano]

My professors have gone over older exams and pointed out all the possible issues, then admitted that under exam time limits, even they could only spot around 80% - 85% of them.

[gwuorbust]

I know, but it seems hard to believe that it can really be that easy and that all my classmates are going to miss most of what matters. . .

Or maybe you'll be the one to miss most of what matters (or just organize things in a convoluted way)... I've been writing some PT's and when you read the model answers it seems a lot easier than it actually is.

I've done about 10 PT in each class and it just seems to me that getting an answer like the model student answer isn't that difficult. Obv I don't expect to get all the possible points, but I don't think there is anything special about the model student answers. It just seems to easy.

[JazzOne]

Ignore what other people are doing. Do what works for you.

I went into 1L with a very specific plan. Sometime around Thanksgiving last year, I started to get worried when I overheard classmates talking about how they stopped reading for class, and how they were gathering up outlines for the final, and how they were relying on supplements. I freaked out and almost abandoned by plan. Luckily, I stuck to my guns, and it worked out really well for me.

People have different methods for studying. Whenever I am asked to speak to 1Ls about success in law school, my first comment is always, "There is more than one way to succeed in law school."

I'm on law review, for whatever that's worth.

[JCougar]

Virtually everyone can spot issues and make good arguments on law exams. The ones that get As are the ones that write concisely and get to the point, and know the law cold so they don't have to spend any time thinking and figuring, and can simply get to more issues. If you bullshit or elaborate more than you need (which is what happens when you start feeling unsure of your arguments) then you eat up valuable time you could use spotting other issues. It's all about giving yourself enough time for all the issues. If you read through the question and you see 7 issues and it's a 60-minute question, and it takes you 10 minutes to read it and outline, then you have seven minutes to discuss each issue. It shouldn't take you more than three minutes to identify the issue and spell out the standards that decide the issue. Then you have another 4 to apply the facts to that issue, and usually some facts will go one way and some facts will go another way, so it makes your counterargument naturally.

I've been told by someone who did extremely well (and I've experienced it on my practice exams) to treat law school exams like video games and you should attack them with the mentality of simply "racking up the points" rather than making yourself sound smart. You can't waste time waxing poetic or trying to out-do Cardozo in coming to your conclusions.

[dailygrind]

This, my criminal law prof told us that his final last year, the highest score was like 75% of the possible points, and the median score was around 40%. If a professor is doing it right, there is no way in hell to get anywhere near a perfect point score on a law exam, and that fact alone will separate the curve

also, you'd be surprised how many people have brain-lapses on exam (myself included) and will forget little things, that others won't, it has a way of working itself out

as stated, just do the best you can do, use what you've learned, use what works best for you, and learn to move on

i've done a shit ton of practice tests for my contracts class, and that's usually the distribution too. there are some years where the highest grade is like a 50%. truly nerve wracking stuff when you're taking it, i'm sure.

[bostonian]

I've been told by someone who did extremely well (and I've experienced it on my practice exams) to treat law school exams like video games...

I would love to do this to my exams:
--ImageRemoved--

[Holly Golightly]

I've been told by someone who did extremely well (and I've experienced it on my practice exams) to treat law school exams like video games...

I would love to do this to my exams:
--ImageRemoved--

Unfortunately you're only allowed to do that in CLR presentations.