Getting to Maybe question

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
UML
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:03 pm

Getting to Maybe question

Postby UML » Thu Aug 25, 2011 5:33 pm

Chapter 4, Section 3.b. - Broad vs. narrow purposes

I understand the concept of spin vs. counter-spin and floodlight vs. laser beam, but I don't understand its application to exams. "Broad vs. narrow purposes" seems out of place in the chapter. What am I missing?

User avatar
Heartford
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 9:02 pm

Re: Getting to Maybe question

Postby Heartford » Thu Aug 25, 2011 6:52 pm

Ugh. I can't answer your question because I stopped reading that book after like 5 pages, but I was stuck in a class taught by one of the authors and this question reminds me of how torturous it was.

NotMyRealName09
Posts: 1395
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:50 pm

Re: Getting to Maybe question

Postby NotMyRealName09 » Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:10 pm

It is possible to well in law school without reading that book. Just saying.

User avatar
beach_terror
Posts: 7250
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:01 pm

Re: Getting to Maybe question

Postby beach_terror » Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:11 pm

Getting to Maybe: realize there are ambiguities in the law and they will be tested in the exam, argue both ways.

071816
Posts: 5511
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:06 pm

Re: Getting to Maybe question

Postby 071816 » Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:13 pm

NotMyRealName09 wrote:It is possible to well in law school without reading that book. Just saying.


Image

UML
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:03 pm

Re: Getting to Maybe question

Postby UML » Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 pm

beach_terror wrote:Getting to Maybe: realize there are ambiguities in the law and they will be tested in the exam, argue both ways.

Glad you have it down. Perhaps you could be the one to answer my question.

User avatar
YourCaptain
Posts: 719
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Getting to Maybe question

Postby YourCaptain » Fri Aug 26, 2011 11:46 pm

UML wrote:
beach_terror wrote:Getting to Maybe: realize there are ambiguities in the law and they will be tested in the exam, argue both ways.

Glad you have it down. Perhaps you could be the one to answer my question.


You miss the point; at the end of the day, see the ambiguity, argue both ways, come to a conclusion, explain the conclusion.

There's no need to pay attention to "floodlights" (I don't even recall what that's in reference to). Seriously, don't make it so complicated. Focus on keeping track of the BLL and significant minutiae that influenced decisions instead of GTM

nigelfrost
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:42 pm

Re: Getting to Maybe question

Postby nigelfrost » Sat Aug 27, 2011 12:12 am

UML wrote:Chapter 4, Section 3.b. - Broad vs. narrow purposes

I understand the concept of spin vs. counter-spin and floodlight vs. laser beam, but I don't understand its application to exams. "Broad vs. narrow purposes" seems out of place in the chapter. What am I missing?


Put down your copy of Getting to Maybe and start reading your Torts assignment.

End thread.

User avatar
Naked Dude
Posts: 746
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Getting to Maybe question

Postby Naked Dude » Sat Aug 27, 2011 1:05 am

Heartford wrote:Ugh. I can't answer your question because I stopped reading that book after like 5 pages, but I was stuck in a class taught by one of the authors and this question reminds me of how torturous it was.


or tortious amirite?




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: axel.foley, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Bruins4Lyfe, paragonloop, Yahoo [Bot] and 12 guests