Am I doing this wrong? Forum

[Exeter]

I seem to find myself taking a lot of notes from Casebook readings as of late as my professors seem to harp on the dissent etc.
Is anyone else having a great deal of notes from a damn 25 page reading? or am I doing this the wrong way? All my professors give MC parts of their test where certain dissents etc. are "fair game"

[071816]

Impossible to say without seeing your notes or knowing more about them.

[Exeter]

basically, I read the case book, then I read the corresponding info in the supplements. I spend most of my time in the library but thus far I think I have a solid grasp on the info. Casebook notes are more of mini briefs of cases, dissents, etc

[071816]

basically, I read the case book, then I read the corresponding info in the supplements. I spend most of my time in the library but thus far I think I have a solid grasp on the info. Casebook notes are more of mini briefs of cases, dissents, etc

If you feel this is working for you then I don't see a problem. There is no right or wrong way to do it. What you're doing doesn't sound unreasonable.

[TheFactor]

basically, I read the case book, then I read the corresponding info in the supplements. I spend most of my time in the library but thus far I think I have a solid grasp on the info. Casebook notes are more of mini briefs of cases, dissents, etc

This is basically what I do. And I know I'm going to be top 10% or better.

[Kabuo]

basically, I read the case book, then I read the corresponding info in the supplements. I spend most of my time in the library but thus far I think I have a solid grasp on the info. Casebook notes are more of mini briefs of cases, dissents, etc

This is basically what I do. And I know I'm going to be top 10% or better.

Quoted for the lulz.

[Blindmelon]

basically, I read the case book, then I read the corresponding info in the supplements. I spend most of my time in the library but thus far I think I have a solid grasp on the info. Casebook notes are more of mini briefs of cases, dissents, etc

This is basically what I do. And I know I'm going to be top 10% or better.

Quoted for the lulz.

Yea, wait till your learn the joy of the arbitrary factor in grading.

[TheFactor]

basically, I read the case book, then I read the corresponding info in the supplements. I spend most of my time in the library but thus far I think I have a solid grasp on the info. Casebook notes are more of mini briefs of cases, dissents, etc

This is basically what I do. And I know I'm going to be top 10% or better.

Quoted for the lulz.

Yea, wait till your learn the joy of the arbitrary factor in grading.

Failure to grasp obvious sarcasm.

[23402385985]

Had a mock midterm graded by my professor the other day. Got an A on it. He graded and curved just as he would in a real class. I hardly use the casebook other than taking out the actual law and how it's applied.

I take no notes from the book outside of the holding and law of the case and, say, the restatement text itself (or U.C.C. or whatever else). I don't see the point in taking any notes from the book outside of the actual law you need to grasp from it. If you are taking notes on the actual law laid out for you (maybe the MPC in Crim), then I'd say that that's a good thing since you need it anyway.

I mean, what notes are you actually taking from the book? The only thing you should be having in your notes or outlines about cases or from the casebook is the actual law. If you need to take some notes so you don't feel like a dumbass when called on, that's another thing.

PS -- don't mean to be douchey with the opening statement. Just wanted to say that you don't need a retarded amount of notes to succeed on an exam.

[Icculus]

Had a mock midterm graded by my professor the other day. Got an A on it. He graded and curved just as he would in a real class. I hardly use the casebook other than taking out the actual law and how it's applied.

I take no notes from the book outside of the holding and law of the case and, say, the restatement text itself (or U.C.C. or whatever else). I don't see the point in taking any notes from the book outside of the actual law you need to grasp from it. If you are taking notes on the actual law laid out for you (maybe the MPC in Crim), then I'd say that that's a good thing since you need it anyway.

I mean, what notes are you actually taking from the book? The only thing you should be having in your notes or outlines about cases or from the casebook is the actual law. If you need to take some notes so you don't feel like a dumbass when called on, that's another thing.

PS -- don't mean to be douchey with the opening statement. Just wanted to say that you don't need a retarded amount of notes to succeed on an exam.

Be wary, a professor told us today that his midterm is generally not representative of how the final grades play out. Shockingly, people tend to not put as much effort into an ungraded midterm as an actual final. I have two ungraded midterms and my guess is I will not be as diligent about studying as I will be for the final. Though nice job. I just threw this out there since a professor gave us this exact warning today, and even said he thinks many students don't focus as much on his midterm (and it is graded)./rant

OP, I basically take the law and the holding from each case and I think I have a pretty good grasp on everything so far. From talking to upperclassmen it seems these are the most important things to grasp so I'm with joncrooshal.

[23402385985]

Be wary, a professor told us today that his midterm is generally not representative of how the final grades play out. Shockingly, people tend to not put as much effort into an ungraded midterm as an actual final. I have two ungraded midterms and my guess is I will not be as diligent about studying as I will be for the final. Though nice job. I just threw this out there since a professor gave us this exact warning today, and even said he thinks many students don't focus as much on his midterm (and it is graded)./rant

OP, I basically take the law and the holding from each case and I think I have a pretty good grasp on everything so far. From talking to upperclassmen it seems these are the most important things to grasp so I'm with joncrooshal.

Oh, I'm sure. Some people will think that they "know what they are doing" and will relax a bit. Others will work extra hard to catch up. The people that relax too much will fall down to the median or below and the people that fucked up but found out how to hustle and put the effort in will rise above.

The key is continuing to work hard (which I admit I do even if I don't take many case notes -- I work my ass off) and continuing to grasp the law. At least I'd guess that (unless the teacher is a "let's throw these up the stairs and see who's gets the highest" type grader).

As an aside, I continue to see people in class focusing on the wrong things in the cases. I don't go to Harvard (far from it -- WVU), but I'd imagine that this is something that extends throughout all law schools from top to bottom. Don't focus on the inane in the case. Focus on the BLL. I just see so many people focusing on the little details and getting caught up in the philosophy of the law.

[Redzo]

IMO, the appropriate method for treating cases varies widely with the subject matter. In many classes the cases are just examples of the rules. However, in civil procedure, when you're learning something like personal jurisdiction, the cases are the law and the words of the opinion become very significant in and of themselves.

I don't know about everybody else but my class recently did a practice exam and my civil procedure teacher made it very clear that she expects us to specifically reference landmark cases when making arguments about personal jurisdiction, draw parallels and distinguish differences, and even be able to talk about concurring and dissenting opinions in certain cases.

Know what your teacher wants, and that will inform you how much to draw from the cases.

[23402385985]

IMO, the appropriate method for treating cases varies widely with the subject matter. In many classes the cases are just examples of the rules. However, in civil procedure, when you're learning something like personal jurisdiction, the cases are the law and the words of the opinion become very significant in and of themselves.

I don't know about everybody else but my class recently did a practice exam and my civil procedure teacher made it very clear that she expects us to specifically reference landmark cases when making arguments about personal jurisdiction, draw parallels and distinguish differences, and even be able to talk about concurring and dissenting opinions in certain cases.

Know what your teacher wants, and that will inform you how much to draw from the cases.

Now THAT sucks. Would not like to be in that position. Granted, I assume you have an open book Civ Pro exam?

[Redzo]

Oh yeah, open book, open note, totally transparent. And she makes it very clear what she's looking for, so it isn't going to be a surprise. I'm already working on a special outline page that just has brief case summaries and the important stuff that she has emphasized in class.

[Icculus]

Know what your teacher wants, and that will inform you how much to draw from the cases.

+1, I have spent a ton of time talking to 2Ls and 3Ls who had my professors to get a good idea of what the professors like us to focus on.

[23402385985]

Oh yeah, open book, open note, totally transparent. And she makes it very clear what she's looking for, so it isn't going to be a surprise. I'm already working on a special outline page that just has brief case summaries and the important stuff that she has emphasized in class.

Yeah, I hear you. Every teacher I have doesn't care about case facts. Kind of surprising one somewhere actually does, since that all really has no bearing on anything. If you can synthesize the rule from the case, you can just use that synthesized rule as the analysis, you'd think. Sorry to hear about your situation.

My Civ Pro exams are all closed book. We can have the rule book open. That's it. And the rule book can have no writing in it whatsoever.

In short, I am not a big Civ Pro fan.

[youarereadingthis]

As an aside, I continue to see people in class focusing on the wrong things in the cases. I don't go to Harvard (far from it -- WVU), but I'd imagine that this is something that extends throughout all law schools from top to bottom. Don't focus on the inane in the case. Focus on the BLL. I just see so many people focusing on the little details and getting caught up in the philosophy of the law.

I understand what you are saying here. You have to see the big picture and not worry so much about all the little details. But I'm not ignoring policy considerations behind the BLL or glossing over the methods judges use to apply it to facts. It seems like that would be a foolish thing to do (at least in my classes). 2 of my professors are seriously into policy questions on exams.

I do take many notes and try to extract the reasoning and policy considerations from cases. So... can any 2Ls comment if they think I'm doing this wrong?

[23402385985]

As an aside, I continue to see people in class focusing on the wrong things in the cases. I don't go to Harvard (far from it -- WVU), but I'd imagine that this is something that extends throughout all law schools from top to bottom. Don't focus on the inane in the case. Focus on the BLL. I just see so many people focusing on the little details and getting caught up in the philosophy of the law.

I understand what you are saying here. You have to see the big picture and not worry so much about all the little details. But I'm not ignoring policy considerations behind the BLL or glossing over the methods judges use to apply it to facts. It seems like that would be a foolish thing to do (at least in my classes). 2 of my professors are seriously into policy questions on exams.

I do take many notes and try to extract the reasoning and policy considerations from cases. So... can any 2Ls comment if they think I'm doing this wrong?

I agree. But there likely isn't all THAT much for policy. You will find a little bit more that you'll have to add, but you won't need to write pages in your outline on policy alone.