1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread Forum

[AlexanderSupertramp]

Just read the Property Exam (that I took yesterday) instructions posted on twen. It said not to write past the red margins in the blue book. Which I did. There goes three points. On top of all that I'm totally second guessing my analysis. I'm fucked. Property is one of my best classes. I was saving my B for Contracts.

[northwood]

Was flipping out because I kept comparing my practice answers to the model answer our professor wrote. Finally found and compared my answer to an actual A- exam someone wrote and realized my answer was about that level instead. I am forever grateful that students post their exams and need to stop getting upset because I don't nail everything the prof does. (But also learn from the model answers.)

Thats better than comparing your answers to the one student exam he puts up, thinking your doing great because you pretty much got everything answered, then going to class and having him tell you he put up a median paper as opposed to a model answer.

THATS OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Ba- case for IIED

[BlueDiamond]

Quick question for someone here: If a car company has a manufacturing defect where the brakes don't work and someone crashes into a building killing people. The estates can sue Toyota directly right? (considering driver wasn't negligent at all).

in theory yes.. but real world its pretty hard to prove that it left the manufacturer with the defect and that it wasnt caused by a dealer/retailer instead

Ok thanks. Just to clarify (regardless of proving defect) the injured people(inside the building)can go right to Toyota or do they have to sue the driver first?

Also now an additional question...Toyota brake cases...manufacturing defect or design? Manufacturing right, since all the cars were not affected?

For the purposes in my class our professor would likely have us argue both and explain why.. there are decent arguments either way in her mind event though I see it as manufacturing so I probably will not be helpful there as far as what the actual answer is

And the people in the building would also have to prove a defect but yes they can sue Toyota directly from my understanding.. my professors exact words were "By-standers are allowed to bring these suits in almost every state as well"

[Eugenie Danglars]

My civ pro exam covers solely Erie and removal...and I feel like I should study more but don't konw what to do. this is the first year the profs done it this way, so his sample exam isn't helpful really...

[dabomb75]

does anyone else feel completely unmotivated when actually writing the exam? I just reeeeally don't feel like putting the effort in to write for 3 straight hours. I'm hoping that this is just because it's practice and I'll have a fire under my ass come actual exam time, but I just get so bored when actually writing the exam the minute I finish outlining all the causes of action

[lisjjen]

I feel like my brain is turning to paste when I study for CivPro. The good news is our test is multiple choice. The bad news is that 18/40 was the A+ last year.

I would actually take that as the good news as well.

Maybe. It sounds too much like the LSAT for my tastes though. This professor is legendary. On the last day of class, she gave us the opportunity to ask any question we wanted to.

Random girl: "I heard that people have seizures when they're on call in your class."
Professor M: "That's only happened twice. I went to the hospital to make sure they were alright the first time."

[TheFutureLawyer]

Why can't all crimes just be strict liability? And why are there so many defenses? Can't we just hang people at random and let God sort out the mess?

[crossarmant]

does anyone else feel completely unmotivated when actually writing the exam? I just reeeeally don't feel like putting the effort in to write for 3 straight hours. I'm hoping that this is just because it's practice and I'll have a fire under my ass come actual exam time, but I just get so bored when actually writing the exam the minute I finish outlining all the causes of action

I'm actually amazed at how goddamn fast those 3 hours blow by. If it's Torts or Contracts, I almost find the practice tests kind of fun (aside from crippling anxiety that the real thing will determine my life's trajectory)... Civil Procedure it's like slowly having people stick thumbtacks under your fingernails

[ph14]

Quick question for someone here: If a car company has a manufacturing defect where the brakes don't work and someone crashes into a building killing people. The estates can sue Toyota directly right? (considering driver wasn't negligent at all).

Yes. If they can prove it's a manufacturing defect, it's strict liability.

Also consider the crashworthiness doctrine, which holds a automobile manufacturer liable for injuries which, although not the cause of the crash, caused or aggravating an injury.

[Eugenie Danglars]

I <3 Civ Pro! I dislike studying for it a little because I'm how sure what to study exactly, but it's so interesting. I'm a federalism geek

[TheFutureLawyer]

There are no football games going on, continue studying.
There are no football games going on, continue studying.
There are no football games going on, continue studying.
There are no football games going on, continue studying.
There are no football games going on, continue studying.
There are no football games going on, continue studying.
There are no football games going on, continue studying.
There are no football games going on, continue studying.
There are no football games going on, continue studying.

[AlexanderSupertramp]

I'm just here to fap some more about all the second-guessing I am doing instead of actually, ya know, studying for Civ Pro so I don't potentially screw that up as well. Need hugs, coffee, and raw cookie dough.

[piccolittle]

Oh god, I just "finished" (I say that because I didn't finish) a contracts question that should have been so easy, but it made me realize I don't know anything and I spent 45 minutes staring at my outline, and still got everything wrong. Also still don't know how to calculate damages. Good lord I'm boned.

*Goes to get drunk*

[ahduth]

I <3 Civ Pro! I dislike studying for it a little because I'm how sure what to study exactly, but it's so interesting. I'm a federalism geek

Ya, Civ Pro is sweet. I kind of think it's at least partially my prof, but now that I understand "the system" a little bit, it's the cat's pajamas.

[alicrimson]

Was flipping out because I kept comparing my practice answers to the model answer our professor wrote. Finally found and compared my answer to an actual A- exam someone wrote and realized my answer was about that level instead. I am forever grateful that students post their exams and need to stop getting upset because I don't nail everything the prof does. (But also learn from the model answers.)

I know how that feels. In looking at model answers and grade rubrics, at first I was beating myself up if I didn't spot a particular issue or analyze it the way the model answer did. It took about a week of practice tests before I was able to realize that not performing up to the model answer is not failure. They did the best for a reason and its still possible to get a fantastic grade without beating the book award winner from the year prior. lol. It seems so obvious but...not always. I wish I could see examples of different grades. Its difficult because sometimes the model answer doesn't seem super insightful...particularly, because often in class it seems everyone knows what they're talking about. It gets easy to get overwhelmed but I keep reminding myself that I don't have to know everything. Just enough things. I mean, in many of my classes a 60/100 will get you a solid A.

[TheFutureLawyer]

Oh god, I just "finished" (I say that because I didn't finish) a contracts question that should have been so easy, but it made me realize I don't know anything and I spent 45 minutes staring at my outline, and still got everything wrong. Also still don't know how to calculate damages. Good lord I'm boned.

*Goes to get drunk*

lol, I figured that out yesterday. Was going through a PT and that was a question that was recommended to take like 7 minutes, it took me like 40 to make sure I was doing it right.

[FeelTheHeat]

CALI has been overloaded all day...great time for it to flake out

[bostonlawchick]

Okay... can someone give me an overview of breach? Our prof is a little scatterbrained and all I really got from her is that you need to show that a RPP would not have done what D did, and what the RPP would have done instead. Not really sure where the Carroll Towing formula fits in.

I know it's not a problem in negligence per se questions where the breach is a violation of statute, but I'm confused about when it is just straight up negligence what you have to say about breach. Is it if Burden of precautions<PL and the D did not take those precautions, then there is a breach?

My brain is mush.

[stewie27]

Anyone have an opinion about doing an 8 hour take home at home vs at the law school library? I'm thinking it might be worth it to do it at home even if I lose 10 minutes driving each way since I'll be able to print it there and also not have to deal with fighting for a cubicle in the library.

[FeelTheHeat]

Okay... can someone give me an overview of breach? Our prof is a little scatterbrained and all I really got from her is that you need to show that a RPP would not have done what D did, and what the RPP would have done instead. Not really sure where the Carroll Towing formula fits in.

I know it's not a problem in negligence per se questions where the breach is a violation of statute, but I'm confused about when it is just straight up negligence what you have to say about breach. Is it if Burden of precautions<PL and the D did not take those precautions, then there is a breach?

My brain is mush.

You want to initially analyze it as a reasonable person under the circumstances (whatever they may be). My professor is big on B<PL, so I make sure to apply it wherever I can. From there, go through a checklist of sorts...was it an emergency? Industry custom? Negligence per se? Child standard? Physical disabilities?

Res ipsa also falls under breach, so look to that as well.

[ph14]

Okay... can someone give me an overview of breach? Our prof is a little scatterbrained and all I really got from her is that you need to show that a RPP would not have done what D did, and what the RPP would have done instead. Not really sure where the Carroll Towing formula fits in.

I know it's not a problem in negligence per se questions where the breach is a violation of statute, but I'm confused about when it is just straight up negligence what you have to say about breach. Is it if Burden of precautions<PL and the D did not take those precautions, then there is a breach?

My brain is mush.

Breach = failing to live up to the standard of due care (act as a reasonable person). The Carroll formula attempted to reduce breach to a formula, but courts treat it only as a factor in the analysis and not really dispositive or anything, and some don't use it at all.

The formula is:

B<PL = negligent
Where b = burden of taking measures to prevent the harm < probability of that harm occurred multiplied by the damage that occurred

so basically if B<PL then it is pretty solid evidence that they did not act reasonably and thus breached their duty of due care. But sometimes you don't even really need B<PL (although i'd still hit it on an exam if you're not word limited) such as maybe setting off fireworks at a dynamite factory or something.

[bostonlawchick]

You want to initially analyze it as a reasonable person under the circumstances (whatever they may be). My professor is big on B<PL, so I make sure to apply it wherever I can.From there, go through a checklist of sorts...was it an emergency? Industry custom? Negligence per se? Child standard? Physical disabilities?

Res ipsa also falls under breach, so look to that as well.

See, she talked about all of that under duty and not breach. I understood it as you have a duty to act as the RPP in an emergency, the reasonable prudent child of your age (unless you are operating a motor vehicle, etc. ), the RPP with a physical disability, and so on. We really didn't learn that as part of breach, only that all of those fold into what the reasonable person standard you're held to is.

I guess it's tough because duty and breach blend together so much.

Breach = failing to live up to the standard of due care (act as a reasonable person). The Carroll formula attempted to reduce breach to a formula, but courts treat it only as a factor in the analysis and not really dispositive or anything, and some don't use it at all.

The formula is:

B<PL = negligent
Where b = burden of taking measures to prevent the harm < probability of that harm occurred multiplied by the damage that occurred

so basically if B<PL then it is pretty solid evidence that they did not act reasonably and thus breached their duty of due care. But sometimes you don't even really need B<PL (although i'd still hit it on an exam if you're not word limited) such as maybe setting off fireworks at a dynamite factory or something.

Thanks. This is exactly what I was thinking, I just wasn't sure. It was the only solid thing I could grasp onto in the casebook's chapter on breach. Everything else was just... hey, they didn't act like a reasonable person because they ____ instead of _____. So I wasn't sure how that fit in with the Hand formula. It is just more evidence whether or not they did all that a reasonable person would have done to prevent harm. I think I got it now.

[jd20132013]

Is Parol Evidence supposed to be a really hard concept? I feel like I may be missing something. granted we only spent a day on it, but it seems that it's relatively straightforward.

any common tripups that I may not even know I don't know? I suppose that if it's not a contract for goods then it becomes an issue of choosing from the common law tests but they seem to be not too complex.

[ClutchCity24]

Anybody want to go into a little more detail about how to talk about breach on the exam? Our professor told us it would take maybe 4 sentences to discuss breach. Also our exam is all negligence. So Learned Hand Formula + ?.

[NonTradHealthLaw]

Anybody want to go into a little more detail about how to talk about breach on the exam? Our professor told us it would take maybe 4 sentences to discuss breach. Also our exam is all negligence. So Learned Hand Formula + ?.

I've been looking at breach based on five categories of reasonableness, though B<PL really applies to every aspect of breach (in my opinion). You can discuss breach by mentioning custom or statute, where both represent the basement of reasonable behavior, except for custom of medical practice where failure to comport with custom represents automatic breach. Also in reasonableness you can discuss the special categories of people as applicable to your fact pattern (child, physical limitation, mental limitation, intoxication, professional, etc.) and how reasonableness varies, and then the final category is res ipsa, which, my prof, calls the WTF test. Each of these (except RIL) can be BPLed; pingponging back and forth between burden and risk and policy for modifying one's behavior.

Can't imagine talking about breach in only 4 sentences as BPL seems to get at policy where other portions are largely straightforward. Maybe it's teacher dependent, or maybe I'm just wordy - most likely the latter.