1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread Forum

[kapital98]

I still have to make my way to Substantive Due process. I fell asleep in class that day.

Thanks though. Ill keep an eye out for when things are substantive due process violations now.

there is no such thing as substantive due process

(hugo black)

Also
--ImageRemoved--
Not a fan.

My professor had the biggest hardon for Thomas. It was common to see Thomas dissents and notes about Thomas dissents at the end of the chapters.

Thomas and Scalia, individually, are bad enough. It gets even worse when the professor is interested in why they disagree on particular issues

[5ky]

My professor had the biggest hardon for Thomas. It was common to see Thomas dissents and notes about Thomas dissents at the end of the chapters.

Thomas and Scalia, individually, are bad enough. It gets even worse when the professor is interested in why they disagree on particular issues

It's actually quite interesting to look at particular issues where they disagree, although I see how it could be beneath you to have to examine the legal niceties of S.Ct. justices with whom you disagree.

[094320]

..

[kapital98]

My professor had the biggest hardon for Thomas. It was common to see Thomas dissents and notes about Thomas dissents at the end of the chapters.

Thomas and Scalia, individually, are bad enough. It gets even worse when the professor is interested in why they disagree on particular issues

It's actually quite interesting to look at particular issues where they disagree, although I see how it could be beneath you to have to examine the legal niceties of S.Ct. justices with whom you disagree.

No, not all Justices. Rehnquist, O'Connor, Roberts, and Alito are usually worth reading.

Just Scalia and Thomas are beneath me.

[071816]

My professor had the biggest hardon for Thomas. It was common to see Thomas dissents and notes about Thomas dissents at the end of the chapters.

Thomas and Scalia, individually, are bad enough. It gets even worse when the professor is interested in why they disagree on particular issues

It's actually quite interesting to look at particular issues where they disagree, although I see how it could be beneath you to have to examine the legal niceties of S.Ct. justices with whom you disagree.

No, not all Justices. Rehnquist, O'Connor, Roberts, and Alito are usually worth reading.

Just Scalia and Thomas are beneath me.

But Scalia's opinions are fuckin funny.

[3|ink]

My professor had the biggest hardon for Thomas. It was common to see Thomas dissents and notes about Thomas dissents at the end of the chapters.

Thomas and Scalia, individually, are bad enough. It gets even worse when the professor is interested in why they disagree on particular issues

It's actually quite interesting to look at particular issues where they disagree, although I see how it could be beneath you to have to examine the legal niceties of S.Ct. justices with whom you disagree.

No, not all Justices. Rehnquist, O'Connor, Roberts, and Alito are usually worth reading.

Just Scalia and Thomas are beneath me.

But Scalia's opinions are fuckin funny.

And they never let Thomas write anything.

[Gettingstarted1928]

I still have to make my way to Substantive Due process. I fell asleep in class that day.

Thanks though. Ill keep an eye out for when things are substantive due process violations now.

there is no such thing as substantive due process

(hugo black)

Also
--ImageRemoved--
Not a fan.

My professor had the biggest hardon for Thomas. It was common to see Thomas dissents and notes about Thomas dissents at the end of the chapters.

Thomas and Scalia, individually, are bad enough. It gets even worse when the professor is interested in why they disagree on particular issues

Since the vast majority of law and undergraduate professors have no qualms with expressing their left-wing philosophy, consider this an opportunity to discover a different view.

[Lasers]

i like reading scalia's and thomas' opinions as much as i like reading the other justices' opinions.

[tedalbany]

i like reading scalia's and thomas' opinions as much as i like reading the other justices' opinions.

This. (And in my case, not at all. Seriously, fuck the case method.)

[TTTLS]

Anyone else out there feel like they royally fucked up on this round of exams? How much does life suck right now? All that studying and preparation for nothing. I really don't know what I would do if I bombed my property exam. I'm at my wits' end. I called my family to tell them that I'm probably dropping out. What would you do if you dropped out?

[JenDarby]

Anyone else out there feel like they royally fucked up on this round of exams? How much does life suck right now? All that studying and preparation for nothing. I really don't know what I would do if I bombed my property exam. I'm at my wits' end. I called my family to tell them that I'm probably dropping out. What would you do if you dropped out?

Marry my bf ASAP. (for those who don't know me - kidding.)

At this point all you can do is be zen. Worry about what you would do when and if it happens - you've studied and prepared do you'll probably do better than you expect.

[crossarmant]

i like reading scalia's and thomas' opinions as much as i like reading the other justices' opinions.

This. (And in my case, not at all. Seriously, fuck the case method.)

+1

I don't understand how people have favorite justices due to their writing style. To me it's all the same annoying recitation of case facts, meandering thoughts on why this is different or alike, and personal views on the world. I rarely see any difference in their writing styles. The only thing different about their writing styles is that it seems that Scalia likes to make his seem more like crass personal attacks and usually expresses an opinion that is the complete opposite of how pretty much any given case should turn out.

[dreakol]

My professor had the biggest hardon for Thomas. It was common to see Thomas dissents and notes about Thomas dissents at the end of the chapters.

Thomas and Scalia, individually, are bad enough. It gets even worse when the professor is interested in why they disagree on particular issues

It's actually quite interesting to look at particular issues where they disagree, although I see how it could be beneath you to have to examine the legal niceties of S.Ct. justices with whom you disagree.

No, not all Justices. Rehnquist, O'Connor, Roberts, and Alito are usually worth reading.

Just Scalia and Thomas are beneath me.

(libtard hating on conservaheros)

[alicrimson]

Anyone else out there feel like they royally fucked up on this round of exams? How much does life suck right now? All that studying and preparation for nothing. I really don't know what I would do if I bombed my property exam. I'm at my wits' end. I called my family to tell them that I'm probably dropping out. What would you do if you dropped out?

I feel similar. I've actually been sleeping longer and more often because I don't want to be awake and worried about how far my gpa is going to slip. Even that is losing its effect, as I've started dreaming about the failure. I know this is whiny and silly, but I just can't get out of this funk.

[merc280]

Are there any other sources I can consult for Con law questions. I know its going to e different than what my professor wants, but there's no way of knowing how much I know unless I see how it might be tested against my knowledge.

and another thing, my professor said to cross off the answer choices by reading them as T/F selectors, but the four sample questions he gave us it really throws me off to see it like that and confuses me. Is that the way to go though?

[ilovesf]

Anyone else out there feel like they royally fucked up on this round of exams? How much does life suck right now? All that studying and preparation for nothing. I really don't know what I would do if I bombed my property exam. I'm at my wits' end. I called my family to tell them that I'm probably dropping out. What would you do if you dropped out?

I feel the same way. I feel like getting grades is going to be the worst day of my life. I'm not near dropping out, but I feel really down about the exams this semester, and it sucks because I studied so much more this semester than last semester.

[LSATmakesMeNeurotic]

Anyone else out there feel like they royally fucked up on this round of exams? How much does life suck right now? All that studying and preparation for nothing. I really don't know what I would do if I bombed my property exam. I'm at my wits' end. I called my family to tell them that I'm probably dropping out. What would you do if you dropped out?

I feel similar. I've actually been sleeping longer and more often because I don't want to be awake and worried about how far my gpa is going to slip. Even that is losing its effect, as I've started dreaming about the failure. I know this is whiny and silly, but I just can't get out of this funk.

Drink more alcohol.

[BlueDiamond]

crim is a philosophy class... con law is a history class... civ pro teaches me what to do if I work on the 1% of cases that actually go to trial

SCREW THIS and its relevance to my job prospects

edit for language

[tedalbany]

crim is a philosophy class... con law is a history class... civ pro teaches me what to do if I work on the 1% of cases that actually go to trial

SCREW THIS and its relevance to my job prospects

edit for language

Not to mention that the majority of those 1% of cases aren't going to have some crazy jurisdictional issues or hardcore choice of law analysis

[merc280]

crim is a philosophy class... con law is a history class... civ pro teaches me what to do if I work on the 1% of cases that actually go to trial

SCREW THIS and its relevance to my job prospects

edit for language

Not to mention that the majority of those 1% of cases aren't going to have some crazy jurisdictional issues or hardcore choice of law analysis

Looking back to that civ pro class makes me think I should have memorized the way a case can be thrown out over random jurisdictional issues. But I guess its the same with most things, in that they seem more interesting once its not mandatory to study it.

[gdane]

Come on! Positive thinking! If youse all prepared well enough then you'll be ok. If you fucked around the whole semester and thought three days of reading the E&E would do it for you, then yea worry. But from what Ive read most everyone on here worked hard all semester long.

So, smile. And look forward to getting some A's.

[merc280]

Come on! Positive thinking! If youse all prepared well enough then you'll be ok. If you fucked around the whole semester and thought three days of reading the E&E would do it for you, then yea worry. But from what Ive read most everyone on here worked hard all semester long.

So, smile. And look forward to getting some A's.

still not sure about con law. We only got 4 sample questions, and I got those correct the first time I did it, but then I did the kaplan bar questions and pretty much keep getting them wrong.

[gdane]

Well, I'll vent about con law. It sucks. So much of it is just subjective test after subjective test that can come out any way. I'm having a tough time with Dormant Commerce clause analysis because when the hell is something facially neutral or when is the balancing test satisfied, etc.

The positive thing about this is that there is more to argue on an exam. So, I can always be like "This statute may fail the Pike test because of... However,..." I tend to do a lot of back and forth analysis on exams and its worked so far. So, hopefully it will work for me on Tuesday!

[piccolittle]

So for adverse possession, does the APer have to exercise the exact same activity as the landowner? Say, a house next door mows a section of land as part of their yard or a university uses part of a field for football practice, but the land actually begins to a farmer... for AP, would they have to use the land consistently with their ownership/possession, or with the farmer's? E.g. would they have to be farming the land to get AP? I say no, other members of my study group say yes.

[Mike12188]

So for adverse possession, does the APer have to exercise the exact same activity as the landowner? Say, a house next door mows a section of land as part of their yard or a university uses part of a field for football practice, but the land actually begins to a farmer... for AP, would they have to use the land consistently with their ownership/possession, or with the farmer's? E.g. would they have to be farming the land to get AP? I say no, other members of my study group say yes.

No. Do they actually cite to any specific cases, I can't even imagine where they got that idea from.