(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
-
merc280
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:52 am
Post
by merc280 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:42 pm
BlueDiamond wrote:Decided that all I want is B's.. all I need for that is top 85% in each class.. however, ive done nothing all semester because I hate law school.. looking for someone to list the 5 most important topics in con law, crim, and civ pro.. thanks
Crim law
1. Actus reus/Mens rea
2. Mistake and Ignorance
3. Homicide
4. Defense
5. Attempt/Conspiracy/Accomplice Liability
oh and Defense breaks down to justification/Excuse
-
MrPapagiorgio
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:36 am
Post
by MrPapagiorgio » Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:46 pm
Con Law
1. Commerce Clause
2. Dormant Commerce Clause
3. Due Process, Equal Protection and Privileges/Immunities
4. Federal Preemption of State Statutes
5. State Action Doctrine
Civ Pro (hard to list just five, but here's a start)
1. Personal, Subject Matter, Diversity and Supplemental Jurisdiction
2. Joinder
3. Pleadings (Twiqbal)
4. Discovery
5. Summary Judgment, Directed Verdict and JNOV
and Claim/Issue Preclusion
Last edited by
MrPapagiorgio on Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
kapital98
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:58 pm
Post
by kapital98 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:49 pm
Civ Pro:
1) Rule 12(b)(6) -- Pleadings
2) Rule 26 -- Discovery
3) Rule 50/54 (JMOL + Judgment)
4) Jurisdiction (Common Law)
5)????
-
merc280
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:52 am
Post
by merc280 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:50 pm
kapital98 wrote:Civ Pro:
1) Rule 12(b)(6) -- Pleadings
2) Rule 26 -- Discovery
3) Rule 50/54 (JMOL + Judgment)
4) Jurisdiction (Common Law)
5)????
might differ for classes, but our class emphasized rule 11, the four violations that can get sanctions and the case thrown out.
-
BlueDiamond
- Posts: 952
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 12:56 pm
Post
by BlueDiamond » Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:51 pm
woah.. walked to the corner to get a drink and already have my finals study guide. thanks people
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
ilovesf
- Posts: 12837
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm
Post
by ilovesf » Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:52 pm
kapital98 wrote:Civ Pro:
1) Rule 12(b)(6) -- Pleadings
2) Rule 26 -- Discovery
3) Rule 50/54 (JMOL + Judgment)
4) Jurisdiction (Common Law)
5)????
5) could either be choice of law or joinders/other similar rules
-
Shammis
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:26 pm
Post
by Shammis » Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:57 pm
ilovesf wrote:
5) could either be choice of law or joinders/other similar rules
At least for us it's def. Joinder.
-
crossarmant
- Posts: 1116
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:01 am
Post
by crossarmant » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:11 pm
Reading all this talk about CivPro makes me feel like I was victimized back in December and I'm forcibly blocking it all out now. I prefer pretending like it never happened (until the Bar exam)
-
ilovesf
- Posts: 12837
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm
Post
by ilovesf » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:17 pm
crossarmant wrote:Reading all this talk about CivPro makes me feel like I was victimized back in December and I'm forcibly blocking it all out now. I prefer pretending like it never happened (until the Bar exam)
I want to do litigation so I'm going to take civ pro 2 next semester
already regretting this decision.
Want to continue reading?
Register for access!
Did I mention it was FREE ?
Already a member? Login
-
merc280
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:52 am
Post
by merc280 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:18 pm
crossarmant wrote:Reading all this talk about CivPro makes me feel like I was victimized back in December and I'm forcibly blocking it all out now. I prefer pretending like it never happened (until the Bar exam)
same here. Definitely not wanting to think about it again. So annoying. So many nightmares about venue and pleadings.
-
merc280
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:52 am
Post
by merc280 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:23 pm
Got bored, quit working on my outline, and now doing cali lessons to justify staying in the library. Don't feel like doing anything substantive tonight.
-
reasonable troll
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:34 pm
Post
by reasonable troll » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:40 pm
while we're on civ pro (sorry, crossarmant) can anyone give me something to grasp for the Twiqbal pleading standard?
basically i've got:
8(a)(2) says short plain statement showing pleader is entitled to relief, liberal standard, blah blah
Twiqbal has imposed the need to assert facts showing that pleader's claim is plausible, otherwise vulnerable to 12(b)(6), etc.
anything else???
please/thank you
-
jess
- Posts: 18149
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:27 pm
Post
by jess » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:45 pm
.
Last edited by
jess on Fri Oct 27, 2017 1:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
Eugenie Danglars
- Posts: 2353
- Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 12:04 pm
Post
by Eugenie Danglars » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:49 pm
gdane wrote:Last year our professor had a commerce clause fact pattern and then asked something like "It is 1936, how would the court rule on this case?"
He also told us to keep in mind the old economic substantive due process cases, even though many of them have been overruled.
In other words, I literally have to memorize everything. Or at least have a broad idea of old/bad law and good law.
I have a chart of cases with years. Do you want it?
-
angrybird
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:15 am
Post
by angrybird » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:53 pm
Eugenie Danglars wrote:gdane wrote:Last year our professor had a commerce clause fact pattern and then asked something like "It is 1936, how would the court rule on this case?"
He also told us to keep in mind the old economic substantive due process cases, even though many of them have been overruled.
In other words, I literally have to memorize everything. Or at least have a broad idea of old/bad law and good law.
I have a chart of cases with years. Do you want it?
wow, you just reminded me that our professor gave us a handout with a table of all the commerce clause cases, the substantive rules they created, and their reasoning. now where the hell did i put it...
-
merc280
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:52 am
Post
by merc280 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:49 pm
angrybird wrote:Eugenie Danglars wrote:gdane wrote:Last year our professor had a commerce clause fact pattern and then asked something like "It is 1936, how would the court rule on this case?"
He also told us to keep in mind the old economic substantive due process cases, even though many of them have been overruled.
In other words, I literally have to memorize everything. Or at least have a broad idea of old/bad law and good law.
I have a chart of cases with years. Do you want it?
wow, you just reminded me that our professor gave us a handout with a table of all the commerce clause cases, the substantive rules they created, and their reasoning. now where the hell did i put it...
Well if you find it, could you send a copy to me. I could really use anything that would help with knowing rules and stuff abou the commerce clause.
-
TheFutureLawyer
- Posts: 3925
- Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 2:28 pm
Post
by TheFutureLawyer » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:00 pm
Lasers wrote:not studying too much today for my exam tomorrow.
i'm thinking just light review and refresher is enough. it's not because i'm confident, it's because i'm certain anything more is futile at this point.
this sounds familiar...
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
gdane
- Posts: 14023
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 2:41 pm
Post
by gdane » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:02 pm
Eugenie Danglars wrote:gdane wrote:Last year our professor had a commerce clause fact pattern and then asked something like "It is 1936, how would the court rule on this case?"
He also told us to keep in mind the old economic substantive due process cases, even though many of them have been overruled.
In other words, I literally have to memorize everything. Or at least have a broad idea of old/bad law and good law.
I have a chart of cases with years. Do you want it?
I really appreciate this. It's very kind of you, but no thank you. I learn better doing this stuff on my own. Thanks again though!
-
angrybird
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:15 am
Post
by angrybird » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:51 pm
merc280 wrote:angrybird wrote:Eugenie Danglars wrote:gdane wrote:Last year our professor had a commerce clause fact pattern and then asked something like "It is 1936, how would the court rule on this case?"
He also told us to keep in mind the old economic substantive due process cases, even though many of them have been overruled.
In other words, I literally have to memorize everything. Or at least have a broad idea of old/bad law and good law.
I have a chart of cases with years. Do you want it?
wow, you just reminded me that our professor gave us a handout with a table of all the commerce clause cases, the substantive rules they created, and their reasoning. now where the hell did i put it...
Well if you find it, could you send a copy to me. I could really use anything that would help with knowing rules and stuff abou the commerce clause.
i found it, and it's not nearly as useful as i remember. i'll post it here anyway:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/fhpaclwu7orw6 ... ndout.docx
-
Flips88
- Posts: 15246
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:42 pm
Post
by Flips88 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:01 pm
Our prof did this too. Our practice midterm asked us to analyze a law in 1820, 1870, 1920, 1970, and today. Sucked. One of his past exams asked for it in 1930 and another asked for it based on what John Marshall would think.
-
ilovesf
- Posts: 12837
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm
Post
by ilovesf » Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:06 pm
lol that sounds like a history test.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
-
MrPapagiorgio
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:36 am
Post
by MrPapagiorgio » Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:09 pm
ilovesf wrote:lol that sounds like a history test.
Seriously. In our last class our prof was like "I know I've lectured about the changing standards of review and tests for various powers such as the commerce clause etc, but for the love of god analyze the questions under the current law." Even my civ pro prof basically said "I don't give a fuck about the Conley standard for pleading with the Twiqbal standard prevalent now. If you talk about it you won't be penalized, but your wasting time."
-
BlueDiamond
- Posts: 952
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 12:56 pm
Post
by BlueDiamond » Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:17 pm
MrPapagiorgio wrote:ilovesf wrote:lol that sounds like a history test.
Seriously. In our last class our prof was like "I know I've lectured about the changing standards of review and tests for various powers such as the commerce clause etc, but for the love of god analyze the questions under the current law." Even my civ pro prof basically said "I don't give a fuck about the Conley standard for pleading with the Twiqbal standard prevalent now. If you talk about it you won't be penalized, but your wasting time."
So lucky.. for con law we were told recently that there will be somewhere between 3 and 5 questions and then the prof said for example I could ask something like write the dissenting opinion for a case we have read.. so I counted that we have read 68 cases.. so thats 68 dissenting opinions I'd have to write and memorize.. or I could just take the C and move on
-
kapital98
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:58 pm
Post
by kapital98 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:48 pm
merc280 wrote:kapital98 wrote:Civ Pro:
1) Rule 12(b)(6) -- Pleadings
2) Rule 26 -- Discovery
3) Rule 50/54 (JMOL + Judgment)
4) Jurisdiction (Common Law)
5)????
might differ for classes, but our class emphasized rule 11, the four violations that can get sanctions and the case thrown out.
You're right. It's 11(b)(6). I really hate civ pro and it was the only course still not covered.
-
bartleby
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 3:23 am
Post
by bartleby » Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:53 pm
1937 is a pretty significant date though. Or was it 1936... for Con Law
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login