One of mine is great. That's the one I'm studying now which is why I'm happy. Studying for my other one is probably going to make me cry.Dany wrote:I love my elective.
1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread Forum
- Eugenie Danglars
- Posts: 2353
- Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 12:04 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
- ilovesf
- Posts: 12837
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
I like my elective, immigration, but it's definitely going to be my worst grade. 24 hour take home? No thank you.
- Eugenie Danglars
- Posts: 2353
- Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 12:04 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
Aww, good luck. We had an overnight take home for civ pro. That wasn't as bad as I thought, so maybe yours won't be either!ilovesf wrote:I like my elective, immigration, but it's definitely going to be my worst grade. 24 hour take home? No thank you.
- crossarmant
- Posts: 1116
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:01 am
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
I've been so lucky to dodge these 24-hour take home exams. Like the idea of it being graded on a 3.0 curve just terrifies me to the core, knowing I need an A but only like 2 people will get one... I really hope to avoid any of those for the next 2 years.Eugenie Danglars wrote:Aww, good luck. We had an overnight take home for civ pro. That wasn't as bad as I thought, so maybe yours won't be either!ilovesf wrote:I like my elective, immigration, but it's definitely going to be my worst grade. 24 hour take home? No thank you.
- Lawst
- Posts: 503
- Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:02 am
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
I'm jealous of the people who get take-home exams. Yeah, there's probably more expectations, but it would nice to be able to spend more time on completing a thought, check things I'm not totally certain about and best of all, not have to sit in a room between Heavy Mouth Breather and Nervous Pen Clicker.
My first exam is con law, closed book, three hours. I'm like, what am I, a wizard?
My first exam is con law, closed book, three hours. I'm like, what am I, a wizard?
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- jess
- Posts: 18149
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:27 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
.
Last edited by jess on Fri Oct 27, 2017 1:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Eugenie Danglars
- Posts: 2353
- Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 12:04 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
I have a chart of this that my prof wrote on the board. Non-chart form:Jessuf wrote:Bringing my finder's law question in here:
Does anyone know who has the superior interest in lost property vs. mislaid property vs. abandoned property vs. treasure trove when you have an original owner, finder, and landowner?
True owner has rights over all. Other than that:
Lost property goes to the finder.
Mislaid property to the locus owner
Abandoned property to the finder (if proven to be abandoned, true owner has lost rights).
Treasure trove to finder.
Exception- finder is agent of locus owner.
Exception- thing found is "attached" to the land (standard for attached-ness varies)
Last edited by Eugenie Danglars on Fri Apr 27, 2012 11:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Eugenie Danglars
- Posts: 2353
- Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 12:04 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
also, the E&E has a good section on this kind of stuff if you can get your hands on one.
- jess
- Posts: 18149
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:27 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
.
Last edited by jess on Fri Oct 27, 2017 1:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Extension_Cord
- Posts: 592
- Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:15 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
RAP Question:
O devises to A for life, then to O's first grandchild and his or her heirs. (O has six children and no grandchildren).
State of Title:
A: Possossory estate in life estate.
O's first grandchild: Contingent remainder in FSA.
O's estate: Reversion in FSA.
Vulnerable to RAP:
O's First grandchilds contingent remainder in FSA.
Kill the lives in Being:
A, O.
Still Possible that it won't vest after 21 years?
I think so, what if O's children have O's first grandchild after 21 years of killing the lives in being. I don't see why thats not a possibility that would invalidate the contingent remainder. The book says this is a valid interest though. Why?
O devises to A for life, then to O's first grandchild and his or her heirs. (O has six children and no grandchildren).
State of Title:
A: Possossory estate in life estate.
O's first grandchild: Contingent remainder in FSA.
O's estate: Reversion in FSA.
Vulnerable to RAP:
O's First grandchilds contingent remainder in FSA.
Kill the lives in Being:
A, O.
Still Possible that it won't vest after 21 years?
I think so, what if O's children have O's first grandchild after 21 years of killing the lives in being. I don't see why thats not a possibility that would invalidate the contingent remainder. The book says this is a valid interest though. Why?
- angrybird
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:15 am
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
O's children are lives in being.Extension_Cord wrote:RAP Question:
O devises to A for life, then to O's first grandchild and his or her heirs. (O has six children and no grandchildren).
State of Title:
A: Possossory estate in life estate.
O's first grandchild: Contingent remainder in FSA.
O's estate: Reversion in FSA.
Vulnerable to RAP:
O's First grandchilds contingent remainder in FSA.
Kill the lives in Being:
A, O.
Still Possible that it won't vest after 21 years?
I think so, what if O's children have their first child after 21 years of killing the lives in being. The book says this is a valid interest though. Why?
- Extension_Cord
- Posts: 592
- Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:15 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
angrybird wrote:O's children are lives in being.Extension_Cord wrote:RAP Question:
O devises to A for life, then to O's first grandchild and his or her heirs. (O has six children and no grandchildren).
State of Title:
A: Possossory estate in life estate.
O's first grandchild: Contingent remainder in FSA.
O's estate: Reversion in FSA.
Vulnerable to RAP:
O's First grandchilds contingent remainder in FSA.
Kill the lives in Being:
A, O.
Still Possible that it won't vest after 21 years?
I think so, what if O's children have their first child after 21 years of killing the lives in being. The book says this is a valid interest though. Why?
Thanks, for some reason I thought only the named people in the conveyance were lives in being.
If I changed it from "O devises" to "O to A", it would violate the RAP because O could possibly have after born children?
- crossarmant
- Posts: 1116
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:01 am
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
I think the worst thing about studying for so long is how badly my lower back starts to ache from the library chairs. It's almost unbearable.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- akili
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:21 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
Woo! Done with Con Law. I'm cautiously optimistic and I think I caught a couple of subtleties in the facts. Honestly no idea how I did, but I don't think I could've done much more to prepare for it.
On to Crim and K's.
On to Crim and K's.
- gdane
- Posts: 14023
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 2:41 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
Boo!!! I did so much joinder stuff yesterday to prepare for my civ pro II exam, but almost none showed up on it. No counterclaim stuff or crossclaim stuff either. As far as I could spot, but Im pretty sure there wasnt.
I dont feel fantastic because while I did do a good analysis on the stuff I spotted, which after talking to others they spotted as well, I feel like there were really well hidden issues. We shall see when I get my grades back...
On to Contractos!
I dont feel fantastic because while I did do a good analysis on the stuff I spotted, which after talking to others they spotted as well, I feel like there were really well hidden issues. We shall see when I get my grades back...
On to Contractos!
- 3|ink
- Posts: 7393
- Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
How much do you really have to do to prepare for joinder questions? It seems pretty straightforward.gdane wrote:Boo!!! I did so much joinder stuff yesterday to prepare for my civ pro II exam, but almost none showed up on it. No counterclaim stuff or crossclaim stuff either. As far as I could spot, but Im pretty sure there wasnt.
I dont feel fantastic because while I did do a good analysis on the stuff I spotted, which after talking to others they spotted as well, I feel like there were really well hidden issues. We shall see when I get my grades back...
On to Contractos!
- ilovesf
- Posts: 12837
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
You mean talking to your friends didn't make you feel superior to all of them like last time?gdane wrote: I dont feel fantastic because while I did do a good analysis on the stuff I spotted, which after talking to others they spotted as well, I feel like there were really well hidden issues. We shall see when I get my grades back...
gdane wrote:Man I loved talking about my exams! The second they were over I went around talking to everyone just to see what I spotted that other people didnt.
I did feel bad last semester though when I made my friend realize that he completely missed a gigantic issue. He was sad after that.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- Shammis
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:26 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
My local pub has free WiFi - finals win...
- Extension_Cord
- Posts: 592
- Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:15 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
Could someone help me with this estates question?
Arthur owned blackacre. Arthur devised it by will as follows: "To my son, Roger, for life; remainder to my grandchildren when they reach 21." At the time Arthur died, he had two sons, Roger and Ted. Roger and his wife have two minor children who were alive at the time of Arthur's death.
Based upon the foregoing, following Arthur's death, blackacre is most likely held in which manner?
A. Life estate in Roger; contingent remainder in Arthur's grandchildren; reversion in Arthur's heirs
B. Liefe estate in Roger; vested remainder in Arthur's grandchildren; reversion in Arthur's heirs
C. Life estate in Roger; reversion in Arthur's heirs
D. Life estate in Roger; contingent remainder in Arthur's grandchildren
Arthur owned blackacre. Arthur devised it by will as follows: "To my son, Roger, for life; remainder to my grandchildren when they reach 21." At the time Arthur died, he had two sons, Roger and Ted. Roger and his wife have two minor children who were alive at the time of Arthur's death.
Based upon the foregoing, following Arthur's death, blackacre is most likely held in which manner?
A. Life estate in Roger; contingent remainder in Arthur's grandchildren; reversion in Arthur's heirs
B. Liefe estate in Roger; vested remainder in Arthur's grandchildren; reversion in Arthur's heirs
C. Life estate in Roger; reversion in Arthur's heirs
D. Life estate in Roger; contingent remainder in Arthur's grandchildren
- sundance95
- Posts: 2123
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 7:44 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
C. The 'remainder to my grandchildren' clause violates the classic RAP. Roger, who is the measuring life, may be outlived by his brother. His brother could then have a child after Roger's death. That child would mature more than 21 years after the end of the measuring life. So the entire clause must be struck, which means that Roger gets a life estate, after which the property will revert to A's heirs.Extension_Cord wrote:Could someone help me with this estates question?
Arthur owned blackacre. Arthur devised it by will as follows: "To my son, Roger, for life; remainder to my grandchildren when they reach 21." At the time Arthur died, he had two sons, Roger and Ted. Roger and his wife have two minor children who were alive at the time of Arthur's death.
Based upon the foregoing, following Arthur's death, blackacre is most likely held in which manner?
A. Life estate in Roger; contingent remainder in Arthur's grandchildren; reversion in Arthur's heirs
B. Liefe estate in Roger; vested remainder in Arthur's grandchildren; reversion in Arthur's heirs
C. Life estate in Roger; reversion in Arthur's heirs
D. Life estate in Roger; contingent remainder in Arthur's grandchildren
- Extension_Cord
- Posts: 592
- Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:15 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
Extension_Cord wrote:Could someone help me with this estates question?
Arthur owned blackacre. Arthur devised it by will as follows: "To my son, Roger, for life; remainder to my grandchildren when they reach 21." At the time Arthur died, he had two sons, Roger and Ted. Roger and his wife have two minor children who were alive at the time of Arthur's death.
Based upon the foregoing, following Arthur's death, blackacre is most likely held in which manner?
A. Life estate in Roger; contingent remainder in Arthur's grandchildren; reversion in Arthur's heirs
B. Liefe estate in Roger; vested remainder in Arthur's grandchildren; reversion in Arthur's heirs
C. Life estate in Roger; reversion in Arthur's heirs
D. Life estate in Roger; contingent remainder in Arthur's grandchildren
I thought it was A, but the book says its C. When you kill the lives and being, Arthur, Roger, and Ted; you would know whether any of Roger or Teds children reach the age of 21 during the perpeituities period.
I MIGHT recall something about the 21 years ticking at the time of the grantors death when it comes to gifts. If so, then Roger and Ted could have children that would invalidate the contingent remainder. But if Roger and Ted are killed off before the 21 years starts ticking, then we must know whether the contingent remainder will vest or fail within the perpituities period.
HELP?!?!?!
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!
Already a member? Login
- Extension_Cord
- Posts: 592
- Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:15 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
So brother doesn't have to die before the perpituities period begins? Is that because this was a will? We've been doing these questions as killing all the lives in being at once.sundance95 wrote:C. The 'remainder to my grandchildren' clause violates the classic RAP. Roger, who is the measuring life, may be outlived by his brother. His brother could then have a child after Roger's death. That child would mature more than 21 years after the end of the measuring life. So the entire clause must be struck, which means that Roger gets a life estate, after which the property will revert to A's heirs.Extension_Cord wrote:Could someone help me with this estates question?
Arthur owned blackacre. Arthur devised it by will as follows: "To my son, Roger, for life; remainder to my grandchildren when they reach 21." At the time Arthur died, he had two sons, Roger and Ted. Roger and his wife have two minor children who were alive at the time of Arthur's death.
Based upon the foregoing, following Arthur's death, blackacre is most likely held in which manner?
A. Life estate in Roger; contingent remainder in Arthur's grandchildren; reversion in Arthur's heirs
B. Liefe estate in Roger; vested remainder in Arthur's grandchildren; reversion in Arthur's heirs
C. Life estate in Roger; reversion in Arthur's heirs
D. Life estate in Roger; contingent remainder in Arthur's grandchildren
- ilovesf
- Posts: 12837
- Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
Property is bringing back nightmares of last December.
- crossarmant
- Posts: 1116
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:01 am
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
So, with Nat'l League of Cities v. Usery and subsequently Garcia v. San Antonio Metro, we have the court saying that initially that the federal government must respect the sovereign nature of the state govts and cannot interfere with how they regulate, but then Garcia says, no that the Congress is essentially a federal branch and do not fully represent state sovereignty so judicial review of state regulations is allowed. And then Printz/NY v. US go on to essentially say that Feds cannot force states to comply with federal programs that infringe with state sovereignty (like setting a 21 yo drinking age) but can incentivise them with federal funding and that they cannot use state officials to enforce federal functions...
Do I have this right? Guch, you seem to have this stuff down.
Do I have this right? Guch, you seem to have this stuff down.
- Extension_Cord
- Posts: 592
- Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:15 pm
Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread
Did you find the Con Law Q & A useful?ilovesf wrote:Property is bringing back nightmares of last December.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login