1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
ilovesf
Posts: 11779
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby ilovesf » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:14 pm

first exam tomorrow - slowly starting to not care anymore because i'm so fed up with studying future interests

User avatar
ph14
Posts: 3225
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby ph14 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:15 pm

ilovesf wrote:first exam tomorrow - slowly starting to not care anymore because i'm so fed up with studying future interests


Good luck!!! I still have nearly 2 weeks until my 1st. Blessing and a curse.

User avatar
$peppercorn
Posts: 142
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 2:49 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby $peppercorn » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:17 pm

ilovesf wrote:first exam tomorrow - slowly starting to not care anymore because i'm so fed up with studying future interests


Good luck! I am trying to find out the best way to spend Thursday without frantically going over tests, but still keeping everything fresh.

User avatar
ilovesf
Posts: 11779
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby ilovesf » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:30 pm

Thanks guys :D I'm only doing practice tests, but leisurely. I'm making sure I get all of the issues and main points of each one. I'm not worried about time, I'm just worried about making sure I get all of the important stuff figured out. I think I am going to stop at about 8pm, take a bubble bath, watch a movie, and go to sleep early (if I can). My exam isn't until 1:30 tomorrow, so I'll wake up at 7:30, review my outline once or twice, go out to lunch, then hit the exam. I REALLY don't want to go into the test totally freaking out, so I'm trying everything to keep calm.

User avatar
ilovesf
Posts: 11779
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:20 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby ilovesf » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:32 pm

oh yeah - forgot to mention the part where I go to the court and hand out all of my judicial externship applications in the morning!

User avatar
crossarmant
Posts: 1116
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:01 am

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby crossarmant » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:37 pm

thegrayman wrote:anyone have civ pro seem to make sense until you step away from it for a day or two and come back to it?

I swear I knew this shit yesterday :oops:

arghhhh


I'm like that too. Though, look for the "CivPro Flowcharts" in this forum... goddamn lifesaver and really helps with visualizing it all.

User avatar
brickman
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 2:59 am

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby brickman » Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:50 pm

things I wish I was told prior to law school:

Laws are made by humans with biases and goals in mind. They have values. Laws are expressions of those values.

Some areas of laws have left over values from a long time ago and now different states just try to say what we should value.

applies pretty much to torts and crim, though for civpro:

Same as above + when systems clash, they try to resolve it with new constructions. new constructions solve some problems, but there are limited resources so they can't all be solved.

User avatar
ph14
Posts: 3225
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby ph14 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:51 pm

brickman wrote:things I wish I was told prior to law school:

SC bases most of their decisions on politics but disguises them as legal principles, confusing law students forever to come.

User avatar
Gettingstarted1928
Posts: 407
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 11:45 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby Gettingstarted1928 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:53 pm

ph14 wrote:
brickman wrote:things I wish I was told prior to law school:

SC bases most of their decisions on politics but disguises them as legal principles, confusing law students forever to come.

+100000

Conservatives have coincidentally taken a textualist approach.
Liberals coincidentally consider the Constitution a living breathing document

They're really just a bunch of ideologues

User avatar
ph14
Posts: 3225
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby ph14 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:56 pm

ph14 wrote:
brickman wrote:things I wish I was told prior to law school:

SC bases most of their decisions on politics but disguises them as legal principles, confusing law students forever to come.


SC would actually articulate standards like "comports with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice."

User avatar
brickman
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 2:59 am

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby brickman » Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:00 pm

ph14 wrote:
ph14 wrote:
brickman wrote:things I wish I was told prior to law school:

SC bases most of their decisions on politics but disguises them as legal principles, confusing law students forever to come.


SC would actually articulate standards like "comports with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice."


nothing wrong with this necessarily, and it serves a function to have this fact shrouded in ambiguity, creates a lot of systemic complacence which is functionally good.

User avatar
dabomb75
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 10:56 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby dabomb75 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:34 pm

brickman wrote:alright.

motivational videos.

go.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6wRkzCW5qI

SwampRat88
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:23 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby SwampRat88 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:31 pm

Statute of Frauds/contracts question: if there is a written offer signed by the party to be charged, and the offeree properly accepts the offer, is that a sufficient writing? Or does it have to be writing after the offer and acceptance has occured?

User avatar
northwood
Posts: 4872
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 7:29 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby northwood » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:35 pm

if the writing has been signed off- even if its not fully completed, there just has to be some sort of written record of the memorandum with both parties signature on it as long as teh K falls within the statue of frauds


if the K does not fall within the statue ( not a K for realo estate, surety, year and a day type of K) then an oral K is all you need

User avatar
crossarmant
Posts: 1116
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:01 am

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby crossarmant » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:52 pm

Another Contracts question: If one engages in procuring an option contract and pays valid consideration for that option, then they decide against the contract, can they claim unjust enrichment against the other party to recover that option consideration?

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby r6_philly » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:56 pm

I really like the fact that we are not learning the same things in the same courses.

User avatar
gdane
Posts: 12384
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 2:41 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby gdane » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:02 pm

ilovesf wrote:first exam tomorrow - slowly starting to not care anymore because i'm so fed up with studying future interests

Good luck! You'll do well.

SwampRat88
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:23 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby SwampRat88 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:05 pm

northwood wrote:if the writing has been signed off- even if its not fully completed, there just has to be some sort of written record of the memorandum with both parties signature on it as long as teh K falls within the statue of frauds


if the K does not fall within the statue ( not a K for realo estate, surety, year and a day type of K) then an oral K is all you need


I don't think this is correct. There only needs to be a signature by the party to be charged.

With that understanding, does everyone else here agree that an offer signed by the party to be charged, that was properly accepted, is sufficient to meet the SoF (assuming meeting the SoF was required, and that there was no subsequent signing after the mutual intent to be bound)?

User avatar
crossarmant
Posts: 1116
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:01 am

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby crossarmant » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:08 pm

r6_philly wrote:I really like the fact that we are not learning the same things in the same courses.


My Contracts professor is adamantly Anti-UCC and CISG. I'm reviewing using CALI and E&E and half the explanations are useless since he's specifically said to ignore pretty much all of the UCC.

User avatar
AlexanderSupertramp
Posts: 167
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby AlexanderSupertramp » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:09 pm

SwampRat88 wrote:
northwood wrote:if the writing has been signed off- even if its not fully completed, there just has to be some sort of written record of the memorandum with both parties signature on it as long as teh K falls within the statue of frauds


if the K does not fall within the statue ( not a K for realo estate, surety, year and a day type of K) then an oral K is all you need


I don't think this is correct. There only needs to be a signature by the party to be charged.

With that understanding, does everyone else here agree that an offer signed by the party to be charged, that was properly accepted, is sufficient to meet the SoF (assuming meeting the SoF was required, and that there was no subsequent signing after the mutual intent to be bound)?

We learned (unless I'm wrong and I'm going to do worse in Ks than I thought!) To be sufficient the writing or memorandum thereof must contain
1. Identity of parties
2. subject matter of the transaction
3. essential terms
4. consideration (unless already given)
5. signed by the party being charged

User avatar
Extension_Cord
Posts: 592
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:15 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby Extension_Cord » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:22 pm

crossarmant wrote:
r6_philly wrote:I really like the fact that we are not learning the same things in the same courses.


My Contracts professor is adamantly Anti-UCC and CISG. I'm reviewing using CALI and E&E and half the explanations are useless since he's specifically said to ignore pretty much all of the UCC.


How can he be anti-UCC? Thats a substantial part of contracts.

User avatar
$peppercorn
Posts: 142
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 2:49 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby $peppercorn » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:40 pm

SwampRat88 wrote:Statute of Frauds/contracts question: if there is a written offer signed by the party to be charged, and the offeree properly accepts the offer, is that a sufficient writing? Or does it have to be writing after the offer and acceptance has occured?


we talked about this and my professor said that it does not have to be a writing and signing made after the agreement has been reached. That is one of the problems with the SOF. Assuming here that the offeror is the party to be charged, the offeree can enforce the contract against the offeror but not vice versa, almost in a way to use fraud to his advantage. But the SOF doesnt prove that a contract is actually in place. It just means if there is one according to the terms of that writing, it is enforceable against the offeror. Offeree will have to prove there was an actual agreement but doesnt matter when the "memorial" was made or signed.

User avatar
introversional
Posts: 181
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 11:59 am

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby introversional » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:50 pm

crossarmant wrote:
r6_philly wrote:I really like the fact that we are not learning the same things in the same courses.


My Contracts professor is adamantly Anti-UCC and CISG. I'm reviewing using CALI and E&E and half the explanations are useless since he's specifically said to ignore pretty much all of the UCC.


He must be from Louisiana. Or, he doesn't like intentional ambiguity in statutory language, which is of course weird.

My honest impression of most of the UCC is that it's a statutory device courts can use to justify whichever way they'd like to rule in a case.

User avatar
alicrimson
Posts: 923
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:27 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby alicrimson » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:52 pm

crossarmant wrote:Another Contracts question: If one engages in procuring an option contract and pays valid consideration for that option, then they decide against the contract, can they claim unjust enrichment against the other party to recover that option consideration?



I don't think so. I believe the payment is consideration for leaving the offer open for the specified time period. Essentially, you are paying them to let you have time. If you could get unjust enrichment for not accepting, this open offer wouldn't really be good for anything. This is just my interpretation. Its not based on a restatement. It just seem intuitive to me. I could be wrong.

User avatar
$peppercorn
Posts: 142
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 2:49 pm

Re: 1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread

Postby $peppercorn » Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:54 pm

alicrimson wrote:
crossarmant wrote:Another Contracts question: If one engages in procuring an option contract and pays valid consideration for that option, then they decide against the contract, can they claim unjust enrichment against the other party to recover that option consideration?



I don't think so. I believe the payment is consideration for leaving the offer open for the specified time period. Essentially, you are paying them to let you have time. If you could get unjust enrichment for not accepting, this open offer wouldn't really be good for anything. This is just my interpretation. Its not based on a restatement. It just seem intuitive to me. I could be wrong.


If they deny the option, they still get what they bargained for. The right to decide on the offer for however long the option was open.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: unsweetened and 16 guests