What is the most famous 1L case? Forum

[LawMan20]

Are you guys suggesting that your lol schools are better than mine because mine hasn't been teaching 'famous' cases?

[ph14]

1) Palsgraf
2) Pennoyer
3) Erie

[romothesavior]

Are you guys suggesting that your lol schools are better than mine because mine hasn't been teaching 'famous' cases?

It is nearly impossible to have an understanding of Torts (specifically proximate cause) without reading Palsgraf. It is impossible to understand choice of law in federal courts without reading Erie. Pennoyer is no longer really applicable, but it is a pretty helpful building block to understanding personal jurisdiction, and I'd guess that nearly every Civil Procedure class in the country starts out with it in PJX. Pierson v. Post is a classic that I'd imagine 95%+ of law students learn, and Hawkins and Dudley are both relatively well-known and are almost always read in first-year classes.

I can maybe understand not reading Pierson, Dudley, and Hawkins, but to have never heard of Palsgraf, Erie, or Pennoyer means you you don't pay much attention, your law school is not in the United States, or you are full of crap about not reading any of these cases.

[LawMan20]

Are you guys suggesting that your lol schools are better than mine because mine hasn't been teaching 'famous' cases?

It is nearly impossible to have an understanding of Torts (specifically proximate cause) without reading Palsgraf. It is impossible to understand choice of law in federal courts without reading Erie. Pennoyer is no longer really applicable, but it is a pretty helpful building block to understanding personal jurisdiction, and I'd guess that nearly every Civil Procedure class in the country starts out with it in PJX. Pierson v. Post is a classic that I'd imagine 95%+ of law students learn, and Hawkins and Dudley are both relatively well-known and are almost always read in first-year classes.

I can maybe understand not reading Pierson, Dudley, and Hawkins, but to have never heard of Palsgraf, Erie, or Pennoyer means you you don't pay much attention, your law school is not in the United States, or you are full of crap about not reading any of these cases.

Not sure what to tell you, and I don't want to potentially out myself by saying what classes I took last semester and what I'm taking this semester. But, at this point in my 1L year, the only case I've read/heard of from that list is Marbury v. Madison.

[red_owl]

Marbury

[bdubs]

Are you guys suggesting that your lol schools are better than mine because mine hasn't been teaching 'famous' cases?

It is nearly impossible to have an understanding of Torts (specifically proximate cause) without reading Palsgraf.

That is just wrong. Palsgraf is a concept development case, but the most of the law discussed in it is totally inapplicable to modern tort law (remember that in the end it's a directness test decision). I could see a professor who has no interest in the history of tort law skipping Palsgraf and replacing it with one of the more modern discussions of the proximate cause standard.

I'd say it's a toss up between Dudley and Hawkins, only because they have memorable facts.

[beachbum]

It is impossible to understand choice of law in federal courts without reading Erie.

In fairness, some civpro classes just don't cover Eerie. My civpro prof had this existential crisis about whether to cover the case (which apparently involved a listserv of civpro profs who were facing a similar dilemma), and finally decided to cover it, but only spend one class on it. On the other hand, I've heard horror stories from other civpro classes that spend a considerable chunk of the semester on Eerie and its progeny.

[Antilles Haven]

It is impossible to understand choice of law in federal courts without reading Erie.

In fairness, some civpro classes just don't cover Eerie. My civpro prof had this existential crisis about whether to cover the case (which apparently involved a listserv of civpro profs who were facing a similar dilemma), and finally decided to cover it, but only spend one class on it. On the other hand, I've heard horror stories from other civpro classes that spend a considerable chunk of the semester on Eerie and its progeny.

Erie -->

Hannah/Byrd -->

Gasperini -->

[romothesavior]

It is impossible to understand choice of law in federal courts without reading Erie.

In fairness, some civpro classes just don't cover Eerie. My civpro prof had this existential crisis about whether to cover the case (which apparently involved a listserv of civpro profs who were facing a similar dilemma), and finally decided to cover it, but only spend one class on it. On the other hand, I've heard horror stories from other civpro classes that spend a considerable chunk of the semester on Eerie and its progeny.

Yeah I know it isn't covered in all classes. But of the trifecta I listed (Palsgraf, Erie, Pennoyer), it would be pretty hard to avoid all three in LS.

[beach_terror]

Pennoyer because nobody forgets that shit exists if you're forced to read it. It's also still good law in part, so it's not like it stands for nothing.

[AreJay711]

If I was a hiring partner I would no offer the fuck out of someone for not knowing Pierson v. Post with its chasing foxes and the mocking dissent. If some young buck managed to drop "Well maybe if I had just had X of imperial stature..." he would have a job in a second. It is also still good law and came up in that migratory bird case.

[Tanicius]

If I was a hiring partner I would no offer the fuck out of someone for not knowing Pierson v. Post with its chasing foxes and the mocking dissent. If some young buck managed to drop "Well maybe if I had just had X of imperial stature..." he would have a job in a second. It is also still good law and came up in that migratory bird case.

It really depends on how much class time was given to the case though. Pierson v. Post is understandable in, like, a five minute discussion. I just remember it as one of many equally absurd cases in a slew that show there are ridiculous policy reasons underlying lots of property law. "Oh, that's the one case where they tried to encourage killing foxes, right."

[LawMan20]

If I was a hiring partner I would no offer the fuck out of someone for not knowing Pierson v. Post with its chasing foxes and the mocking dissent. If some young buck managed to drop "Well maybe if I had just had X of imperial stature..." he would have a job in a second. It is also still good law and came up in that migratory bird case.

I have a couple interviews next week, so I guess I'll have to read/brief all of these over the weekend

[Guchster]

It is impossible to understand choice of law in federal courts without reading Erie.

In fairness, some civpro classes just don't cover Eerie. My civpro prof had this existential crisis about whether to cover the case (which apparently involved a listserv of civpro profs who were facing a similar dilemma), and finally decided to cover it, but only spend one class on it. On the other hand, I've heard horror stories from other civpro classes that spend a considerable chunk of the semester on Eerie and its progeny.

Erie -->

Hannah/Byrd -->

Gasperini -->

fuck ginsberg for gasperini

[ceereeus420]

Leonard v. Pepsi Co.
Twombly/Iqbal

[TTH]

Maybe not the most famous, but certainly the most badass is Pennzoil v. Texaco.

[Ikki]

I don't think a single case has made me crack up inside a library as loud as UNITED NOVELTY CO., Inc. v. DANIELS et al..

[superhands]

I don't think a single case has made me crack up inside a library as loud as UNITED NOVELTY CO., Inc. v. DANIELS et al..

This case is pretty absurd. Almost as absurd as Palsgraf 2.0.

[shoeshine]

So Palsgraf is the clear winner then.

[AreJay711]

If I was a hiring partner I would no offer the fuck out of someone for not knowing Pierson v. Post with its chasing foxes and the mocking dissent. If some young buck managed to drop "Well maybe if I had just had X of imperial stature..." he would have a job in a second. It is also still good law and came up in that migratory bird case.

It really depends on how much class time was given to the case though. Pierson v. Post is understandable in, like, a five minute discussion. I just remember it as one of many equally absurd cases in a slew that show there are ridiculous policy reasons underlying lots of property law. "Oh, that's the one case where they tried to encourage killing foxes, right."

Maybe. I think all property cases of creating ownership rights are about maximizing the take / production / furnishing of the market though.

[bceagles182]

If you interpret the question as "what is the most famous case for 1Ls" I think it comes down to Erie and Palsgraf. We had endless discussion on both and I heard about both of them during 1L long before actually getting to them. I voted Erie; I think it's the only case in any of my outlines that has an entire section on it (although Chevron is close in Admin).

If you interpret the question as "what is the case read in 1L but most famous universally" I think it's obviously Marbury.

TCR.

If you asked most lawyers, "what case do you associate most with 1L?" I imagine most would say Erie, Palsgraf, or Pennoyer.

But if you gave the American public a list of all cases that are generally read during 1L and asked which one is the most well known, the most common answer would undoubtedly be a Con Law case -- probably either Marbury v. Madison, Brown v. Board, or Roe v. Wade (if you included the latter two).

[johansantana21]

Are you guys suggesting that your lol schools are better than mine because mine hasn't been teaching 'famous' cases?

It is nearly impossible to have an understanding of Torts (specifically proximate cause) without reading Palsgraf. It is impossible to understand choice of law in federal courts without reading Erie. Pennoyer is no longer really applicable, but it is a pretty helpful building block to understanding personal jurisdiction, and I'd guess that nearly every Civil Procedure class in the country starts out with it in PJX. Pierson v. Post is a classic that I'd imagine 95%+ of law students learn, and Hawkins and Dudley are both relatively well-known and are almost always read in first-year classes.

I can maybe understand not reading Pierson, Dudley, and Hawkins, but to have never heard of Palsgraf, Erie, or Pennoyer means you you don't pay much attention, your law school is not in the United States, or you are full of crap about not reading any of these cases.

I got above median in Torts and I don't even remember what Palsgraf is.

[PDaddy]

Con Law: You might want to list I would also look at Dred Scott v. Sanford. Agreed strongly with listing of Madison v. Marbury.

Civ Pro: I would add Dennis Prince et al. v. The Pittston Company, also known as the case that arose out of The Buffalo Creek Disaster.

Others include both Brown v. Board cases, which you cannot study effectively without studying Plessy v. Ferguson, the Grad School Cases (such as Murray v. Maryland, 1936), et. al.

Plessy isn't highlighted as much, but no one can fully understand the Brown cases without studying it, as well as Charles Hamilton Houston's methodical efforts at chipping away at the doctrine of "separate but equal" via grad school cases.

Plessy was the left jab that set up the knockout punch that was Brown.
.

[L’Étranger]

US v. X-Citement Video
Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.

[TTH]

US v. X-Citement Video
Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, Inc.

Don't care about your poast that much, but strong tar.