OFFICIAL 1L Exam Prep & Motivation Thread (CSWS) Forum

[Nova]

Thanks. Ill definitely do that now.

[Raiden]

I agree with Stinger, I've been trying to make a "paragraph outline" where I just have the rule statements in complete sentences. For those of you on closed book exams, it may be effective to just keep rewriting these to have the rules ingrained into your muscle memory, I think.

Also, team, whats the consensus on studying for multiple choice? Q&A? I feel like I should have a mastery of the restatements and UCC, I think thats where memorizing the outline comes in.

Also, totally don't know how to attack my K policy exam. More than likely, its going to be on some minute difference in a restatement. Maybe make fake hypos as examples during the exam?

[Stringer6]

And if anyone wants, I can send "good" outlines that I made second semester last year, along with the attack outlines. Just private message me. The reason I offer this is b/c I remember that part of the struggle during first semester of 1L was figuring out how to make an outline that will actually help you during an exam. My first semester outlines were good in that they had the necessary info, but it's really important to organize them correctly.

Also, try at all times to relax. I know that basically everything is at stake, but you can't let it get to you to the point where it's paralyzing. I had some trouble with this first semester last year. Try to take it easy.

[crv8623]

Stringer6 care to show an example of a pre-written attack answer?

[Stringer6]

Stringer6 care to show an example of a pre-written attack answer?

For a Civ Pro question about federal-question jurisdiction, I'd do something like this. So I'd put the first paragraph for every question on subject-matter jurisdiction, then I'd use the second part if it were specifically about federal question. After writing this, apply it to the fact pattern.

I'd obviously have prepared stuff for the other kinds of subject-matter jurisdiction, too. The headings should be in the outline, but not in the answer; same w/ the bullet points.
---------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
Subject matter jurisdiction refers to a court’s power to hear a case because of the nature of the dispute. Article III provides that federal courts are authorized to hear, among other cases, those between citizens of different states and those arising under the federal Constitution or federal law. Statutory authority for subject matter jurisdiction is provided by various jurisdictional statutes.

Federal Question Jurisdiction
Under §1331, federal courts have federal-question jurisdiction over cases in which the federal issue is necessary to prove the plaintiff’s claim (this is sometimes referred to as the Mottley well-pleaded complaint rule, after the case that established the rule). Under this standard, it is not enough for the plaintiff to merely refer to federal law in the complaint, and federal defenses and counterclaims are not a basis for federal-question jurisdiction.
• However, if the plaintiff, in order to establish a state-law claim, must prove a proposition of federal law, the court may exercise federal-question jurisdiction. For this to apply, the federal issue must be imbedded in the state law claim and be essential to its resolution, the controversy must concern either the constitutional validity of a federal statute or turn on a substantial question of federal law, and the imbedded federal issue must be substantial.

[LSL]

Checking in, good people. Outlines done, began prepping with hypos and CALI today. Focusing on knocking out reading for semester and finishing last legal writing project. Then it's all prep all the time. CSWS!!! Best of studying to everyone. We got this shit.

[005618502]

Checking in, good people. Outlines done, began prepping with hypos and CALI today. Focusing on knocking out reading for semester and finishing last legal writing project. Then it's all prep all the time. CSWS!!! Best of studying to everyone. We got this shit.

What is CALI and is it worth the investment? Dont know why I havent asked this sooner

[swimmer11]

Checking in, good people. Outlines done, began prepping with hypos and CALI today. Focusing on knocking out reading for semester and finishing last legal writing project. Then it's all prep all the time. CSWS!!! Best of studying to everyone. We got this shit.

What is CALI and is it worth the investment? Dont know why I havent asked this sooner

Cali is for the grand total of FREE brotha. Your librarian should have the password, and yes they are worth it. They are tutorials with questions on nearly every subject in 1L. You should definitely look into it.

I have taken two practice exams today, and I feel great about both. I am loving it brothas, fucking loving it.

CSWS ALL DAY YO1LO

[LetsGoLAW]

Grinding out this LRW paper. Not hard, just time consuming. Then it's all prep, all day.

[Birdnals]

Tagging for future. BORN and BRED for SUCCESS and ACHIEVEMENT.

ETA MOTIVATIONAL YOUTUBE VIDEO TO PRODUCTIVELY PROCRASTINATE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yX39J_YyKbs

[JG7773]

Property Outline: Done
Civ Pro Outline: Done
Torts Outline: Next target!!!

Feels good!! CSWS

[LetsGoLAW]

Going hard for another hour. Waking up tomorrow, finishing this fucking paper.

Yes, everyone will know the law. But we will have different tools. We will practice hypos. We will write multiple exams. We know the fucking deal. This thread is not for the weak. Not for the soft. I will not stop. I can't fucking stop. They can't make me. They want to, but they won't. They can't. It's a fact.

I'm not guaranteeing success. What I am guaranteeing is an opportunity. An opportunity for that one inch. That one extra inch, baby. And if you can crawl, dig, fight, BURN to get as close as possible to that fucking inch... Well, then your chance for success is better than the others.

I want my soldiers lined up. I want you ready to go. Next week, it is go week. Let's turn those 12 hour days into 14 hour days. We can do it. No, we will do it. Stay strong, hit it hard. I have an utter, unshakable belief in all of you.

Edit: It's 2:24. Where the fuck is my team at not posting?!?

[greenchair]

Regarding pre-written answers --- how helpful do you think they are on WORD-LIMITED Civ Pro exams? I have heard from numerous people that time is not an issue because you have 4 hours to do it, but you are word-limited. Hmm. Strange...

My Torts prof recommends that we "interweave the facts" more vigorously than anyone I've ever seen. He stresses that his issue spotters are extremely time intensive, and those who do the strict IRAC lose out because they can't type fast enough. Our TAs, however, still insist that we should do IRAC so we don't miss any important points. I think thats a n00b approach, and if you know it enough that you won't miss anything important, you shouldn't be doing IRAC on this prof's exam.

He also is not very strict with the exact definitions of rules...

Instead of:
The issue is whether A committed battery when he threw the chair against B. Battery is the 1) intent and 2) act of 3) causing a harmful or offensive contact to someone or 4) causing imminent apprehension of such contact and 5) such contact results. [Begin analysis]

He wants, right off the bat:
A met the intent and act element for battery when he physically picked up the chair and threw it against B. A met the harmful and offensive contact element because having a chair thrown at you would likely offend the personal dignity of a reasonably prudent person. etc etc etc.

Is this pretty unusual? It's like Delaney's "interweave the facts" but at an extreme level -- "No bullshit" type of prof. Anyone else see that from looking at sample answers the prof wrote?

[renardthecrocs]

Hey friends. I haven't started outlining yet, but I'm not overly worried. I probably won't outline at all for at least one of my classes, and I finished typing up all of my notes yesterday so I'm in good shape to get cracking.

I have a bunch of torts & contracts materials - if anyone doing ks had a strong emphasis on the UCC, I have A LOT of UCC material. I'd love to find good con law/property outlines (the latter if you are using Dukeminier, Krier, et al as your text). I also need to make a civ pro outline but we don't cover jurisdiction at all here so outlines from other schools will most likely be useless for me. Anyone up for a swap/to donate to a lost and confused 1L? Message me!

[brotherdarkness]

.

[Jsa725]

.

[SportsFan]

Gonna take a contract PT today. Only have like 3 old PT's from my professor but its my first final so I need to get on it.

[swimmer11]

GreenChair - My professor has advocated the same thing and said that we do not need to explicitly state the rules only interweave the facts into the rule. That being said, would you mind sending me that model answer you have and the PT that goes along with it?

Also, I am pulling 80 hours this week. Who is with me?


CSWS

[Jsa725]

.

[Birdnals]

Gonna take a contract PT today. Only have like 3 old PT's from my professor but its my first final so I need to get on it.

I have hear as a general rule you should study one subject all in a row before moving onto the next one, and do it in the reverse order of the final order.

For example, my test order is Civ Pro-->4 day break-->Prop-->3 day break--->Torts

So my study order is: Torts-->Prop-->Civ Pro. Study everything in the subject real hard, then put them on the back burner when I move to the next subject. This way when you are near burnt out after the first final you only need refresher stuff in those few days before the next final.

I have heard this is, generally, the best way to do things. HTH. CSWS

[SportsFan]

study schedules? what is your plan of attack? what is the most credited?

1) study each class for a few hours each day
2) study two classes per day and alternate
3) study one class for 2-3 days then switch

CSWS.

I have ~3 weeks until my first final (December 10th), and maybe its not TCR but I'm not going into this with any sort of strategy. Just gonna go with my gut feeling on everything. I usually try to alternate (study 1 or 2 subjects one day, then the other 1 or 2 the next day, etc.), but I don't plan out more than like a day in advance.

Gonna take a contract PT today. Only have like 3 old PT's from my professor but its my first final so I need to get on it.

I have hear as a general rule you should study one subject all in a row before moving onto the next one, and do it in the reverse order of the final order.

For example, my test order is Civ Pro-->4 day break-->Prop-->3 day break--->Torts

So my study order is: Torts-->Prop-->Civ Pro. Study everything in the subject real hard, then put them on the back burner when I move to the next subject. This way when you are near burnt out after the first final you only need refresher stuff in those few days before the next final.

I have heard this is, generally, the best way to do things. HTH. CSWS

Hm, interesting, and thanks for the advice. I think I'll try to do something like that (make sure that before the K's exam I spend 2 or 3 days just going really hard on that) but before that, I think I'm just gonna try to study all of them somewhat equally.

[greenchair]

GreenChair - My professor has advocated the same thing and said that we do not need to explicitly state the rules only interweave the facts into the rule. That being said, would you mind sending me that model answer you have and the PT that goes along with it?

Also, I am pulling 80 hours this week. Who is with me?


CSWS

I would, man, but it's not online It's like 5 pages single spaced, and it's only in hard copy. Sorry!

[swimmer11]

Just took my first torts hypothetical. My teacher has one party multiple choice, one part long hypo, and one party policy question. The long hypo, went interesting. There is so much going on, I did my best to try and outline but I got all messed up. However, I do not think it is that difficult, and I can master it.

Does anyone feel the same about torts hypos the first time they did one? It just seemed like such a clusterfuck. Actually, it seemed like a lot of cords tangled up, and you had to untangle them. Which, I might have did well, I do not know.

Also, 2,900 words in 1.5 hours for a torts hypo good? Bad? Where do I need to be at?


EDIT: If anyone has torts hypos with model answers to share I will love you FOREVER.

EDIT AGAIN: My first final is in three weeks. Should I begin allocating time now based on when my finals are? So study my last final for four days this week, my second to last 2 days, and my first 1 day? Or maybe do something like 3,3,2? And then the week before my first final gun gun it home only that first final?

[Maximized]

Checking in on a 12-hour Contracts day. I'll be outlining all of it over today and tomorrow. And because it's been a topic lately, here's my plan:

1. Outlining everything over Thanksgiving.

2. Studying two classes per day between Thanksgiving and finals, giving only slightly more time to my 4-hour classes than my 3-hour ones. It'll basically entail going through each outline and memorizing weak points, plus attacking practice problems where I can find them. This will also include reviewing the E&Es and working through Siegel's for both Contracts and Torts, and doing 2 of the 6 practice exams I have for Civ.Pro. I still don't know what to do for Leg.Reg. except study the textbook material.

3. My finals are on the 11th, 14th, 17th, and 20th, so I'll be taking those days totally off of studying (okay, I might review a little bit), and devoting the two days before each to studying only that class. I'll be taking two practice tests per day for each of the two preparation days here, plus going through the outline for the exam I'm studying for and checking that I have the material down cold.

Feel free to critique this approach, haha. I'm a little late in the outlining game but it should work out alright. These will be 12-14 hour days, every day. CSWS.

"Always in a rush to get back to you I ain't heard you yet
Not even once say you appreciate me I deserve respect
I've done my best to give you nothing less than perfectness
And I know that if I end this I'll no longer have nothing left." - Eminem, "25 to Life"

[SportsFan]

Looking over the practice exam I did today for contracts and comparing it to the answers my professor gave, I'm feeling pretty good. It was a 3 hour exam but I got lazy and gave up after about 2 hours and 15 minutes lol. Manager to write ~4000 words, which was just over what the sample answer has. On the first question, seems like I managed to hit all the same points except like 1 or 2 (that I mentioned very briefly but not in as much detail as in the sample answer), and generally my analyze agreed with what my professor was saying except in 2 cases where I basically had it backwards (if that makes any sense...). On the second question, I went in a bit of a different direction than the sample answer and talked about a few different points. Still seemed to hit most of the same issues though, so thats good. Not going to get complacent, but I feel pretty good right now. I was really hesitating looking at the sample answer since I thought I would just be completely off and wrong (since I haven't actually studied my outline at all and ended up spending half my time reading through it and learning the law lol), but it seems like I'm definitely on the right track, and thats good.

Definitely need to work on my analysis a bit. I think I spent a little too long restating the BLL, which I guess he doesn't really care about since it wasn't really mentioned at all (just the names of the rules and whatnot). Definitely helps me understand better what people mean when they say that law school exams are all about applying law to facts.