Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
Kage3212
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:34 am

Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

Postby Kage3212 » Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:05 am

So our school requires us to buy two supplements to our case books for Con Law and Civil Procedure. These aren't the traditional supplements so to speak, it seems as if they are supplemental cases that show how the law has evolved since the publication of the book? (this is what I have gathered at least) Here is an example of the Civ Pro one: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss? ... 0314281807

My question is whether it is absolutely essential to buy the 2012 edition. The 2011 of the same edition can be had for $1. I would much rather purchase the cheaper supplements if at all possible. Thanks to anyone who may be able to provide some insight.

lawhaus
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 11:08 pm

Re: Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

Postby lawhaus » Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:49 am

it depends whether the 2011 version includes goodyear, mcintyre cases.

if they are omitted, check if the supplement company provides an updated supplement for free on their website

User avatar
dietcoke0
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 2:46 pm

Re: Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

Postby dietcoke0 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 9:37 pm

I bought the 2011 supp for civ pro on accident, and it had Goodyear, McIntyre and the rest, but the pages were different. The rules were all just about one page off, but the cases were completely different page wise. But if there is a new case you read, just pull it off lexis. Dunno about con law.

User avatar
laxbrah420
Posts: 2748
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:53 am

Re: Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

Postby laxbrah420 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 9:50 pm

lawhaus wrote:it depends whether the 2011 version includes goodyear, mcintyre cases.

if they are omitted, check if the supplement company provides an updated supplement for free on their website

or check lexis :lol:
It's nice to have them edited down a bit but for only ~3 cases, who cares

Kage3212
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:34 am

Re: Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

Postby Kage3212 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 9:52 pm

Is it a good idea to buy the 2011 version? Did you find it to be a huge pain in the ass or was it just a minor hassle? Appreciate your insight guys. Bout to pull the trigger on both of these in the near future.

User avatar
laxbrah420
Posts: 2748
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 1:53 am

Re: Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

Postby laxbrah420 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 9:54 pm

I vote buy it if you don't mind pre-highlighted shit. I do mind pre-highlighted shit though

User avatar
JamMasterJ
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

Postby JamMasterJ » Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:47 pm

It also won't have Walmart v. Dukes FWIW

lawyerdown27
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:21 pm

Re: Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

Postby lawyerdown27 » Mon Dec 24, 2012 10:29 am

I had to buy the 2012 supplement for Con Law for the edited portions of Sebelius/ACA case for commerce clause and taxing/spending power, but we only ended up using the supplement itself for 4 classes. I would check your syllabus and see how many days you're going to need to use the supplement - if it's not many, just check it out from the library or borrow it from somebody and scan the pages you need.

User avatar
Blessedassurance
Posts: 2081
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:42 pm

Re: Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

Postby Blessedassurance » Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:08 am

Re: Civ Pro

You can google Goodyear and McIntyre.

All McIntyre does is show that SCOTUS doesn't still agree on whether purposeful availment in stream of commerce requires an additional act ("plus") or whether mere placement suffices. In short, Asahi remains unresolved.

The only thing Goodyear is good for really, is restating that the rationale for general PJ is that D has enough contacts to render the forum its "home turf" such that asserting PJ would not violate traditional notions of fair play blah blah blah...

Everything Goodyear stands for, you can find in Helicopteros (i.e. mere purchases, even at regular intervals are not enough, lack of office/physical presence [see Perkins] etc etc). All those cases stand for what will not suffice than what will.

It's amazing how many unnecessary books they make you buy for this shit. You'd think they'd be concerned about the debt the average student is incurring...

User avatar
Bronck
Posts: 2025
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:28 pm

Re: Supplement to Casebook for Con Law and Civil Procedure?

Postby Bronck » Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:11 pm

Blessedassurance wrote:Re: Civ Pro

You can google Goodyear and McIntyre.

All McIntyre does is show that SCOTUS doesn't still agree on whether purposeful availment in stream of commerce requires an additional act ("plus") or whether mere placement suffices. In short, Asahi remains unresolved.

The only thing Goodyear is good for really, is restating that the rationale for general PJ is that D has enough contacts to render the forum its "home turf" such that asserting PJ would not violate traditional notions of fair play blah blah blah...

Everything Goodyear stands for, you can find in Helicopteros (i.e. mere purchases, even at regular intervals are not enough, lack of office/physical presence [see Perkins] etc etc). All those cases stand for what will not suffice than what will.

It's amazing how many unnecessary books they make you buy for this shit. You'd think they'd be concerned about the debt the average student is incurring...


Not to mention: Glannon updated the PJ chapter of the E&E . . . I can't recall the link off the top of my head, but he says more than enough about those two cases to get you by.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baller31, cdemps3, Pomegranate27, Yahoo [Bot] and 19 guests