Re: Am I doing 1L right?
Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 11:55 am
How long until we know what's relevant in a case then? I'm sure it depends on the person, but does it usually click before the end of the 1st semester?
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=215561
About halfway through the semester you should start hitting your stride. At that point, use supplements and start outlining. Nothing heavy. Heavy is for after Thanksgiving.bsktbll28082 wrote:How long until we know what's relevant in a case then? I'm sure it depends on the person, but does it usually click before the end of the 1st semester?
Reading cases might actually be a waste of time once you learn the ropes, re-reading cases is absolutely a waste of time. It doesn't matter if you look like a fool when you are cold called, it matters how many points you get on the exam. The exam will be new fact patterns that require you to apply laws and principles, not a test requiring you to regurgitate factual information about cases or doctrines from supplements.sinfiery wrote:At this point, I really have no idea what to look for in taking notes so I'm thinking I read a previous years outline about the case (They gave us multiple versions of this for all our classes..!) and just read the case so I don't look like a fool when cold called. Then in about a month or so, I'll go reread the cases and start creating my own outline/using supplements and such.
Any flaws here? Guide me TLS
thesealocust wrote: Reading cases might actually be a waste of time once you learn the ropes, re-reading cases is absolutely a waste of time. It doesn't matter if you look like a fool when you are cold called, it matters how many points you get on the exam. The exam will be new fact patterns that require you to apply laws and principles, not a test requiring you to regurgitate factual information about cases or doctrines from supplements.
It took looking at an exam to know the defintions of the crimes...in crimlawhopeful10 wrote:I will just say this. On the first day of class I looked at my crim teachers final exam and saw she has a definitions section. Like half the words that were tested on this old exam she went over like the first 2 or 3 classes. I talked to the TA who ace the class and she said in this class she took double the notes of other classes because of how the teacher tested. Moral of the story if I hadn't found this out so early I probably wouldn't have given a shit about the definition of felony murder or interlocutory appeal even though that is gonna be tested. Yea maybe a 2L would have had it but I rather trust my notes.
I generally agree with this. Knowing the facts of the cases can be somewhat helpful because some profs will put analogous facts into the exam fact pattern (either looking for you to make a connection to a particular case, or as a red herring to make you think you should think of that case). But it's not that you need to make a concerted effort to sit down and learn the facts because you need to be able to tell the prof what the facts of X v. Y were. It's more that the facts can help you think about/remember what part of the law you should be applying. So, if, on your torts exam, the bozo in the fact pattern disables some safety feature on some dangerous item and gets horribly injured, you might think, Ah, this is like Hood v. Ryobi, I should talk about adequacy of warnings.thesealocust wrote:Reading cases might actually be a waste of time once you learn the ropes, re-reading cases is absolutely a waste of time. It doesn't matter if you look like a fool when you are cold called, it matters how many points you get on the exam. The exam will be new fact patterns that require you to apply laws and principles, not a test requiring you to regurgitate factual information about cases or doctrines from supplements.sinfiery wrote:At this point, I really have no idea what to look for in taking notes so I'm thinking I read a previous years outline about the case (They gave us multiple versions of this for all our classes..!) and just read the case so I don't look like a fool when cold called. Then in about a month or so, I'll go reread the cases and start creating my own outline/using supplements and such.
Any flaws here? Guide me TLS
This is right. Some of the people who end up with the highest grades/jobs from 1L OCI were the same ones who sounded inarticulate in class. There is no grade for class. 1L tests only on your ability to apply BLL, and policy to some degree, to a brand new set of facts. Class exists to inform you of what areas the test will cover, and to teach you what "applying BLL" looks like.thesealocust wrote:Reading cases might actually be a waste of time once you learn the ropes, re-reading cases is absolutely a waste of time. It doesn't matter if you look like a fool when you are cold called, it matters how many points you get on the exam. The exam will be new fact patterns that require you to apply laws and principles, not a test requiring you to regurgitate factual information about cases or doctrines from supplements.sinfiery wrote:At this point, I really have no idea what to look for in taking notes so I'm thinking I read a previous years outline about the case (They gave us multiple versions of this for all our classes..!) and just read the case so I don't look like a fool when cold called. Then in about a month or so, I'll go reread the cases and start creating my own outline/using supplements and such.
Any flaws here? Guide me TLS
I think I'd wait to use upperclass outlines. For me, wasting a lot of time in the beginning of the semester helped me eventually understand the important takeaways.masterbrowski wrote:Obtain good (reputable) outlines from upper classmen. Review them after each class - see what was relevant from today's class. Try to commit that to memory. The sooner you understand how to boil what you covered in class down into digestible outline form, the better. Reading outlines after class will show you that method. At some point, you'll become ready to make your own, or at least to start editing the ones you got from others.
I don't mean that you shouldn't skim/read cases, come to class, take notes, and try and think on your own. I'm just saying that outlines can be like a checklist - to make sure you didn't miss anything before you move on to another topic.ImNoScar wrote:I think I'd wait to use upperclass outlines. For me, wasting a lot of time in the beginning of the semester helped me eventually understand the important takeaways by conditioning how to read.masterbrowski wrote:Obtain good (reputable) outlines from upper classmen. Review them after each class - see what was relevant from today's class. Try to commit that to memory. The sooner you understand how to boil what you covered in class down into digestible outline form, the better. Reading outlines after class will show you that method. At some point, you'll become ready to make your own, or at least to start editing the ones you got from others.
Some profs will put policy questions on exams, and those questions will often ask you to discuss something like the difference between retributive and utilitarian sentencing policies or some such nonsense. You'll have to try to get a hold of old exams from your professor to see if this is something you should focus on. Also ask upperclassmen who had the same professor.dj_roomba wrote:Is the theory and background facts that don't necessarily have to do with the law or applying law important at all?
For example: entire chapter of crim law is on the institution of punishment, different views on it, etc.
Will this be tested? I was under the impression that exams tested applying law to fact.
I'll just be quite honest. I read nothing of this thread...not your OP nor anyone else's posts. That's for the simple reason that TCR is always, always...no. No. You're doing it wrong. Go figure out how to do it better. Obsessive, pathological, depression-inducing self-criticality is the key to success in law school and the legal profession generally. Enjoy hell.AllDangle wrote:I read most of the TLS guides prior to starting. I am reading the casebook/cases for the relevant BLL. I am doing mini-briefs that just list a sentence of fact, the rule (BLL), any policy considerations the opinion mentioned, as well as any other nuances it states (a majority of jurisdictions use this other rule, etc). I am reading the sections in my supps that correspond to what I am reading in class (tough right now since some classes are presenting cases that cover many different topics in the law, only for us to go back and look at each topic later in more depth). In class I am taking notes when the professor mentions something I hadn't thought of, a new point of law, policy, etc. Am I doing 1L right?
There probably will not be a question asking you to describe your thoughts on the theories of punishment. But the law is the physical manifestation of policies, and applying law to fact on an exam will require you to resolve ambiguities and gray area fact patterns. There are many ways to do that, but one (which will get you points) is to always consider the policies.dj_roomba wrote:Is the theory and background facts that don't necessarily have to do with the law or applying law important at all?
For example: entire chapter of crim law is on the institution of punishment, different views on it, etc.
Will this be tested? I was under the impression that exams tested applying law to fact.
Lol it took looking at an exam to realize it is a different format then every other law exam for my other professors as well as every other law exam I have seen. This teacher gives points for case citations, MPL rules and other random stuff. And yes sure I would have thought definitions were important but not necessarily my test would have a definitions section. Outside of trying to be a dick on an anonymous online forum are you really advising people not to look at what the final exam will be like. Fuck off dude.Joe Quincy wrote:It took looking at an exam to know the defintions of the crimes...in crimlawhopeful10 wrote:I will just say this. On the first day of class I looked at my crim teachers final exam and saw she has a definitions section. Like half the words that were tested on this old exam she went over like the first 2 or 3 classes. I talked to the TA who ace the class and she said in this class she took double the notes of other classes because of how the teacher tested. Moral of the story if I hadn't found this out so early I probably wouldn't have given a shit about the definition of felony murder or interlocutory appeal even though that is gonna be tested. Yea maybe a 2L would have had it but I rather trust my notes.
law...were important? What else would they test?
Wait... your prof has a definitions section? So what? Say she tells you what the definition of felony murder is (killing in furtherance of the commission of a felony - no culpability requirement). That isn't going to help you in an exam, unless you literally forget everything.lawhopeful10 wrote:Lol it took looking at an exam to realize it is a different format then every other law exam for my other professors as well as every other law exam I have seen. This teacher gives points for case citations, MPL rules and other random stuff. And yes sure I would have thought definitions were important but not necessarily my test would have a definitions section. Outside of trying to be a dick on an anonymous online forum are you really advising people not to look at what the final exam will be like. Fuck off dude.Joe Quincy wrote:It took looking at an exam to know the defintions of the crimes...in crimlawhopeful10 wrote:I will just say this. On the first day of class I looked at my crim teachers final exam and saw she has a definitions section. Like half the words that were tested on this old exam she went over like the first 2 or 3 classes. I talked to the TA who ace the class and she said in this class she took double the notes of other classes because of how the teacher tested. Moral of the story if I hadn't found this out so early I probably wouldn't have given a shit about the definition of felony murder or interlocutory appeal even though that is gonna be tested. Yea maybe a 2L would have had it but I rather trust my notes.
law...were important? What else would they test?
dj_roomba wrote:Is the theory and background facts that don't necessarily have to do with the law or applying law important at all?
For example: entire chapter of crim law is on the institution of punishment, different views on it, etc.
Will this be tested? I was under the impression that exams tested applying law to fact.
Sure, my point is just that looking at my teachers final exam keyed me into specific things I should be paying attention to that I otherwise might not have realized their importance. I don't feel like listing over more examples but my entire point is just to look at your teachers final exam in case it is very unique which is possible.masterbrowski wrote:Wait... your prof has a definitions section? So what? Say she tells you what the definition of felony murder is (killing in furtherance of the commission of a felony - no culpability requirement). That isn't going to help you in an exam, unless you literally forget everything.lawhopeful10 wrote:Lol it took looking at an exam to realize it is a different format then every other law exam for my other professors as well as every other law exam I have seen. This teacher gives points for case citations, MPL rules and other random stuff. And yes sure I would have thought definitions were important but not necessarily my test would have a definitions section. Outside of trying to be a dick on an anonymous online forum are you really advising people not to look at what the final exam will be like. Fuck off dude.Joe Quincy wrote:It took looking at an exam to know the defintions of the crimes...in crimlawhopeful10 wrote:I will just say this. On the first day of class I looked at my crim teachers final exam and saw she has a definitions section. Like half the words that were tested on this old exam she went over like the first 2 or 3 classes. I talked to the TA who ace the class and she said in this class she took double the notes of other classes because of how the teacher tested. Moral of the story if I hadn't found this out so early I probably wouldn't have given a shit about the definition of felony murder or interlocutory appeal even though that is gonna be tested. Yea maybe a 2L would have had it but I rather trust my notes.
law...were important? What else would they test?
You will still need to know things like: 1) what felonies can be used (inherently dangerous felonies only? merger doctrine?), 2) what does "in furtherance" mean?, 3) Does the jurisdiction follow agency theory or prox. cause theory?, 4) how does felony murder interact with conspiracy or accomplice liability . . . ETC.
There are a million small rules of felony murder, and knowing how those rules apply will separate good and bad grades on a felony murder answer.
is the test closed book, then? if so, your idea of memorizing definitions right now is smart. flashcard making ftw.lawhopeful10 wrote:And yes I mean exactly what Kalvano said.