My torts prof is OBSESSED with Economics Forum

[BrooklynLaw16]

My torts prof is OBSESSED with economics! We're lucky if he even briefly mentions black letter law, most of the time it's just "hmm how do we most efficiently spread the loss?" Then gunners (it's the same people every time) raise random guesses that the torts prof usually shrugs off as "Maybe..."
He's an avid follower of Posner (judge who writes about economics and the law), he has written the Hand Formula on the board at least 10 times...anybody have a similar experience?

[Younger Abstention]

Yep. It can be fun. Learn the Hand formula well as it will be the most important concept in the class and he'll likely make you apply it to every theory of negligence on the exam.

[ph14]

My torts prof is OBSESSED with economics! We're lucky if he even briefly mentions black letter law, most of the time it's just "hmm how do we most efficiently spread the loss?" Then gunners (it's the same people every time) raise random guesses that the torts prof usually shrugs off as "Maybe..."
He's an avid follower of Posner (judge who writes about economics and the law), he has written the Hand Formula on the board at least 10 times...anybody have a similar experience?

Torts is a field that is well-suited to economic analysis.

[gchatbrah]

My torts prof is OBSESSED with economics! We're lucky if he even briefly mentions black letter law, most of the time it's just "hmm how do we most efficiently spread the loss?" Then gunners (it's the same people every time) raise random guesses that the torts prof usually shrugs off as "Maybe..."
He's an avid follower of Posner (judge who writes about economics and the law), he has written the Hand Formula on the board at least 10 times...anybody have a similar experience?

Significantly more interesting than a black letter law version of the class.

Full disclosure: UChicago 2L

[BeautifulSW]

But make sure you learn enough black letter law to pass the Bar Exam. Your Supreme Court couldn't care less if you understand some academic's view of the risk spreading nature of liability for tortious actions; they want to know if YOU know what the elements are for defamation of character. In fact courts in general don't pay very much attention to legal academics compared with precedent.

[5ky]

But make sure you learn enough black letter law to pass the Bar Exam. Your Supreme Court couldn't care less if you understand some academic's view of the risk spreading nature of liability for tortious actions; they want to know if YOU know what the elements are for defamation of character. In fact courts in general don't pay very much attention to legal academics compared with precedent.

torts is so difficult nobody could ever learn the BLL for it during bar study period

[3|ink]

I had the same experience at George Mason. Coase came up every day. And not just in torts class. Every class. I'm pretty sure George Mason has a shrine for Coase somewhere on campus.

[guano]

Hand formula and Coase theorem for the win
Learn it, love it, live it

[kay2016]

Hand formula and Coase theorem for the win
Learn it, love it, live it

[stillwater]

Hand formula and Coase theorem for the win
Learn it, love it, live it

or just ignore it because its dumb.

[guano]

Hand formula and Coase theorem for the win
Learn it, love it, live it

or just ignore it because its dumb.

No, it isn't. It's pretty much the opposite of dumb

[stillwater]

Hand formula and Coase theorem for the win
Learn it, love it, live it

or just ignore it because its dumb.

No, it isn't. It's pretty much the opposite of dumb

hows law school guano?

oh, and hand formula and coase theorem are dumb.

[odoylerulez]

The Coase Theorem and the Learned Hand formula are good stuff.

The Coase Theorem will help you really understand what's going on in a lot of cases from a different angle, but I'm not sure that knowing the ins-and-outs of it is within the scope of most 1L Torts classes. It certainly wasn't for us, even though the professor alluded to it a little bit.


Gotta know that B = PL, though.

[guano]

or just ignore it because its dumb.

No, it isn't. It's pretty much the opposite of dumb

hows law school guano?

oh, and hand formula and coase theorem are dumb.

I dropped out. FYI I had Coase theorem in business school long before I considered getting a JD. I knew about the Hand formula long before then too. Whether you agree with them or not, the concepts are brilliant

[Eco]

Your professor is Turley, I'm assuming. I'm probably right lmao. Get ready for an epic bloodbath of an exam btw. Study the black letter law because it is on the exam even if he isn't teaching it.

[BrooklynLaw16]

This stuff is tought. Just when I think I've got it, there's a new caveat to the traditional rule that was modified by the modern rule but still retains the exception from the old rule. It's starting to erode my confidence to a certain point, not because I don't understand, because I do understand as I'm reading it. But my exam is closed book, and if you ask me to recite the elements an exceptions of a tort that I learned last month, I doubt that I'd be able to do it with 100% accuracy. The exam is a traditional issue spotter. TLSer's...any words of wisdom?

[haus]

I had the same experience at George Mason. Coase came up every day. And not just in torts class. Every class. I'm pretty sure George Mason has a shrine for Coase somewhere on campus.

Maybe it is kept in back at the Einstein Bagels.

[Eco]

TLSer's...any words of wisdom?

Is your professor Turley at GW?