Should 1Ls Read Treatises? Forum

[tuhaybey]

I put together a list of supplements here: law school study aids. I initially did not recommend that 1Ls buy the treatises (although I do recommend that they buy the E&Es, and maybe the nutshells and/or multiple choice questions). However, some other posters do recommend that 1Ls read the treatises as well. What do you think?

[banjo]

Just to add to my post in that other thread, I would say yes for these:

Chemerinsky (Con Law)
Chirelstein's Concepts & Insights (the book with the ship on it)
Dressler (Crim; heard great things)
Abrams (Torts; heard some good things)
Oxford Introductions to Property Law (ONLY IF you're using the Merrill casebook)

ETA: I'm worried that people will read this poll and think only of clunky Hornbooks. Most law students refer to all of the above simply as "supplements"

[sublime]

..

[sideroxylon]

talk to the professor/you do you

[sighsigh]

I initially did not recommend that 1Ls buy the treatises (although I do recommend that they buy the E&Es, and maybe the nutshells and/or multiple choice questions). However, some other posters do recommend that 1Ls read the treatises as well. What do you think?

Can I ask what are the multiple choice questions that you're referring to?

Thanks.

[tuhaybey]

Can I ask what are the multiple choice questions that you're referring to?

Thanks.

I recommend the questions and answers series from Lexis, but if somebody likes a different set better, I'm certainly open to suggestions.

[tuhaybey]

Just to add to my post in that other thread, I would say yes for these:

Chemerinsky (Con Law)
Chirelstein's Concepts & Insights (the book with the ship on it)
Dressler (Crim; heard great things)
Abrams (Torts; heard some good things)
Oxford Introductions to Property Law (ONLY IF you're using the Merrill casebook)

ETA: I'm worried that people will read this poll and think only of clunky Hornbooks. Most law students refer to all of the above simply as "supplements"

The Chemerinsky book appears to be 1440 pages long. That's as clunky as they come unless I'm looking at the wrong one.

Can I ask, did you read those and the E&Es and Nutshells? Or just those ones? Did you read the whole books, or just key sections?

It isn't that I don't think the longer ones are useful. They are, which is why I listed them on the main page. They're just expensive and take a long time to read. IMO, you can get away with the much quicker to read and cheaper Nutshell and then fill in the gaps as needed in the library.

[BankruptMe]

I dabble in the treatises the professors say they "love"

[banjo]

Just to add to my post in that other thread, I would say yes for these:

Chemerinsky (Con Law)
Chirelstein's Concepts & Insights (the book with the ship on it)
Dressler (Crim; heard great things)
Abrams (Torts; heard some good things)
Oxford Introductions to Property Law (ONLY IF you're using the Merrill casebook)

ETA: I'm worried that people will read this poll and think only of clunky Hornbooks. Most law students refer to all of the above simply as "supplements"

The Chemerinsky book appears to be 1440 pages long. That's as clunky as they come unless I'm looking at the wrong one.

Can I ask, did you read those and the E&Es and Nutshells? Or just those ones? Did you read the whole books, or just key sections?

It isn't that I don't think the longer ones are useful. They are, which is why I listed them on the main page. They're just expensive and take a long time to read. IMO, you can get away with the much quicker to read and cheaper Nutshell and then fill in the gaps as needed in the library.

For Con Law, I just used Chemerinsky and I would say the vast majority of my class (even in other sections) used the same supplement. Typically, Con Law courses cover only a few topics (commerce clause, Fourteenth Amendment, executive powers, maybe Tenth Amendment), so people only read the relevant portions. Chemerinsky also has a clear, analytical writing style, so at times it reads more like Glannon than like the Torts hornbook.

[lacrossebrother]

Lol at "buy the treatises."

Do you know how expensive they are

They're available on lexis/west though.

[tuhaybey]

Lol at "buy the treatises."

Do you know how expensive they are

They're available on lexis/west though.

I personally don't think I should recommend buying them, but to be clear, the treatises that have been recommended are not like the multi-volume sets of treatises you generally find on Lexis or West. We are talking about single volume, mass market, treatises that cost under $150 at the most. The publishers call them "treatises" which is also how I've heard them referred to, but Banjo considers them to just be "supplements." Personally, I still think they're too expensive and take too long to read, but we're not talking about like Nimmer on Copyright and that kind of stuff. Buying one of those sets that take up like a whole shelf in the library certainly would not be a sensible option for a law student.

[lacrossebrother]

Lol at "buy the treatises."

Do you know how expensive they are

They're available on lexis/west though.

I personally don't think I should recommend buying them, but to be clear, the treatises that have been recommended are not like the multi-volume sets of treatises you generally find on Lexis or West. We are talking about single volume, mass market, treatises that cost under $150 at the most. The publishers call them "treatises" which is also how I've heard them referred to, but Banjo considers them to just be "supplements." Personally, I still think they're too expensive and take too long to read, but we're not talking about like Nimmer on Copyright and that kind of stuff. Buying one of those sets that take up like a whole shelf in the library certainly would not be a sensible option for a law student.

Oh. Yea, if it's not essential to the practice, it's not a treatise.

The more comprehensive supplements, like the aspen student treatise series, concise hornbooks, and the understanding series are the shit though. Especially the understanding series.

[tuhaybey]

Oh. Yea, if it's not essential to the practice, it's not a treatise.

The more comprehensive supplements, like the aspen student treatise series, concise hornbooks, and the understanding series are the shit though. Especially the understanding series.

Those are what banjo is recommending, so you could as a "buy" vote I think.

[tuhaybey]

Ok, well, pretty decisive vote against treatises, but after reading the comments, I wonder if it is partly different people meaning different things when they say "treatise". I added them in on the home page and I think I'll make a subsection on the 1L page about it... I'll update the thread about the list once I do. If anybody has further suggestions, they're still most welcome. Thanks to all who participated!

[NotMyRealName09]

I knew them as hornbooks (treatises as I use the word are something different, specialized, for practitioners not law students), and I never read a line from any of them in law school.

[tuhaybey]

I knew them as hornbooks (treatises as I use the word are something different, specialized, for practitioners not law students), and I never read a line from any of them in law school.

Yeah, whatever we want to call them, I didn't use them heavily. I did fill in a couple of gaps in my outlines using them from time to time, but I probably would have been fine not doing that and I just got them in the library anyways.

That said, I could see a different strategy entirely working- just read the hornbook and skip the E&E, nutshell, etc. A number of posters seem to have had luck with that approach as well. Personally, though, I think I'd rather have a variety of sources and styles of materials so I don't get sick of it. And, a lot of what they cover in the hornbooks is way too far down in the weeds to end up on an exam.

[Nebby]

E&E are TCR.

[kaiser]

A 1L should never waste money on an actual treatise/hornbook (though E&E's aren't hornbooks and what I say about hornbooks doesn't necessarily apply to E&E's, which can be very helpful).

Understand what the purpose of a treatise is. Its not meant to be read from cover to cover. Rather, its meant to fill in tiny gaps in your knowledge, paint some additional context to certain concepts, or provide you with case examples of certain legal points. For example, you may consult a hornbook for the specific issue of proximate cause to help you better understand the concept. Or perhaps you understand proximate cause very well, and just want to slightly refine your ability to break down and discuss the concept on an exam. Treatise helps for that purpose as well (though it will provide far more detail and nuance than you could ever need).

Your library will have all the best treatises at your disposal. Don't waste money on them. Just wait until you hit a concept that requires a little extra context, check out the treatise, and put it right back on the shelf.