Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7099
EDIT:Is this acceptable to professors, who may expect the conclusion at the end? Has anyone else read that book and applied its techniques during an exam?
LEEWS is very good. Try to go at Spring Break your first semester. Prior to school don't worry about any specific courses. Instead try to work on your writing skills and legal research. West and Lexis both have free tutorials. Grab E&E's off of Amazon when you do start school and pay more attention to them than to your casebook. Don't get bogged down briefing cases. Instead pull the briefs off Lexis.Ethan826 wrote:To echo Mobb_Deep's question--
I just read Delaney's How to Do Your Best on Law School Exams. He recommends CIRI(P) instead of IRAC: Conclusion, Issue, Rule, Interweaving (of the facts with the elements constituting the cause of action), and as necessary, Policy.
If A threw a rock at B that B was unaware of until being struck by it, Delaney would format the answer more or less as follows:
A Liable to B for the Intentional Tort of Battery
The issue is whether A is liable to B for battery for throwing a rock, unobserved, that hit B. Battery requires the intentional and unprivileged harmful or offensive contact with another. A demonstrated the intent to harm B by throwing the rock, and B suffered a harmful contact when the rock hit him.
A Not Liable to B for the Intentional Tort of Assault
The issue is whether A is liable to B for assault. Assault requires intentionally causing the imminent apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact with another. Because B was not aware of the rock having been thrown until it struck him, he did not apprehend the imminent contact. The tort of assault serves the purpose of protecting individuals from the fear of unwanted contacts, and thus does not apply to a situation in which an individual does not apprehend the contact before it occurs.
Is this acceptable to professors, who may expect the conclusion at the end? Has anyone else read that book and applied its techniques during an exam?
Also, has anyone used the other PLS II recommendation of LEEWS? I've heard mixed things.
This strikes me as very reasonable (note: 0L speaking).What seems perhaps more reasonable is that professors use class time to emphasize one aspect of learning best facilitated by classroom interaction (e.g., policy implications, abstract theory, etc), and use exams to verify and enforce another aspect of learning that is achievable by individual study (e.g., black letter law). Or is that naive?
What I have found is that good lawyers do not necessarily make good teachers. I don't know if it is sour grapes or just trying to open your eyes. If the schools and professors did their jobs, why would there be such a market for E&E, Leews, Bar-Bri, etc. You will have good professors and you will have some that can't even answer their own test. Your best source of information is from upper level students that have had that professor. Most will be glad to help if you will just ask.Also, while his advice about books seems good, I got a pretty big sense of sour grapes from the PLS II author, with him charging professors of acting in bad faith, intentionally deceiving students as to what's most important.
I don't think this is reasonable, honestly. If the professor gives you no clue that she intends to test you on something tangential to reading and classes, she's screwing everyone over. But really, I never got the impression that my professors wanted to surprise anyone. Indeed, many volunteered information about how to approach and answer their exams. On some level, I think professors derive some personal satisfaction from seeing their students perform objectively well, notwithstanding the curve.Ethan826 wrote: What seems perhaps more reasonable is that professors use class time to emphasize one aspect of learning best facilitated by classroom interaction (e.g., policy implications, abstract theory, etc), and use exams to verify and enforce another aspect of learning that is achievable by individual study (e.g., black letter law). Or is that naive?
jackassjim wrote:War and Peace