WUSTL Recent Grad (and others) Taking Questions Forum

[DoveBodyWash]

Any thoughts on Baker for contracts??

[TatteredDignity]

Her scholarship is mostly in gender issues, so if you can find a way to incorporate those into her exam you will get bonus points.

On a property exam?

[Birdnals]

Her scholarship is mostly in gender issues, so if you can find a way to incorporate those into her exam you will get bonus points.

On a property exam?

Yeah, worked for me.

For example if I talked about the Coase Therum I would throw in a sentence about irrational behavior behind sexism, or the non-monitary value of housework or something. Pretty much all the policy stuff can be linked back to gender issues. And since she is big on policy, it came up a lot. Her exams are designed to give you an extra hour more than you should need, so there is time at the end to brainstorm and try to throw in one liners I thought she would like to see.

[Michael Bluth]

Her scholarship is mostly in gender issues, so if you can find a way to incorporate those into her exam you will get bonus points.

On a property exam?

Yeah, worked for me.

For example if I talked about the Coase Therum I would throw in a sentence about irrational behavior behind sexism, or the non-monitary value of housework or something. Pretty much all the policy stuff can be linked back to gender issues. And since she is big on policy, it came up a lot. Her exams are designed to give you an extra hour more than you should need, so there is time at the end to brainstorm and try to throw in one liners I thought she would like to see.

Glad I didn't have her. I would lose my mind if other students got bonus points on a property exam for parroting a professor's personal beliefs back to her. Drobak FTW.

[TatteredDignity]

Her scholarship is mostly in gender issues, so if you can find a way to incorporate those into her exam you will get bonus points.

On a property exam?

Yeah, worked for me.

For example if I talked about the Coase Therum I would throw in a sentence about irrational behavior behind sexism, or the non-monitary value of housework or something. Pretty much all the policy stuff can be linked back to gender issues. And since she is big on policy, it came up a lot. Her exams are designed to give you an extra hour more than you should need, so there is time at the end to brainstorm and try to throw in one liners I thought she would like to see.

Glad I didn't have her. I would lose my mind if other students got bonus points on a property exam for parroting a professor's personal beliefs back to her. Drobak FTW.

+1

[Cellar-door]

Any suggestions on good places to get affordable/decent quality Mattresses and furniture in STL? (Stores that is not craigslist).

[goldeneye]

Is it true that CSO got rid of the oci lottery this year? Someone in the Midwest oci thread had grades 87-90 that didn't get a single interview? At least in the past CSO picked 6/20 slots.

[Randomnumbers]

I was under the impression that we were entirely preselect.

[goldeneye]

I was under the impression that we were entirely preselect.

We used to have some slots as lottery, hence the bid numbers. I think there was a change this year, likely to appease employers. Not a good look for the school if that person who has a 87-90, median at the least, probably top 1/3, received 0 interviews.

[hoos89]

/

[Birdnals]

I was under the impression that we were entirely preselect.

We used to have some slots as lottery, hence the bid numbers. I think there was a change this year, likely to appease employers. Not a good look for the school if that person who has a 87-90, median at the least, probably top 1/3, received 0 interviews.

I was under the impression that it was an 80/20 split between preselect and lottery for all the firms, but idk.

Maybe that person didn't bid everywhere or only for that market (I would guess KC or something like that) or there was a flaw with the resume he uploaded or something? Also they came out rolling so maybe he checked too early? Seems odd to say the least

[Xs20]

.

[notedgarfigaro]

I was under the impression that we were entirely preselect.

We used to have some slots as lottery, hence the bid numbers. I think there was a change this year, likely to appease employers. Not a good look for the school if that person who has a 87-90, median at the least, probably top 1/3, received 0 interviews.

Not surprising at all...at least last year, the interview #s dropping considerably after the top 20%. Good thing that guy is hustling already...a lot of people in his same situation got caught flatfooted. Also, the lottery is a pretty big flame- you'll get 1 slot at most. I got a lottery slot 5PM the night before interviews started, and even then it was an "alternate lottery." I didn't hear of anyone getting more than one, and most people got zero.

Anyone have suggestions on supplements to get for Tamanaha and Smith? I just ordered Understanding Property for Konig.

E&E for torts is fine for tamanaha, but in reality, you probably won't need it (he drills it into you). As for Peggy...well, I used the ship book and it was pretty decent. She's pretty straight forward, so I'm sure any reasonable supplement would work.

[Dolphine]

.

[nachosrgood]

So I have a few questions about books and supplements. Figured it was easiest to filter this by professor.

Contracts w/ Greenfield
1. Do I need to buy the latest edition of the Contracts Casebook (10th ed. is new of April 2013) or can I order the 9th edition (much cheaper) and supplement missing cases with a current copy from the library?

2. What supplements?

Torts w/ Goldwasser
3. Again do I need to buy the latest edition of the Torts casebook (April 2013 is new ed.) or can I use old addition and supplement with a library copy?

4. What supplements?


Property w/ Mandelker
3. What supplements?

Edit: Oops, you are right Hoos. Fixed text to assign Torts to Goldwasser & Contracts to Greenfield.

[hoos89]

/

[notedgarfigaro]

I believe you mixed up Goldwasser and Greenfield. I would be wary of buying older casebooks. There's more to it than just which cases are in there. Cases are almost universally edited, often heavily, for the casebook in order in to focus in on the issue(s) at hand. There's also notes from the editors discussing the cases.

I think the older editions are perfectly fine, especially in areas of law that aren't subject to a lot of change like contracts and torts. Civ Pro and Con law, those are books I'd be more leery about getting the older editions due to substantial upheaval in the law. Also, time between editions is another factor to look at...the only time I got burned getting the older edition was due to a 9 year gap between editions (but fuck that teacher for assigning a $200 book for a weekend course).

As for supplements for Mandelker...he recommends the nutshell (I didn't find it helpful at all), but the scope of his course is so different from the normal property course that I'm not sure any supplement would really be helpful. However, when I needed to review some property law for a seminar paper this semester, the E&E was SUPER helpful.

[Michael Bluth]

So I have a few questions about books and supplements. Figured it was easiest to filter this by professor.

Torts w/ Greenfield
1. Do I need to buy the latest edition of the Contracts Casebook (10th ed. is new of April 2013) or can I order the 9th edition (much cheaper) and supplement missing cases with a current copy from the library?

2. What supplements?

Contracts w/ Goldwasser
3. Again do I need to buy the latest edition of the Contracts casebook (April 2013 is new ed.) or can I use old addition and supplement with a library copy?

4. What supplements?


Property w/ Mandelker
3. What supplements?

Re: supplements for Torts:

I doubt you need any. And for Goldwasser your outline should be, like, 2 pages tops. 1 page is probably sufficient.

[nachosrgood]

I believe you mixed up Goldwasser and Greenfield. I would be wary of buying older casebooks. There's more to it than just which cases are in there. Cases are almost universally edited, often heavily, for the casebook in order in to focus in on the issue(s) at hand. There's also notes from the editors discussing the cases.

I think the older editions are perfectly fine, especially in areas of law that aren't subject to a lot of change like contracts and torts. Civ Pro and Con law, those are books I'd be more leery about getting the older editions due to substantial upheaval in the law. Also, time between editions is another factor to look at...the only time I got burned getting the older edition was due to a 9 year gap between editions (but fuck that teacher for assigning a $200 book for a weekend course).

Hmm, seems like a difficult choice... $360 on new editions of Torts and Contracts whereas the old editions total less than $20 but come with the risk of missing info. The only positive about the new editions is that I can probably get $100-150 selling them back to amazon after the semester.

Suppose I'll sleep on it in case anyone else pines in.

[nachosrgood]

Re: supplements for Torts:

I doubt you need any. And for Goldwasser your outline should be, like, 2 pages tops. 1 page is probably sufficient.

Surprising to hear. But good to know, guess I'll be coming back to you more advice later on why that is. Thanks

[sublime]

..

[hoos89]

/

[notedgarfigaro]

Grocery Stores near Delmar? It seems like on and around Delmar they have pretty much anything you would want aside from a real grocery store. The only thing that is close that I have found is Long Acres Farm/The Market in the Loop, which just kind of looks like a produce stand and has conflicting things about it online.

If I am living close to Delmar, is there an actual grocery store within 3-4 miles that I have been over looking? I won't have a car.


Thanks!

The green line shuttle goes to the Schnucks on Olive in the afternoon starting at 5:30 I think.

[TatteredDignity]

Re: supplements for Torts:

I doubt you need any. And for Goldwasser your outline should be, like, 2 pages tops. 1 page is probably sufficient.

Surprising to hear. But good to know, guess I'll be coming back to you more advice later on why that is. Thanks

I brought in a 1-page outline, and I don't think I looked at it once. There honestly isn't time in a racehorse exam like hers. The law is very simple--the skill is in applying it to new facts, and there's no way to outline that. Plus, you should have taken enough practice exams by then that you know the law cold.

[romothesavior]

Re: supplements for Torts:

I doubt you need any. And for Goldwasser your outline should be, like, 2 pages tops. 1 page is probably sufficient.

Surprising to hear. But good to know, guess I'll be coming back to you more advice later on why that is. Thanks

I brought in a 1-page outline, and I don't think I looked at it once. There honestly isn't time in a racehorse exam like hers. The law is very simple--the skill is in applying it to new facts, and there's no way to outline that. Plus, you should have taken enough practice exams by then that you know the law cold.

Yeah I think this is especially the case in a class like torts. The subject matter is very accessible and you just have to know how to argue both sides of the issue. E.g., "A will argue negligence because of XYZ, duty, breach, negligence, damages, and B will argue against all of those things because of whatever. And B will argue some affirmative defenses or mitigating factors like comparative negligence." Pretty easy stuff. I used my outlines in class more as a 2L and a 3L, but I think the only 1L class where you might glance at it is Civ Pro.