Law School Gameplan Forum

[Young Marino]

So here are. About a month or so from starting law school. I haven't really done a lot of substantive prep but I have read a few of the guides on here and a few books on law school success. From what I've gathered so far, it seems that the best key to success is taking notes on case book readings, supplements and of course, class notes and then condensing it all into an outline that I'll review every weekend. After getting a feel for the statutes and rules, I'd apply it to a hypothetical situation and ask myself "why is this law structured this way?" Whether it's political or philosophical, the professor is likely to hit on that and I should hit on it in the exam. Is this a good way of going about being successful in law school? I'd like to hear responses from rising 2Ls and above. What worked for you guys?

[jbagelboy]

There are like seven different threads on this from the past two weeks. If you do any "substantive" "prep" before starting class, you're doing it wrong.

Re:

"it seems that the best key to success is taking notes on case book readings, supplements and of course, class notes and then condensing it all into an outline that I'll review every weekend."

I mean, I would not take notes on a supplement - Chemerinsky as a potential exception - and outlining in your fall semester really won't pick up until November since you won't have any idea what to look for. Take notes in class, take some notes on cases if that's how you active reading works for you (varies from person to person), and then yes you'll construct your outline from those, hopefully while referencing a prior year outline to fill in what you miss.

Re:

"After getting a feel for the statutes and rules, I'd apply it to a hypothetical situation and ask myself "why is this law structured this way?""

Kind of. This isn't really a one-size-fits-all. Most of the 1L curriculum is not statutory interpretation driven. In my crim class, we did dig into the language and policy merits of the MPC and other federal statutes. But most of the doctrinal classes will have a little black letter that you just learn and then a lot of case reading and general principles that vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. There are "rules," whether from common law, a restatement, FRCP, ect., and you have to be able to spot where they apply and when to apply them, but it's more important to be able to analogize & distinguish the cases you've studied to a fact pattern. Policy considerations are important in the context of making and supporting an argument and you should know the one's that your professor emphasizes in class...once you start looking at past exams you'll be able to tell whether your professor likes to ask broad policy Q's about a single topic like adverse possession or strict liability, but that's lazy exam writing IMO.

[BigZuck]

Pay attention/take notes in class (this may or may not be optional), do the readings (this may or may not be optional), start outlining about 6 weeks to a month before finals (or use a good outline from an upperclassman), do a bunch of practice tests a few weeks out, and you should be good.

If you don't have a ton of free time for school activities, video games, beer pong, whatever, then you're doing it wrong.

Sounds like you're planning on doing a bunch of "work" which will really be wheel-spinning and/or lead to burnout. Don't do that.

[jbagelboy]

Pay attention/take notes in class (this may or may not be optional), do the readings (this may or may not be optional), start outlining about 6 weeks to a month before finals (or use a good outline from an upperclassman), do a bunch of practice tests a few weeks out, and you should be good.

If you don't have a ton of free time for school activities, video games, beer pong, whatever, then you're doing it wrong.

Sounds like you're planning on doing a bunch of "work" which will really be wheel-spinning and/or lead to burnout. Don't do that.

I will definitely second in all seriousness that if you haven't left enough time for beer pong, you're doing it wrong. This apparently applies universally from TX to NY.

[Young Marino]

There are like seven different threads on this from the past two weeks. If you do any "substantive" "prep" before starting class, you're doing it wrong.

Re:

"it seems that the best key to success is taking notes on case book readings, supplements and of course, class notes and then condensing it all into an outline that I'll review every weekend."

I mean, I would not take notes on a supplement - Chemerinsky as a potential exception - and outlining in your fall semester really won't pick up until November since you won't have any idea what to look for. Take notes in class, take some notes on cases if that's how you active reading works for you (varies from person to person), and then yes you'll construct your outline from those, hopefully while referencing a prior year outline to fill in what you miss.

Re:

"After getting a feel for the statutes and rules, I'd apply it to a hypothetical situation and ask myself "why is this law structured this way?""

Kind of. This isn't really a one-size-fits-all. Most of the 1L curriculum is not statutory interpretation driven. In my crim class, we did dig into the language and policy merits of the MPC and other federal statutes. But most of the doctrinal classes will have a little black letter that you just learn and then a lot of case reading and general principles that vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. There are "rules," whether from common law, a restatement, FRCP, ect., and you have to be able to spot where they apply and when to apply them, but it's more important to be able to analogize & distinguish the cases you've studied to a fact pattern. Policy considerations are important in the context of making and supporting an argument and you should know the one's that your professor emphasizes in class...once you start looking at past exams you'll be able to tell whether your professor likes to ask broad policy Q's about a single topic like adverse possession or strict liability, but that's lazy exam writing IMO.

But what do you mean by "black letter law". Is that like what constitutes a rule? Also, just to be clear, when you refer to a "fact pattern" is that when a specific set of facts leads to a rule or conclusion? For example, a case where a drunk delivery driver hits and kills a pedestrian on route to deliver a package is charged with manslaughter would be because the driver didn't show intent to hit the pedestrian? (I don't really know what constitutes as what yet but just giving an example) is that a fact pattern?

[First Offense]

This is stuff you really don't have to worry about yet. You'll figure this stuff out your first week in class.

[bandenjamin]

There are like seven different threads on this from the past two weeks. If you do any "substantive" "prep" before starting class, you're doing it wrong.

Re:

"it seems that the best key to success is taking notes on case book readings, supplements and of course, class notes and then condensing it all into an outline that I'll review every weekend."

I mean, I would not take notes on a supplement - Chemerinsky as a potential exception - and outlining in your fall semester really won't pick up until November since you won't have any idea what to look for. Take notes in class, take some notes on cases if that's how you active reading works for you (varies from person to person), and then yes you'll construct your outline from those, hopefully while referencing a prior year outline to fill in what you miss.

Re:

"After getting a feel for the statutes and rules, I'd apply it to a hypothetical situation and ask myself "why is this law structured this way?""

Kind of. This isn't really a one-size-fits-all. Most of the 1L curriculum is not statutory interpretation driven. In my crim class, we did dig into the language and policy merits of the MPC and other federal statutes. But most of the doctrinal classes will have a little black letter that you just learn and then a lot of case reading and general principles that vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. There are "rules," whether from common law, a restatement, FRCP, ect., and you have to be able to spot where they apply and when to apply them, but it's more important to be able to analogize & distinguish the cases you've studied to a fact pattern. Policy considerations are important in the context of making and supporting an argument and you should know the one's that your professor emphasizes in class...once you start looking at past exams you'll be able to tell whether your professor likes to ask broad policy Q's about a single topic like adverse possession or strict liability, but that's lazy exam writing IMO.

But what do you mean by "black letter law". Is that like what constitutes a rule? Also, just to be clear, when you refer to a "fact pattern" is that when a specific set of facts leads to a rule or conclusion? For example, a case where a drunk delivery driver hits and kills a pedestrian on route to deliver a package is charged with manslaughter would be because the driver didn't show intent to hit the pedestrian? (I don't really know what constitutes as what yet but just giving an example) is that a fact pattern?

"Black letter law" = the law that is actually written, i.e. a statute or well understood principle in law (Battery = Intent to contact + contact occurs). Fact patterns are more like the story. "Bill is out driving drunk on his delivery route and kills a passenger. What will he be charged with and why? What is the likely outcome?"

To reaffirm what others are saying. Just take the next couple weeks off and relax, you'll get plenty of it soon enough.

[kalvano]

I'm so glad someone finally had the foresight to tackle the topic of 0L preparation for law school. It's definitely an area of need on TLS.

[Shema]

This is stuff you really don't have to worry about yet. You'll figure this stuff out your first week in class.

This and all other advise not to prepare for law school before 1L is a mistaken position too often taken on TLS. While much of the advise given on TLS regarding how to approach classes during the semester is golden I will challenge the "0L summer vacation" at the expense of ridicule. Take or leave my advice it landed me transfer from a T2 to T1 and over the years I have mentored other TLSers to do the same at law schools in the LA region.

First, let me admit that I prepared over the summer because I had a guide (a law school tutor). Perhaps much of the reason 0L's on TLS are advised against summer prep is because most people do not hire or tutor or because of the expense of law school cannot afford to. For me it was an investment. I was attending a T2 and knew that the only way I could land a top job in big law, negotiate more scholarship or transfer to a T1 would be to take an approach that others (like those on TLS) thought was unnecessary. Because I wanted an extraordinary result I took extraordinary action. Despite the expense it was justified later when over my 2L summer I made over $30,000 over a few short summer months from my summer associate position in Big Law. A position I only earned because of the GPA I earned from having started to learn the "black letter law" (the rules of law) and legal policy over the summer and in advance of law school semester.

This is what my tutor did with me over the summer. With his guidance I narrowed down what the classes would be that I would take in the fall semester. By narrowing this down I was able to not cover content for those classes that would not begin until Spring. This way I was focusing on courses I would begin in the fall. During late June and July we covered Contracts, then Civ Pro, half of Property and then Torts. He explained the relevant rules of law, how they operated, how they were tested on an, and how all of the rules of law fit together in an exam context. This way when I got to class I already knew what most of the legal terms meant and why they mattered and related to one another. Talk to anyone who has been to law school before and they will tell you that in the first semester figuring out that much doesn't happen until the end of November and sometimes not even then. But learning the content is only half the battle because the content is only the rules and theory. Application is what matters.

In law school application means exam taking. I did a lot of that and I started earlier than most of my peers. One exam in each class determines your class standing and unless you have other connections your class standing determines the scope of career opportunities you will enjoy (personality and networking should not be ignored either but grades open the door for a good networker). While my tutor taught me the black letter law and legal policies he also gave me practice exams. These were fact patterns or stories about a situation where at the end you are given what is referred to as the "call of the question". The call of the question is what your essay is supposed to analyze and ultimately answer. By cross pollenating the black letter law explanations with exam questions, I developed important exam writing skills including how to organize and approach an exam response. This approach assured that I was not only blindly learning doctrinal rules of law but that I was also learning how to apply the theory to the real practice of writing an exam. The difference is sort of like the disparity between reading a drivers ed and book versus learning how to drive. Reading the book helps but there is no better experience than getting behind the wheel. Again, anyone who has been to law school will tell you that having known exactly how to write an exam before law school even starts would be a major benefit.


By the time class started I was a beast (so to speak). A lot of my class mates were hearing this information for the first time and typing on their lap tops like they were court reporters. I was able to absorb what was going on in class and really think about it instead of freaking out because I had such a big picture understanding of the material plus I knew quite a bit of the details. You see in law school the professor slowly unveils information and week after week things get more and more complicated. I did not have to wait for the law school professor to unveil anything because my tutor had already explained the areas of law to me so I knew where things were going. Basically I was that annoying person who had already seen the movie. Fortunately for my class mates I never let on because my tutor had already advised me that the little my peers thought I knew the better. Since I had already "seen the movie", however, there was an added benefit as well. I was able to pick up on subtle points that went over my class mates head because they were so busy trying to understand what was being taught that they did not have the perspective to see higher level concepts since they were still in the basics that I had covered over the summer.

One of the common myths about starting over the summer is that you will be disadvantaged because "every professor is different". That is like not learning the basics of cooking first because you are going to study with Martha Stewart and she has her own way of doing things. There are still universal concepts to cooking that if you were aware of you would excel far more in Martha's class. There are still basic principles that if you knew prior, even if Martha had a different perspective you would better understand her position on a unique approach of hers because you understood the framework she was building on. In fact most unique theories your professor has relates to or is a building on central principles that they are developing and evolving. A good tutor know this and prepares the student for their professor. Thus, students who make this point have a poor understanding of how legal academia is but the advancement of new ideas standing on the shoulders of older ideas. The other reason that this is a myth is that if you have a good tutor they will be familiar with the differing legal theories and indicate to you or flag these areas as they teach you the law. So many times I sat in class and recalled "oh yeah, my tutor told me that my Professor might teach things this way." This is why you work with someone with experience. Another thing a good tutor will do is use past outlines to help their student anticipate their professors unique take on the law. Once I found out who my professors were my tutor got several past outlines, combed through them and created a policy approach specifically for each course. Because of this, in class I often knew what the professor would use as a policy example before he or she started.

The best part about having a good tutor is that I was finished with the black letter law and my outline by the end of September or early October (an outline is the culmination of case briefs and class notes that is organized in a way that attempts to make sense of various moving parts of the rules of law, cases and legal theories and policies). Of course as the semester continued I constantly polished my outline, edited it and added key points from my professor and from class. However, the substantial body of the outline was done by the end of September. For the next two months I built exam skills. The rest of the class did not know enough law to build exam skills this early because they had started two months later than me learning the law. While they were prepping for class I was gaining exam experience. By the end of October my tutor had me sitting for exams and during the month of November I was taking exams under time conditions. If you talk to others that have been to law school they will tell you that most people don't take practice exams until the end of November and those people are rare because it is so easy to fall behind in law school because of the demands of legal research and writing that most people are just trying to finish up their outline before the exam.

The final benefit of working with a tutor has to do with exam feedback. If you are an avid reader of TLS advice you will notice that some of the top performers urge those who want to be successful to take practice exams. But the key to a practice exam is getting good feed back. Most students end u getting feed back from their class mates in a study group (blind leading the blind). If you are lucky and your professor has sample answers you will find that they are only so helpful. My tutor actually read my exam and gave me detailed responses that helped me develop my specific writing approach and structure. Because I had started so early I was able to go to each of my professors and have them look at an example of an exam that I had edited after my tutors comments. Because I was writing exams so early I was able to meet with my professor before the mad dash of my peers who only come to office hours in the final two weeks before exam. When I was in office hours having my exam reviewed none of my peers know or understand enough of the rules of law and how they worked to write an exam. I also looked like a prize student to my professors because it appeared like I took their class very seriously (this really helped when I needed a letter of recommendation to transfer).

I could say a lot more about the pros and cons of working with a tutor but this is becoming obnoxiously long as it is. If you would like to know more please PM me.

Working with a tutor is not for everyone and an experienced tutor is hard to find. Having one was pricey but the security paid off. I have a great job in Big Law and did well in law school from first semester tip graduation. Most people did not do what I did but most people did not reap the results I did either. In the end the services more than paid for them elves many times over.

[BigZuck]

from a T2 to T1

I'm sure the wall of text was well meaning and perhaps full of great advice but honestly this is where I stopped.

Enjoy your summer Dan. Leave plenty of time for beer pong.

[A. Nony Mouse]

The problem with the suggestions in the wall of text is that there are plenty of people who accomplish those things (top grades, transferring to a better school, the biglaw SA) without hiring a tutor to do any of the things described in that wall of text. Unless that poster was #1 in their class, they had classmates who ranked higher without that kind of tutoring. Even if they were ranked #1 in their class, the students ranked #2-10 (to pick an arbitrary cut-off) still excelled, most likely without that kind of tutoring. Because very few people engage in that kind of tutoring.

[DoveBodyWash]

OP which school are u going to?

[Southwestee]

The problem with the suggestions in the wall of text is that there are plenty of people who accomplish those things (top grades, transferring to a better school, the biglaw SA) without hiring a tutor to do any of the things described in that wall of text. Unless that poster was #1 in their class, they had classmates who ranked higher without that kind of tutoring. Even if they were ranked #1 in their class, the students ranked #2-10 (to pick an arbitrary cut-off) still excelled, most likely without that kind of tutoring. Because very few people engage in that kind of tutoring.

There is no "problem" with the post. It worked for them. There is no problem with that. It is no for everyone. Just like whatever approach you used is not for everyone. This is a forum for people to share their experiences and inquiries. I don't think that the point is to go hire a tutor because this guy or gal did it. The point is that there are many alternatives and some of them costing more than others but each with there own pros and cons. I thought it was cool to read about what Shema did and I appreciate this perspective. It is no more "problematic" than anyone else's experience. Thanks Shema.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Oh, honey, no - you don't get to bolster your earlier post by sock-puppeting.

(Yes, Shema and Southwestee are the same person.)

[DoveBodyWash]

Oh, honey, no - you don't get to bolster your earlier post by sock-puppeting.

(Yes, Shema and Southwestee are the same person.)

ROFL

[jbagelboy]

This is stuff you really don't have to worry about yet. You'll figure this stuff out your first week in class.

This and all other advise not to prepare for law school before 1L is a mistaken position too often taken on TLS. While much of the advise given on TLS regarding how to approach classes during the semester is golden I will challenge the "0L summer vacation" at the expense of ridicule. Take or leave my advice it landed me transfer from a T2 to T1 and over the years I have mentored other TLSers to do the same at law schools in the LA region.

First, let me admit that I prepared over the summer because I had a guide (a law school tutor). Perhaps much of the reason 0L's on TLS are advised against summer prep is because most people do not hire or tutor or because of the expense of law school cannot afford to. For me it was an investment. I was attending a T2 and knew that the only way I could land a top job in big law, negotiate more scholarship or transfer to a T1 would be to take an approach that others (like those on TLS) thought was unnecessary. Because I wanted an extraordinary result I took extraordinary action. Despite the expense it was justified later when over my 2L summer I made over $30,000 over a few short summer months from my summer associate position in Big Law. A position I only earned because of the GPA I earned from having started to learn the "black letter law" (the rules of law) and legal policy over the summer and in advance of law school semester.

This is what my tutor did with me over the summer. With his guidance I narrowed down what the classes would be that I would take in the fall semester. By narrowing this down I was able to not cover content for those classes that would not begin until Spring. This way I was focusing on courses I would begin in the fall. During late June and July we covered Contracts, then Civ Pro, half of Property and then Torts. He explained the relevant rules of law, how they operated, how they were tested on an, and how all of the rules of law fit together in an exam context. This way when I got to class I already knew what most of the legal terms meant and why they mattered and related to one another. Talk to anyone who has been to law school before and they will tell you that in the first semester figuring out that much doesn't happen until the end of November and sometimes not even then. But learning the content is only half the battle because the content is only the rules and theory. Application is what matters.

In law school application means exam taking. I did a lot of that and I started earlier than most of my peers. One exam in each class determines your class standing and unless you have other connections your class standing determines the scope of career opportunities you will enjoy (personality and networking should not be ignored either but grades open the door for a good networker). While my tutor taught me the black letter law and legal policies he also gave me practice exams. These were fact patterns or stories about a situation where at the end you are given what is referred to as the "call of the question". The call of the question is what your essay is supposed to analyze and ultimately answer. By cross pollenating the black letter law explanations with exam questions, I developed important exam writing skills including how to organize and approach an exam response. This approach assured that I was not only blindly learning doctrinal rules of law but that I was also learning how to apply the theory to the real practice of writing an exam. The difference is sort of like the disparity between reading a drivers ed and book versus learning how to drive. Reading the book helps but there is no better experience than getting behind the wheel. Again, anyone who has been to law school will tell you that having known exactly how to write an exam before law school even starts would be a major benefit.


By the time class started I was a beast (so to speak). A lot of my class mates were hearing this information for the first time and typing on their lap tops like they were court reporters. I was able to absorb what was going on in class and really think about it instead of freaking out because I had such a big picture understanding of the material plus I knew quite a bit of the details. You see in law school the professor slowly unveils information and week after week things get more and more complicated. I did not have to wait for the law school professor to unveil anything because my tutor had already explained the areas of law to me so I knew where things were going. Basically I was that annoying person who had already seen the movie. Fortunately for my class mates I never let on because my tutor had already advised me that the little my peers thought I knew the better. Since I had already "seen the movie", however, there was an added benefit as well. I was able to pick up on subtle points that went over my class mates head because they were so busy trying to understand what was being taught that they did not have the perspective to see higher level concepts since they were still in the basics that I had covered over the summer.

One of the common myths about starting over the summer is that you will be disadvantaged because "every professor is different". That is like not learning the basics of cooking first because you are going to study with Martha Stewart and she has her own way of doing things. There are still universal concepts to cooking that if you were aware of you would excel far more in Martha's class. There are still basic principles that if you knew prior, even if Martha had a different perspective you would better understand her position on a unique approach of hers because you understood the framework she was building on. In fact most unique theories your professor has relates to or is a building on central principles that they are developing and evolving. A good tutor know this and prepares the student for their professor. Thus, students who make this point have a poor understanding of how legal academia is but the advancement of new ideas standing on the shoulders of older ideas. The other reason that this is a myth is that if you have a good tutor they will be familiar with the differing legal theories and indicate to you or flag these areas as they teach you the law. So many times I sat in class and recalled "oh yeah, my tutor told me that my Professor might teach things this way." This is why you work with someone with experience. Another thing a good tutor will do is use past outlines to help their student anticipate their professors unique take on the law. Once I found out who my professors were my tutor got several past outlines, combed through them and created a policy approach specifically for each course. Because of this, in class I often knew what the professor would use as a policy example before he or she started.

The best part about having a good tutor is that I was finished with the black letter law and my outline by the end of September or early October (an outline is the culmination of case briefs and class notes that is organized in a way that attempts to make sense of various moving parts of the rules of law, cases and legal theories and policies). Of course as the semester continued I constantly polished my outline, edited it and added key points from my professor and from class. However, the substantial body of the outline was done by the end of September. For the next two months I built exam skills. The rest of the class did not know enough law to build exam skills this early because they had started two months later than me learning the law. While they were prepping for class I was gaining exam experience. By the end of October my tutor had me sitting for exams and during the month of November I was taking exams under time conditions. If you talk to others that have been to law school they will tell you that most people don't take practice exams until the end of November and those people are rare because it is so easy to fall behind in law school because of the demands of legal research and writing that most people are just trying to finish up their outline before the exam.

The final benefit of working with a tutor has to do with exam feedback. If you are an avid reader of TLS advice you will notice that some of the top performers urge those who want to be successful to take practice exams. But the key to a practice exam is getting good feed back. Most students end u getting feed back from their class mates in a study group (blind leading the blind). If you are lucky and your professor has sample answers you will find that they are only so helpful. My tutor actually read my exam and gave me detailed responses that helped me develop my specific writing approach and structure. Because I had started so early I was able to go to each of my professors and have them look at an example of an exam that I had edited after my tutors comments. Because I was writing exams so early I was able to meet with my professor before the mad dash of my peers who only come to office hours in the final two weeks before exam. When I was in office hours having my exam reviewed none of my peers know or understand enough of the rules of law and how they worked to write an exam. I also looked like a prize student to my professors because it appeared like I took their class very seriously (this really helped when I needed a letter of recommendation to transfer).

I could say a lot more about the pros and cons of working with a tutor but this is becoming obnoxiously long as it is. If you would like to know more please PM me.

Working with a tutor is not for everyone and an experienced tutor is hard to find. Having one was pricey but the security paid off. I have a great job in Big Law and did well in law school from first semester tip graduation. Most people did not do what I did but most people did not reap the results I did either. In the end the services more than paid for them elves many times over.

nerd

[DoveBodyWash]

OP i tried to do that "OMG PREPARE FOR LAW SCHOOL AND EXAMS NOW, READ ALL THE BOOKS" thing. It didn't make a difference other than ruining my summer and infuriating me in mid september when I realized it was all for nothing. Ended up doing just fine in school.

[LRGhost]

Don't be a nerd. Seriously. You won't know what to do until you go. It's enough to know that you should, at least initially, read cases and take notes in class on what seems important. Get E&E's. Read them sparingly at first. The time you put in the first two months won't mean half as much as the time you put in towards the last month. Don't believe the hype.

[Zero99]

Pay attention/take notes in class (this may or may not be optional), do the readings (this may or may not be optional), start outlining about 6 weeks to a month before finals (or use a good outline from an upperclassman), do a bunch of practice tests a few weeks out, and you should be good.

If you don't have a ton of free time for school activities, video games, beer pong, whatever, then you're doing it wrong.

Sounds like you're planning on doing a bunch of "work" which will really be wheel-spinning and/or lead to burnout. Don't do that.

Agree with this. At the beginning of the year though, definitely do the readings and pay attention/take notes until you have a handle on what stuff is garbage.

[First Offense]

Pay attention/take notes in class (this may or may not be optional), do the readings (this may or may not be optional), start outlining about 6 weeks to a month before finals (or use a good outline from an upperclassman), do a bunch of practice tests a few weeks out, and you should be good.

If you don't have a ton of free time for school activities, video games, beer pong, whatever, then you're doing it wrong.

Sounds like you're planning on doing a bunch of "work" which will really be wheel-spinning and/or lead to burnout. Don't do that.

Agree with this. At the beginning of the year though, definitely do the readings and pay attention/take notes until you have a handle on what stuff is garbage.

This. I would even go so far as to brief cases for the first couple of weeks just to get comfortable with what you need to know/look for when reading cases. Just have the confidence that, when mid-way through the first semester you realize that by taking reading and class notes you're just reiterating what is going on, stop doing all the BS work. The professors normally (and by normally, I mean over 90% of the time) aren't trying to hide the ball on you - they will tell you in class EXACTLY what is going to be on the exam. If you take good class notes, you will probably have all you need to do well.

Beyond that, I'll reiterate that 0L prep is useless, and no wall of text will convince me otherwise. I did very well 1L without any 0L prep beyond reading half of GtM and realizing that since I didn't know what the fuck the UCC was I was probably wasting my energy.

[shock259]

I did 0L prep. Why not? It's not going to hurt you. Is it necessary? Of course not. Is it helpful? I think it was a little helpful. Your 1L grades are ridiculously important. They helped me transfer and get biglaw. Anything you can do to get a leg up should be done.

FWIW, I read Getting to Maybe, Law School Confidential, and Planet (something that I can't remember). I also did LEEWS. And then I read the E&E's for each fall subject. The first three books give you a sense of what you are getting into and how to spot issues. LEEWs, although ridiculously long-winded, gives you a system for writing law school exam answers. And the E&Es give some exposure to the substantive areas of law. Yes, of course, your professor will teach it differently, and you need to pay attention to what they say. But it's helpful having SOME idea of what consideration is before your professor starts teaching about it.

[BigZuck]

Pay attention/take notes in class (this may or may not be optional), do the readings (this may or may not be optional), start outlining about 6 weeks to a month before finals (or use a good outline from an upperclassman), do a bunch of practice tests a few weeks out, and you should be good.

If you don't have a ton of free time for school activities, video games, beer pong, whatever, then you're doing it wrong.

Sounds like you're planning on doing a bunch of "work" which will really be wheel-spinning and/or lead to burnout. Don't do that.

Agree with this. At the beginning of the year though, definitely do the readings and pay attention/take notes until you have a handle on what stuff is garbage.

This. I would even go so far as to brief cases for the first couple of weeks just to get comfortable with what you need to know/look for when reading cases. Just have the confidence that, when mid-way through the first semester you realize that by taking reading and class notes you're just reiterating what is going on, stop doing all the BS work. The professors normally (and by normally, I mean over 90% of the time) aren't trying to hide the ball on you - they will tell you in class EXACTLY what is going to be on the exam. If you take good class notes, you will probably have all you need to do well.

Beyond that, I'll reiterate that 0L prep is useless, and no wall of text will convince me otherwise. I did very well 1L without any 0L prep beyond reading half of GtM and realizing that since I didn't know what the fuck the UCC was I was probably wasting my energy.

Definitely agree that you should keep up at first, at least until you get to the point where you understand whether doing the readings/paying attention is important or not.

[resilience99]

my 2 cents:

Read about taking law school exams. It will not necessarily give you an advantage, but it will get you in the mindset of figuring out how to take law school exams early. Also, do not think that hard work will = good grades. I always focused on being as efficient as possible. If I am doing something that does not have an effect on my grades, I would probably not do it. Later in the semester, if you feel that reading briefs is helpful and you want to focus your time on taking as many practice exams as possible, then do it. People get really caught up in preparing for the cold call that they leave all the practicing and applying the law to very late in the semester. I would not waste time on substantive learning before 1L.

(top of my class in TT)

[Young Marino]

OP which school are u going to?

As of now small reigonal tier 4 in FL with $$$$. Chose that option over the state flagship at in-state sticker (FSU).

[Young Marino]

my 2 cents:

Read about taking law school exams. It will not necessarily give you an advantage, but it will get you in the mindset of figuring out how to take law school exams early. Also, do not think that hard work will = good grades. I always focused on being as efficient as possible. If I am doing something that does not have an effect on my grades, I would probably not do it. Later in the semester, if you feel that reading briefs is helpful and you want to focus your time on taking as many practice exams as possible, then do it. People get really caught up in preparing for the cold call that they leave all the practicing and applying the law to very late in the semester. I would not waste time on substantive learning before 1L.

(top of my class in TT)

When you say to practice applying law to fact pattern, what's the best way to do that? I'm thinking like "okay I'll larn what battery is and learn it by applying a set of hypothetical facts that fit into those elements" is that how you're supposed to practice?