Top Law Schools

I'm not sure if I want to go into litigation or transactional work.

Which is the most useful course -- M&As, Sec Reg, or Jurisdiction?

I've heard that Sec Reg is the most useful of the three, but it's taught by a notorious professor next semester, which is making me hesitate from signing up for it.

Anonymous User wrote:I'm not sure if I want to go into litigation or transactional work.

Which is the most useful course -- M&As, Sec Reg, or Jurisdiction?

I've heard that Sec Reg is the most useful of the three, but it's taught by a notorious professor next semester, which is making me hesitate from signing up for it.

Depends on what "Jurisdiction" is... if you go to a school where you don't cover personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction in civ pro (michigan, I think) then you should probably take that.

vamedic03 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I'm not sure if I want to go into litigation or transactional work.

Which is the most useful course -- M&As, Sec Reg, or Jurisdiction?

I've heard that Sec Reg is the most useful of the three, but it's taught by a notorious professor next semester, which is making me hesitate from signing up for it.

Depends on what "Jurisdiction" is... if you go to a school where you don't cover personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction in civ pro (michigan, I think) then you should probably take that.

We did cover jurisdiction in civ pro at M, but I can't really remember much except the bare bones of subject matter and personal jurisdiction. I think the "Jurisdiction" course is a lot more in-depth and expansive. I have heard that it's only useful if you want to clerk...not sure how true that is.

Anonymous User wrote:

vamedic03 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I'm not sure if I want to go into litigation or transactional work.

Which is the most useful course -- M&As, Sec Reg, or Jurisdiction?

I've heard that Sec Reg is the most useful of the three, but it's taught by a notorious professor next semester, which is making me hesitate from signing up for it.

Depends on what "Jurisdiction" is... if you go to a school where you don't cover personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction in civ pro (michigan, I think) then you should probably take that.

We did cover jurisdiction in civ pro at M, but I can't really remember much except the bare bones of subject matter and personal jurisdiction. I think the "Jurisdiction" course is a lot more in-depth and expansive. I have heard that it's only useful if you want to clerk...not sure how true that is.

Theoretically, at Michigan, Civ Pro (being one semester, and given that I guess Seinfeld is really good for jurisdiction or whatnot) does not include jurisdiction. However, the exception seems to be rapidly overwhelming the rule. A visiting prof last year did jurisdiction, and so does Croley.

If you actually just want to know the material, read the E&E. You can teach yourself jurisdiction pretty fast. Read a few of the big name cases mentioned in there, and I'd say you're in fine shape. If you want to be able to prove to someone you did jurisdiction, I guess you'd need to take the course.

Definitely take it if you want to clerk.

I'd go with Sec Reg. M&A might be helpful, but I'm not sure how a class like that would be structured. You've had some exposure to jurisdiction...you've had none to securities regulations.

Jessep wrote:I'd go with Sec Reg. M&A might be helpful, but I'm not sure how a class like that would be structured. You've had some exposure to jurisdiction...you've had none to securities regulations.

I'm discouraged from taking Sec Reg because the prof teaching it next semester has a not-so-nice reputation.

Anonymous User wrote:

Jessep wrote:I'd go with Sec Reg. M&A might be helpful, but I'm not sure how a class like that would be structured. You've had some exposure to jurisdiction...you've had none to securities regulations.

I'm discouraged from taking Sec Reg because the prof teaching it next semester has a not-so-nice reputation.

If you are at M I feel you. I'm @ Michigan and I think I'm going to take it anyway -- I'm going to New York so I think it would be very helpful for SA work there. I guess I'll just have to suck it up

Anonymous User wrote:I'm not sure if I want to go into litigation or transactional work.

Which is the most useful course -- M&As, Sec Reg, or Jurisdiction?

I've heard that Sec Reg is the most useful of the three, but it's taught by a notorious professor next semester, which is making me hesitate from signing up for it.

Take Jurisdiction if you go to M. I worked with someone last summer who went to Michigan and had the basic understanding of jurisdiction that comes from Michigan's civpro course. While the subject didn't come up ridiculously often, the fact is that this is a basic part of law that everyone is taught and expected to know. When the subject did come up, the M student was embarrassed as it looked like he didn't know a basic 1L topic.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I'm not sure if I want to go into litigation or transactional work.

Which is the most useful course -- M&As, Sec Reg, or Jurisdiction?

I've heard that Sec Reg is the most useful of the three, but it's taught by a notorious professor next semester, which is making me hesitate from signing up for it.

Take Jurisdiction if you go to M. I worked with someone last summer who went to Michigan and had the basic understanding of jurisdiction that comes from Michigan's civpro course. While the subject didn't come up ridiculously often, the fact is that this is a basic part of law that everyone is taught and expected to know. When the subject did come up, the M student was embarrassed as it looked like he didn't know a basic 1L topic.

Thanks for the input. So I am assuming that this means you found Jurisdiction more useful than Sec Reg? How often did topics from Sec Reg come up during the summer?

verdandi wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Jessep wrote:I'd go with Sec Reg. M&A might be helpful, but I'm not sure how a class like that would be structured. You've had some exposure to jurisdiction...you've had none to securities regulations.

I'm discouraged from taking Sec Reg because the prof teaching it next semester has a not-so-nice reputation.

If you are at M I feel you. I'm @ Michigan and I think I'm going to take it anyway -- I'm going to New York so I think it would be very helpful for SA work there. I guess I'll just have to suck it up

Yeah, I'm still wavering. I have heard that P forbids you from skipping any lectures, even for good, legitimate reasons.

verdandi wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Jessep wrote:I'd go with Sec Reg. M&A might be helpful, but I'm not sure how a class like that would be structured. You've had some exposure to jurisdiction...you've had none to securities regulations.

I'm discouraged from taking Sec Reg because the prof teaching it next semester has a not-so-nice reputation.

If you are at M I feel you. I'm @ Michigan and I think I'm going to take it anyway -- I'm going to New York so I think it would be very helpful for SA work there. I guess I'll just have to suck it up

Just chiming in with a contrary voice:

Did my SA at a V10 in NY, and not once did I touch jurisdiction. Maybe someone else did in their SA, but I didn't. I would plan, though, to take the course before you graduate, if I were you.

Anonymous User wrote:

verdandi wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Jessep wrote:I'd go with Sec Reg. M&A might be helpful, but I'm not sure how a class like that would be structured. You've had some exposure to jurisdiction...you've had none to securities regulations.

I'm discouraged from taking Sec Reg because the prof teaching it next semester has a not-so-nice reputation.

If you are at M I feel you. I'm @ Michigan and I think I'm going to take it anyway -- I'm going to New York so I think it would be very helpful for SA work there. I guess I'll just have to suck it up

Yeah, I'm still wavering. I have heard that P forbids you from skipping any lectures, even for good, legitimate reasons.

I'm in PC with Pritchard right now - he does not forbid you from skipping lectures, despite what that outdated review says on the professor reviews website. You're on call one day per week, however, which you cannot miss without a solid reason (callbacks/sickness are considered a legitimate reason, despite the review saying to the contrary). If you miss without an excuse and are called on, or if you are unprepared for the cold call, you're docked 2% off of your final exam each time. If you frequently miss on days when you're not on call, it seems as though he may be more likely to call on you repeatedly on the day when you are on call. However, when I missed on days that weren't my "on call" days because of CBs, he responded to my email by telling me I didn't have to inform him on those days. I still tried to inform him during a week when I was sick, as I get the impression he just wants students to take the course seriously. For that reason, you also can't use P/F in his class and he sticks quite adamantly to the curve. Despite all of that, I find him pretty damn enjoyable as a professor, and quite helpful for those who take advantage of his office hours. But I'm also saying that as somebody who hasn't been subjected to a strict curve in a 25 person class.

Pritchard is one of the most prominent scholars in securities regulation. Indeed, he co-wrote the textbook with Choi. A few of my friends have taken the class and have nothing but high regard for him and the course. Yes, the course is difficult. But you learn a lot.

pritchard is heinous. too bad khanna isn't teaching it this go around.

the worst part about pritchard isn't his "sloth and indifference" points docking, it's his idiotic closed-book exam. he wonders why people were beating down khanna's door to get in last year when his class had 15 people in it? maybe it's an awful closed book exam, an adherence to the curve in a small class, and a reputation of being a dick.

Anonymous User wrote:pritchard is heinous. too bad khanna isn't teaching it this go around.

the worst part about pritchard isn't his "sloth and indifference" points docking, it's his idiotic closed-book exam. he wonders why people were beating down khanna's door to get in last year when his class had 15 people in it? maybe it's an awful closed book exam, an adherence to the curve in a small class, and a reputation of being a dick.

hahaha, thanks for that info

definitely not signing up for sec reg this time around - I'll wait for H or K. I think H also has a closed book exam, but I think he's generally considered nicer and he allows you to p/f if you need to.

the worst part about pritchard isn't his "sloth and indifference" points docking, it's his idiotic closed-book exam. he wonders why people were beating down khanna's door to get in last year when his class had 15 people in it? maybe it's an awful closed book exam, an adherence to the curve in a small class, and a reputation of being a dick.

None of this shows that Pritchard is a bad teacher. All of this shows that you just can't handle the work.

He used to make fun of people who took the other classes. Securities regulation with Pritchard was awesome.

yeah cause once this partner was like, yo summer associate, CAN WE SUE THIS GUY? and i was like, lol wut i don't know, and then i got no-offered

Anonymous User wrote:

the worst part about pritchard isn't his "sloth and indifference" points docking, it's his idiotic closed-book exam. he wonders why people were beating down khanna's door to get in last year when his class had 15 people in it? maybe it's an awful closed book exam, an adherence to the curve in a small class, and a reputation of being a dick.

None of this shows that Pritchard is a bad teacher. All of this shows that you just can't handle the work.

He used to make fun of people who took the other classes. Securities regulation with Pritchard was awesome.

exactly. he made fun of people who took the other classes. he's a dick. and one with boatloads of sour grapes to boot.

any teacher who uses closed-book exams is a head-in-the-clouds academic, and that's fucking worthless.

i'll take my A in sec reg with a professor who doesn't get off on making his students miserable, and be totally okay that the 'leading scholar in securities regulation, the author of the casebook himself, is so vile and repugnant to the average student that he gets 16 people in his class. sounds like a good exchange.

LOL if you think that an exam, open or closed book, is at all useful (or is even supposed to be useful) toward the practice of law.


It's not hard to get an A in Pritchard's class. Know many who did, myself included.

Anonymous User wrote:LOL if you think that an exam, open or closed book, is at all useful (or is even supposed to be useful) toward the practice of law.


It's not hard to get an A in Pritchard's class. Know many who did, myself included.

Maybe you're a top 10% order of the coif kind of person. but really, only ~20% of the class gets an A- or A since it's a strict curve. Unless 80% of the class slacked off, I wouldn't be so quick to call it 'not hard' to get an A given the underlying circumstances (closed book, method of teaching, gunners self-selecting into his class, etc.)