1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread Forum

[goosey]

studying for torts. FML

im trying to motivate myself to study for civ pro but its SO HARD after doing the crim exam all day...ugh

[jmhendri]

scurred for tomorrow.

[BioEBear2010]

Just. One. More.

[gwuorbust]

i got semi-murdered by my 8 hours crim take home, which, I ran out of time for and had to rush at the end b/c I accidentally spent 30 minutes answering a question that wasnt asked.

I did not get an A. I will be lucky with a B+

dude, you had 8 h o u r s. how long was it?

[snowpeach06]

Last thing I want to be doing on a friday night... studying for torts. I just want to watch tv!

[Stanford4Me]

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/3f5a87 ... rel=player

No need to study if you just watch this video.

[kxz]

ahahah

[goosey]

i got semi-murdered by my 8 hours crim take home, which, I ran out of time for and had to rush at the end b/c I accidentally spent 30 minutes answering a question that wasnt asked.

I did not get an A. I will be lucky with a B+

dude, you had 8 h o u r s. how long was it?

4 questions...and 4500 word limit...I have no idea why it took me so long, but it seems a lot of ppl in my section had time issues as well

[09042014]

i got semi-murdered by my 8 hours crim take home, which, I ran out of time for and had to rush at the end b/c I accidentally spent 30 minutes answering a question that wasnt asked.

I did not get an A. I will be lucky with a B+

dude, you had 8 h o u r s. how long was it?

4 questions...and 4500 word limit...I have no idea why it took me so long, but it seems a lot of ppl in my section had time issues as well

Don't try to grade your own performance. Unless you took a nap during it other people probably missed the issue too. Work on the next class.

[goosey]

i got semi-murdered by my 8 hours crim take home, which, I ran out of time for and had to rush at the end b/c I accidentally spent 30 minutes answering a question that wasnt asked.

I did not get an A. I will be lucky with a B+

dude, you had 8 h o u r s. how long was it?

4 questions...and 4500 word limit...I have no idea why it took me so long, but it seems a lot of ppl in my section had time issues as well

Don't try to grade your own performance. Unless you took a nap during it other people probably missed the issue too. Work on the next class.

yeah, I mean I know its not possible for me to guess my grade, but seriously...I claimed necessity as a defense to manslaughter, where her options were not even illegal [like, she acted recklessly out of necessity]. I did torts necessity instead of crim necessity!!!

[twert]

Just took my property final. I feel like i absolutely rocked it. I choose to believe i'm correct so i can keep my confidence and momentum up.

[bostonian]

So......who here wants to teach me contracts?

[Stanford4Me]

So......who here wants to teach me contracts?

This is the only class I'm confident in.

[uwb09]

most random ass contract exam ever, but whatever, at least its over

one more exam left.... really glad they saved my favorite (Crim law) for last, was hard to get motivated for contracts, but im diving right into crim

[Charles Barkley]

Holy fuck. I just made a huge mistake on a contracts practice problem.

I need to remind myself it's only practice. But I am pissed and disturbed, none the less.

[PirateCap'n]

Holy fuck. I just made a huge mistake on a contracts practice problem.

I need to remind myself it's only practice. But I am pissed and disturbed, none the less.

Speaking of contracts, does anyone know if Restatement §87(2) (drennan rule) and 86 (material benefit) can be used in a UCC context since the UCC doesn't cover them? I think it can because the common law supplements when the UCC doesn't expressly cover something, but I'm not sure. Help?

[mths]

--ImageRemoved--

[Helmholtz]

Brain = fried

[Holly Golightly]

Brain = fried

Ditto. Unsure how I'm supposed to attempt to learn contracts now.

[los blancos]

civ pro is over! don't think i dd well at all but hooray!

[La Grind Date]

Brain = fried

Ditto. Unsure how I'm supposed to attempt to learn contracts now.

I feel y'all.

Thankfully, i've got a motivating lyric from a freeway record in my head. what's interesting, the rapper who gives the lyric was in a group called the Young Gunnerz. The lyric? "Pop broke his pivot got addicted to work/ Man, they say it's shame, but as they say it's the game!" He goes on to rap, "I never made it to them five on fives, they was playing [NBA] Live, / I was trying to stay live / trying to stay alive!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKJoDKepl-w

[beach_terror]

Bit of a theoretical Civ Pro question:

Lets say you have a choice of law issue involving a FRCP, if you determine that it isn't on point through a narrow reading, shouldn't you technically run it through the Erie analysis to see if the court can still apply it?

We stopped at Hanna, and our teacher essentially told us that if the FRCP isn't on point, then you should just apply state law. It seems that more often than not, a narrow reading of the FRCP that knocks it through Erie should come out this way anyway, but is she just dumbing down the analysis for us?

[GeePee]

Bit of a theoretical Civ Pro question:

Lets say you have a choice of law issue involving a FRCP, if you determine that it isn't on point through a narrow reading, shouldn't you technically run it through the Erie analysis to see if the court can still apply it?

We stopped at Hanna, and our teacher essentially told us that if the FRCP isn't on point, then you should just apply state law. It seems that more often than not, a narrow reading of the FRCP that knocks it through Erie should come out this way anyway, but is she just dumbing down the analysis for us?

No. If it's not valid and applicable, why would you try to apply it?

[09042014]

Bit of a theoretical Civ Pro question:

Lets say you have a choice of law issue involving a FRCP, if you determine that it isn't on point through a narrow reading, shouldn't you technically run it through the Erie analysis to see if the court can still apply it?

We stopped at Hanna, and our teacher essentially told us that if the FRCP isn't on point, then you should just apply state law. It seems that more often than not, a narrow reading of the FRCP that knocks it through Erie should come out this way anyway, but is she just dumbing down the analysis for us?

What do you mean "isn't on point through a narrow reading?" If you find that the FRCP doesn't actually cover the rule, then you need to determine what the federal rule is what is its source (not FRCP but the rule based on precedent or whatever). Then you run it through Erie.

Gasperini v Center for Humanities, Inc. deals with an issue like this

[beach_terror]

Bit of a theoretical Civ Pro question:

Lets say you have a choice of law issue involving a FRCP, if you determine that it isn't on point through a narrow reading, shouldn't you technically run it through the Erie analysis to see if the court can still apply it?

We stopped at Hanna, and our teacher essentially told us that if the FRCP isn't on point, then you should just apply state law. It seems that more often than not, a narrow reading of the FRCP that knocks it through Erie should come out this way anyway, but is she just dumbing down the analysis for us?

No. If it's not valid and applicable, why would you try to apply it?

Well, it'd arguably still be valid even if it's not "on point", because valid speaks to the constitutionality of the rule. The issue is you can read rules different ways, and the court's have an interest in applying their own set of rules even if there's a state rule that is more "on point".