OFFICIAL 1L Exam Prep & Motivation Thread (CSWS) Forum

[gobuffs10]

First final today. This was supposed to be my easy one. I can confirm for everyone now that my approach to finals does not work, and those of you killing yourselves studying are probably doing it right.

This test absolutely fucked me up. It felt like I'd never seen a single bit of criminal law before. Three problems, word limits of 1200, 1500, and 1000. I think I did 1100, 800, and 400. I have never felt this awful after an exam before, not even after the first time I sat for the LSAT. Everyone else said it was fine, and they felt good about it. I refused to share anything at all.

I legitimately may have failed this exam. CS...WS? S.

You'll be fine dude. Its all water under the bridge now. Just blow the next 3 exams out of the water

Thanks man. Glad to have you as a classmate. People like you are why I enjoy our school. Let's do this.

[Raiden]

First final today. This was supposed to be my easy one. I can confirm for everyone now that my approach to finals does not work, and those of you killing yourselves studying are probably doing it right.

This test absolutely fucked me up. It felt like I'd never seen a single bit of criminal law before. Three problems, word limits of 1200, 1500, and 1000. I think I did 1100, 800, and 400. I have never felt this awful after an exam before, not even after the first time I sat for the LSAT. Everyone else said it was fine, and they felt good about it. I refused to share anything at all.

I legitimately may have failed this exam. CS...WS? S.

You'll be fine dude. Its all water under the bridge now. Just blow the next 3 exams out of the water

Thanks man. Glad to have you as a classmate. People like you are why I enjoy our school. Let's do this.

Yeah man, don't let this get to you. Part of this whole finals escapade is to keep our heads up even as the bullets keep on whizing by.

Plus, you totally could have rocked it (or not done as bad as you think). I have a prof who has a word count limit, and there was a trend for those who wrote less to score higher on his midterm; could be similar with your prof as well.

In any case, don't stop, and keep Cant Stopping, Won't Stopping.

[seahawk32]

contracts

[Raiden]

I DID IT! I feel great after my exam!

Woot, nice LGL!

I have one more left. Civ Pro, lets see if you have any personal jurisdiction in my home court.

[thelong]

okay I am feeling worse and worse about my exam.

2L here but this is the credited response to any exam. Once grades are released you will either be relieved or at the very least know your limits and how you did. The people in my section that claimed to rock out their exams fell into two groups: 5% that actually rocked exam, 95% that did median or lower.

Well, shit, because I really feel like I'm going to crush some exam tomorrow.


Also,

So, is TCR to just pound a shot, burn all of my notes and trade my case book in the second I submit my exam?

[LawyerMan]

Civ Pro Question: If a corporation has PPB in a state is that automatically PJ?

[SportsFan]

My Contracts exam is next week. I'm currently looking at some of my professor's old exams, and I really am poor at spotting the issues. I think one reason I'm struggling is because I don't really know how to approach a contracts problem. I understand the model answer when I look at it. If I know where to start my analysis, I do really well, but often I don't know where to start.

I seem to have figured out, though, that by first figuring out who is suing for breach and what remedy they are seeking (she usually puts this at the end of the problem), I can more easily figure out where to start (for example, a party is suing for breach, but in order to sue the other party has to have either 1) anticipatorily repudiated or 2) the suing party must have substantially performed, which naturally requires the question of whether the party has substantially performed, which requires an analysis of the terms of the contract, parol evidence, etc).


Any advice for K issue spotting/how to analyze a K problem (aside from the obvious was there consideration, offer/acceptance, etc...my prof seems to rarely ask about those issues) is welcome. Also, she doesn't really seem to be big on the UCC, as we've really only discussed in depth 2-207.

Yeah, I'd say that definitely first figure out who's suing who and what for (that is, figure out what the breach actually was). But in terms of analysis, at least in my class, it was always best to start with offer/acceptance, then talk about what the terms of the contract were (modification/2-207/whatever), then performance, breach, and defenses to breach, and finally damages.

[emkay625]

Had first exam. Do not think it went well. Think I missed lots of issues. Did not have enough time to fully discuss others. Ended up changing conclusions while writing. Sigh.

[JG7773]

Civ Pro Question: If a corporation has PPB in a state is that automatically PJ?

For corporations general jurisdiction exists if the corporation has its principal place of business in the state, is incorporated there or carries on “continuous and systematic” business in the state.

[thelong]

Civ Pro Question: If a corporation has PPB in a state is that automatically PJ?

I feel like there is probably some kind of ridiculous exception somewhere, but generally, it's PJ where it's incorporated, and its primary place of business decided by either Nerve Center (head office/decision makers) or Muscle Test (primary place of manufacture/distribution).

Also, and I usually make this mistake, in a PJ jurisdictional analysis, don't forget to at east mention general jurisdiction, just to make sure you get those points if they're there.

[smaug_]

Civ Pro Question: If a corporation has PPB in a state is that automatically PJ?

For corporations general jurisdiction exists if the corporation has its principal place of business in the state, is incorporated there or carries on “continuous and systematic” business in the state.

The PPB is also now defined by the nerve center test in Hertz. Continuous and systematic/general jurisdiction stuff is really gray after Goodyear.

[mr.hands]

Civ Pro Question: If a corporation has PPB in a state is that automatically PJ?

I feel like there is probably some kind of ridiculous exception somewhere, but generally, it's PJ where it's incorporated, and its primary place of business decided by either Nerve Center (head office/decision makers) or Muscle Test (primary place of manufacture/distribution).

Also, and I usually make this mistake, in a PJ jurisdictional analysis, don't forget to at east mention general jurisdiction, just to make sure you get those points if they're there.

Yeah probably. If a company resides where it's incorporated and at its PPB, it is subject to general PJ there.

(the court rejected the muscle center in Hertz v. Friend. Stick with nerve-center)

Edit: Scooped with Hertz.

Also, even if the corp. wasn't a resident of the place where it has its PPB, there would still be a really strng argument that it is still "essentially at home" at its PPB, which would subject it to general jurisdiction under Goodyear

[Doorkeeper]

Civ Pro Question: If a corporation has PPB in a state is that automatically PJ?

Yes. Perkins said PPB establishes general personal jurisdiction.

That being said, my class said there is no discrete test for PPB for general personal jurisdiction, but it's thought to be similar to the Nerve Center Test.

Remember, Hertz established PPB as domicile for corporation for diversity purposes. To my knowledge, it has not been explicitly extended as the test for PPB for personal jurisdiction. Then again, my Civ Pro class went over a remarkably few amount of cases over the semester.

[LawyerMan]

Great, thank you all!

[SEngland]

First final today. This was supposed to be my easy one. I can confirm for everyone now that my approach to finals does not work, and those of you killing yourselves studying are probably doing it right.

This test absolutely fucked me up. It felt like I'd never seen a single bit of criminal law before. Three problems, word limits of 1200, 1500, and 1000. I think I did 1100, 800, and 400. I have never felt this awful after an exam before, not even after the first time I sat for the LSAT. Everyone else said it was fine, and they felt good about it. I refused to share anything at all.

I legitimately may have failed this exam. CS...WS? S.

CSWS, MAFUCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKA



1L AIN'T NO JOKE BRAH. GET YOUR SHIT TOGETHER MY PLAYA.

[cts2012]

My Contracts exam is next week. I'm currently looking at some of my professor's old exams, and I really am poor at spotting the issues. I think one reason I'm struggling is because I don't really know how to approach a contracts problem. I understand the model answer when I look at it. If I know where to start my analysis, I do really well, but often I don't know where to start.

I seem to have figured out, though, that by first figuring out who is suing for breach and what remedy they are seeking (she usually puts this at the end of the problem), I can more easily figure out where to start (for example, a party is suing for breach, but in order to sue the other party has to have either 1) anticipatorily repudiated or 2) the suing party must have substantially performed, which naturally requires the question of whether the party has substantially performed, which requires an analysis of the terms of the contract, parol evidence, etc).


Any advice for K issue spotting/how to analyze a K problem (aside from the obvious was there consideration, offer/acceptance, etc...my prof seems to rarely ask about those issues) is welcome. Also, she doesn't really seem to be big on the UCC, as we've really only discussed in depth 2-207.

Here is my approach. I start with a general approach to all hypo's:

1) Is there an offer (look for definite terms, addressed to the offeree, necessary terms)
2) If there is an offer, is it a special offer (firm offer, option, unilateral, etc...)
3) If there is an offer, then is there an acceptance (mirror image rule, 2-207, performance as acceptance, etc...)
4) if there is an agreement, then is there consideration? Look for past consideration, gratuitous promise, pre-existing duty, unsolicited action, etc... that show there is no consideration
5) If there is no agreement, then is there another reason for enforcement (unjust enrichment, material benefit, reliance on a promise)

Then depending on the hypo, ask:
1) Does the SofF apply? Is it satisfied?
2) Does the PER apply?
- A general note, if there is mention of an oral agreement in the hypo, look for a SofF issue. If there is mention of a written K, look for a PER issue.

My K's class is two semesters, so we didn't get much further. I found that as I worked through these main issues, I would usually spot the things the professor was looking for - at least I hope so.

[Dead Parrot]

Last Final is over!!!

Good luck to all of you still going! CSWS

[shredderrrrrr]

Civ Pro Question: If a corporation has PPB in a state is that automatically PJ?

Also make sure it comports with the long arm statute.

[shredderrrrrr]

My Contracts exam is next week. I'm currently looking at some of my professor's old exams, and I really am poor at spotting the issues. I think one reason I'm struggling is because I don't really know how to approach a contracts problem. I understand the model answer when I look at it. If I know where to start my analysis, I do really well, but often I don't know where to start.

I seem to have figured out, though, that by first figuring out who is suing for breach and what remedy they are seeking (she usually puts this at the end of the problem), I can more easily figure out where to start (for example, a party is suing for breach, but in order to sue the other party has to have either 1) anticipatorily repudiated or 2) the suing party must have substantially performed, which naturally requires the question of whether the party has substantially performed, which requires an analysis of the terms of the contract, parol evidence, etc).


Any advice for K issue spotting/how to analyze a K problem (aside from the obvious was there consideration, offer/acceptance, etc...my prof seems to rarely ask about those issues) is welcome. Also, she doesn't really seem to be big on the UCC, as we've really only discussed in depth 2-207.

Would love to help but my professor sounds the exact opposite: equal split between CL and UCC and focuses on step-by-step basic procedure (offer-acceptance-etc...).

[Oklahoma2014]

Finished up finals today with Contracts. Glad it was last. Felt good after my previous finals but very unsure about this one. 4 hours, 100% essay, total of 11 pages single spaced worth of hypos (3 hypos total, first was 6 pages!). Felt buried just trying to figure out the story, haha.

Anyway, glad the semester is over. Looking forward to a month of relaxation. Then lets do it again!

Good luck to all still taking finals!

[Nova]

K strategy

Thats exactly what I do

[minnbills]

okay I am feeling worse and worse about my exam.

2L here but this is the credited response to any exam. Once grades are released you will either be relieved or at the very least know your limits and how you did. The people in my section that claimed to rock out their exams fell into two groups: 5% that actually rocked exam, 95% that did median or lower.

Glad to hear it. Thanks.

[Nova]

Had first exam. Do not think it went well. Think I missed lots of issues. Did not have enough time to fully discuss others. Ended up changing conclusions while writing. Sigh.

Forget about it.

ON TO THE NEXT ONE!!!

[shumpshump]

Have CivPro tomorrow, where the prof gives you check marks for everything. Like if you write the rule word for word, you get several check marks. When you apply the rule, you get check marks. He then adds up all the check marks and gives you a grade based on the number of check marks you have.

TCR is to just write a shitload, yes?

[Nova]

TCR for sure