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

[seahawk32]

Thanks for the Ks advice, those who responded. Though my prof doesn't emphasize offer/accep, the questions are much easier when I use a step-by-step approach like the ones outlined above.

[omninode]

Have my first exam on Thursday. I'm deep into studying, starting to panic about missing issues, but this thread makes me feel so much better just knowing that it is possible to feel overwhelmed by exams and still come out with decent grades. Thank you, everybody who contributes, especially 2L+.

CS. WS.

[swimmer11]

First exam today. Scared as shit. Everyone on facebook is posting about how they are going to rock the exam. It makes me feel like I must be missing something....

[dietcoke0]

First exam today. Scared as shit. Everyone on facebook is posting about how they are going to rock the exam. It makes me feel like I must be missing something....

It's about attitude. No reason to freak out, as it will just lead to anxiety and worrying about everything. No good can come out of this.

However, keeping calm, working on the test as if it was business as usual, and doing your best will lead to greatness.

[minnbills]

First exam today. Scared as shit. Everyone on facebook is posting about how they are going to rock the exam. It makes me feel like I must be missing something....

It's a good thing they're overconfident. You'll crush it man. Go forth and slay

[shredderrrrrr]

First exam today. Scared as shit. Everyone on facebook is posting about how they are going to rock the exam. It makes me feel like I must be missing something....

It's a good thing they're overconfident. You'll crush it man. Go forth and slay

Yeah don't worry about being nervous. Nerves will help you focus and give it all your effort.

[thelong]

First exam down. First question threw everyone for a loop, so I was glad that I wasn't the only one.

However, 7500+ words in three hours. If there was an issue I probably got it. Blunderbuss strategy.

Now it's time to sit still for a bit, get some lunch, live a little. Then diving into Ks.

[minnbills]

K I took yesterday and this morning off to recoup from my exam. Now on to Conlaw. Takehome exam on friday, then K on monday. I need good grades out of these courses. Bombs away

[Bronck]

Two-thirds done.... just finished my Civ Pro test. That was exhausting. Contracts next Tuesday, then I'm done.

[otnemem]

Civ pro just destroyed me. There were 1 or 2 shorter questions that I didn't even understand the scope of...
O well, time for a beer and Ks.

[Raiden]

Clocking for another day at work. Two more days left..

[minnbills]

So a couple of people are telling me Twiqbal didn't come up on the exam, whereas I was positive it did and made it a fairly big part of one of my answers.

Now, I'm terrified I fucked up an entire question, uh.

[SEngland]

So a couple of people are telling me Twiqbal didn't come up on the exam, whereas I was positive it did and made it a fairly big part of one of my answers.

Now, I'm terrified I fucked up an entire question, uh.

Share the hypo and we can figure it out. What do you remember?

[minnbills]

So a couple of people are telling me Twiqbal didn't come up on the exam, whereas I was positive it did and made it a fairly big part of one of my answers.

Now, I'm terrified I fucked up an entire question, uh.

Share the hypo and we can figure it out. What do you remember?

It was a pleading question- for fraud. So rule 9 heightened pleading standards. I argued Twiqbal still applied whereas some other people didn't think so and didn't talk about it.

Edit: Pleading against a 12(b)(6) motion.

[dietcoke0]

Was there anything about Pleading? Maybe you just spotted an issue no one else did.

[dietcoke0]

So a couple of people are telling me Twiqbal didn't come up on the exam, whereas I was positive it did and made it a fairly big part of one of my answers.

Now, I'm terrified I fucked up an entire question, uh.

Share the hypo and we can figure it out. What do you remember?

It was a pleading question- for fraud. So rule 9 heightened pleading standards. I argued Twiqbal still applied whereas some other people didn't think so and didn't talk about it.

If that came up for me, I would've mentioned Twombly/Iqbal too, something like:

"Pleading used to more for notice to the Defendant about a suit. However, after Twombly/Iqbal, the plaintiff must not only plead possible facts, but plausible facts. **Analyze whether facts were plausible or possible**

Furthermore, Twombly and Iqbal shows that courts will ignore conclusory facts. **Analyze the facts to see if they are conclusory**

In addition, causes of action that allude to Fraud must meet the pleading standard of Rule 9. **Apply Rule 9 with the facts**

Therefore, conclusion.

[buckythebadger]

So a couple of people are telling me Twiqbal didn't come up on the exam, whereas I was positive it did and made it a fairly big part of one of my answers.

Now, I'm terrified I fucked up an entire question, uh.

Share the hypo and we can figure it out. What do you remember?

It was a pleading question- for fraud. So rule 9 heightened pleading standards. I argued Twiqbal still applied whereas some other people didn't think so and didn't talk about it.

Edit: Pleading against a 12(b)(6) motion.

I would imagine Ashcroft and Twombly almost certainly apply to this. It would seem right that you applied 9b for fraud and then also the requirements that the 12(b)(6) cases now state

I'm also starting to realize that after the exam you keep doubting yourself more and more. Took my crim exam yesterday, and now realize how stupid I was on a question for attempted 1st degree intentional homicide. I outlined all the mitigating circumstances that were brought an issue and how to apply attempt, but then never mentioned that you should also submit attempted 2nd degree intentional because of the mitigating circumstances.

[minnbills]

Yeah that's more or less what I did. I didn't see why it wouldn't apply. I just figured Twiqbal would apply to "pleading with particularity" or whatever you want to call it from using Rule 9.

[dietcoke0]

And I think it's absolutely necessary to bring up Twobly and Iqbal in that situation, in case the CoA ends up not being Fraud. I wasn't responsible for Rule 9, so I don't know enough about it. But if the Pleading met Twombly/Iqbal, but not Rule 9, but the CoA ended up something else, then it would be well-pleaded, and thus no issue with the pleading.

I say it looks good for you, instead of worse for you.

[minnbills]

Great. Thanks everyone.

There was also another issue in that the pleading never actually said fraud or alleged it explicitly. You had to infer it.

The 12(b)(6) motion said it was fraud, but I highlighted that the pf should have made that clearer but in any event should amend his pleading to negligence or something, because as the pleading stood it couldn't pass Rule 9 + Twiqbal.

[SEngland]

Great. Thanks everyone.

There was also another issue in that the pleading never actually said fraud or alleged it explicitly. You had to infer it.

The 12(b)(6) motion said it was fraud, but I highlighted that the pf should have made that clearer but in any event should amend his pleading to negligence or something, because as the pleading stood it couldn't pass Rule 9 + Twiqbal.

You are good. Sounds like you may not be median pwned in CivPro

[dietcoke0]

Yeah, sounds like you should've done a little dance when others told you Twombly didn't come up.

[minnbills]

*phew*

For better or worse I am feeling better and better about how I did.

(fast forward 3 hours when I'm doubting myself again.)

[buckythebadger]

Great. Thanks everyone.

There was also another issue in that the pleading never actually said fraud or alleged it explicitly. You had to infer it.

The 12(b)(6) motion said it was fraud, but I highlighted that the pf should have made that clearer but in any event should amend his pleading to negligence or something, because as the pleading stood it couldn't pass Rule 9 + Twiqbal.

I think you answered it right. I would have done the same. Basically would have said here are the 12(b)(6) cases and the requirements they now impose (cant simply make conclusions etc) and since this is a fraud case, we have further requirements based on 9b. Then apply the facts. Sounds like you did it right.

[shredderrrrrr]

How do you organize an issue spotter Torts exam?

I our class, we covered Intentional Torts and Immunities, Negligence (duty, breach, cause in fact, proximate cause, damages/injury) and Defenses, and Strict Liability and Products Liability.

Im assuming you break it down by party by grouping the A v. B issues together, B v. A, A v. C, C v. A, B v. C, C v. B, etc...

Assuming that is how you big-picture organize it, do you then just go issue by issue stating which Intentional Tort/Negligence/Strict Liability it is and then accompanying that discussion with the relevant Privilege/Defense? I.e. "The first A v. B issue is assault and battery. B could argue self-defense."