Quick Q Forum

[green]

Also kind of random, but are there any classes we * should * take at some point in law school, like for the bar or for our own benefit? I already know that evidence, corporations, and trusts and estates are pretty standard, but are there any others?

[gladiator]

Is legislation really a gunner class? I thought that was pretty standard. It's not as gunner-ish as federal courts, right?

Legislation with Nelson moreso than Gilbert but yes Fed Courts and Conflict of Laws are 1 and 2.

Kind of random, but if you aren't going for a federal clerkship, is Fed Courts worth taking? Like, on the off-chance that you might end up practicing at some point in federal court?

I think if you want to take it, take it. I don't think that any individual class really prepares you adequately to practice in that field; it's always just an introduction. So I don't really believe someone who takes a class has a big advantage.

[vamedic03]

Also kind of random, but are there any classes we * should * take at some point in law school, like for the bar or for our own benefit? I already know that evidence, corporations, and trusts and estates are pretty standard, but are there any others?

I think legislation is really useful - despite its name, its purely about statutory interpretation and doesn't touch at all on the legislative process (at least if you take Nelson). Otherwise, I've heard that its really useful to have some sort of statutory based class. Also, I've heard Tax and Admin law are useful.

[vamedic03]

Is legislation really a gunner class? I thought that was pretty standard. It's not as gunner-ish as federal courts, right?

Legislation with Nelson moreso than Gilbert but yes Fed Courts and Conflict of Laws are 1 and 2.

Kind of random, but if you aren't going for a federal clerkship, is Fed Courts worth taking? Like, on the off-chance that you might end up practicing at some point in federal court?

I think if you want to take it, take it. I don't think that any individual class really prepares you adequately to practice in that field; it's always just an introduction. So I don't really believe someone who takes a class has a big advantage.

From what I've heard, if there is any possibility that you will ever end up in a federal court its useful to have fed courts.

[green]

Legislation with Nelson moreso than Gilbert but yes Fed Courts and Conflict of Laws are 1 and 2.

Kind of random, but if you aren't going for a federal clerkship, is Fed Courts worth taking? Like, on the off-chance that you might end up practicing at some point in federal court?

I think if you want to take it, take it. I don't think that any individual class really prepares you adequately to practice in that field; it's always just an introduction. So I don't really believe someone who takes a class has a big advantage.

From what I've heard, if there is any possibility that you will ever end up in a federal court its useful to have fed courts.

Yeah, I mean, I'm interested in federal courts, mostly because I found con law interesting and not terribly difficult, though I'm not sure how much of an indicator that is for doing well in fed courts.

[vamedic03]

I understood fed courts to be more of an extension of civ pro in some ways.

[Gooner]

Also kind of random, but are there any classes we * should * take at some point in law school, like for the bar or for our own benefit? I already know that evidence, corporations, and trusts and estates are pretty standard, but are there any others?

If there's one course of this sort I'd recommend, it's Legislation. The skills you'll develop in reading and interpreting statutes are widely applicable across all kinds of legal documents.

Other advice: Focus on skills courses like clinics (especially if there's one in your practice area) and Trial Ad, and try to get into one of those rapidly-filled courses on motions or evidentiary procedure. Fed Courts is useful to introduce you to issues that you may encounter in practice with regard to standing and jurisdiction and such. Save T&E for BarBri.

[green]

Also kind of random, but are there any classes we * should * take at some point in law school, like for the bar or for our own benefit? I already know that evidence, corporations, and trusts and estates are pretty standard, but are there any others?

If there's one course of this sort I'd recommend, it's Legislation. The skills you'll develop in reading and interpreting statutes are widely applicable across all kinds of legal documents.

Other advice: Focus on skills courses like clinics (especially if there's one in your practice area) and Trial Ad, and try to get into one of those rapidly-filled courses on motions or evidentiary procedure. Fed Courts is useful to introduce you to issues that you may encounter in practice with regard to standing and jurisdiction and such. Save T&E for BarBri.

Ah, I wanted to take legislation anyway. Thanks!

[green]

So, sorry for all the questions, but which of the following do you think is most likely to fill up: Legislation (Gilbert), Criminal Adjudication (Brown), or Trademark (Sprigman)? I know the first two are probably more important, but I think I might like trademark/copyright, so I want to lock down trademark. Thanks!

[thesealocust]

edit: n/m

[d34d9823]

I don't want to derail the thread, but I am interested in the fact there are warnings about gunners being posted. Why is this? The impression I had gathered from here was that gunners generally weren't better, just more annoying, so I wouldn't think they'd be curve wreckers. Is it because they ruin the class atmosphere or what? PM me your thoughts.

[vamedic03]

So, sorry for all the questions, but which of the following do you think is most likely to fill up: Legislation (Gilbert), Criminal Adjudication (Brown), or Trademark (Sprigman)? I know the first two are probably more important, but I think I might like trademark/copyright, so I want to lock down trademark. Thanks!

Wait until the Spring and take Legislation with Nelson... He's an expert on statutory interpretation and is writing his own casebook, plus, he's an amazing teacher that will help you understand the material.

FWIW - I think Trademark will fill up first among those 3

[green]

So, sorry for all the questions, but which of the following do you think is most likely to fill up: Legislation (Gilbert), Criminal Adjudication (Brown), or Trademark (Sprigman)? I know the first two are probably more important, but I think I might like trademark/copyright, so I want to lock down trademark. Thanks!

Wait until the Spring and take Legislation with Nelson... He's an expert on statutory interpretation and is writing his own casebook, plus, he's an amazing teacher that will help you understand the material.

FWIW - I think Trademark will fill up first among those 3

Yeah...I know Nelson is probably the better one, but the whole gunner thing scares me off. I have pretty middling grades, and I did well in the last class I took with Gilbert, so I'm not sure the added burden of outgunning half the law review is worth the marginal increase in professor quality. Plus, I have a lot of other stuff going on (Dillard, clinic, etc).

[green]

I don't want to derail the thread, but I am interested in the fact there are warnings about gunners being posted. Why is this? The impression I had gathered from here was that gunners generally weren't better, just more annoying, so I wouldn't think they'd be curve wreckers. Is it because they ruin the class atmosphere or what? PM me your thoughts.

Depends on how you interpret the term "gunner," and it can mean different things in different contexts. In 1L classes, they are typically the louder, more annoying people who prepare hypotheticals the night before and ask questions for half the class. If you're talking about 2L/3L clerkship gunners, then you are typically talking about the higher achieving law students. Not that the too groups can't overlap, just that they don't necessarily have to.