F**k the Rule Against Perpetuities! Forum
- Verity
- Posts: 1253
- Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 11:26 pm
Re: Fuck the Rule Against Perpetuities!
Only B-school kids like perps.
- TCScrutinizer
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 11:01 pm
Re: Fuck the Rule Against Perpetuities!
I'd say it's challenging, but I find the RAP interesting and sort of fun to think about, so it's difficult to conceive of it as "hard". I highly doubt I was given softballs in class.Renzo wrote:The RAP is so hard that it's not malpractice in California for a lawyer to screw it up. If you didn't think it was hard, then you were being fed softball questions.TCScrutinizer wrote:"No interest is good unless it must vest, if at all, not later than 21 years after the death of some life in being at the creation of the interest" got you a job?solotee wrote:RAP anecdote:
On one of my call backs, a partner asked me what the RAP was. I am so glad my professor made us memorize the rule.
Needless to say, got an offer on the spot.
Lesson: memorize the RAP!
Damn.
And if the RAP is hard, I clearly need to pursue property law as a career path.
- soaponarope
- Posts: 169
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:02 pm
Re: Fuck the Rule Against Perpetuities!
You wouldn't know one way or the other (unless you completed RAP problems outside of your property class which were similar/equal to/ harder). And by your own admission, you have some doubt to whether or not your property classed gave you "softball questions," thus a reasonable inference is that you did not practice RAP problems outside of your class because if you did then you would know with absolute certainty that the RAP problems in your property class were not of a "softball" nature.TCScrutinizer wrote:I highly doubt I was given softballs in class.Renzo wrote:The RAP is so hard that it's not malpractice in California for a lawyer to screw it up. If you didn't think it was hard, then you were being fed softball questions.TCScrutinizer wrote:"No interest is good unless it must vest, if at all, not later than 21 years after the death of some life in being at the creation of the interest" got you a job?solotee wrote:RAP anecdote:
On one of my call backs, a partner asked me what the RAP was. I am so glad my professor made us memorize the rule.
Needless to say, got an offer on the spot.
Lesson: memorize the RAP!
Damn.
And if the RAP is hard, I clearly need to pursue property law as a career path.
- TCScrutinizer
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 11:01 pm
Re: Fuck the Rule Against Perpetuities!
Brutal cross, counselor. Unfortunately, far from the mark. I did, in fact, practice a lot of property questions outside of class, including RAP questions. Perhaps you should learn that "reasonable inferences" spring necessarily from "reasonable" amounts of information.soaponarope wrote:You wouldn't know one way or the other (unless you completed RAP problems outside of your property class which were similar/equal to). And by your own admission, you have some doubt to whether or not your property classed gave you "softball questions," thus a reasonable inference is that you did not practice RAP problems outside of your class because if you did then you would know with absolute certainty that the RAP problems in your property class were not of a "softball" nature.TCScrutinizer wrote:
I highly doubt I was given softballs in class.
Let's put it this way: I'm sure that in the universe of RAP questions, there were more difficult ones than I got in class... but I didn't find them. If you're looking for absolute certainty, I suggest a life plan that doesn't involve further education.
- soaponarope
- Posts: 169
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:02 pm
Re: Fuck the Rule Against Perpetuities!
An absence of a fact is indeed a fact... don't be mad at me because you were imprecise in the language you used... counselor.TCScrutinizer wrote:Brutal cross, counselor. Unfortunately, far from the mark. I did, in fact, practice a lot of property questions outside of class, including RAP questions. Perhaps you should learn that "reasonable inferences" spring necessarily from "reasonable" amounts of information.soaponarope wrote:You wouldn't know one way or the other (unless you completed RAP problems outside of your property class which were similar/equal to). And by your own admission, you have some doubt to whether or not your property classed gave you "softball questions," thus a reasonable inference is that you did not practice RAP problems outside of your class because if you did then you would know with absolute certainty that the RAP problems in your property class were not of a "softball" nature.TCScrutinizer wrote:
I highly doubt I was given softballs in class.
Let's put it this way: I'm sure that in the universe of RAP questions, there were more difficult ones than I got in class... but I didn't find them. If you're looking for absolute certainty, I suggest a life plan that doesn't involve further education.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- fatduck
- Posts: 4135
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm
Re: Fuck the Rule Against Perpetuities!
i'm about to hold both of you in contempt for not laughing at my amazing joke, counselors
- soaponarope
- Posts: 169
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:02 pm
Re: Fuck the Rule Against Perpetuities!
I'm just trollin, so I ought to be held in contempt.fatduck wrote:i'm about to hold both of you in contempt for not laughing at my amazing joke, counselors

As for the joke, I laffed.
- TCScrutinizer
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 11:01 pm
Re: Fuck the Rule Against Perpetuities!
Are you my wife's troll account?soaponarope wrote:An absence of a fact is indeed a fact... don't be mad at me because you were imprecise in the language you used... counselor.TCScrutinizer wrote:Brutal cross, counselor. Unfortunately, far from the mark. I did, in fact, practice a lot of property questions outside of class, including RAP questions. Perhaps you should learn that "reasonable inferences" spring necessarily from "reasonable" amounts of information.soaponarope wrote:You wouldn't know one way or the other (unless you completed RAP problems outside of your property class which were similar/equal to). And by your own admission, you have some doubt to whether or not your property classed gave you "softball questions," thus a reasonable inference is that you did not practice RAP problems outside of your class because if you did then you would know with absolute certainty that the RAP problems in your property class were not of a "softball" nature.TCScrutinizer wrote:
I highly doubt I was given softballs in class.
Let's put it this way: I'm sure that in the universe of RAP questions, there were more difficult ones than I got in class... but I didn't find them. If you're looking for absolute certainty, I suggest a life plan that doesn't involve further education.