forgot to talk about the long arm statute on my civ pro exam Forum

[mollie]

on a personal jurisdiction question--how screwed am I?

[A'nold]

on a personal jurisdiction question--how screwed am I?

So, that's not a big analysis thing, right? I mean, yeah, you lost points, but I wonder how many points a professor gives for hitting that point anyway.

[270910]

Optimist: You'd be shocked how common doctrinal mistakes like this are. People leave points on the table all the time. You can make pretty big errors and compete for As - the problem is you can't make very many. Just doing that, on your average time-pressured issue spotting law school exam, is going to hardly be fatal.

Pessimist: PWN PWN PWN DEBTOR'S PRISN

[dresden doll]

Would depend on how many other students made the same mistake.

[270910]

on a personal jurisdiction question--how screwed am I?

So, that's not a big analysis thing, right? I mean, yeah, you lost points, but I wonder how many points a professor gives for hitting that point anyway.

Pulling numbers out of my ass: Big Jx issue spotter is 1/3 of the exam, requires close analysis of SMJ/PJ/Venue... PJ is going to require careful constitutional analysis, possibly for multiple defendants... random ass guess: close analysis of the long arm statute was 4-5% of the points on the exam.

[mollie]

agh, was rushing to finish the exam and in my haste overlooked the long arm. Basically, the context was arguing over a 12(b)(2) and I skipped right to saying no minimum contacts under Intl. Shoe.

[nickwar]

Well you can't analyze personal jurisdiction without a long-arm statute, so I'd say if you miss the first part of the question the rest of your analysis is flawed.

You will probably miss the entire question.

[270910]

Well you can't analyze personal jurisdiction without a long-arm statute, so I'd say if you miss the first part of the question the rest of your analysis is flawed.

You will probably miss the entire question.

No. Don't be stupid. The harder / more interesting part of PJ is the minimum contacts and substantial justice and wah wah wah part of the test. The constitutional issue is entirely separate from the long arm statute, other than the fact that the long arm statute can't go beyond constitutional limits and both must be satisfied for PJ to exist.

[hithere]

At this point, you just need to hope that your classmates did poorly on that exam.

[A'nold]

Well you can't analyze personal jurisdiction without a long-arm statute, so I'd say if you miss the first part of the question the rest of your analysis is flawed.

You will probably miss the entire question.

No. Don't be stupid. The harder / more interesting part of PJ is the minimum contacts and substantial justice and wah wah wah part of the test. The constitutional issue is entirely separate from the long arm statute, other than the fact that the long arm statute can't go beyond constitutional limits and both must be satisfied for PJ to exist.

Disco = credited, everyone else = ..........OL's? There's not really any analysis for long arm statutes, unless your prof. gives you an example where you have to determine if the long arm statute overreaches or something.

[dresden doll]

Well you can't analyze personal jurisdiction without a long-arm statute, so I'd say if you miss the first part of the question the rest of your analysis is flawed.

You will probably miss the entire question.

No. Don't be stupid. The harder / more interesting part of PJ is the minimum contacts and substantial justice and wah wah wah part of the test. The constitutional issue is entirely separate from the long arm statute, other than the fact that the long arm statute can't go beyond constitutional limits and both must be satisfied for PJ to exist.

Disco = credited, everyone else = ..........OL's? There's not really any analysis for long arm statutes, unless your prof. gives you an example where you have to determine if the long arm statute overreaches or something.

Not me, buddy. Not a crazy remark I made there either. I did well in Contracts after writing an objectively awful test merely because others were even more clueless than myself.

It's all about the curve.

[jetlagz28]

Drop out

[Action Jackson]

Civ Pro sucks.

[Action Jackson]

Drop out

This made me lol.

[rayiner]

Optimist: You'd be shocked how common doctrinal mistakes like this are. People leave points on the table all the time. You can make pretty big errors and compete for As - the problem is you can't make very many. Just doing that, on your average time-pressured issue spotting law school exam, is going to hardly be fatal.

Pessimist: PWN PWN PWN DEBTOR'S PRISN

This. My best exams last semester still quite full of holes, although more misapplication of the laws than missed issues. One of my "good" exams was actually pretty bad: my professor kept using the word "weird" when I went over it with him.

[270910]

The only caveat is if jx wasn't granted by the long arm, your analysis is done. The court would have completely stopped at that point and never have gotten to the constitutional test. However, it is pretty unlikely that is the case... So should be fine.

Exactly. And even if it was like 70/30 the long arm statute didn't apply, you'd still get points for analyzing constitutional pj, so all would be hunky-dory.

Let this be a lesson though: CHECK YOU CHECKLISTS. You'll still miss things from time to time, but if you have a big list in front of you where you literally check off boxes you're going to save yourself from dumb mistakes and get better grades.

[Bankhead]

Holy shit you are fucked.

[FlightoftheEarls]

Optimist: You'd be shocked how common doctrinal mistakes like this are. People leave points on the table all the time. You can make pretty big errors and compete for As - the problem is you can't make very many. Just doing that, on your average time-pressured issue spotting law school exam, is going to hardly be fatal.

Pessimist: PWN PWN PWN DEBTOR'S PRISN

This. My best exams last semester still quite full of holes, although more misapplication of the laws than missed issues. One of my "good" exams was actually pretty bad: my professor kept using the word "weird" when I went over it with him.

Agreed on both.

My Civ Pro professor last semester told us that there were about 160-180 possible points on any of his exams. If we managed hit 100, he told us we should expect to book the class.

[enygma]

your biggest mistake is worrying about it. especially when you've got more finals to take. this one's over, you have to move on to the next.

[stinger35]

I dont have the patience to read all the responses right now, just wanted to make you feel better by telling you a story


For my contracts exam, I got "at least 10 points higher" than any other student who received an A. When I went through many parts of my exam with the professor he explicitly showed me that other students hit more issues than me, even ones who didn't get A's, but I got double, or more, points for my analysis. That (apparently) is key. The fact that you forgot it is not dispositive. My professor this semester showed what points correlated to what answers and the easy ones, such as long arm, were pretty small. The points may hurt, but trust me, you aren't screwed, if you did well on everything else.

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I dont have the patience to read all the responses right now, just wanted to make you feel better by telling you a story


For my contracts exam, I got "at least 10 points higher" than any other student who received an A. When I went through many parts of my exam with the professor he explicitly showed me that other students hit more issues than me, even ones who didn't get A's, but I got double, or more, points for my analysis. That (apparently) is key. The fact that you forgot it is not dispositive. My professor this semester showed what points correlated to what answers and the easy ones, such as long arm, were pretty small. The points may hurt, but trust me, you aren't screwed, if you did well on everything else.

Depends on the professor. Some care about issues more than analysis.

[270910]

I dont have the patience to read all the responses right now, just wanted to make you feel better by telling you a story


For my contracts exam, I got "at least 10 points higher" than any other student who received an A. When I went through many parts of my exam with the professor he explicitly showed me that other students hit more issues than me, even ones who didn't get A's, but I got double, or more, points for my analysis. That (apparently) is key. The fact that you forgot it is not dispositive. My professor this semester showed what points correlated to what answers and the easy ones, such as long arm, were pretty small. The points may hurt, but trust me, you aren't screwed, if you did well on everything else.

Depends on the professor. Some care about issues more than analysis.

It's not as simple as caring more about issues or analysis, it depends how the exam is set up. But on almost any exam, a single 'issue' can be worth multiple points depending on how you argue it, so it's possible to 'spot' fewer issues and get more points.

[McBean]

No Jx question would include a long-arm that was determinative. Few would include one that is worth analyzing. It's CivPro class, not a Con law or Legislation. My CivPro professor always threw in that the long arm allowed jurisdiction to the Constitutional limit.

You probably did not miss an issue, you missed a sentence.

[rbgrocio]

My final was soo long that I forgot putting quite a few things.... The time was killing me!

[samiseaborn]

My final was soo long that I forgot putting quite a few things.... The time was killing me!

same here. I was writing until the last second and have spent the last day wondering: how could there not have been anything about juries on that test?? how did I not write about forum non-convenience anywhere?! I'm hoping they weren't big things because I really did cover tons of other material