Top Law Schools

samiseaborn wrote:

rbgrocio wrote: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

I can't describe how much I hate that feeling. It's bad when you have the faint "Wait... I never talked about interpretation / actus reus / title warranty.. that has to have been on the exam, somewhere..." It's damn near unlivable when you realize you actually forgot to talk about something. Doesn't matter if the grade winds up fine, shit will plague you.

I can definitely sympathize. My exam didnt have forum non conveniens, work product rule, jury trial, or erie doctrine. I also argued a res judicata instead of a collateral estoppel, which fortunately was my only regret in that exam. I think I nailed it, but so do all my classmates lol

I'm an idiot because I said that the plaintiff could NOT aggregate her unrelated claims to meet the amount in controversy. Lucky it was just a short answer and I said that if she could do that, jurisdiction would be proper. Hopefully I don't lose a lot of points there.

disco_barred wrote:

samiseaborn wrote:

rbgrocio wrote: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

I can't describe how much I hate that feeling. It's bad when you have the faint "Wait... I never talked about interpretation / actus reus / title warranty.. that has to have been on the exam, somewhere..." It's damn near unlivable when you realize you actually forgot to talk about something. Doesn't matter if the grade winds up fine, shit will plague you.

Well... I know I answered every question that was asked, but for example in a question about pleadings I forgot to mention the alternative of rule 12 (e) and say that dismissing would be unfair and that the D should just ask for a more clear statement. I also didn't have time to read anything that i wrote, so I dont know if I made any sense whatsoever. I also mention summary judgment in a question that hadnt gone through the discovery process. But I hope she understands that I meant that if after discovery no additional evidence is found that the plaintiff should move for summary judgment since the Ds liability had been established in a previous proceedings. I just hate finals!!! I just had a panic attack like 2 hours ago. My husband came out from work to calm me down because I am just too overwhelmed.

It's gonna cost you points. For what it's worth, I missed issues on my civ pro exam too. We had to argue lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and I skipped right to 1367(b) analysis without talking about 1367(a). Wound up getting a B.

rbgrocio wrote:I also mention summary judgment in a question that hadnt gone through the discovery process.

Might have been a tactical blunder, but legally you can move for summary judgment basically contemporaneously with your response. I think you can even submit pleadings and an MSJ motion if you're really feeling frisky

rbgrocio wrote:I just hate finals!!! I just had a panic attack like 2 hours ago. My husband came out from work to calm me down because I am just too overwhelmed.

asfhgfaag yes +100. <3

I didn't read this whole thread, but I'll respond to the original question.


There really isn't much analysis to do with regards to a long arm statute in my opinion. You either have one or you don't. If you do have one, all you really need to do is put a sentence acknowledging that the action probably falls under some section of the long arm statute (alternatively you could say: assuming the actions fall within the reach of the long arm statute).

The fact of the matter is you always have to the the personal jurisdiction analysis anyway.

I had a similar situation last semester and thought I was screwed because I didn't do a detailed analysis of the LR Statute. When I got my grade back I was very happy, and I actually ended up getting all the possible point on the personal jurisdiction question.

It's not a big deal...

disco_barred wrote:

rbgrocio wrote:I also mention summary judgment in a question that hadnt gone through the discovery process.

Might have been a tactical blunder, but legally you can move for summary judgment basically contemporaneously with your response. I think you can even submit pleadings and an MSJ motion if you're really feeling frisky

rbgrocio wrote:I just hate finals!!! I just had a panic attack like 2 hours ago. My husband came out from work to calm me down because I am just too overwhelmed.

asfhgfaag yes +100. <3

So do you think it was good or not to say that he should move for summary judgment?

Thanks guys--in this particular problem, the plaintiff was asserting personal jurisdiction on quasi in rem grounds (attaching property). I just argued that under Shaffer v Heitner, we still need the defendant to meet Int'l Shoe's minimum contacts test in order to have personal jurisdiction based on specific jurisdiction (or else have general jurisdiction based on systematic contacts under Helicopteros standard). Got so caught up in the quasi in rem analysis that I skipped the long arm analysis.