Top Law Schools

I had a closed book exam the other day and could not remember which cases the law came from. I did correctly state the law and apply it to the facts, though. For closed books, do you think I am gonna get docked a lot of points for not citing?

thuggishruggishbone wrote:I had a closed book exam the other day and could not remember which cases the law came from. I did correctly state the law and apply it to the facts, though. For closed books, do you think I am gonna get docked a lot of points for not citing?

"In a decided case, the court held that..."

Honestly, it's fine.

in the fall i cited exactly 4 cases on my 3 large essay, issue-spotter exams:

-twombly
-erie
-palzgraf
-pennoyer (lol jk i didnt actually cite pennoyer)

this semester i had conlaw so i obv cited, and i had a professor obsessed with citing cases so i did there too, but for my other 2 classes i never did.

It's rare that you GET points for citing cases, but not unheard of. They can make your life easier in certain subjects, but I'd say your average law prof will not dock points for no cases or add them for citing cases. Your mileage may vary, see local rules and regulations, offer void where prohibited, some exceptions may apply.

disco_barred wrote:It's rare that you GET points for citing cases, but not unheard of. They can make your life easier in certain subjects, but I'd say your average law prof will not dock points for no cases or add them for citing cases. Your mileage may vary, see local rules and regulations, offer void where prohibited, some exceptions may apply.

Covered your ass, didn't you.

disco_barred wrote:It's rare that you GET points for citing cases, but not unheard of. They can make your life easier in certain subjects, but I'd say your average law prof will not dock points for no cases or add them for citing cases. Your mileage may vary, see local rules and regulations, offer void where prohibited, some exceptions may apply.

This: it varies by professor. My property professor explicitly wants them, so she's going to get them, but it would be a mistake to spend a lot of time summarizing cases. Last semester, I didn't cite a single case in any class and I did fine.

operasoprano is full of new york lies! heretic!

apper123 wrote:operasoprano is full of new york lies! heretic!

I protest, sir! I was not a victim of forced grades based attrition, and I really never mentioned any cases.

she's not a real law student! she is a bear from east asia!

apper123 wrote:she's not a real law student! she is a bear from east asia!

No, actually, she is a bear from the San Diego Zoo. The panda just looked up while she was eating, and I took the picture.

I cited Brown v. Board on my property exam. Lol.

Other than Con Law (for obvious reasons), I practically never cited cases on my exams, and I have never regretted it.

This semester I had a professor explicitly say that we would not get points for citing rule numbers or case names. He wants us to explain what the rule is, and if we say "The Smith v. Jones rule applies" without explaining what that is, we get zero points for that. If we know what the rule is and explain it properly, we get points for doing so even without giving the case name. He was pretty explicit about that in class.

While it varies from professor to professor, what most want to see is that you understand the law and can apply it to facts. It's possible to show them that you do without case names.

I've only cited cases in Conlaw and Fed. CrimPro.

...

Agreed. Unless it's Con Law or a class where your professor is oddly obsessed with case names, don't bother.