Top Law Schools

edit: n/m

You know what we should discuss? The a-holes at our school who keep sending every piece of negative information they receive to ATL for mass publication.

edit: n/m

thesealocust wrote:I'm trying to sort out my schedule. I've heard time and time again that the professor you take is more important than the class, and in that spirit I thought I'd start this thread.

Here's what I've heard, any contributions of 'buzz' would be greatly appreciated - I'm sure by myself as well as many others.

Fantastic professor basically without reservation: Coughlin

Fantastic professor, attracts clerkship gunners / can be intense: Nelson

Other names I have Heard Good Things About but am less sure of precisely why they are good (so anybody who knows more and feels like commenting here would be great): Collins, Jeffries, Harrison, Schauer, Mahoney, Mitchell, Geis

Nelson - a legal machine that is an absolutely amazing teacher

Collins - brings an incredible amount of energy into the classroom and makes topics understandable and interesting

Mitchell - incredibly entertaining - makes Evidence very, very funny and breaks things down into smaller rules... heavy B+ median though

Geis - he's a former McKinsey consultant and has top notch presentations... he's one of the only professors that I've seen effectively use powerpoint to improve his lectures... plus, he's very entertaining

Schauer - engaging lecturer

Brown - entertaining lecturer with dry humor, very nice and interested in his students doing well

I've had Mitchell and Geis. Mitchell can be funny, but I didn't find that he was a great teacher. And the B+ curve sucks. Geis is great in lecture and gives very straightforward exams. I'd recommend him.

By the way, is there anyone at UVA who actually likes the new course selection system? I can think of at least 5 reasons why I hate it.

Also, of the profs that I had, I would recommend:

Harmon: Former prosecutor, so she has a lot of good stories. Very engaging in class - I never got bored in criminal law. It's kind of a mystery what she wants on the exam, though.

Gilbert: Gilbert is awesome. He's really young and incorporates a lot of multimedia into the discussion. Again, I never got bored in his class, and his exam was pretty straightforward.

Anyone know anything about Howard? I have a seminar with him.

green wrote:I've had Mitchell and Geis. Mitchell can be funny, but I didn't find that he was a great teacher. And the B+ curve sucks. Geis is great in lecture and gives very straightforward exams. I'd recommend him.

By the way, is there anyone at UVA who actually likes the new course selection system? I can think of at least 5 reasons why I hate it.

I think the new system is absolutely horrible... The only thing that I, sort of, like is that they split the lottery for the fall and spring. But, the rest of it is friggin' awful.

Do Not Take (Fall 2010 Edition):
Remedies with Harrison
Mergers and Acquisitions with Dooley
Patent Law with Bagley
Securities Regulation with Kitch
Evidence with Spellman
Federal Income Tax with Robinson

Gunner Danger:
Conflict of Laws
Federal Courts
Legislation

gladiator wrote:Do Not Take (Fall 2010 Edition):
Remedies with Harrison
Mergers and Acquisitions with Dooley
Patent Law with Bagley
Securities Regulation with Kitch
Evidence with Spellman
Federal Income Tax with Robinson

Gunner Danger:
Conflict of Laws
Federal Courts
Legislation

Thanks for this. One question: Gunner Danger = Gunners take these classes? ...If that is the case, why is it that gunners take these classes? For fear of damning my credibility, they sound kind of interesting.

thesealocust wrote:I'm trying to sort out my schedule. I've heard time and time again that the professor you take is more important than the class, and in that spirit I thought I'd start this thread.

Here's what I've heard, any contributions of 'buzz' would be greatly appreciated - I'm sure by myself as well as many others.

Fantastic professor basically without reservation: Coughlin

Fantastic professor, attracts clerkship gunners / can be intense: Nelson

Other names I have Heard Good Things About but am less sure of precisely why they are good (so anybody who knows more and feels like commenting here would be great): Collins, Jeffries, Harrison, Schauer, Mahoney, Mitchell, Geis

Mahoney is a pimp.

badwithpseudonyms wrote:

gladiator wrote:Do Not Take (Fall 2010 Edition):
Remedies with Harrison
Mergers and Acquisitions with Dooley
Patent Law with Bagley
Securities Regulation with Kitch
Evidence with Spellman
Federal Income Tax with Robinson

Gunner Danger:
Conflict of Laws
Federal Courts
Legislation

Thanks for this. One question: Gunner Danger = Gunners take these classes? ...If that is the case, why is it that gunners take these classes? For fear of damning my credibility, they sound kind of interesting.

Because most gunners are confident they will one day be hotshot US attorneys or members of Congress; also they look good for clerkship apps which all gunners believe they will get. If you like the class, take it; just be aware of who else it attracts.

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

green wrote: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.

Tagged. (Sorry for my laziness.)

tag for future

I should also mention that the course reviews are usually pretty accurate so before you take something, read the review as they usually contain some good info. The key number is the overall quality question (the last 1 to 5 rating question). Great professors usually get 4.75+, good professors get 4.5+, 4+ is okay but proceed with caution, under 4 there's usually an issue.

gladiator wrote:

green wrote: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.

If you're going to take Legislation, take it with Nelson - its really an amazing class. But, FWIW literally 1/3 of Nelson's legislation class this past spring was law review members (90 person class).

My 2 cents:

- Collins is great. His classes are starting to attract more and more gunners, but he makes even the toughest materials manageable. And he is legitimately funny.

- I really liked Verkerke. Incredibly nice guy and a great teacher. Not a huge fan of his internet forum setup (the same 5 post-whores ran that show), but I got a decent grade and never posted.

- International Business Transactions with Walt is the most boring course I have ever taken. Managed to make interesting material seem dull. Would not recommend at all.

- John Norton Moore is a horrible professor. Over-reliant on outdated slides, spends more time name dropping than actually explaining stuff, and his exam was a true clusterfuck. Would not recommend.

tagged for later

Anyone know anything about:

Kordana?

Sprigman?

Armacost?

Yale?

or Prof. Duffy who's visiting from GWU?

gladiator wrote:Do Not Take (Fall 2010 Edition):
Remedies with Harrison
Mergers and Acquisitions with Dooley
Patent Law with Bagley
Securities Regulation with Kitch
Evidence with Spellman
Federal Income Tax with Robinson

Gunner Danger:
Conflict of Laws
Federal Courts
Legislation

What's wrong with Harrison's Remedies course?

vamedic03 wrote:Anyone know anything about:

Kordana?

Sprigman?

Armacost?

Yale?

or Prof. Duffy who's visiting from GWU?

I've heard good things about Sprigman. I'm thinking of taking Trademark with him.

I had Armacost for torts, and I left with mixed feelings. I felt like she truly tried to get us to see arguments and think like lawyers would actually think, but her cold-calling was a bit trying. She's pretty tough, and she's a word-digger, so sometimes if you answer her question the right way she'll make you keep answering it until you say it the way she wants. She tends to be pretty theoretical and abstract, and she doesn't take any breaks to make jokes or small talk with the class - sitting through her class is truly a mental exercise. She also never got my name right even after I went to office hours about 10 times. She's very nice, though, probably one of the nicest professors I've had.

showNprove wrote:

gladiator wrote:Do Not Take (Fall 2010 Edition):
Remedies with Harrison
Mergers and Acquisitions with Dooley
Patent Law with Bagley
Securities Regulation with Kitch
Evidence with Spellman
Federal Income Tax with Robinson

Gunner Danger:
Conflict of Laws
Federal Courts
Legislation

What's wrong with Harrison's Remedies course?

Terrible terrible exam. If you do take it though, I'd sell you my book.

gladiator wrote:

green wrote: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?

vamedic03 wrote:Anyone know anything about:

Kordana?

Sprigman?

Armacost?

Yale?

or Prof. Duffy who's visiting from GWU?

Kordana- hilarious and brilliant, doesn't cold call, explains the cases and adds in his own astute opinions on the cases as well as ridiculous hypos, fast paced, some people don't like him as much as me though

Sprigman- pretty good, I believe has a no laptops policy

Armacost- decent

Yale- good professor, tends to be heavy on the Code and problem sets

Duffy- no clue