So I keep hearing from professors and such how there are certain classes everyone should take before graduating, and Evidence is one of them. At my school in particular it is hard to get into, and I'm being told I'm lucky to get in as a 2L... I hated Civ Pro and am not feeling very excited about Evidence. I'm really wondering how much to follow people's advice about this, if I'm almost sure I don't want to be a litigator. Law school is obviously very litigation focused, and most people's advice seems to be litigation focused especially because so many students think they want to be litigators right now.
Thoughts? Is it useful no matter what? Is Evidence a whole different animal than Civ Pro? Are you just loling at the idea that I'm going to learn anything substantively useful in law school?
Evidence for people leaning transactional? Forum
-
Action Jackson
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:46 am
Re: Evidence for people leaning transactional?
I don't know about you, but I'm going to be so drunk so many times between now and the Bar Exam that whatever I could possibly learn in Evidence will be out my butt by then, even if I take Evidence in the last semester.
So I'm planning on skipping it.
So I'm planning on skipping it.
