is it really necessary to memorize the FRCP rules? Forum

[trey]

or is being able to find specific rules in your outline quickly sufficient?

[beach_terror]

or is being able to find specific rules in your outline quickly sufficient?

What does common sense tell you?

[trey]

common sense tells me no but I see everyone in my class making and studying flashcards which makes me wonder

[Gamecubesupreme]

common sense tells me no but I see everyone in my class making and studying flashcards which makes me wonder

What's that old adage? If everyone jumps off a cliff, would you follow?

[20160810]

TBH, I think it's probably necessary. If you're flipping through your outline to try and figure out what a 12(b)(6) is and everyone else is typing, who do you think's getting the A's?

[amonynous_ivdinidual]

on the other hand, i think most of the questions will appear in a context. do i know what rule 13(g) is off the top of my head? no, but if the question deals with crossclaims with coparties, i know the rule cold and can state it accurately. whether or not i remember to cite 13(g) shouldn't be the difference between an A and a C. jmo.

[Geist13]

or is being able to find specific rules in your outline quickly sufficient?

I think it depends on what you mean by memorize. I certainly don't know the rules word for word, however, I do know off the top of my head that amendments that relate back (i.e. you passed the statute of limitations) are governed under 15(c) and that if the relevant amendment is claim based, it needs to arise from the same T/O as the original claim, and if the amendment changes a named party, the amendment must give the new party sufficient notice to prepare a defense and the circumstances must have been such that the new party knew or should have known that but-for a case of mistaken identity they would have been the subject of a suit.

If you're having trouble getting all the rules down, I found it really helpful to sit down with the rules book and for each rule break it down analytically like you would if you were making a flow chart. Much of my civ pro outline is a series of questions to ask myself, each question essentially corresponding to a step in the rule.

For example, for relation back I have:
1. does the SL allow for relation back
2. does the amendment arise out of the same t/o
3. does the amendment change a named party
4. does the new party have sufficient notice to prepare?
5. did the new party know or should have known that but-for a mistaken identity, they would have been the subject of a suit?

Then you just do hypos (e&e) and use your analysis. After a couple questions for each topic you pretty much have the rule down.

on the other hand, i think most of the questions will appear in a context. do i know what rule 13(g) is off the top of my head? no, but if the question deals with crossclaims with coparties, i know the rule cold and can state it accurately. whether or not i remember to cite 13(g) shouldn't be the difference between an A and a C. jmo.

Correct, not the difference between an A and a C. May very well be the tipping point between a B+ and an A- though, which is huge.

[beach_terror]

TBH, I think it's probably necessary. If you're flipping through your outline to try and figure out what a 12(b)(6) is and everyone else is typing, who do you think's getting the A's?

My statement didn't mean to implicate something like that. By memorizing the FRCP, I meant the more menial stuff - like everything in 8(c)(1)

12(b) motions, rule 56, etc. are different.

[uwb09]

I don't think it's that hard to memorize the basics of every rule, so that if it comes up and you need an absolute specific reading of the rule, you know exactly where to look

AKA

If there is a question regarding the service of process, I know to go to Rule 4 and know the basics for serving a person, corporation, and foreign defendant

If there is a question on protesting jurisdiction, go to 12(b), know that must be made in pre-response motion or at same time as

Know diversity jurisdiction is 1332, federal question 1331, removal 1441, venue 1391, supplemental 1367 (1367b if diversity case), so on and so forth

then maybe put the full extended rule at the back of your outline for quick reference

[chicagolaw2013]

I hate anyone who can bring anything into his or her Civ Pro exam.

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

Someone kill me.

[OGR3]

I hate anyone who can bring anything into his or her Civ Pro exam.

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

Someone kill me.

Did you not tattoo the FRCP onto the backs of your eyelids?

[chicagolaw2013]

I hate anyone who can bring anything into his or her Civ Pro exam.

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

Someone kill me.

Did you not tattoo the FRCP onto the backs of your eyelids?

Nope. I'm totes fucked. Dammit.

[evilxs]

No worries, you're not the only one who can't bring anything into the exam.

[mths]

Tab rulebook

profit

[crEEp]

I don't know very many civ pro exams that will phrase a question and explicitly tell you what rule to use. You'll never be asked to tell the prof what 12(6)(b) is, verbatim (unless the prof is insidious); instead, you might have a fact pattern that indicates a case where such a dismissal is warranted. You need to recognize that. What I did for civ pro worked for me- I summarized & understood in plain english the meaning behind each rule we covered. That's all I committed to memory... if I wanted to go in depth about something , I'd flip through my (tabbed) rule book and quote specifics as necessary.