1L newbie question Forum

[Assumpsit]

I'm having trouble these first few days with comparing the amount of info being thrown at us and the relatively small amount of rule/opinions that I see on people's outlines for corresponding cases. We obviously can't memorize every single thing the professor says so how much is just the professor talking and how much do we really need to be synthesizing into learnable/understanable knowledge for the exam / outline ? How much of this is really just getting us into the mode of looking at the reasoning from a perspective to help us analyze future cases and how much do we actually have to retain/memorize importantly?

[paulinaporizkova]

uhh, figure this out and you've figured out lawl skool

[Assumpsit]

uhh, figure this out and you've figured out lawl skool

Hahaha. I guess my question does suck. Just having a hard time figuring out what guidelines I should use in between remembering everything and the 1 or 2 rules you get from a case/class

[PitchO20]

Remember the rules. The facts behind the case are largely irrelevant. You may however see a fact pattern on an exam that mirrors the facts of a specific case.

[rdcws000]

You will get better at understanding what is important, and what isn't. It will take some time but you will see how it all fits together.

It's hard to tell you how this process works, because it is almost mandatory that this process be learned the hard way. Take solace in the fact that you will figure it out, and it shouldn't take too long.

At the beginning of the semester it won't kill you to write down a thing or two that you don't need. Later in the semester when you are beginning to see the big picture, it will be easy for you to see what information was useless. Then, in the future you will begin to sniff out this useless info the minute you hear it, and you will know not to waste your time writing it down.

[Miller32]

You will get better at understanding what is important, and what isn't. It will take some time but you will see how it all fits together.

It's hard to tell you how this process works, because it is almost mandatory that this process be learned the hard way. Take solace in the fact that you will figure it out, and it shouldn't take too long.

At the beginning of the semester it won't kill you to write down a thing or two that you don't need. Later in the semester when you are beginning to see the big picture, it will be easy for you to see what information was useless. Then, in the future you will begin to sniff out this useless info the minute you hear it, and you will know not to waste your time writing it down.

This. For me, a lot of the material didn't start coming together until the middle/end of my first semester. Outling helps a bunch in this area. Once you see all of the info/topics you are responsible for in a single document it becomes easier to see things in a big picture kind of a way.

Bottom line is you'll be fine. Just trust the process and work hard.

[jjlaw]

How does one know what is BLL and what isn't when reading an opinion? Is it fairly obvious?

(Sorry to hijack the thread, but I felt like my question fell into the "newbie" category.)

[Baylan]

How does one know what is BLL and what isn't when reading an opinion? Is it fairly obvious?

(Sorry to hijack the thread, but I felt like my question fell into the "newbie" category.)

It will become fairly obvious. Those first few weeks, you're swimming upstream against a big current, reading old opinions that are complicated and you have no point of reference for.

[beach_terror]

How does one know what is BLL and what isn't when reading an opinion? Is it fairly obvious?

(Sorry to hijack the thread, but I felt like my question fell into the "newbie" category.)

BLL will often be stated as "the rule in these casec is that blah blah blah." Just look for something that applies regardless of the current facts. For instance, "a battery is a harmful or offensive touching" is BLL.

[NotMyRealName09]

How does one know what is BLL and what isn't when reading an opinion? Is it fairly obvious?

(Sorry to hijack the thread, but I felt like my question fell into the "newbie" category.)

BLL will often be stated as "the rule in these casec is that blah blah blah." Just look for something that applies regardless of the current facts. For instance, "a battery is a harmful or offensive touching" is BLL.

Look for the "R" between the "I" and the "AC."

The court will (generally) discuss the facts of the case first - then note why the facts present a problem or question (the problem is the ISSUE) - then discusses the applicable RULE (generally after talking about precedent, so watch for the RULE SYNTHESIS following discussion of other cases that had their own Rules, which are then combined into the one RULE that controls that ISSUE (and those cases discussed are sometimes distinguished, i.e., meaning explained why their rule doesn't apply, which can sometimes be because their facts are not similar)) - followed by APPLICATION of the RULE to the ISSUE - the resolution of which is the CONCLUSION.

Bam - 1L year. Crystal clear, no doubt.

I'm not getting into teaching theories or anything - I learned and followed IRAC - but IRAC works because that is how court's write opinions. They really do. Go read a modern federal district court opinion. Facts - Issue - Rule(s) - Application - Conclusion. It really is logical. (If multiple issues - It could be Facts - Issues - (Issue 1 Rule - Issue 1 Application) - (Issue 2 Rule - Issue 2 Application) (etc.) - Conclusion).

So the "black letter rule" will generally be found following discussion of facts and the issue (problem or question).

ASIDE - You have to realize that the "cases" you are reading as a 1L are often edited down to narrow the issues - thus if you find yourself not quite following a case, or wondering why there are some questions being begged, you have to realize it is because the case you are reading about NEGLIGENCE also dealt with workers compensation - but workers compensation isn't relevant to what your professor is teaching, and the book edits it down. This is why I never understood people who just "went to lexis to read the case brief," and then wondered why they didn't understand what the professor was getting at when he or she skipped half the case.

For example, a case about a child on a tricycle injuring a party guest may wonderfully illustrate battery - but the full case also discussed parental liability, which doesn't help with a battery analysis. So they leave that part out of your case book. Just study "your professor," not the "law" in general, and you will do better than people studying from generic supplements / flash cards / whatever.

[lawuntoherself]

^Bump^