Top Law Schools

generally, do we need to know cases for exams? open or closed book exams?

I'm noticing them on some old outlines

yes

do we need to know the facts? or reasoning/holding

HyeMart wrote:do we need to know the facts? or reasoning/holding

both, b/c u will need to apply the reasoning/holding to a different set of facts. thus would be helpful to know facts in determining why one case came out one way, versus another.

bro, just do everything ur supposed to. read all the cases, brief them efficiently, dont skip class, pay attention, read supplements, take practice tests. any shortcuts and ur grades will suffer. everyone i know who has good grades did everything.

thanks bro, just wondering what to put in the outline

man, i gotta remember case names for closed book exams?

Holy shit, you have to read and remember and study stuff in school? What the hell is that all about.

man, i know where your coming from

...

so a case we read will be refereed to in a test, without the facts/reasoning/holding,

HyeMart wrote:so a case we read will be refereed to in a test, without the facts/reasoning/holding,

Seriously? Look up an old exam, there should be some on file at the library. Or do a google search.

can't find any online, ask the library?

ask your professor

that normal this early?

HyeMart wrote:that normal this early?

To be honest, you should have done this months ago.

Depends on the class. Some cases are important and should be mentioned always (e.g. Palsgraf in Torts). In most classes, the rules from cases are more important than the case. Some professors expect rules to be cited to the case in exams. A few professors like facts from cases and the rules. Most professors will give points for fact comparisons if the exam is similar to a case covered in class.

Generally, cases don't matter too much in classes like Torts, Crim, and Contracts. In classes like Civ Pro and Con Law though cases play a bigger role. But these general "rules" are by no means absolute. Every professor is different. Look at older model exams (not for content but for case citing) and ask your professors. Law school exams test substantive knowledge, but your professor decides how to grade that knowledge. Talking to professors and looking at old exams (or even asking 2Ls or 3Ls) can be a great way to find out what you need to know.

random5483 wrote:
Generally, cases don't matter too much in classes like Torts, Crim, and Contracts. In classes like Civ Pro and Con Law though cases play a bigger role. But these general "rules" are by no means absolute. Every professor is different.

I would add, that you may be able to pick up a feeling in class, from whether the professor is constantly referring back to cases from previous classes.

Judge Philip Banks wrote:

HyeMart wrote:that normal this early?

To be honest, you should have done this months ago.

lol loyola

Ask your professor

Yes, cases are important.

They don't care to see what you *think* the law should be/might be (unless it is actually a policy asking you for your opinion on where the law should go).

They care to see that you can apply the law to the fact patterns (whether that means to find similarities or to distinguish). Knowing the cases, their holdings, and enough of the facts that led them to that holding, is important for this analysis.

it seems like half of tls says you don't need to know cases and the other half says you need to know cases

such confusion

..

I'll echo what others have said: this depends 100% on your professor.

If your professor believes in transparency at all, he or she will make it abundantly clear what he or she expects you to know about particular cases for the exam.

If the professor is not very clear, then I would ask TA's and other students who have had that class in the past, and look at past model answers if you can.

Some cases are so super-important that you have to mention them, regardless of the prof. However, your professor will usually hit on those a lot.