For those who've taken LEEWS-- Step 1? Forum

[lawschoolproblems86]

I took LEEWS at the start of the semester, but I found that blindly following it really screwed me up on my (ungraded) midterm. Overall, it seemed like a very good program and helped me gain some great insight. I guess my main issue is the Step 1 Analysis.

For those of you who have mastered LEEWS, how did you manage to master that step? I just could never understand how it was possible to identify all the parties and what each party wants without a deep read of the problem first. In our class, Wentworth kept saying how we should never read the problem, and should just skim to identify each party and what each party wants.

Then he would have a big list compiled of every single possible party and claim they could make. And once you have that list, writing an organized exam response becomes a lot more simplified. I am just puzzled as to how you can compile a list identifying so many issues, without having ever done a full read-through of the problem.

I feel like that's what screwed me over on my midterm because I tried so hard to follow his advice, but now I feel like I would have been better off had I read the entire problem before I outlined. I even try his practice problems in the back of the book, but find that I struggle with completing Step 1 without doing a deep read of the problem first.

Anybody have any advice on how they were able to master the outlining stage?

[Seminole_305]

The thing with LEEWS is that it shouldn't be a rigid device. You must allow some flexibility depending on the class. I think LEEWS is excellent for a class like Torts and probably Civ Pro but is not effective for Contracts or Property.

LEEWS is essentially HIRAAC. I find that headings are important for organizational purposes.

[duckmoney]

After going through LEEWS, GTM, Delaney, and the exam advice in Glannon's torts E&E, all the advice just seems to blend together (in a good way). Basically everything boils down to some version of IRAC. The key is to spot the issue, identify it clearly, state the rule of law, and apply that persuasively to the facts. It doesn't really matter what order you follow or how you paragraph and what headings you use, just do what makes sense to you.

Let me know if anyone can add to this.

[shock259]

I wouldn't follow LEEWs with such dedication. Take what you can from it and leave the rest. The main thing I took from it was that it can be helpful to lay out your issue spotting in a party by party framework and to really nitpick each side's arguments for each issue. Beyond that, I found his first few steps weird and burdensome. Reading the whole fact pattern once makes a lot more sense to me, so I'm going to do that.

[blackletterbat]

It's impossible to come up with a good response without a strong command of the facts. So on this point (step 1), I feel your pain when it comes to LEEWS if you used the conflict pairing setup as also a guide to reading. I was making a similar mistake earlier in the semester too.

I think the advice on step 2 "cull the facts", solves the problem. Step 1 is great for getting some upfront organizing, and step 2 is where you can really dig in. I've heard from some solid exam takers that they list the major facts and cross them out as they hit them in the analysis.

[Peg]

I think LEEWS is excellent for a class like Torts and probably Civ Pro but is not effective for Contracts or Property.

+1,000,000

Started LEEWS 3 days ago, finished it this morning, and have spent the day trying to figure out how to apply LEEWS to Contracts and Property, but I just can't get it as cookie-cutter clear as it is with Torts. Thought something might be wrong with my thinking until I read this.

Can anyone give some insight on how to adapt LEEWS thinking to Contracts especially? The rules are few in number, but ridiculously complex and intertwined when it comes to application. The problem is that LEEWS boils down to: Premise --> Elements of Premise --> Which element is relevant --> argue both sides of the relevant element.

But you can't do that with Contracts! Or at least, I can't figure out how to do it.

[Grizz]

BRRRRPPP!

[Peg]

BRRRRPPP!

I had an "Are you serious?" look on my face when he did that.

No but seriously, anyone know how to apply LEEWS to Contracts?