Top Law Schools

I schedule my final semester in a few hours... I don't really want to take evidence, but it's on the Illinois Bar. Is it ok for me to just rely on Barbri for this?

Do both, I am a barbri rep at my school, and I am doing both.

I should clarify, evidence is only on the multistate exam, not the actual IL portion.

stintez wrote:Do both, I am a barbri rep at my school, and I am doing both.

This is just plain wrong.

Only take evidence if you want to. Your professor won't be preparing you for the bar; BarBri will teach you what you need to know.

wildhaggis wrote:

stintez wrote:Do both, I am a barbri rep at my school, and I am doing both.

This is just plain wrong.

Only take evidence if you want to. Your professor won't be preparing you for the bar; BarBri will teach you what you need to know.

+1. Taking classes because they are on the bar is silly.

I say do both. Lots of commercial supplements available. It's not that bad, really.

Take evidence, it's just good stuff to know. Probably one of the most important classes I've taken thus far.

SBL wrote:Take evidence, it's just good stuff to know. Probably one of the most important classes I've taken thus far.

Agreed. Nearly every action in litigation revolves around evidence in some form or fashion. In some ways evidence is the "rulebook" for litigation, sort of the boundaries that the parties must work within, but in a lot of ways evidence is really the litigation itself (if that makes any sense). Even if you don't want to litigate, it is really important shit to know and understand as a lawyer.

I know law school doesn't prepare you to be a lawyer, but I'd say evidence is on the short list of classes that may be useful knowledge in 2 years.

FWIW, several people during callbacks suggested not only taking it but taking it 3L second semester because they felt it would have been helpful to have it fresh in your mind when you hit barbri (and ultimately the bar).

romothesavior wrote:

SBL wrote:Take evidence, it's just good stuff to know. Probably one of the most important classes I've taken thus far.

Agreed. Nearly every action in litigation revolves around evidence in some form or fashion. In some ways evidence is the "rulebook" for litigation, sort of the boundaries that the parties must work within, but in a lot of ways evidence is really the litigation itself (if that makes any sense). Even if you don't want to litigate, it is really important shit to know and understand as a lawyer.

I know law school doesn't prepare you to be a lawyer, but I'd say evidence is on the short list of classes that may be useful knowledge in 2 years.

What else is on that short list?

blowhard wrote:FWIW, several people during callbacks suggested not only taking it but taking it 3L second semester because they felt it would have been helpful to have it fresh in your mind when you hit barbri (and ultimately the bar).

+1 to this, I was also told this multiple times. It was also suggested that Secured Transactions might be a good one, as learning UCC Article 9 on your own was somewhat unpleasant.

My choice was between Evidence and Business Tax, and I am going into transactional work. I chose business tax based on the recommendation of my transactional professors.

Take evidence. It is important even for non-litigators. Taking a bar class just to help with the bar is not really needed for most people. But, evidence is one of those few classes that everyone really should take.

Not as important as some other classes for those interested in transactional work. But we all get quite a few units to spend on "other" classes and Evidence makes a good choice here.

Follow up question then, should I take Trusts and Estates or Evidence?

I think evidence is the one non-required bar class that everyone should take. It's useful no matter what you do and it's actually pretty interesting.

I've had a lot of people tell me that Evidence is one of the classes that it's best to have BarBri refresh your memory rather than trying to learn it from scratch.

Plus, it's a prerequisite for clinics at my school.

Evidence is a required 4 unit course at my school. My school's goal is to pump out prepared lawyers (TTT), and evidence is one of the 9 required courses. I think that speaks to its utility in practice. However, most of us will be working DUI cases rather than merging corporations, so...

shepdawg wrote:Evidence is a required 4 unit course at my school. My school's goal is to pump out prepared lawyers (TTT), and evidence is one of the 9 required courses. I think that speaks to its utility in practice. However, most of us will be working DUI cases rather than merging corporations, so...

wow. you win the award for the most depressing, defeated post on tls.

goosey wrote:

shepdawg wrote:Evidence is a required 4 unit course at my school. My school's goal is to pump out prepared lawyers (TTT), and evidence is one of the 9 required courses. I think that speaks to its utility in practice. However, most of us will be working DUI cases rather than merging corporations, so...

wow. you win the award for the most depressing, defeated post on tls.

Ditto. Normally it's the elitists on TLS who bash "TTT's," but this one takes the cake for most depressing post.


As for me: Taking Evidence next semester as I figured I might be doing some litigation work at graduation. Crim Pro from I hear is dense, but I might just skip it and focus on other classes that actually interest me.

If there is any slight possibility you will do anything even remotely litigious, take it. It's about the only useful class in law school, outside of Civ Pro.

Renzo wrote:If there is any slight possibility you will do anything even remotely litigious, take it. It's about the only useful class in law school, outside of Civ Pro.

You might just be right. I keep hearing that from other 2Ls and 3Ls.

Most recommended classes by others: Evidence, Civ Pro 2, Crim Pro

Optional: Federal Income Tax, Business Associations, Corporations

Feel free to add your own.

zeth006 wrote:

Renzo wrote:If there is any slight possibility you will do anything even remotely litigious, take it. It's about the only useful class in law school, outside of Civ Pro.

...
Most recommended classes by others: Evidence, Civ Pro 2, Crim Pro

Optional: Federal Income Tax, Business Associations, Corporations...

Guess which ones I didn't take? LOL @ litigators, amirite?!

Do not take any class for the purpose of the bar.

I'll repeat. Do not take any class for the purpose of the bar.

The bar exam tests your knowledge a mile wide and an inch deep. Law school classes tend to go an inch wide and a mile deep. The bar exam is a formula. You pass by looking like every other person who took Barbri/whatever other flavor of bar prep. You will get hit with enough sample MBE questions to pick up any area of the law you didn't take. For the essays, being creative is bad. Your essays should be written the way bar prep teaches. Often you will need to "unlearn" stuff you learned in class to get close to the model answers for your state.

That said, as others have stated, Evidence is a very useful class if you plan to do any litigation. If you don't plan on being a litigator, then ymmv.

What classes you "should" take depends on what you want to end up doing. Fed Courts/Civ Pro are very useful areas (though some profs kill the usefulness) for both litigation and regulatory/admin. Admin, obviously, if you want to be a regulatory lawyer. Secured transactions, commercial paper, corporations, tax, if you want to do corp. Evidence, trial advocacy, mock trial, clinics, if you want to do litigation.

Then there is the other school of thought -- as long as you are willing to thumb through a couple of hornbooks, don't worry about what areas you want to practice in, take what you find interesting. Law school classes probably put you a couple of weeks up on someone who didn't take the class. If you are a relatively quick study and know how to ask basic questions without sounding too dumb, then you'll pick up what you need, as you need it. Law school will probably be the last time you have a chance to learn for the sake of learning.