Check List Type Outline? Forum

[IHaveLawyers]

I'm looking to see if anyone has ever seen a check list for all issues to cover on an exam? I'm talking about a basic skeleton outline where topics are not defined.

I know there are dozens of places to download outlines from and wanted to know if anyone has ever ran into something like this.

[denimchickn]

All the "Acing" supplements are like this. I used the Civ Pro one and it was enormously helpful.

[IHaveLawyers]

Thanks! I can't spend more on supplements but if nothing turns up, I'll get this.

[shock259]

I read the Acing series for each of my classes. It's short (few hundred pages) and provides a pretty good overview of all topics. I used it to supplement my outlines.

I found its "checklists" to be a little tedious and used a lot of space to convey little information, but some people probably learn better from them.

[kalvano]

Did your professor provide a syllabus? Just use that to make one yourself, and bonus, it only has the stuff you professor wanted to cover on it.

[IHaveLawyers]

good idea, any other ideas?

[sundance95]

Thanks! I can't spend more on supplements but if nothing turns up, I'll get this.

Your library probably has it on reserve. Check it out and photocopy the checklist pages-you'll probably only need to do about 50 or so since you can fit two open pages on one sheet of paper. Use them to create an attack outline and fill in with notes from your class.

[NeighborGuy]

I plan on making these myself once I have my main outlines finished (hopefully tomorrow). My main outlines have the likely forks/issues highlighted in red, so when I'm done all I will need to do is go through and compile them into a checklist.

Disclaimer: 1L here.

[Bronte]

In 1L, I would go back after I finished my outlines (which were very long, in the 30-80 page range) and create minioutlines in the 3-8 page range. This was helpful for two reasons: (1) it served as a great way to review my outlines in a comprehensive way and really condense the ideas down to their core and (2) it created something that was much more manageable for actual use on the exam. Here's an example: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13OR ... t?hl=en_US (it was actually two pages when it was a word doc).

[SilverE2]

In 1L, I would go back after I finished my outlines (which were very long, in the 30-80 page range) and create minioutlines in the 3-8 page range. This was helpful for two reasons: (1) it served as a great way to review my outlines in a comprehensive way and really condense the ideas down to their core and (2) it created something that was much more manageable for actual use on the exam. Here's an example: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13OR ... t?hl=en_US (it was actually two pages when it was a word doc).

This may seem extremely stupid to someone who has already been through this, but as I try to condense my outline I'm having huge issues trying to decide what to leave in and what to take out..

[Gettingstarted1928]

In 1L, I would go back after I finished my outlines (which were very long, in the 30-80 page range) and create minioutlines in the 3-8 page range. This was helpful for two reasons: (1) it served as a great way to review my outlines in a comprehensive way and really condense the ideas down to their core and (2) it created something that was much more manageable for actual use on the exam. Here's an example: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13OR ... t?hl=en_US (it was actually two pages when it was a word doc).

This may seem extremely stupid to someone who has already been through this, but as I try to condense my outline I'm having huge issues trying to decide what to leave in and what to take out..

same

[Bronte]

In 1L, I would go back after I finished my outlines (which were very long, in the 30-80 page range) and create minioutlines in the 3-8 page range. This was helpful for two reasons: (1) it served as a great way to review my outlines in a comprehensive way and really condense the ideas down to their core and (2) it created something that was much more manageable for actual use on the exam. Here's an example: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13OR ... t?hl=en_US (it was actually two pages when it was a word doc).

This may seem extremely stupid to someone who has already been through this, but as I try to condense my outline I'm having huge issues trying to decide what to leave in and what to take out..

It's not stupid. It's just hard to respond. In some classes my mini-outlines would be closer to six pages, like so: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wLi ... t?hl=en_US. You just have to focus on the core issues that matter the most. The big picture. Lose all the little fact specif rules. It's also about condensing the core doctrines into shorter formulations.

[IHaveLawyers]

I don't know if this will be helpful for you guys trying to shorten your outline, but - what i did was go though my outline and noticed that I just needed to topic sentence for most things, I usually had a couple of sentences types under each category explaining it.

[Ikki]

When you guys are doing this, say for contracts, have you guys pretty much memorized each common law example for each part of a theory? Or how did you end up writing your exam answers? When you're talking about promissory estoppel, do you just lay out what Section 90 of RC says, or did you also put in a case that more or less fits the facts of the exam question?

[Bronte]

When you guys are doing this, say for contracts, have you guys pretty much memorized each common law example for each part of a theory? Or how did you end up writing your exam answers? When you're talking about promissory estoppel, do you just lay out what Section 90 of RC says, or did you also put in a case that more or less fits the facts of the exam question?

It depends on your professors, but cases don't generally matter for exams. It usually boils down to blackletter law. On some exams, I didn't cite anything and did well. In contracts, I generally went off the restatement and the UCC. The restatement is great in contracts because it basically amounts to an outline of the law that's very rigorous and correct. In some areas, it's very liberal (like in its treatment of the parol evidence rule) and should be distinguished from the common law's tortured treatment. But in other areas it just succinctly captures the prevailing law. The comments and examples in the contracts restatement are also a great source.

Whatever you do, do not memorize cases or case fact patterns. Even in classes where I cited cases, I did not analogize to facts. It might sometimes be the difference between an A- and an A to analogize to facts, but it's not required and is certainly not always the case. It's far more important to apply the blackletter law to the factpattern on the exam.