1st week of Law School Forum

[sangr]

hey guys

im on the first week and im just thinkin

what should i try to take away from reading these cases? obviously the law that affects them and other things i should derive blah blah.

however

to be quite honest when i read it
1. its a bit foreign reading to me in the first place
2. i dont honestly find it easy to read through everything

i heard about some kid already briefing cases in his first class and such..

how should i prepare?

thanks

[justonemoregame]

lol you've been on tls a little too long not to know

[I.P. Daly]

In addition to providing his own insight, AV did a good job summarizing the collective wisdom of TLS:
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=189333

[20130312]

I'm "briefing cases" in the sense that I just scribble down one sentence about the facts, one about procedural history, the issue, the holding, and the reasoning. It seemed like all the professors care about is the issue and reasoning, but they will grill you if you don't know the facts, holding, and history.

Honestly, I don't think we're expected to fully grasp the cases or concepts yet. It is only our first week, and we might as well be reading Kant in German.

[sangr]

thanks all who replied with helpful insight or personal experience

to the guy at the top,

i got too burnt out by TLS after LSATS, i immediately went cold turkey after i took my last test, except a few times

[LAWYER2]

do yourself a favor and buy the case-brief book keyed to your casebook. Never waste time briefing cases again (unless you want to).
Lexis\WestLaw for pulling rules and quick case synapses are hella helpful as well.

[20130312]

do yourself a favor and buy the case-brief book keyed to your casebook. Never waste time briefing cases again (unless you want to).
Lexis\WestLaw for pulling rules and quick case synapses are hella helpful as well.

Yes, why attempt to learn the material yourself when you can just regurgitate the info from elsewhere?

[sangr]

so one individual believes gettting an already optimized summary of cases so one WONT have to go thru

and another believes in going thru the grind, and writing it out himself

is there a middle ground that would be worthwhile? what are your opinions?

[Guchster]

so one individual believes gettting an already optimized summary of cases so one WONT have to go thru

and another believes in going thru the grind, and writing it out himself

is there a middle ground that would be worthwhile? what are your opinions?

It's about what works for you breh. Each person learns differently from reading cases. Try it a few different ways, and see which way allows you to retain the information for class/exam and understand how each puzzle piece fits into the larger legal picture.

[sangr]

if i were to buy one case summary book which course would you guys generally and most likely say i should start out with?
meaning which class of 1l, torts, civ pro, crim, contracts

thanks

[20130312]

if i were to buy one case summary book which course would you guys generally and most likely say i should start out with?
meaning which class of 1l, torts, civ pro, crim, contracts

thanks

Not sure what you mean by this. One of my professors recommended a supplement, another didn't recommend one but I noticed the casebook author had written a supplement on the same class so I bought that. You should buy them if you want to further your understanding of a topic that you're unclear about. If you need to, buy one for every class. It's all about what you need.

[sangr]

whats the difference between case note and E&E? does e and e go into much more depth?

to the gentleman above (or whoever knows), by the casenote program do you mean the book with the crayon on the cover? or does the brand not matter? im sure it has to be keyed to your professor?

thanks

[Kind]

hey guys

im on the first week and im just thinkin

what should i try to take away from reading these cases? obviously the law that affects them and other things i should derive blah blah.

however

to be quite honest when i read it
1. its a bit foreign reading to me in the first place
2. i dont honestly find it easy to read through everything

i heard about some kid already briefing cases in his first class and such..

how should i prepare?

thanks

Get a copy of the "law in a flash" first year flashcards. Read said flashcards for the assigned section of the casebook BEFORE you read the cases. Then, the one kernal of wisdom that is in each case will find you, brother. That piece of wisdom is the holding. Frequently there will be 'notes' after each major case. These notes will show you law splits (two different jurisdictions under same facts yield different results) and fact splits (if one fact is changed, then a different result obtains). Immerse yourself. Think about the cases and try to visualize the parties, etc. while reading them. If you use the flashcards, you won't need any supplements to get top grades.

On a final exam, frequently you will encounter fact or law splits or both in one question. In K, it is UCC v Common Law. In evidence, FRE v Common Law; in Con law, it is every circuit for themselves until SCOTUS gets into it. So, read the frickin' notes... But only if you want to look 'deep' and 'insightful' in the eyes of the prof... and have an easier time on exams...

Briefing cases is analogous to a medical doctor cutting up cadavers. You must master the art of disection of many pages full of words. Don't cut corners early in the semester. Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.
For Briefing you might need a system:

1. Facts (Relevant only)
2. Procedural history (where is this case in appellate process, and how did it get here?)
3. Issue (This is the legal question that the key facts present for this court to decide.)
4. Holding - the answer to the question above.
5. Who won the appeal, and what happens next?
6. Rational or reasoning for the decision
7. Major dissents, if any, and the reasoning behind them.


DO: Write the statement of facts AFTER you determine the issue and holding. (Issue will be easy to spot if you read flashcards first, especially civ pro.)
Use only the facts that really count... it is a brief, after all. Generally, more than 150 words or so is not brief.
ALWAYS: Keep a Black's Law Dictionary open while reading cases. Underline every unfamiliar word in casebook. Look up word. Write consise definition in margin of casebook.
Bring now defaced casebook and briefs to class and be prepared to discuss the cases.
Avoid using too much highlighter. If you must, use it on the issue/holding only.

8. ????
9. Profit.

GL

[LAWYER2]

if i were to buy one case summary book which course would you guys generally and most likely say i should start out with?
meaning which class of 1l, torts, civ pro, crim, contracts

thanks

Contracts Case briefs seemed to help me the most, but that was my preference.

do yourself a favor and buy the case-brief book keyed to your casebook. Never waste time briefing cases again (unless you want to).
Lexis\WestLaw for pulling rules and quick case synapses are hella helpful as well.

Yes, why attempt to learn the material yourself when you can just regurgitate the info from elsewhere?

Actually it does help to see another perspective on what you just read. Personally, I would read the brief first, then read the case, then re-read the brief again. Call it whatever you want, but it helped get me A's and I'd swear by it!

[I.P. Daly]

if i were to buy one case summary book which course would you guys generally and most likely say i should start out with?
meaning which class of 1l, torts, civ pro, crim, contracts

thanks

Check this website out before you decide to buy anything (Why buy when you can get case briefs and outlines for free?):
http://lawschoolcasebriefs.com/

[LSATNightmares]

I did well my first year at a T-30. I understand how you feel... I felt the same way. I didn't really brief my first year, and I'm glad I didn't. However, I think taking notes is really helpful. The classes I did best in were the ones that I took some kind of notes as I went along. In most classes (Torts, Property, etc.), you just want to write down the holding, the black letter law, a couple facts, and maybe a couple of points regarding reasoning (basically, whatever you think is important, but don't overdo it). I think a course like Con Law is a bit different... there, you want to write down the standard of review, the differing opinions, the source of that constitutional opinion (e.g. history, natural law), etc. There's no ideal approach... it's trial and error. Everyone does it differently.