ughhh... what am i supposed to be doing Forum

[ThreeRivers]

I read all the TLS advice... Briefing is pointless, just get the BLL, etc..

Now I'm in orientation and they reserve 2 hours everyday on how to read cases / do briefs / etc..

I'm confused as hell.. what should I learn that'll actually be on the test?

So far I've learned to put the procedural posture / facts /issues / holdings / reasonings / rule (which is always the part I'm not clear on / part I think is most important)

What should I actually be striving to learn out of those?

[20130312]

Did you read the TLS advice about not going?

[shock259]

Chill.

Go through the motions as they teach you to do whatever.

Stick to the TLS guides.

Briefing is a huge waste of time.

[ThreeRivers]

Did you read the TLS advice about not going?

Lol yes that too

[ThreeRivers]

Chill.

Go through the motions as they teach you to do whatever.

Stick to the TLS gameplans.

I'm not sure what that is any more..

I feel comfortable in doing absolutely everything but finding the "black letter law." Just frustrating that apparently all that matters is what they've been covering so very minimally

What should I be doing for every case is what I'm asking... is all that matters is the rules?

[20130312]

I'm doing a very short brief for each case so I don't look like a jackass in class, and then after the professor goes through it just writing down one thing to remember about it for the exam (a rule, a note, whatever the Prof emphasizes).

[patentlybored]

ThreeRivers
Post subject: ughhh... what am i supposed to be doing

Dropping out

[ThreeRivers]

So on a law school exam.. all we need to end up knowing is law (Rule) that we can apply to the hypo-situation presented on test?

Will we ever have to even know any of the facts or anything?

I'm started to wonders whats even the point of reading the cases lol

[WannabeBlueDevil]

breathe. do what shock said. get your bearings, maybe go out a few times. Then hunker down and study wisely and diligently once you can know whats going on. (dont make this an excuse to be lazy). If you are super restless, buy an E&E and read that, at least youll get some solid background.

- btw, studying for the final to get a B is very different then studying for the final to get an A. I am sure the other posters will agree. Assuming you want an A, you are going have to work hard and smart. Find out what kind of stuff scores for your professor.

[Gorki]

So on a law school exam.. all we need to end up knowing is law (Rule) that we can apply to the hypo-situation presented on test?

Will we ever have to even know any of the facts or anything?

I'm started to wonders whats even the point of reading the cases lol

1. Yes, and policy arguments that you can cook up. Practice tests are somewhat useful, but honestly you need feedback on them. Its hard to know how good/bad you are until you have 5-6 other section mates take the same PT and compare answers.

2. Yes and no. You need them to not feel dumb on cold calls, and you can use them on exams to analogize the fact pattern to a case (every prof I had viewed this as some type of plus, though it was never expected). No, because as a 2L anytime prof asks any of us for the facts now and they get shitty responses... This is what all of us always wanted to do 1L, but does not happen in 1L due to being stuck in the same group of people and not wanting to look "dumb."

3. Try to think of cases as hypos (the facts) that were answered by someone (the judge).

[rouser]

I read all the TLS advice...

What should I actually be striving to learn?

[20130312]

- btw, studying for the final to get a B is very different then studying for the final to get an A. I am sure the other posters will agree. Assuming you want an A, you are going have to work hard and smart. Find out what kind of stuff scores for your professor.

Go on...

[emkay625]

- btw, studying for the final to get a B is very different then studying for the final to get an A. I am sure the other posters will agree. Assuming you want an A, you are going have to work hard and smart. Find out what kind of stuff scores for your professor.

Go on...

Agreed. Some of us would love the difference.

[Mr. Frodo]

Did you read the TLS advice about not going?

Lmao.

[WannabeBlueDevil]

... sigh

(ignore typos, i know they are there im just busy, sorry)
so one of the necessary things to getter top grades is mastering the what your professor feels (in his/her opinion) what the fundamental of his/her course are.
- you need to know these cold. if you go to a t2 school or hire, odds are there is at least 5 kids who will not miss a single fundamental point. so you need to get all the fundamental points (that are on there), and apply them properly on the exam.
• the prof wil reserve the bulk of the points for the exam for this.

note: some professors do a pure tally system, so for everything you say that they like, point(s). Some professors have a rubric system, where you get 5pts for this issue, 2 for this, 3 for that. 8 for this. These are less forgiving. Because if you are a maestro of the law, but dont talk about the 8 pointer enough or at all, and add layers of awesome stuff elsewhere, if the point awards are capped all you have done is lose 8 points. not to mention all the points that you could have scored elsewhere by using your time better.
note 2: many of these rubric type professors, imo, will pick between A/A-, A-/B+ but how well you mastered the basics. If yo missed one, you will not get the top grade (generally).

for the tally professors, your awesome insights and application of the law to the facts (use all the facts in the exam, even in passing) may keep scoring points for you.

knowing how a professor actually grades his/her exam is HUGE. develop your study strategy around that. master the absolute essentials of the course (the meat). present it in a clear, straight forward organized way, then add a layer or two of impressive detail. then move on to the next piece of meat. said differently, show that you know what you are talking about, you know what he/she wanted you to learn, you can apply it correctly and comprehensively, and "oh, yeah. here's this too."

- thats all ill say for now. GL!

[istara]

... Now I'm in orientation and ...

Start classes, then come back.

Seriously, if your orientation is anywhere near as nuts as the one here, it will do you little, if any, good. Do the reading. Go to class. Slowly the TLS advice will (hopefully) start to make sense. If it doesn't, then come back and ask more questions.

[WannabeBlueDevil]

... Now I'm in orientation and ...

Start classes, then come back.

Seriously, if your orientation is anywhere near as nuts as the one here, it will do you little, if any, good. Do the reading. Go to class. Slowly the TLS advice will (hopefully) start to make sense. If it doesn't, then come back and ask more questions.

this.

[manofjustice]

So on a law school exam.. all we need to end up knowing is law (Rule) that we can apply to the hypo-situation presented on test?

Will we ever have to even know any of the facts or anything?

I'm started to wonders whats even the point of reading the cases lol

1. Yes, and policy arguments that you can cook up. Practice tests are somewhat useful, but honestly you need feedback on them. Its hard to know how good/bad you are until you have 5-6 other section mates take the same PT and compare answers.

2. Yes and no. You need them to not feel dumb on cold calls, and you can use them on exams to analogize the fact pattern to a case (every prof I had viewed this as some type of plus, though it was never expected). No, because as a 2L anytime prof asks any of us for the facts now and they get shitty responses... This is what all of us always wanted to do 1L, but does not happen in 1L due to being stuck in the same group of people and not wanting to look "dumb."

3. Try to think of cases as hypos (the facts) that were answered by someone (the judge).

Like the opinion of a case, answers to hypos can have dicta. Should you include dicta in your answers?

[Nova]

I feel ya 3Riv. I'm confused as fuck.

[20130312]

I'm confused because everything seems so easy and straightforward.

[Nova]

I'm confused because everything seems so easy and straightforward.

I'm confused because idkwtf I'm doing.

[top30man]

I'm confused because everything seems so easy and straightforward.

I'm confused because idkwtf I'm doing.

Haha agreed nova

[LazinessPerSe]

I remember last year being in your shoes.

The best advice I can give is to +1 Shock. Chill out. If you really want the BLL that badly, buy an E&E (or whatever supplement your prof recommends) and it'll give it to you without all the fanfare of judges who love to sound smart. If you have no idea how to study after ready Arrow's guide (or AVIs, or Talons, etc etc), then you need to drop out. They aren't hard to follow.

[EvilClinton]

I read all the TLS advice... Briefing is pointless, just get the BLL, etc..

Now I'm in orientation and they reserve 2 hours everyday on how to read cases / do briefs / etc..

I'm confused as hell.. what should I learn that'll actually be on the test?

So far I've learned to put the procedural posture / facts /issues / holdings / reasonings / rule (which is always the part I'm not clear on / part I think is most important)

What should I actually be striving to learn out of those?

Chill the fuck out.

Read the cases for now. Start outlining in a month. Do some practice exams during the exam period and you will be fine.

[Nova]

My question is, which rules matter? today, six cases all had to do with invasion of privacy. They ranged from 1975 to like 2010. They were all fairly consistant. But what happens when they arent? Just pay attention to the most recent? Just pay attention to the most recent s ct case? What about rules from cts in other states? How does it all fit together for exam answers?

Would it be like "The Wisc s ct says blah blah blah. Application. Analysis. Conversly, the Minn s ct says blah blah blah. Application. Analysis." ??

Also, I always hear that breifing is SUCH a time sink. Is it really?? it doesnt seem like it would take too long to write up case name, ct, yr, facts, rules, opinion, conclusion, and any other additional analysis. What would be a better use of my time??