What Issues To Discuss?
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:10 pm
Feeling pretty good about my ability to pinpoint and apply issues. I am disadvantaged in terms of memory and prob classic study ability, but for whatever reason in my limited sample size I am luckily good at spotting every issue and finding the subtleties in applying them.
But I see every issue for some classes, and don't wanna miss the forest for the trees. If you're doing torts, and there's say a shit ton of issues about whether there was a duty-breach, would u still wanna mention causation if it's obvious - like P dies in a car accident directly from collision. Would I be making a mistake if I spent the hour only discussing the negligence issues and ending, even if P can prove D was n, they'd have to prove their n caused the shit?
Also, is it better to address more issues or to go more into depth about applying the issues you find?
But I see every issue for some classes, and don't wanna miss the forest for the trees. If you're doing torts, and there's say a shit ton of issues about whether there was a duty-breach, would u still wanna mention causation if it's obvious - like P dies in a car accident directly from collision. Would I be making a mistake if I spent the hour only discussing the negligence issues and ending, even if P can prove D was n, they'd have to prove their n caused the shit?
Also, is it better to address more issues or to go more into depth about applying the issues you find?