Do/Did you guys understand most of what the cases said? Forum

[hukchobo]

1L here.

I'm getting used to learning through case reading and I seem to understand the "main point" of what the court wanted to say and how that point relates to the overall structure of the class BUT... I have trouble understanding some of the reasonings for the minor points..

maybe my mind is zoning out reading those parts since I think it's not important but I'm scared I might miss some crucial information in case I'm wrong and that what I think is trivial is actually paramount. this is especially true for civ pro.

question then is: did you guys understand most of the minor points in the cases you read? and how they did or did not interact with the major points?

thanks in advance

[Jack_Sheridan]

See there is no denying..YES it takes time because developing such sound habits is not a one day task. You need to spend a hell lot of time in understanding the minute intrigues and details. I think it is about developing skills. I believe in good reading for developing sound observation skills ( for instance; check this link for http://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/Science- ... in-science)
As far as cases are concerned, the one who fails to address minute details, is the one who is planing to fail

[shifty_eyed]

See there is no denying..YES it takes time because developing such sound habits is not a one day task. You need to spend a hell lot of time in understanding the minute intrigues and details. I think it is about developing skills. I believe in good reading for developing sound observation skills ( for instance; check this link for http://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/Science- ... in-science)
As far as cases are concerned, the one who fails to address minute details, is the one who is planing to fail

It's more important to learn how to read a case and discern what is important rather than understand every nitty gritty detail. In Civ Pro, to use OP's example, we read a lot of cases that involved contracts and other substantive law that was entirely irrelevant. Since we hadn't taken contracts yet, it seemed pretty confusing and the case reading COULD have taken forever. But really there was no need to waste time in learning non-procedural law discussed in a case in your Civ Pro casebook. Sometimes the casebooks are poorly edited, and that's why a small point may seem ill-developed. The actual opinion might discuss it in more detail, but because that point is irrelevant to the purpose the casebook authors are attempting to illustrate, it gets the short shrift.

And nobody even needs to read Pennoyer.

[banjo]

Skim the cases and sink your teeth into the E&Es instead.

[WhiskeynCoke]

1L here.

I'm getting used to learning through case reading and I seem to understand the "main point" of what the court wanted to say and how that point relates to the overall structure of the class BUT... I have trouble understanding some of the reasonings for the minor points..

maybe my mind is zoning out reading those parts since I think it's not important but I'm scared I might miss some crucial information in case I'm wrong and that what I think is trivial is actually paramount. this is especially true for civ pro.

question then is: did you guys understand most of the minor points in the cases you read? and how they did or did not interact with the major points?

thanks in advance

- Step 1: Go to class
- Step 2: Write down what your prof says is important about the case. This is often a single sentence. In Civpro, it might be 3-5 sentences (but you'll have far less cases per class).
- Step 3: When taking your exam, look for a conceivably relevant fact pattern (to said sentence) where you can #casenamedrop.
- Step 4: Profit$$$. Oh yea, and laugh at all those inefficient striver fucks who wasted 3 hours on something that took you 8 seconds in class.
- Step 5: When you're working at the same exact firm as said inefficient striver fuck, mention steps 1-4 casually at happy hour between Jager bombs. Also, brag about how much more weight you can bench and how many more chicks you smashed 2L. Don't mention how ugly they were though.

[NotMyRealName09]

Cases in textbooks are highly edited. They omit a lot of context so the book can focus on one topic. If you're confused, go to lexis and read the entire unedited case. Full cases are usually more interesting holistically, but are often not entirely germane to the subject in the textbook

But once you start to recognize that the snippets you're reading don't tell the whole story, you're learning to be a lawyer.

[WhiskeynCoke]

Cases in textbooks are highly edited. They omit a lot of context so the book can focus on one topic. If you're confused, go to lexis and read the entire unedited case. Full cases are usually more interesting holistically, but are often not entirely germane to the subject in the textbook

But once you start to recognize that the snippets you're reading don't tell the whole story, you're learning to be a lawyer.

Holy shit, what a colossal waste of time. OP, don't do this, it's terrible advice.

Do you really think that, while plowing through your issue spotter at the end of the semester, the fact that you wasted hours reading extra, unassigned, irrelevant pages of cases will help you score points whatsoever? Not even the worst of gunners does this.

The cases are edited down for a reason. The reason is that the rest of the pages are a complete waste of time in terms of learning the subject. If you're confused about a case, even after hearing it explained in class, go to office hours.

[NotMyRealName09]

Cases in textbooks are highly edited. They omit a lot of context so the book can focus on one topic. If you're confused, go to lexis and read the entire unedited case. Full cases are usually more interesting holistically, but are often not entirely germane to the subject in the textbook

But once you start to recognize that the snippets you're reading don't tell the whole story, you're learning to be a lawyer.

Holy shit, what a colossal waste of time. OP, don't do this, it's terrible advice.

Do you really think that, while plowing through your issue spotter at the end of the semester, the fact that you wasted hours reading extra, unassigned, irrelevant pages of cases will help you score points whatsoever? Not even the worst of gunners does this.

The cases are edited down for a reason. The reason is that the rest of the pages are a complete waste of time in terms of learning the subject. If you're confused about a case, even after hearing it explained in class, go to office hours.

I wasn't suggesting this become their new study method, nor did I say this would help come finals. I was just saying to take a look and see how the case has been shortened so the OP can better understand why some parts don't make sense. OP clearly didn't understand this, now they do. You read too much into what I said.

[bdm261]

I read but never absorbed any of the information I read in cases during 1L. I never went to class prepared and bombed every cold call. Finished 1L in top 20%. It really doesn't matter.

[kandi007]

Cases in textbooks are highly edited. They omit a lot of context so the book can focus on one topic. If you're confused, go to lexis and read the entire unedited case. Full cases are usually more interesting holistically, but are often not entirely germane to the subject in the textbook

But once you start to recognize that the snippets you're reading don't tell the whole story, you're learning to be a lawyer.

Holy shit, what a colossal waste of time. OP, don't do this, it's terrible advice.

Do you really think that, while plowing through your issue spotter at the end of the semester, the fact that you wasted hours reading extra, unassigned, irrelevant pages of cases will help you score points whatsoever? Not even the worst of gunners does this.

The cases are edited down for a reason. The reason is that the rest of the pages are a complete waste of time in terms of learning the subject. If you're confused about a case, even after hearing it explained in class, go to office hours.

Not the worse advice actually. OP I will say do what works best for you. I wouldn't suggest going on to lexis and reading every case, that might be crazy but I do know there have been some cases I was so confused on and was not understanding how it related to anything in this world, but I looked it up on Lexis (gotta get those points) and it was a little clearer to me.

Office hours help also though. You will find a system that works for you soon.

[star fox]

I understand like one sentence from each case e.g. Hadley v. Baxendale - not liable for unforeseeable damages.

[LAWYER2]

Get the casebriefs keyed to your casebook. Read the case brief before and after reading the case.

[tuhaybey]

did you guys understand most of the minor points in the cases you read?

Not in mid-October of my 1L year, no. In fact, the people who think they understand all the minor points of every case they read already by October of their 1L year are probably the ones who need to be worried... Heck, I'm a practicing lawyer now and I can't say I understand all the minor points in all the cases I read! What is important is that you're identifying what you do understand and what you don't. If what you don't seems important, then you know that is where you need to put your efforts next.

[tuhaybey]

Get the casebriefs keyed to your casebook. Read the case brief before and after reading the case.

I am not sure I agree with that. I would actually recommend reading the case first and not reading the brief until after. Struggling through making sense of the case is half the point of reading it I think. If your approach isn't hard, I'm of the view that you aren't doing it right.

[FSK]

I booked con law and didn't really understand marbury v. madison outside of the relevant black-letter takeaways. That level of understanding is usually enough.

[Lexaholik]

1L here.

I'm getting used to learning through case reading and I seem to understand the "main point" of what the court wanted to say and how that point relates to the overall structure of the class BUT... I have trouble understanding some of the reasonings for the minor points..

maybe my mind is zoning out reading those parts since I think it's not important but I'm scared I might miss some crucial information in case I'm wrong and that what I think is trivial is actually paramount. this is especially true for civ pro.

question then is: did you guys understand most of the minor points in the cases you read? and how they did or did not interact with the major points?

thanks in advance

The good news is that no one really has this figured out. Even lawyers. Being able to understand "the main point" or the "secondary points" is really a bread and butter skill for a litigator. Here are a few tips:

1. For doctrinal courses, use supplements. It's a shortcut that will let you figure stuff out quicker. Just realize that there won't be supplements for all cases in your future career. (You should work to develop this skill, but I don't think you should try to practice this skill while reading Torts or Civ Pro cases.)

2. You might be the kind of person who is easily distracted. That was the case for me. Don't sweat it--many if not most of your classmates are the same way. They just don't admit it.

3. Cases in doctrinal classes are in the book because they serve to illustrate some point. Whatever that main point is, is important. Everything else is irrelevant for exams, regardless of what stuff is discussed in class.

4. Talk to your classmates and friends and see what they think. Obviously take what they say with a grain of salt, but if 4 of your friends are making a point you missed, you might want to write it down.

[AreJay711]

- Step 1: Go to class
- Step 2: Write down what your prof says is important about the case. This is often a single sentence. In Civpro, it might be 3-5 sentences (but you'll have far less cases per class).
- Step 3: When taking your exam, look for a conceivably relevant fact pattern (to said sentence) where you can #casenamedrop.
- Step 4: Profit$$$. Oh yea, and laugh at all those inefficient striver fucks who wasted 3 hours on something that took you 8 seconds in class.
- Step 5: When you're working at the same exact firm as said inefficient striver fuck, mention steps 1-4 casually at happy hour between Jager bombs. Also, brag about how much more weight you can bench and how many more chicks you smashed 2L. Don't mention how ugly they were though.

Just get an outline from someone who already took the class. You guys did undergrad; you're over-thinking this. And don't be a dick.