Top Law Schools

How did you organize your paper in terms of the issues? Are they all mentioned in the introduction then analyzed and concluded with the rest of the paper? Or, was the whole body of the paper a mixture of issues and analysis? Should they be introduced as "hey prof, here's the issue!" or will the prof pick up on a little bit more subtle exposition of the issues? Thanks in advance.

All you 0'ls are already scaring me

chizzy wrote:All you 0'ls are already scaring me

How so?

MS415 wrote:

chizzy wrote:All you 0'ls are already scaring me

How so?

School hasn't even started and I have no idea how exams are. People like you have a leg up

chizzy wrote:

MS415 wrote:

chizzy wrote:All you 0'ls are already scaring me

How so?

School hasn't even started and I have no idea how exams are. People like you have a leg up

Don't let my question fool you lol. I probably know about as much as you do if we average out our knowledge about law school lol

I just say "Al will likely raise frustration of purpose as their defense. Or Bob will likely bring a battery claim against whoever." Then just start analyzing the rules/cases/policy with the facts and make as many good arguments as you can. At the end if you want you could have a one sentence conclusion on the likely turn out but often times it is always a toss up so finding a "right" answer isn't the way to think about it.

Edit: to answer your first question I present the claim/defense or whatever and then make lots of arguments and then proceed to the next claim or defense. A lot of organization though can depend on your teacher and the subject.

Gunner.

thesealocust wrote:Gunner.

Ouch...Isn't being a gunner frowned upon or something in Law School? Sorry, but I thought I was asking an innocent question. My bad.

lawhopeful10 wrote:I just say "Al will likely raise frustration of purpose as their defense. Or Bob will likely bring a battery claim against whoever." Then just start analyzing the rules/cases/policy with the facts and make as many good arguments as you can. At the end if you want you could have a one sentence conclusion on the likely turn out but often times it is always a toss up so finding a "right" answer isn't the way to think about it.

Edit: to answer your first question I present the claim/defense or whatever and then make lots of arguments and then proceed to the next claim or defense. A lot of organization though can depend on your teacher and the subject.

Did this format work for all classes in your experience?

Read thesealocust's post on how to take exams and the other how to do well in law school posts if you want since they explain law exams very well. But yes for the most part I structures all my exams that way with minor changes depending on the professor.

you use a version of IRAC ( issue rule, application, conclusion)

Every issue you see, you do this for it. You make headings as you go along, with one issue for each sub category. For criminal and torts you may be better breaking it down by parties- and going from there.

You will get a hang of it as you learn the material. But for now, you should be focusing solely on having fun, getting your resume put together, and let law school related thoughts get brushed aside until mid august, because for the next 3 years from Mid August, you will be stuck with law school related thoughts.


Kick back, relax, and enjoy your freedom for the next 3 and a half months while you still can.

MS415 wrote: I probably know about as much as you do if we average out our knowledge about law school

LOL 180. I think I'll remember this humblebrag model for future use.

sighsigh wrote:

MS415 wrote: I probably know about as much as you do if we average out our knowledge about law school

LOL 180. I think I'll remember this humblebrag model for future use.

yea that is hilarious now that I think about it.

lawhopeful10 wrote:

sighsigh wrote:

MS415 wrote: I probably know about as much as you do if we average out our knowledge about law school

LOL 180. I think I'll remember this humblebrag model for future use.

yea that is hilarious now that I think about it.

I had to think about that one too. I didn't realize it mid-moment. lol

lawhopeful10 wrote:

sighsigh wrote:

MS415 wrote: I probably know about as much as you do if we average out our knowledge about law school

LOL 180. I think I'll remember this humblebrag model for future use.

yea that is hilarious now that I think about it.

It's not even a humblebrag. That statement will always be true no matter how much either side knows.

It's not complicated. IRAC pretty much nails it (with the C being like.. totally unnecessary for most profs).

beepboopbeep wrote:That statement will always be true no matter how much either side knows.

+1.