Top Law Schools

Besides the usual 1L fare, and Evidence, Family Law and Criminal Procedure, I'm not planning on taking very many "bar courses". I have no interest in Tax, Trusts and Estates, Corporations, etc. I am filling up my schedule with "fun" courses like International Human Rights and for-credit internships. Should I take those bar classes just so I'll be better prepared for the bar even though they don't interest me in the slightest? FYI my school's bar passage rate is only in the low 80s--not much higher than the state's passage rate. I'd appreciate any insight!

Manali wrote:Besides the usual 1L fare, and Evidence, Family Law and Criminal Procedure, I'm not planning on taking very many "bar courses". I have no interest in Tax, Trusts and Estates, Corporations, etc. I am filling up my schedule with "fun" courses like International Human Rights and for-credit internships. Should I take those bar classes just so I'll be better prepared for the bar even though they don't interest me in the slightest? FYI my school's bar passage rate is only in the low 80s--not much higher than the state's passage rate. I'd appreciate any insight!

I took as many bar courses as possible, but I felt like Barbri did a pretty good job of filling in black letter law where I hadn't taken a course (sales, california evidence, california civil procedure)

I DO wish I had taken more classes about the mechanics of the bar. I don't know what state you're in, but California has PT's and essays. My school offered classes to help with the essays and PT's but they never actually named them anything that would make you think thats what they were. In addition, you had to be in the bottom of the rank to sign up for the essay class. But I think that those would have been great classes to take...so I think if you're in a state that has a written portion of the exam and your school offers a class to help with those, its a good class to take. It may also be a two-fer in that you may pick up some important law in a subject you haven't taken just by taking an essay class.

The advice given at my school was to take what you want, but know that you will have to learn the material eventually. If you're okay with having to potentially learn several bar subjects from scratch in only two months, then don't take bar classes. The school did, however, strongly recommend that you take at least one finance class because they stated that the material was more difficult and just important to understand the basic concepts of in most practices.

I managed to take most bar classes. The only class I didn't take was Evidence, because it just never worked with my schedule (evening student...very limited selection). I really regret not taking Evidence. Studying is more fun as a review than in learning cold.

Another thought to consider: look up the subjects tested on your bar. In my state, certain subjects are tested more than others. So for Family Law which has two essays, I might make a point to take regardless of interest level, but not worry about a class only tested in one essay.

I took almost no bar classes. Bar study sucked, but it was going to suck anyway and I didn't want to spend semesters and exams on the topics. I passed easily. But YMMV.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:I took almost no bar classes. Bar study sucked, but it was going to suck anyway and I didn't want to spend semesters and exams on the topics. I passed easily. But YMMV.

Or you could take bar classes now, study for 3 days before the final and then not have to study for the bar.

I took a bunch of bar courses because I figured it would only help with bar prep, and I wasn't at all interested in many of the other courses. It definitely helped with bar prep, since the material was fresh.

However, looking back, I wish I took more courses that helped me hit the ground running as a practicing attorney: like State specific Civ Pro (would have helped me as a litigation associate right out of law school) or some practical writing course (advanced legal writing or law and motion).

Also, since I didn't get a job via OCI, I wish I had done more internships during 2L/3L. I summered 1L for a gov agency, clerked 2L for a solo, and interned in-house for my last semester. In retrospect, once I knew I wasn't getting a job via OCI (which was immediate, since I went to a TT), I should have clerked every semester to get as much experience as possible.

post-edit: I would at least take corporations though, should help with the bar and will likely be useful in the future.

Taking Wills & Trusts and Business Associations was pretty helpful. I would skip remedies because you get a taste of that in so many other courses.

However, if you're familiar with either topic it may not be a big deal to skip it.

If you want to only take one, I would take Wills & Trusts. You can watch some old episodes of American Greed and Frontline's "To Catch a Trader" and get the gist of Rule 10b-5. And you'll be familiar with the concept of duties and agency from Torts so it won't all be completely foreign to you.

AReasonableMan wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:I took almost no bar classes. Bar study sucked, but it was going to suck anyway and I didn't want to spend semesters and exams on the topics. I passed easily. But YMMV.

Or you could take bar classes now, study for 3 days before the final and then not have to study for the bar.

Lol at the idea that a law school course is going to prepare you for the bar. Did you not study contracts, property, con law, or crim law because you took them in law school?

Thanks for the replies. No need to torture myself for a semester with Federal Income Tax, T&E, Corporations, etc. Yay for fluffy courses!

AReasonableMan wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:I took almost no bar classes. Bar study sucked, but it was going to suck anyway and I didn't want to spend semesters and exams on the topics. I passed easily. But YMMV.

Or you could take bar classes now, study for 3 days before the final and then not have to study for the bar.

Yeah, except that the bar is all state specific and your course is probably not geared towards your state, even if you happen to be going to school in the state bar you're sitting for.

FWIW, you're taking as many Bar courses as I did post 1L, and I did fine. And because you're taking Evidence and Crim Pro, you've already got all of the MBE subjects covered (it's K, Torts, Civ Pro, Con Law, Crim/Crim Pro, Property, and Evidence). The only think you might be missing from those subjects is if your school's 1L Con Law is just governmental power and authority and you're not doing any rights and liberties. Of course if you want some of that you can take classes that encompass that that you think would be fun, rather than taking a broad Con Law II survey class.

Sure studying for the state essays might be a little harder, but it's a huge PITA anyway. I focused on the topics that were most frequently tested on the state essays and ignored the other aspects of those subjects. At least in Texas, they seem to test the same 2-4 topics for each subject over and over again, but then throw in one or two questions (out of 12) that are out of left field. On those questions, they're not really testing whether you know the material (because almost no one does), but rather how well you answer when you don't know the answer. (This summer's left-field question was a property question about a materialmen and mechanics' lien for a custom staircase that was built but never installed, and whether the owner had a legal obligation to keep a retainage under the contract. If you're reading that and saying WTF?, so were 98% of bar examinees).

BVest wrote:FWIW, you're taking as many Bar courses as I did post 1L, and I did fine. And because you're taking Evidence and Crim Pro, you've already got all of the MBE subjects covered (it's K, Torts, Civ Pro, Con Law, Crim/Crim Pro, Property, and Evidence). The only think you might be missing from those subjects is if your school's 1L Con Law is just governmental power and authority and you're not doing any rights and liberties. Of course if you want some of that you can take classes that encompass that that you think would be fun, rather than taking a broad Con Law II survey class.

Sure studying for the state essays might be a little harder, but it's a huge PITA anyway. I focused on the topics that were most frequently tested on the state essays and ignored the other aspects of those subjects. At least in Texas, they seem to test the same 2-4 topics for each subject over and over again, but then throw in one or two questions (out of 12) that are out of left field. On those questions, they're not really testing whether you know the material (because almost no one does), but rather how well you answer when you don't know the answer. (This summer's left-field question was a property question about a materialmen and mechanics' lien for a custom staircase that was built but never installed, and whether the owner had a legal obligation to keep a retainage under the contract. If you're reading that and saying WTF?, so were 98% of bar examinees).

My Con Law class just goes over gov't power and authority. Con Law II (which is not compulsory) covers individual rights and liberties.

Manali wrote:
My Con Law class just goes over gov't power and authority. Con Law II (which is not compulsory) covers individual rights and liberties.

Same with me. I took Crim Pro rather than Con Law II (we had to do one or the other), so when studying for the bar I had to learn the table of scrutiny (rational basis, intermediate scrutiny, strict scrutiny) under the EP clause, Lemon Test, and a few other things, but really not all that much. Everything I drilled for Con Law on the MBE fit onto two sides of a handrwitten page, and was mostly tables.

(Basically my table for scrutiny looked like a combination of these two tables, listing both what the test was and what categories fell into the test: http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/i ... al1[1].jpg [to access link, copy and paste entire link]
http://nationalparalegal.edu/conlawcrim ... story1.jpg )

BVest wrote:

Manali wrote:
My Con Law class just goes over gov't power and authority. Con Law II (which is not compulsory) covers individual rights and liberties.

Same with me. I took Crim Pro rather than Con Law II (we had to do one or the other), so when studying for the bar I had to learn the table of scrutiny (rational basis, intermediate scrutiny, strict scrutiny) under the EP clause, Lemon Test, and a few other things, but really not all that much. Everything I drilled for Con Law on the MBE fit onto two sides of a handrwitten page, and was mostly tables.

(Basically my table for scrutiny looked like a combination of these two tables, listing both what the test was and what categories fell into the test: http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/i ... al1[1].jpg http://nationalparalegal.edu/conlawcrim ... story1.jpg )

First link is dead...

Manali wrote: First link is dead...

Copy and paste it. Sorry, the parsers in the phpBB code get tripped up by the [] and the board doesn't allow tiny urls.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

AReasonableMan wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:I took almost no bar classes. Bar study sucked, but it was going to suck anyway and I didn't want to spend semesters and exams on the topics. I passed easily. But YMMV.

Or you could take bar classes now, study for 3 days before the final and then not have to study for the bar.

Lol at the idea that a law school course is going to prepare you for the bar. Did you not study contracts, property, con law, or crim law because you took them in law school?

I just had to gloss over all but crim and con law, because I took them in law school. The other courses we either didn't get anywhere or focused on one topic and not others. I remembered most of the rules, and think a lot of people are the same. I didn't do great on the bar exam, but I also pushed >3 hour study days off till July 20th. If it wasn't for taking these classes in law school I'd have failed.

Or you could just study the bar course materials and not worry about ruining your law school experience.

(If you want to take bar courses that's a totally different issue. But they're absolutely not necessary for passing the bar.)

AReasonableMan wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

AReasonableMan wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:I took almost no bar classes. Bar study sucked, but it was going to suck anyway and I didn't want to spend semesters and exams on the topics. I passed easily. But YMMV.

Or you could take bar classes now, study for 3 days before the final and then not have to study for the bar.

Lol at the idea that a law school course is going to prepare you for the bar. Did you not study contracts, property, con law, or crim law because you took them in law school?

I just had to gloss over all but crim and con law, because I took them in law school. The other courses we either didn't get anywhere or focused on one topic and not others. I remembered most of the rules, and think a lot of people are the same. I didn't do great on the bar exam, but I also pushed >3 hour study days off till July 20th. If it wasn't for taking these classes in law school I'd have failed.

Wow. Which state's bar did you take? I'm both jealous and impressed.

I took all the bar courses in law school, and I think it helped me on the actual bar exam. There was one essay in particular where I remembered the key rules from my law school class.

KatieSpades wrote:

AReasonableMan wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

AReasonableMan wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:I took almost no bar classes. Bar study sucked, but it was going to suck anyway and I didn't want to spend semesters and exams on the topics. I passed easily. But YMMV.

Or you could take bar classes now, study for 3 days before the final and then not have to study for the bar.

Lol at the idea that a law school course is going to prepare you for the bar. Did you not study contracts, property, con law, or crim law because you took them in law school?

I just had to gloss over all but crim and con law, because I took them in law school. The other courses we either didn't get anywhere or focused on one topic and not others. I remembered most of the rules, and think a lot of people are the same. I didn't do great on the bar exam, but I also pushed >3 hour study days off till July 20th. If it wasn't for taking these classes in law school I'd have failed.

Wow. Which state's bar did you take? I'm both jealous and impressed.

New York. I had planned on getting serious in July but had family things come up. Most people who pass could pass without studying much at all. I also believe they only read your essays if the MBE is on the edge so if you just do MBE and didn't struggle in law school it's easy. The downside is you develop insomnia and cry a lot for the four decades it takes them to run your test through a scantron.