. Forum

[GreenEggs]

Do any of your classes take attendance? None of my classes have attendance, and I never really thought about it until a friend at another law school told me that attendance gets taken in order to ensure they meet minimum hours requirements

[Hikikomorist]

Do any of your classes take attendance? None of my classes have attendance, and I never really thought about it until a friend at another law school told me that attendance gets taken in order to ensure they meet minimum hours requirements

I think it varies by professor. It was announced at the beginning of the year that there are formal policies in place regarding minimum attendance, and those would only work if professors were keeping track, but I know at least one of my professors really doesn't care if people are there, and the way he teaches class doesn't make attendance particularly necessary.

[GreenEggs]

Okay not to make this my own study group, but are fixtures real property?

[GoneSouth]

Do any of your classes take attendance? None of my classes have attendance, and I never really thought about it until a friend at another law school told me that attendance gets taken in order to ensure they meet minimum hours requirements

Actually taking attendance seems pretty TTT. I don't get the impression that the ABA is actually auditing whether you've actually been in class for the requisite number of hours, though maybe schools that are in a bit of hot water with the ABA because of admitting a bunch of people who can't pass the bar/get jobs regulate it because they don't want to give the ABA another reason to come after them.

Professors here seem to have pretty varying views on attendance. One was not happy when a bunch of people were missing class early in the semester for 1L summer job interviews, which seemed a little over the top, and one basically said he couldn't care less whether people come to class because maybe he's not actually adding anything that you can't get from the book. There is one dude in our section who has probably been to <20% of all classes, and one of the professors told us that all of our section professors talk about him with each other.

[GoneSouth]

Okay not to make this my own study group, but are fixtures real property?

I believe the answer is yes. If it's considered a fixture, it becomes part of the real property

[MurdockLLP]

Do any of your classes take attendance? None of my classes have attendance, and I never really thought about it until a friend at another law school told me that attendance gets taken in order to ensure they meet minimum hours requirements

Actually taking attendance seems pretty TTT. I don't get the impression that the ABA is actually auditing whether you've actually been in class for the requisite number of hours, though maybe schools that are in a bit of hot water with the ABA because of admitting a bunch of people who can't pass the bar/get jobs regulate it because they don't want to give the ABA another reason to come after them.

Professors here seem to have pretty varying views on attendance. One was not happy when a bunch of people were missing class early in the semester for 1L summer job interviews, which seemed a little over the top, and one basically said he couldn't care less whether people come to class because maybe he's not actually adding anything that you can't get from the book. There is one dude in our section who has probably been to <20% of all classes, and one of the professors told us that all of our section professors talk about him with each other.

My school was actually audited by the ABA this year as part of its required accreditation. That might be why our attendance was taken.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Yeah, there may well be a correlation with rankings and taking attendance (I went to a lower T1), but most of my profs took attendance. However, we also had accreditation review while I was in school, which was stated as one of the reasons the school cared, because the ABA definitely gives schools a hard time about it (HYS et al probably don't care as much about the ABA though). It also probably depends on the prof and their goals for class, too (I bet there's a correlation between taking attendance and banning laptops).

[sublime]

..

[Dr. Nefario]

T20 1L. 3/3 classes took attendance last semester with effect on grade if you miss beyond a certain number of days. 0/4 this semester. I know two of my professors last semester actually dropped people a grade for missing too much. This semester, people skipped or showed up 5 minutes late regularly

[acr]

T20, most 1L classes took attendence, most upper ones either didn't or had a policy so lax that it didn't matter. Although we seem to have more profs that don't allow laptops than most.

I have a friend who went to a TTT who had his graduation delayed for skipping too many classes, which really fucked him. IIRC the ABA guidelines are actually relatively strict.

yeah, I despise "this school's" laptop policy. 1/6 1L profs have allowed laptops -_-

[Dr. Nefario]

yeah, I despise "this school's" laptop policy. 1/6 1L profs have allowed laptops -_-

I feel ya, I had 3/7 that allow them. It would've been clutch to have a laptop in Crim.

[IsThisForReal]

All 1L classes took attendance. Found out that at least one prof never really did anything with the sheets though. Only 1/8 banned laptops

[acr]

yeah, I despise "this school's" laptop policy. 1/6 1L profs have allowed laptops -_-

I feel ya, I had 3/7 that allow them. It would've been clutch to have a laptop in Crim.

Crim was the only one where I could have mine. Con law was fucking brutal without it

[leslieknope]

I've only had one class take attendance, and that one was actually one of the only two classes I've had this year to allow laptops.

[Big Red]

Okay not to make this my own study group, but are fixtures real property?

I believe the answer is yes. If it's considered a fixture, it becomes part of the real property

they're personal property that is attached (annexed?) to the realty in such a way that the law considers it part of the real property

[GoneSouth]

I'm at CLS and am 0/7 on professors taking attendance. And like I said, they're all aware that there's a guy who comes less than 20 percent of the time and none of them appear to care.

5/7 on profs allowing laptops. Honestly, I don't mind the no-laptops that much, and I have horrendous handwriting. I pay much better attention - the only downside is trying to decipher what I wrote 2 months later when I'm outlining. I used to type up my notes after class but gave up on that after a few weeks because it seemed like a huge waste of time.

[Big Red]

I know at least one prof checked attendance based on the little seating chart, although it could be that they were all doing it just more stealth like

also @ 5/6 no laptops

[GoneSouth]

Okay not to make this my own study group, but are fixtures real property?

I believe the answer is yes. If it's considered a fixture, it becomes part of the real property

they're personal property that is attached (annexed?) to the realty in such a way that the law considers it part of the real property

Yeah basically. As in when you sell the house, you can't take them with you. I can't remember the test off the top of my head, but it's basically things that you would expect to be a part of the house rather than just someone's personal property. So stuff like the hot water heater, or built-in shelving, or I remember there was one case about a mirror that was super-attached to a wall.

[GreenEggs]

Okay not to make this my own study group, but are fixtures real property?

I believe the answer is yes. If it's considered a fixture, it becomes part of the real property

they're personal property that is attached (annexed?) to the realty in such a way that the law considers it part of the real property

Yeah basically. As in when you sell the house, you can't take them with you. I can't remember the test off the top of my head, but it's basically things that you would expect to be a part of the house rather than just someone's personal property. So stuff like the hot water heater, or built-in shelving, or I remember there was one case about a mirror that was super-attached to a wall.

Yeah, this is all clear to me, but what I'm thrown off by is the example of say a hot water heater. Let's say I repair a hot water heater and leave it on the side of the road for my client to pick it up. Before my client (A) comes to get it, someone else (B) drives by and thinks it's trash and takes it.

Five years later, A is touring a friend's house and sees the hot water heater. And wants it back.

The SoL for conversion of personal property is three years, but the SoL for the recovery of real property is six years. Let's pretend that SoL runs as soon as A realized the hot water heater is gone.

So is the hot water heater, as a fixture, "real property" and therefore A can recover? Or is it going to be considered "personal property" and A can't recover?

[landshoes]

the answer is that no one knows

seriously

[haus]

Yeah, this is all clear to me, but what I'm thrown off by is the example of say a hot water heater. Let's say I repair a hot water heater and leave it on the side of the road for my client to pick it up. Before my client (A) comes to get it, someone else (B) drives by and thinks it's trash and takes it.

Five years later, A is touring a friend's house and sees the hot water heater. And wants it back.

The SoL for conversion of personal property is three years, but the SoL for the recovery of real property is six years. Let's pretend that SoL runs as soon as A realized the hot water heater is gone.

So is the hot water heater, as a fixture, "real property" and therefore A can recover? Or is it going to be considered "personal property" and A can't recover?

It would seem that the removal of the water heater by a party other than the person who took it could arguably count as converting it from 'real property' to that of 'personal property'.

I would think a similar consideration could be made for trees standing on property. As standing trees they would be 'real property' if the same trees were cut down by the owner, cut up into firewood sizes chunks and stacked up against the house would be 'personal property'.

[GoneSouth]

Okay not to make this my own study group, but are fixtures real property?

I believe the answer is yes. If it's considered a fixture, it becomes part of the real property

they're personal property that is attached (annexed?) to the realty in such a way that the law considers it part of the real property

Yeah basically. As in when you sell the house, you can't take them with you. I can't remember the test off the top of my head, but it's basically things that you would expect to be a part of the house rather than just someone's personal property. So stuff like the hot water heater, or built-in shelving, or I remember there was one case about a mirror that was super-attached to a wall.

Yeah, this is all clear to me, but what I'm thrown off by is the example of say a hot water heater. Let's say I repair a hot water heater and leave it on the side of the road for my client to pick it up. Before my client (A) comes to get it, someone else (B) drives by and thinks it's trash and takes it.

Five years later, A is touring a friend's house and sees the hot water heater. And wants it back.

The SoL for conversion of personal property is three years, but the SoL for the recovery of real property is six years. Let's pretend that SoL runs as soon as A realized the hot water heater is gone.

So is the hot water heater, as a fixture, "real property" and therefore A can recover? Or is it going to be considered "personal property" and A can't recover?

I'm far from a property scholar, but I doubt that whether it actually becomes real property matters for this case because you're seeking to recover it as a chattel (personal property). That's what it was to you. It wouldn't make sense to give you a longer SoL just because someone happens to attach something that was previously unattached in a way that makes it a fixture.

ETA as the post above me said, it seems clear to me that at the time it was stolen (or whatever) it was not a fixture. So I would imagine that that's the SoL that would govern

[GreenEggs]

Interesting. Thanks for the takes on it.

[radio1nowhere]

TFW when ppl talk about law on this forum

[BVest]

It's personal property when it's not affixed (even if it's the taker who detaches it immediately before taking it). Basic conversion.