
I recommend this.
Oh joy. Iqbal is one of my cases for Tuesday.vanwinkle wrote:Yes. This. Read this case carefully. If you are still at all interested in reading cases when you are done, then you probably don't have a life to lose by starting early anyway.JazzOne wrote:OP, read Ashcroft v. Iqbal. It's a real page turner.
So basically, a short a plain statement will not satisfy the pleading requirement. Good thing too, or there wouldn't be anything for lawyers to do.Rotor wrote:Oh joy. Iqbal is one of my cases for Monday.vanwinkle wrote:Yes. This. Read this case carefully. If you are still at all interested in reading cases when you are done, then you probably don't have a life to lose by starting early anyway.JazzOne wrote:OP, read Ashcroft v. Iqbal. It's a real page turner.
Yeah, this is basically all that Iqbal says, it just says it so badly.JazzOne wrote:So basically, a short a plain statement will not satisfy the pleading requirement. Good thing too, or there wouldn't be anything for lawyers to do.
Want to continue reading?
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
+ a lotgregw8705 wrote:A lot of law school is understanding cases through the lens of your professors perspective on the law. It will do you no good to read a case early because you probably won't understand it and definitely won't see it the same way your prof wants you to. Don't be a douche and just have fun between now and the start of law school.