What cases should 0L's start reading in preparation? Forum

[JazzOne]

I am a 1L who did some pretty major prep last summer. I would say it's paying off. I definitely think that reading and briefing cases can be helpful (I did both). The thing is that you don't know what the landmark or key cases are in the various disciplines. I went to the Law Preview courses, and I liked them. Despite the vehement criticism of Law Preview, it gave me a chance to read and brief dozens of cases. There were many times during the semester that I either read a case which I had previously read in Law Preview or read a case that cited to a case I read for Law Preview.

Before I get accused of spamming for Law Preview, I have no affiliation with the program. I received a scholarship for the course, so I cannot address whether it is worth the price.

That's my opinion. If anyone thinks I'm stupid or retarded, I'd be happy to share my first semester grades. Um, they're good.

OP: Give me a day or two and I'll come up with a few cases for you. One example I'll throw out there is Summers v. Tice. I read it for Law Preview, but the casebook that my torts professor wrote used a different case to introduce alternative liability theory. The case used by my professor was one in which the theory did NOT apply. I noticed that some of my classmates had trouble grasping the theory because they had not read a case in which it DID apply. Minor point, but just one example of many.

[TTT-LS]

.

[badwithpseudonyms]

OP: The Fonz would not be pleased with you slandering his good name. ...Gunner-in-training, wtf? If he were around, this is the look he would give you (see below). Then he'd crack the jukebox with his fist and we'd all dance. He wouldn't read a thing and then still ace his civ pro final.



PS: Apologies if you are referring to this "fonzerelli": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fonzerelli.

[fonzerelli]

OP: The Fonz would not be pleased with you slandering his good name. ...Gunner-in-training, wtf? If he were around, this is the look he would give you (see below). Then he'd crack the jukebox with his fist and we'd all dance. He wouldn't read a thing and then still ace his civ pro final.



PS: Apologies if you are referring to this "fonzerelli": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fonzerelli.

"Wait a minute. I don't understand something here. I practice all week until I have to limp home and soak my feet. I spend 18 dollars and fifty cents on a monkey suit. Two nerds come to my room, lock me in my bathroom and start calling names. Sherlock Holmes here chases me and starts yelling at me. Cunningham threatens me with physical violence, Shortcake kicks me in the leg and you all want to go home happy. Well let me tell you something, you're not going anywhere lady. THE FONZ WANTS TO DANCE!" (And do well in law school)

[Oban]

"Don't brief" and "don't read the cases at all" are two remarkably different statements.

The OP doesnt need to read anything to get head.

Probably true...

But, if that was just a typo, you recommended earlier that he did not need to read or brief cases at all; that is extremely bad advice.

i'm just having some lulz.

[badwithpseudonyms]

Well played, sir!

[fonzerelli]

Well played, sir!

[SR86]

I'll answer this question, I'm only a 0L, but I am taking a sort of "survey of law" class and we obviously have to read (abridged) cases. So far we've covered torts and are starting contracts.

For torts, we read: Grimshaw v. Ford Motor; Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad v. American Cyanamid; and Petrovich v. Share Health Plan of Illinois.
For contracts: Embry v. Hargadine, McKittrick Dry Goods; Hamer v. Sidway; Sherwood v. Walker; and Hawkins v. McGee.

I can update as we get more cases assigned if people are interested.

[Renzo]

I'll answer this question, I'm only a 0L, but I am taking a sort of "survey of law" class and we obviously have to read (abridged) cases. So far we've covered torts and are starting contracts.

For torts, we read: Grimshaw v. Ford Motor; Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad v. American Cyanamid; and Petrovich v. Share Health Plan of Illinois.
For contracts: Embry v. Hargadine, McKittrick Dry Goods; Hamer v. Sidway; Sherwood v. Walker; and Hawkins v. McGee.

I can update as we get more cases assigned if people are interested.

My mind is 100% blown.

[como]

[vanwinkle]

ITT: 0Ls debate how to squander their last year of freedom in the dumbest way possible.

[SR86]

I'll answer this question, I'm only a 0L, but I am taking a sort of "survey of law" class and we obviously have to read (abridged) cases. So far we've covered torts and are starting contracts.

For torts, we read: Grimshaw v. Ford Motor; Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad v. American Cyanamid; and Petrovich v. Share Health Plan of Illinois.
For contracts: Embry v. Hargadine, McKittrick Dry Goods; Hamer v. Sidway; Sherwood v. Walker; and Hawkins v. McGee.

I can update as we get more cases assigned if people are interested.

My mind is 100% blown.

Haha why do you say that?

[Kohinoor]

Just wait lil gunners. You'll fuck yourself over if you learn to analyze things in a way your professor doesn't like. I shudder at the thought of taking my contracts exam and thinking that good faith or unconscionability were viable theories for analysis.

[RVP11]

Just wait lil gunners. You'll fuck yourself over if you learn to analyze things in a way your professor doesn't like. I shudder at the thought of taking my contracts exam and thinking that good faith or unconscionability were viable theories for analysis.

+1

And it is HARD to unlearn what has been learned.

[itsfine]

roe v wade

[RVP11]

If you really want to be a gunner, maybe sit down with a dictionary (or even a law dictionary). Learn what words mean.

I didn't know what "dispositive" meant for an embarrassingly long time. Don't let that be you. Law profs love that word, and it has a ton of utility.

[Kohinoor]

If you really want to be a gunner, maybe sit down with a dictionary (or even a law dictionary). Learn what words mean.

I didn't know what "dispositive" meant for an embarrassingly long time. Don't let that be you. Law profs love that word, and it has a ton of utility.

Actually, this works. Start now and you won't be trying to remember the difference between a priori and a fortiori during your final.

[vanwinkle]

If you really want to be a gunner, maybe sit down with a dictionary (or even a law dictionary). Learn what words mean.

I didn't know what "dispositive" meant for an embarrassingly long time. Don't let that be you. Law profs love that word, and it has a ton of utility.

Actually, this works. Start now and you won't be trying to remember the difference between a priori and a fortiori during your final.

And the difference between ex ante and ex post, always crucial in class discussion.

Hell, depending on your professor, you may want to start watching B&W films, 1950s sitcoms, and anything that teaches you quantum physics. You never know what will come in handy.

[Renzo]

I'll answer this question, I'm only a 0L, but I am taking a sort of "survey of law" class and we obviously have to read (abridged) cases. So far we've covered torts and are starting contracts.

For torts, we read: Grimshaw v. Ford Motor; Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad v. American Cyanamid; and Petrovich v. Share Health Plan of Illinois.
For contracts: Embry v. Hargadine, McKittrick Dry Goods; Hamer v. Sidway; Sherwood v. Walker; and Hawkins v. McGee.

I can update as we get more cases assigned if people are interested.

My mind is 100% blown.

Haha why do you say that?

The man asked " what book would you read to learn to fly a plane?" A bunch of trainee pilots answered, "don't, because you can't learn to fly a plane without actual lessons. You'll be wasting your time." Then you came in here and said, "well, I've never been on a plane before, but I have some aviator goggles, so I'll tell you how it's done."

[vanwinkle]

I'll answer this question, I'm only a 0L, but I am taking a sort of "survey of law" class and we obviously have to read (abridged) cases. So far we've covered torts and are starting contracts.

For torts, we read: Grimshaw v. Ford Motor; Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad v. American Cyanamid; and Petrovich v. Share Health Plan of Illinois.
For contracts: Embry v. Hargadine, McKittrick Dry Goods; Hamer v. Sidway; Sherwood v. Walker; and Hawkins v. McGee.

I can update as we get more cases assigned if people are interested.

My mind is 100% blown.

Haha why do you say that?

The man asked " what book would you read to learn to fly a plane?" A bunch of trainee pilots answered, "don't, because you can't learn to fly a plane without actual lessons. You'll be wasting your time." Then you came in here and said, "well, I've never been on a plane before, but I have some aviator goggles, so I'll tell you how it's done."

Ahahahahahahahaha QFT.

[JOThompson]

Reading now to get ahead is like trying to get a leg up in a scavenger's hunt without the list of items to find.

+1,000

This. Every adcomm I've chatted with discouraged me from trying to get ahead for this very reason. I'm taking their advice and going to enjoy what little time I have left before school.

[RVP11]

Shit, any learning I did in September was ridiculously inefficient. I can't even imagine how much time you'd be wasting trying to really learn substantive law as a 0L, with no guidance from a professor on what angles he wants you to take.

My advice to 0Ls: work your ass off in October.

Only gunners and those who'd like to risk burnout are grinding in September. And virtually everyone is grasping the material and grinding in November. So gun in October while people like me are drunk or playing softball. That's where you can get ahead.

October 2010 will probably be a much more important month of study for you than January through September combined.

[SR86]

I'll answer this question, I'm only a 0L, but I am taking a sort of "survey of law" class and we obviously have to read (abridged) cases. So far we've covered torts and are starting contracts.

For torts, we read: Grimshaw v. Ford Motor; Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad v. American Cyanamid; and Petrovich v. Share Health Plan of Illinois.
For contracts: Embry v. Hargadine, McKittrick Dry Goods; Hamer v. Sidway; Sherwood v. Walker; and Hawkins v. McGee.

I can update as we get more cases assigned if people are interested.

My mind is 100% blown.

Haha why do you say that?

The man asked " what book would you read to learn to fly a plane?" A bunch of trainee pilots answered, "don't, because you can't learn to fly a plane without actual lessons. You'll be wasting your time." Then you came in here and said, "well, I've never been on a plane before, but I have some aviator goggles, so I'll tell you how it's done."

Haha I had a feeling my posting that wouldn't be the best idea and people would attack me for it... I'll just say that I disagree with you, the question wasn't "I want to learn to be a lawyer, what can I read to do so?" but rather "I am trying to prepare for law school, what can I read?". Since I am in the exact same situation of wanting to prepare for law school, I feel that I could answer with what I'm doing. I didn't say if it was a good idea or not.

Personally, I wouldn't read cases on my own as preparation for law school. Instead, I am taking a class offered at my school, jointly taught by a dozen or so world-class faculty in their own areas of expertise. I read the cases because they are assigned and I am taking this class for credit. I understand when people say each prof has their own ideas of what is relevant/important when studying the law, but I think getting a glimpse at how some of the brightest law profs think, even if different from the way I will be expected to analyze things in 1L because of different profs having different viewpoints, is a useful experience. After this class, I doubt I will do any further reading, in fact I doubt I'll have time.

You're free to disagree, but in my case, I have guidance not just from the profs teaching the class, but also from upper-year law student TAs, so I feel it's worth it. At the very least, I'm picking up some undoubtedly useful legal vocabulary.

[vanwinkle]

You're free to disagree, but in my case, I have guidance not just from the profs teaching the class, but also from upper-year law student TAs, so I feel it's worth it. At the very least, I'm picking up some undoubtedly useful legal vocabulary.

Yeah, you're in a class that's reviewing cases, and that may benefit you. But trying to recommend the reading assignments to other people who aren't in your "intro to law" class like it'll benefit them also is like someone who just learned to swim telling someone who can't, "Jump in and I'll tell you what the motions are you have to make to not drown."

It doesn't work that way.

[doyleoil]

i can't decide whether this thread or the 0L practice area thread is funnier