Top Law Schools

1L. Just had my legislation and regulation exam. Feel like my answer could've almost been written by someone that hadn't taken the class. Barely touched on the concepts from the course. Gave a complete and thorough answer tho. How screwed?

1. We don't know the question.
2. We don't know your answer.
3. We don't know how the rest of your class answered the question.

Also, how can your answer have been complete and thorough without using any leg&reg concepts?

Somewhere between completely screwed and not screwed at all.

MrPapagiorgio wrote:Also, how can your answer have been complete and thorough without using any leg&reg concepts?

Weren't opportunities to drop the concepts of textualism, purposivism, diff canons of construction, when deference to agencies is acceptable... none of that stuff really seemed to play much a role. I suppose I did discuss some leg and reg concepts, but not much beyond just what you would know from having taken torts, contracts, and civ pro. I used reasoning similar to what was in the opinions from the cases in the class, which I suppose helps.

Based on your avatar, I'm sure you'll catch a break and pull out the A.

bobbyh1919 wrote:Based on your avatar, I'm sure you'll catch a break and pull out the A.

This made me LOL.

No use worrying about it now. I'm pretty sure I choked on my Civ Pro final earlier this week, but I just had to shake it off and move on. Try and take a walk or a shower to reset your mind.

Besides, TIMMY TEBOW dont choke in the 4th.

What kind of school has 1st semester 1Ls take such a farcical class

Who cares? What the hell are you gonna do about it now.

speaking as an obnoxious leg exam acer, I think you're screwed if you don't talk about textualism, purposivism, etc, or at least, clearly display your mastery of the concepts w/o talking about them. the whole point of a leg exam is to be like "oh here's how a textualist would read it, oh wait, here's how a purposivist would read it," or, less schizophrenically, to make a series of arguments that illustrate your grasp of those methodologies. So it depends. If you didn't, for example, say textualism, but deployed canons and talked about the plain meaning of this or that, you could be okay.

sounds about right now that i think back to it. i didn't realize that i didn't utilize the vocabulary until very late in the exam. in the other classes the vocab came out fluently in my exam w/o me paying any special attention to it. i think I'm screwed if she grades strictly on a checklist but okay if she grades just by reading it over and getting a feel for the test's quality (like our contracts prof does)

C+

whuts4lunch wrote:C+

Sorry brother. Just bust ass this semester.