Cuse, Sublime, et all: Would you mind ranking the sections?Fiero85 wrote:Quick Section Guide
A: Torts (Goldwasser), Prop (Mandelker), K (Greenfield)
B: Torts (Goldwasser), Prop (Mandelker), K (Badawi)
C: Torts (Tamanaha), Prop, (Konig), K (Baker)
D: Torts (Tamanaha), Prop, (Konig), K (Baker)
E: Torts (Norwood), Crim (Osgood), K (DeGeest)
F: Torts (Norwood), Con Law (Flagg), K (DeGeest)
Schedule bonus tidbits:
A: light M/T days
B: Most Balanced Schedule award
C: No classes Fridays, no big gaps between classes M-R
D: No classes Fridays, with large gaps between classes M and T
E: No classes Mondays
F: No classes before 10:30 AM
WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle) Forum
- johnnyquest
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 3:56 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
- DoveBodyWash
- Posts: 3177
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
lol it's hard for us to rank sections objectively. I can be super biased about it though if you're down with that. Will probably offend some of my classmates who lurk this thread though.johnnyquest wrote:Cuse, Sublime, et all: Would you mind ranking the sections?Fiero85 wrote:Quick Section Guide
A: Torts (Goldwasser), Prop (Mandelker), K (Greenfield)
B: Torts (Goldwasser), Prop (Mandelker), K (Badawi)
C: Torts (Tamanaha), Prop, (Konig), K (Baker)
D: Torts (Tamanaha), Prop, (Konig), K (Baker)
E: Torts (Norwood), Crim (Osgood), K (DeGeest)
F: Torts (Norwood), Con Law (Flagg), K (DeGeest)
Schedule bonus tidbits:
A: light M/T days
B: Most Balanced Schedule award
C: No classes Fridays, no big gaps between classes M-R
D: No classes Fridays, with large gaps between classes M and T
E: No classes Mondays
F: No classes before 10:30 AM
- DoveBodyWash
- Posts: 3177
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
First, ignore the schedule stuff. Because it's time to man up and just deal with whatever schedule that life hands you.johnnyquest wrote:Cuse, Sublime, et all: Would you mind ranking the sections?Fiero85 wrote:Quick Section Guide
A: Torts (Goldwasser), Prop (Mandelker), K (Greenfield)
B: Torts (Goldwasser), Prop (Mandelker), K (Badawi)
C: Torts (Tamanaha), Prop, (Konig), K (Baker)
D: Torts (Tamanaha), Prop, (Konig), K (Baker)
E: Torts (Norwood), Crim (Osgood), K (DeGeest)
F: Torts (Norwood), Con Law (Flagg), K (DeGeest)
Second, this is all my opinion based on my own experience and those of my friends who had the other profs. Apology in advance if some lurker classmate struggled really hard with a professor that I thought was easy.
Section A
I think Section A has the toughest task as far as coming ahead on the curve. Their small section class is Greenfield, who is the mother-of-all contract professors. Tough prof, tough exam. They also have Mandelker, who traditionally has a flat curve because his exam is so easy. I don't know anything noteworthy about Goldwassar. I never heard anyone complaining or praising regarding her Torts class. If you're in this section, triage Mandelker and pour as much time into hacking Greenfield/Goldwassar. Very likely that you get B+ or A- in Mandelker no matter how hard you try (there are exceptions of course). But K/Torts is where you should try to accumulate the bulk of your points.
Section B
Similar to A. Only difference is Badawai. He didn't teach us, so can't provide any insight here.
Section C and D
IMO the best sections to be in for getting ahead of the curve. Tamanaha is classic issue spotter/horse race. You can drill yourself to an A via practice tests. His entire course can be boiled down to a one-page exam outline and the material is very formulaic. Find a 2L or 3L to give you some guidance and prepared to take a ton of practice tests. His curve usually ends up being bimodal with lower spike getting B/B- and upper spike getting A-/A. Konig is an annoying professor to have because he hasn't gotten complete grasp of this "teaching law school" thing yet. Buy Understanding Property by Sprankling. Apparently he teaches right out of it. Be prepared to do nothing all semester and then a mad scramble towards finals as he tries to cover all the material that he got behind on. Pay attention to all latin terminology and history-esque topics. Baker is the prof that gives zero fucks. Join PAD, download my Baker outline from the outline bank. I didn't upload the complete outline or the rest of my K materials into the PAD bank though. Because I want to retain the option to handpick a mentee for that course. But I will say this, he will talk all the time about how he doesn't care about the cases. But do not ignore the cases. U need to know the UCC like the back of your hand as well as the cases that illustrate common law K principles. His practice tests are a joke. He gives u a test that he used for the LLM students, which is hilariously easy and unrepresentative of the actual final you'll take. There are old exams from his days at UNC that are closer to the difficulty of your final. Feel free to PM me if u have him and i'll send those to you.
Section E
Didn't have Norwood. Just know that she has multiple choice questions on her final. If you have Osgood then prepared to get super abstract. He's not a formulaic prof and prefers to dabble in history and philosophy. None of us had DeGeest but i have a friend in the 3L class (who is now at Harvard) who got 100 with him. Apparently it's all about dem policy arguments. So pay special attention to his policy views.
Section F
Same thing as above for DeGeest/Norwood. If you have Flagg, go with God. Just kidding..kind of. My only advice is to (1) do not neglect her midterm. She says it counts, no one really knows for sure if it does or not, don't risk it. (2) Find a 2L who did well. She has very specific preferences as far as phrasing your argument.
ETA: Sorry, should have included more substantive Mandelker advice. DO NOT FALL BEHIND on the readings. At the end of every week, index and organize your cases. Summarize them. Trying to do it all at the end of term is hell. If you stay on top of it diligently, you could very well be in that small group of ppl that get A or higher. His exam is literally just matching the question up with a case. Five questions, 300 words each. Three hours, completely open book. You won't have to study for his final at all minus cursory review if you stay diligent throughout the course as far as indexing your cases
- chuckbass
- Posts: 9956
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:29 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
If I've said it once I've said it a million times: I <3 Cuse
- Fiero85
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 3:38 am
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
Agreed. Just trying to have some positives for people with shitty sections (perhaps myself included???)cusenation wrote: ignore the schedule stuff. Because it's time to man up and just deal with whatever schedule that life hands you.
And muchos gracias as always, cuse
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- chuckbass
- Posts: 9956
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:29 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
C/D is like perfect professors and schedules doe. Those were what I wanted originally and cuse confirmed that for me above.Fiero85 wrote:Agreed. Just trying to have some positives for people with shitty sections (perhaps myself included???)cusenation wrote: ignore the schedule stuff. Because it's time to man up and just deal with whatever schedule that life hands you.
And muchos gracias as always, cuse
- Fiero85
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 3:38 am
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
Yeah I'm fine with any A thru E.
But F sounds god awful
But F sounds god awful
- DoveBodyWash
- Posts: 3177
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
talk to sublime for Greenfield. His ratio of fucks-given-to-exam-points is ridiculous. So few fucks. But so many points.
- DoveBodyWash
- Posts: 3177
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
i've heard great things about DeGeest. Norwood is neutral. But having Con Law your first term in general is just rough. The fact that it's Flagg is rough too.Fiero85 wrote:Yeah I'm fine with any A thru E.
But F sounds god awful
- chuckbass
- Posts: 9956
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:29 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
Yea I don't want Con Law.cusenation wrote:i've heard great things about DeGeest. Norwood is neutral. But having Con Law your first term in general is just rough. The fact that it's Flagg is rough too.Fiero85 wrote:Yeah I'm fine with any A thru E.
But F sounds god awful
-
- Posts: 223
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:29 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
I ac-cuse you of being awesome, thanks for this.cusenation wrote:First, ignore the schedule stuff. Because it's time to man up and just deal with whatever schedule that life hands you.johnnyquest wrote:Cuse, Sublime, et all: Would you mind ranking the sections?Fiero85 wrote:Quick Section Guide
A: Torts (Goldwasser), Prop (Mandelker), K (Greenfield)
B: Torts (Goldwasser), Prop (Mandelker), K (Badawi)
C: Torts (Tamanaha), Prop, (Konig), K (Baker)
D: Torts (Tamanaha), Prop, (Konig), K (Baker)
E: Torts (Norwood), Crim (Osgood), K (DeGeest)
F: Torts (Norwood), Con Law (Flagg), K (DeGeest)
Second, this is all my opinion based on my own experience and those of my friends who had the other profs. Apology in advance if some lurker classmate struggled really hard with a professor that I thought was easy.
Section A
I think Section A has the toughest task as far as coming ahead on the curve. Their small section class is Greenfield, who is the mother-of-all contract professors. Tough prof, tough exam. They also have Mandelker, who traditionally has a flat curve because his exam is so easy. I don't know anything noteworthy about Goldwassar. I never heard anyone complaining or praising regarding her Torts class. If you're in this section, triage Mandelker and pour as much time into hacking Greenfield/Goldwassar. Very likely that you get B+ or A- in Mandelker no matter how hard you try (there are exceptions of course). But K/Torts is where you should try to accumulate the bulk of your points.
Section B
Similar to A. Only difference is Badawai. He didn't teach us, so can't provide any insight here.
Section C and D
IMO the best sections to be in for getting ahead of the curve. Tamanaha is classic issue spotter/horse race. You can drill yourself to an A via practice tests. His entire course can be boiled down to a one-page exam outline and the material is very formulaic. Find a 2L or 3L to give you some guidance and prepared to take a ton of practice tests. His curve usually ends up being bimodal with lower spike getting B/B- and upper spike getting A-/A. Konig is an annoying professor to have because he hasn't gotten complete grasp of this "teaching law school" thing yet. Buy Understanding Property by Sprankling. Apparently he teaches right out of it. Be prepared to do nothing all semester and then a mad scramble towards finals as he tries to cover all the material that he got behind on. Pay attention to all latin terminology and history-esque topics. Baker is the prof that gives zero fucks. Join PAD, download my Baker outline from the outline bank. I didn't upload the complete outline or the rest of my K materials into the PAD bank though. Because I want to retain the option to handpick a mentee for that course. But I will say this, he will talk all the time about how he doesn't care about the cases. But do not ignore the cases. U need to know the UCC like the back of your hand as well as the cases that illustrate common law K principles. His practice tests are a joke. He gives u a test that he used for the LLM students, which is hilariously easy and unrepresentative of the actual final you'll take. There are old exams from his days at UNC that are closer to the difficulty of your final. Feel free to PM me if u have him and i'll send those to you.
Section E
Didn't have Norwood. Just know that she has multiple choice questions on her final. If you have Osgood then prepared to get super abstract. He's not a formulaic prof and prefers to dabble in history and philosophy. None of us had DeGeest but i have a friend in the 3L class (who is now at Harvard) who got 100 with him. Apparently it's all about dem policy arguments. So pay special attention to his policy views.
Section F
Same thing as above for DeGeest/Norwood. If you have Flagg, go with God. Just kidding..kind of. My only advice is to (1) do not neglect her midterm. She says it counts, no one really knows for sure if it does or not, don't risk it. (2) Find a 2L who did well. She has very specific preferences as far as phrasing your argument.
ETA: Sorry, should have included more substantive Mandelker advice. DO NOT FALL BEHIND on the readings. At the end of every week, index and organize your cases. Summarize them. Trying to do it all at the end of term is hell. If you stay on top of it diligently, you could very well be in that small group of ppl that get A or higher. His exam is literally just matching the question up with a case. Five questions, 300 words each. Three hours, completely open book. You won't have to study for his final at all minus cursory review if you stay diligent throughout the course as far as indexing your cases
- Fiero85
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 3:38 am
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
I'll admit, I lolled thereworkaholic82 wrote:I ac-cuse you of being awesome, thanks for this.

#punlovingguy
-
- Posts: 223
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:29 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
If i can elicit one chortle, then my existence will not have been in vain!Fiero85 wrote:I'll admit, I lolled thereworkaholic82 wrote:I ac-cuse you of being awesome, thanks for this.![]()
#punlovingguy
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- njdevils2626
- Posts: 536
- Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:53 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
At this rate, Cuse will spend his whole 2L year drinking on our dime with how much we owe himcusenation wrote:Drops knowledge bombs left and right
- DoveBodyWash
- Posts: 3177
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
Lol pay it forward with the next generation of 0Ls and we'll call it evennjdevils2626 wrote:At this rate, Cuse will spend his whole 2L year drinking on our dime with how much we owe himcusenation wrote:Drops knowledge bombs left and right
- peachesthedoge
- Posts: 350
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 12:57 am
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
cusenation wrote:Lol pay it forward with the next generation of 0Ls and we'll call it evennjdevils2626 wrote:At this rate, Cuse will spend his whole 2L year drinking on our dime with how much we owe himcusenation wrote:Drops knowledge bombs left and right
ew no 0L's are the worst trololol
- Fiero85
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 3:38 am
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
Ulterior motive alertnjdevils2626 wrote:At this rate, Cuse will spend his whole 2L year drinking on our dime with how much we owe himcusenation wrote:Drops knowledge bombs left and right

ETA: he puled the classic "pay it forward" shitk so I've been thwarted.
Well played, cuse.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- Fiero85
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 3:38 am
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
And chortle is a friggin 180 word, workz.
-
- Posts: 223
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:29 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
I pullz no punchez with my fellow WUSTlers(z)...Fiero85 wrote:And chortle is a friggin 180 word, workz.
- Fiero85
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 3:38 am
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
We almost to pg 300, gang. Nice.
Cuse, sublime, & co:
How did you guys get to 300 in like March of your cycle? Respect.
And how did you let it fizzle out at 399? Respect tentatively retracted...
Cuse, sublime, & co:
How did you guys get to 300 in like March of your cycle? Respect.
And how did you let it fizzle out at 399? Respect tentatively retracted...

- DoveBodyWash
- Posts: 3177
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
we had about twice as many posters during the initial frenzy...then another surge after full ride bail outFiero85 wrote:We almost to pg 300, gang. Nice.
Cuse, sublime, & co:
How did you guys get to 300 in like March of your cycle? Respect.
And how did you let it fizzle out at 399? Respect tentatively retracted...
But then we stopped talking to each other once we started school because all the discussion moved to Facebook
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Fiero85
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 3:38 am
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
Darn Zuckerburg
- Fiero85
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 3:38 am
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
I suppose our cycle has been less dramatic and was shorter for many, with scholly releases starting in December. People started committing or peace-ing out earlier, therefore less people waiting.
- DoveBodyWash
- Posts: 3177
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
yeah...but still...even ur page count is ridiculously high. 400 page threads are not the norm hahaFiero85 wrote:I suppose our cycle has been less dramatic and was shorter for many, with scholly releases starting in December. People started committing or peace-ing out earlier, therefore less people waiting.
- Fiero85
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 3:38 am
Re: WUSTL c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 Cycle)
Yeah well what we lack in preftige we make up for in interweb forum notorietycusenation wrote:yeah...but still...even ur page count is ridiculously high. 400 page threads are not the norm hahaFiero85 wrote:I suppose our cycle has been less dramatic and was shorter for many, with scholly releases starting in December. People started committing or peace-ing out earlier, therefore less people waiting.

(suck it HYS)
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login