Going To Law School

srsly property can rape you on the bar exam though.

i never had snazzy answers. most of the snazzy answers people are not that smart. i think you worry too much, tbh.

I guess if we did a market share liability case, we'd have to demonstrate we understand the formula of x multiplied by y dispersed amongst blah blah blah, and then apply the percentages if the theory is met in some other way. Hurting, you get any of this shit?

― burt_stanton, Tuesday, 25 November 2008 21:42 (9 minutes ago)

We didn't spend a lot of time on the intricacies of market share liability -- it was covered as a subset of actual/but-for causation (i.e. what do you do when you can't prove causation).

I doubt a torts prof is going to ask for a very detailed analysis of market share liability alone unless you really covered it in depth (of course I'm only basing this on my own prof's old exams). I don't think "applying a formula" is as important as recognizing how the theory fits into negligence in your fact situation, how it would address/not address policy concerns in your situation, potential difficulties in applying it, etc.

truth bomb on Blackacre.

BURT!!!! Holy Shit. Take this next sentence as THE most important one for the next month of your life:

It doesn't matter - not ONE LITTLE BIT - what anyone else in the world is doing to prepare for exams.

Outline the materials you covered in class, make sure you at least understand it while you are reading through your outline, and then do practice exams. I cannot stress this approach enough.

In the IRAC form of answers, the issue spotting is terribly important, but the analysis is where you get the points. The more comfortable you are with grabbing a set of facts by the balls and ripping it apart and throwing it back ont he page in the form of a logical answer, the better you increase your chances of doing well. ATTACK that shit. If something doesn't make sense - like "Why is THAT there?" its b/c you haven't found a place for it yet.

Don't let anyone else psych you out for the next month. Just treat it like a REALLY busy month at work.

Our torts prof always reminds us to look at everything through the lens of "Who do we want to hold liable for what and why and how can we do it?" Even principles that are supposed to be solid tort law/theory are bent all the time if it just seems particularly right or wrong to impose liability in a certain situation. Proximate cause is basically just a lot of over-argued bullshit that all boils down to whether or not we have gut feelings that someone should be liable for something.

Hurting OTM. Proximate cause = Negligence Sniff Test

What's this Iraq thing everyone's going on about?

Yeah, I'm a kvetch and a worrier. Even though I was raised Catholic, I fit right in here at Yeshiva U.

they didn't teach you IRAC wtf?

i prefer CREAC but yeah burt you should know that

i'm starting to doubt whether he's even really in law school

I got an A- on one of my first exams (and there's a mean B- curve, very unfriendly), so I'm not you know ... bad at this. I just don't know thems crazy acronyms

I also need a pill that makes me stop worrying. :-{ I get about 2 hours of sleep a night now.

Issue
Rule
Analysis
Conclusion

the IRAC

i'm much more worried about jobs than I am about exams. I mean I know the two are related, but I figure exams are just kind of a one-shot deal -- study as hard as you can and hope for the best. No need to add extra stress to that. The job situation feels much more nebulous -- economy sucks, not even really sure what direction I want to go in, etc.

Does what I do my first summer matter much or is it more just how WELL I do at it?

YES oh god yes, the jobs thing. Even the top law review students at Carbozo are having trouble finding classic big firm gigs, from what I'm hearing. and one would say, "so what, I aint lookin for big firm gigs!". Guess where those kids are going? Add that to NYU and Columbia's decision to eliminate grades next year, and we've got ourselves a situation.

going back over prox cause now. Palsgraf is such a dumb case -- the dissenting judge completely blows Cardozo away.

It's like Eminem burning Jay-Z on Renegade.

I also need a pill that makes me stop worrying. :-{ I get about 2 hours of sleep a night now.

― burt_stanton, Tuesday, November 25, 2008 6:01 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

they have these now u know

palsgraf is hilarious

I happened to read about a somewhat palsgraf-like case in the New York Law Journal recently (not that I read that shit on the regular) -- a guy who was trying to erect a construction sign sued a tractor-driver for driving by too fast, creating "wind gusts" that blew over the sign

I can't find my Blue Book. Any of you dudes know offhand how to cite committee notes on Federal Rules?

I think the most annoying part of writing these legal writing projects isn't the research ... or the writing ... it's plugging in all these damn citations.

no way citations are the best part. it's like "Int'l House of Pancakes of Greater Florida, Inc. vs. American Telephone and Telegraph, 42 F.Supp 185, 192 (6th Cir. 1998) quoting Supercalifragilisticexpialidotious Party Supply and Paper Products vs. United Electrical Workers Local 182, 984 F. Supp 150, 158 (6th Cir 1990)" -- sweet I already have a page!

hurting your bluebooking is atrocious

dude, I'm not going to bluebook a fucking ilx post

lol

oh for the days when you worried about filling a page

Erie Doctrine is just fucking me up. I keep re-outlining it and refining my outline, but it don't quite make sense. I think some how I'm not clear on whether Hanna has prongs or Hanna IS a prong, and what an "unguided Erie" analysis is

yeah, I'm going to crack down on the Erie Doctrine tomorrow. We're doing Semtek for interjurisdictional preclusion and so it's probably important to understand.

FWIW, there's a long Erie "flowchart" here:

http://www.law.georgetown.edu/sba/outlines.html

I find it a little confusing so far -- like maybe it slows down the process too much. I'll look at it again after I've gotten some sleep.

www.law.georgetown.edu

If you're still wrangling with the Erie Doctrine, this chronological summary is pretty clear:

http://www.lexisnexis.com/lawschool/study/outlines/html/civpro/civpro06.htm

Finals library marathon WOOT!

Actually I'm not going as hard as some yet. Did like 8 hours yesterday and will probably clock 8 today (plans for later). Tomorrow hope to do more like 12. First final is Wed, next one is the following Monday.

This is why Cardozo is a horrible school: because it's strict Jewish orthodox whatever, the library is closed on Fridays and Saturdays ... even during exams!!!! I can absolutely not work at home on this shit.

Also, torts exam: I'm screwed.

Torts is probably my best subject if you want to talk torts

What do we do with, like, the scope of risk analysis or the but-for analysis chart in actually answering these questions? Or the market share liability formula for dispersing compensatory damages through theory 1 but not theory 2 as covered in the Fordham Law Review August, 1963?

Our professor's a total turd and is making the exam closed book ... and he wants us to use all that theoretical shit :[

I couldn't any work done today because, without having a school library to go to... there is absolutely nowhere in New York City to just sit for hours! This place has no cafe culture.

http://www.cardozo.yu.edu/MemberContentDisplay.aspx?ccmd=ContentDisplay&ucmd=UserDisplay&userid=10350

I couldn't any work done today because, without having a school library to go to... there is absolutely nowhere in New York City to just sit for hours! This place has no cafe culture.

― burt_stanton, Saturday, December 6, 2008 11:46 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

lies!
besides, you can sit for hours anywhere, if you're smug enough

Hurting, what are your study techniques? I'm just re-reading all the cases since I barely remember most of them ... and of course reading a few of the cases I skipped :{

I mean, say it takes 8 hours to read through the first half of the syllabus, and another 8 hours to do the second half. How are you spending all these 12 hour sessions?

burt i recommend writing a couple sentences about each case, that's what i'm doing right now with int'l law. i find it doubles my efficiency of memorization, even if you can't bring it in with you.

I am ... I took the syllabus, am re-reading each case on it, writing out the principles of tort theory that each case utilizes, how it can be argued for or against, and then inserting class notes below that. I'm panicking because I read through a practice exam, and I have no friggin clue about anything it it! and the exam is Wednesday!

I still also need to study how scope of risk theory, but for causation, etc. etc. limits liability. Too many friggin formulas the professor gave us.

have you done practice problems like i told you to burt

also, that's more than 3 days away. it's funny how you can go from "i don't know anything" to "what else is there to know" in a few days, trust me.

I just grabbed them the other day. One I did well on, another I knew nothing... not a damn thing. If it were open book it'd be easy to utilize all these formulas and analytical theorem things.I mean, when you took a tort exam, how did you work scope of risk into it? Just analyzed a potential causation through the analysis?

what does scope of risk even mean? you mean like if i can be responsible for event A, that i caused, and event B, that was probably caused by event A occurring?