Going To Law School

um gabbneb he asked for a hornbook. prosser is a hornbook, one that is used all the time, by actual lawyers.

law students often use the term 'hornbook' loosely to refer to study aids that are not denominated (or actually) hornbooks, such as the glannon book hurting cites for civ pro (an equivalent of which for torts is the book i linked to upthread). and what is useful for lawyers in their practice is often quite different from what is useful for law students trying to learn the law.

i was just answering the question, as it was asked, to the best of my knowledge. i am well aware of all of these things that you mention in your post. i am sure you are a wonderful lawyer.

you're not well aware of what it's like to be a first-year law student. and i'm suggesting that given this fact, you might leave the advice to those who are. asking the professor, for instance, might well be bad advice, to put it mildly.

you might want to drop the condescending attitude. i'm sure hurting is smart enough to separate out good ideas from the bad on this thread.

there's no one "right" answer to hurting's question, and i have never suggested I know what it's like to be a first year law student. i just know what it's like to work in a law library. if hurting doesn't like my advice, he doesn't have to listen to it. nor do you. so shut the fuck up.

you might want to drop the condescending attitude

or i might not. i'm merely returning the favor. however, in this situation, no condescension is required.

glannon also wrote the torts examples and explanations if that's what you mean. i used it for exam studying and i did a good job in torts.

yeah, i forgot about that at first, but vaguely remember one of the glannons (i'm pretty sure it was civ pro) seeming/being more useful than the other, though maybe i was just put off by the lack of correspondence in the cases and in any event ymmv.

a quick persual suggested that the torts glannon didn't go deep enough maybe?

OK whatever what I want to know is how burt stanton is in smarty-pants law school writing like this:

I'm sure they could care less

I just thoughtlessly wrote "OTM" in the margins of my Civ Pro casebook.

Justice Rehnquist OTM.

I was just advised not to use a hornbook for my torts guy (by another faculty member here) because he disagrees so strongly with the traditional characterizations of so many cases and even with some of the 2nd restatements.

then that class is one where your exam should be regurgitating every personal opinion this guy has on torts

you want to understand the material, but you want to express it in the terms set forth by your professor, not another source

xp

Classic or douche: Asking a lot of questions because you don't want the professor to get to the case you haven't read yet and you know she'll fall for it

'things you were happy to have forgotten all about' for $200

torts (or contracts?) might be the class in which these aids have the least utility.

This is true IMO. Civil Procedure is much easier to summarize in a widely-available commercial study aid because Civil Procedure is (a) statute-based and (b) most schools emphasize the federal rules of civil procedure.

By contrast, Torts and Contracts are (a) common-law subjects and (b) entirely state-law based.

I was just advised not to use a hornbook for my torts guy (by another faculty member here) because he disagrees so strongly with the traditional characterizations of so many cases and even with some of the 2nd restatements.

― Everything is Highlighted (Hurting 2), Friday, September 26, 2008 11:23 AM (5 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

then that class is one where your exam should be regurgitating every personal opinion this guy has on torts

― cutty, Friday, September 26, 2008 11:26 AM (5 hours ago) Bookmark

OTM. Yeah, your professors know that you're going to have to learn the black letter law of torts for the bar. That's probably not what they're teaching.

If you want "Torts 100" it sounds like you want a study aid or commercial outline, not a "hornbook." If so, you kind of do want something that oversimplifies the material. That way you can focus instead on what your prof is trying to teach you. You can look at something like Glannon or Gilbert Torts in a Nutshell if you want the "Torts 100" version.

Seriously, don't try to get it from the Restatement. The Restatement is neither succinct nor, technically speaking, is it always correct. "The" Restatement is only an attempt to restate the common law.

Relating to the "Shit Bin" thread, I'm totally getting some "GET OUT NOW!" vibes with Car0d0z0. Will NYC legal life really be affected by this whole unprecedented Wall Street catastrophe?

It seems like nobody wants to even touch this subject ... I try to talk about it to the other students and they're like, "no no no no no it's all going to be OK, don't worry, it all goes back to normal." But ... will it? ?? ??????

no. you will be living in a cardboard box soon, with copies of the Federal Reporter for your blankets

it will be fine

OK, good.

Ok, I fucking hate the way civil procedure is taught at my school and I am sick of it. The "development" of current rules/case-law (which we learn by studying law that is often no longer good) is hardly interesting or useful enough to spend as much time as we do, and to make things worse we read the cases OUT OF FUCKING ORDER (both chronological and as presented in the book). It's a boring enough subject to begin with. Teach us the rules and concepts we need and move on. It is NOT USEFUL to me to know that supplemental jurisdiction developed out of things called "ancillary" and "pendent" jurisdiction that the courts were all confused about anyway, let alone to spend a week and a half on it before learning the current law.

pennoyer v. neff

that one's personal jurisdiction though

I actually finished both Personal and Subject Matter Jurisdiction a while ago and we're on choice-of-law now, which is the area that's really putting me over the line. We're reading cases that are referencing cases we haven't read, and then reading the referenced cases for the following class. Fucking retarded.

what textbook do you use?

Silberman Stein. It's bad to begin with but our professor makes it worse by skipping around.

It is NOT USEFUL to me to know that supplemental jurisdiction developed out of things called "ancillary" and "pendent" jurisdiction that the courts were all confused about anyway, let alone to spend a week and a half on it before learning the current law.

actually, it is.

tho i think you might be able to bifurcate the world of law school students fairly well into those who do and do not like civ pro. i was the former, tho it helped that i liked the professor, which was probably the key factor in any class.

Yeah, I'm more of the creative/abstract/philosophical-thinking type I guess, so I like torts and crim and hate civ pro. I can handle rules and systems, but I do so grudgingly.

yeah i was gonna say people like english, etc. majors seem to hate civ pro but technical people love it. same with other rules-based or administrative areas like immigration, which i really like.

Sometimes I get this image of me during finals week half-naked, unshaven and caveman-like, scrawling a giant flow-chart of civil procedure over the four walls of my apartment.

I have my first exam Monday for that weird class that no other law school has. I'm already like that; I just locked myself out of my apartment, so now I'm stuck at Cafe Laptop until my landlord gets home (if he ever does).

Civ Pro's definitely my favorite class so far; the professor we have is great for it, so that's probably the reason. If the professor was disorganized or something it'd probably be hell.

It isn't that I don't like rules, I just like rules where I can see the logic behind them. I feel like for every doctrine or rule of civil procedure that seems to have a certain purpose or justification, you can find another doctrine or rule that runs contrary to that purpose or justification in another area of procedure. I also find that you can often argue both sides of an issue equally well even from within the same basic political or jurisprudential viewpoint. Ultimately the more I learn to combine subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, venue, choice-of-law, etc., the less sense there seems to be to any of it and the more unnecessarily complicated it seems to be. I suppose it's the framers' fault for creating this bizarre federation-of-sovereign-states system with two parallel court systems.

yeah i would really like to have one country, not this state shit. but then we wouldn't be spending all this time and money to be proud of ourselves, i guess.

AAAAAARRRgHhhhh Erie Doctrine I rue thee!

that was my second or third favorite part of civ pro! first is prob res judicata and stuff

Actually my favorite part is all the lawyering strategy stuff involved in all of it. Like plaintiffs filing a tort action in defendants' home state just so defendant won't be able to remove it to federal court, or plaintiffs filing in federal court in the state with the longer statute of limitations and then transferring back to their home state right away on *convenience* grounds.

We're nowhere near any of that stuff. The first half of our class was on the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ... we only started jurisdiction last week. Of course it doesn't help that Cardozo has about 12 days off in October for these ridiculous hardcore Jewish holidays.

Yeah, weirdly we don't study most of the rules of civil procedure until later. We do the relevant ones to jurisdiction in passing.

ugh, just took my first exam. I'm sitting here done and everyone's still writing these huge tomes. I hope I did OK. : [ I had all my material ready and knew the answers to all the questions, but I have no idea what these people could be writing! It's like there's a million words on their screen. I only wrote about 2,500 words ... it looks like these guys are writing 10,000. and this isn't even like a real class.

Yeah, I just handed in my first graded writing assignment. 7 page memo. Unlike other schools, we're actually graded for Legal Writing. Thanks, BLS.

We're graded for Legal Writing, too. :[ It's only a 1 credit class stretched over two semesters, so eh. It's still annoying as hell. What's crazy, though, is that I heard NYU and Columbia are going to abolish grades soon. A nice way to shit all over the lesser NYC schools.

i think everyone grades for legal writing?

People have told me it's often (usually?) pass/fail.

o maybe that is when they combine it with legal research and make it like "lawyering skills" like we should have done because we took a separate graded legal research class and it made some people's grades like A A A A C

Ours combines it all ... it's legal writing/lawyering skills. RIght now they have us researching cases ... in a library! my hands touched paper. :{

ew!

Do you guys have the tentacles of Thomson/West and the black hand of Lexis Nexis all up in your school? We get so heavily marketed to it's absurd (also wrt BarBri/Kaplan/Pieper)

um yeah today i had free chipotle on lexis's dime for watching what ended up being like a 10 min presentation about some feature i will never use. westlaw is 10x better and i always use it at work instead of lexis but i accumulate lexis points to use on amazon. westlaw points can't buy anything but i did use them to get a coffee grinder.