Going To Law School

ughhhh. I'm on top of all my work and readings and basically understand everything, but the class thing messes me up. I mean, I understand everything the professor talks about, but then when he asks questions, and classmates answer with these crazy wackadoo things and the professor's like, "right, exactly!" I'm like, "I have no idea what the hell is going on??!"

I mean it's like, where the hell are these people coming up with these things? Am I doing something wrong? Am I not making the right connections?

Remember: Some people who sound good in class will be mediocre students; some people who never speak or sound awkward in class will be top-notch students. Don't worry about who sounds good in class. It's all the exam.

Did you start regular classes yet Stanton? One thing I've noticed so far -- when the prof asks a general, political sciencey question about the general role of the courts, checks and balances, democracy, etc. lots of people think they have smart things to say. Once you get into an actual case, most people shut the fuck up.

My first class was today. Nobody ever asks questions regarding the solid material in the case ... it's always these associative things, and that confuses the hell out of me. Everything the professor says I totally get, and our briefs basically match up (he'll tell us his as guidance), but some of these students who go off on class make me never want to speak.

Today in civ pro the professor mentioned an example case from the text about enforcement of child support -- the point of the example had to do with standing to sue and redressability, not child support, but of course the next four people to talk all gave opinions on how to enforce child support payment that actually had nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I think since some professors include class participation as part of their grade, students will just say whatever the hell they can. Do you have the class Elements of Law? I'm having trouble understanding what the point of that class is. Everything we're covering in that we're concentrating on in every other class.

No, we just have Civ Pro, Torts, Crim and Legal Writing. There is a lot of material that gets covered in more than one class in the beginning, but mostly just stuff about the court system, binding vs. persuasive authority, etc. -- obviously once we get past that there won't be much overlap.

At least one of my professors has said she will consider "quality, not quantity" in participation.

I think since some professors include class participation as part of their grade

I always thought this was nonsense when Professors said class participation influenced grades.

We've got Elements (for the first half, with exam, and Contracts the second half), Civ Pro, Torts, and Legal Writing. I've done Civ Pro work already and that stuff makes sense... Elements of Law, no idea what the hell that class is about.

I always thought this was nonsense when Professors said class participation influenced grades.

I had one prof say it was something like 10%, and another claimed he uses it to bump you up as much as half a grade if he thinks your participation was strong.

Well, don't go by me. I had no inside information, and it's been years since I've been in law school. I'm just saying it always seemed to me to be about the final exam, and little else.

i'm tutoring in evidence at my old law school this semester, and i have to assign 10% of my students' marks to tutorial attendance and participation

Law sounds so much harder in the US than here in Australia. I really didn't do much outside of attend class and cram in the last few weeks before exams.

i am amused by burt's anxiety in classes.

That makes it sound like you're in class with him.

"i hate it too because i fear people are thinking what i think: "why doesn't this asshole shut his/her mouth?" it makes me very nervous and i can never say what i mean. the worst was i took "gender and the law" as a fluff course last year and it was so catty and obnoxious most of the time that i never wanted to say anything despite, i think, knowing what i was talking about."

Ha ha I won the law prize for 'Law, Gender & Feminism'. My proudest moment (and my only prize obv).

they give out prizes now?

yeah, what tim f said applies to law school in scotland too

US law school sounds a bit hard and daunting

It really seems like a properly full time thing. I did law split with arts (you can do law at an undergraduate i.e. sort of college equivalent level here) and had on average about 12 hours a week of contact hours. I did paid work between 15 and 25 hours a week for my entire degree. From the sounds of it that wouldn't really be possible at the US law schools...?

How's work going for you cozen?

I'm almost qualified (3 days to go). I've disliked it for the most part but then I don't think it was ever for me.

However, it is good for choice quotes, especially from bosses. My boss just told a client that "Nigeria is a lawless country" (!!).

Any other plans?

I wish my work was good for choice quotes.

I have plans but I'm being guarded and sheepish about them for the most part, because I don't want to jinx them.

In the short term, I'm off on holiday round Scotland on my bike. In the mid-to-long term I have something promising lined up but am just waiting on a solid job offer.

but some of these students who go off on class make me never want to speak

If this is your first, gut-level instinct with regard to class participation, I would follow it. I tended to be one of the folks who spoke in class pretty regularly, but always tended to talk about the topic at hand - I've always been a person who learned best by asking questions. None of my classmates minded me (or so I was told), however, because I was asking questions about the material, as opposed to just talking to hear myself talk. There were others in my section, however, that had earned everyone's animosity by the second week in class.

"To me it seems like (rephrasing of point that was already made three different times when we were talking about the subject 10 minutes ago)"

Dude! Its like you were IN my first year section!

Part of me really doesn't want to hate these people - we all have our own learning processes, self-learned or otherwise, that we need to go through to get things learned. Paraphrasing in a forum that will either approve or disapprove of the paraphrase is one of these methods.

The problem is when this paraphrasing becomes burdensome on the rest of the class's learning - like "STFU, dude. We want to get to everything we read!"

In real law world, I was just given the following assignment: Here's what I think happened. Write me that story, but with facts to back it up. Awesome.

Torts and Civ Pro are way better, I just had my first classes - I can actually talk about my interpretations of the case that relate to the case. I guess my Elements class is a weird thing ... nobody really has a grasp about what it is, aside from a way to ease students into law school.

I'm also becoming a library rat. I know when I schlep back to my apartment there's no way in hell I'm going to do my assignments... well, at least.

I just read 22 pages of a Supreme Court opinion on the use of FRCP Rule 8(a)(2) and Rule 12(b)(6) regarding some complaint filed on telecom monopolies, and it was downright fascinating.

Ok, q for the vets:

A friend approached me and one other guy with a study idea. Basically there are three of us and three classes that use example cases (the other is legal writing). So he thought we could each take one and be responsible for a running *crib sheet* of all the principle and note cases for that class. I agreed, but just wondering if I'm making extra work for myself.

On the plus side, there's obviously the division of labor thing, and having all cases discussed in an easy format would be good.

On the minus side, maybe this winds up expending too much energy on note cases that, while they illustrate important exceptions and points, we don't have to know them by name or anything.

On the plus side again, just going over all those note cases thoroughly would probably help to remember important rules, variations and exceptions.

principal, rather

I am NOW a qualified solicitor.

I reiterate my warning - do the reading yourself! Do not depend on others to provide you with the essential understanding that will come from putting in the time.

That said, if you were to work to compile a rolling crib sheet for each other, and make regular times to meet/compare/tear each other's notes to shreds, that might be a good thing.

ON NOTE CASES:

The note cases become important once you understand the main thrust of the principal case(s). It is the note cases that show how different courts or different cases can take the same legal principles and manipulate them for different rulings.

COZ -

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!

Well done, sir. Well done.

:) thanks

Hey, I'm still in law school.

I don't have any real reason to bump other than to procrastinate the rest of my torts reading.

Civ Pro is an uphill run that keeps getting steeper, Torts is hard but fun, Crim is the most *philosophical* and hence easiest class. Legal Writing is kind of a joke.

Boring law students are all alike; every interesting law student is interesting in his or her own way. Most of them are boring.

Most fictional depictions are predictably over-dramatic, and I'm realizing that many non-fictional ones are too. There really isn't as much excitement or tension or competition in the air as I expected -- it's a relatively flat experience thus far.

Yeah, same here. Everyone's pretty friendly so far. Civ Pro is my favorite class. I'm going to get Rule 11(b)(2) tattooed on my scrotum. Torts has been a pain in the ass so far, but my professor is a philosophy junky. All we do is read Posner and relate everything to the economic theory of blingwads.

Example torts class question: "In what way does due care relate to the Hand formula, and is that in any way different than Posner's critique of Holmes's theory of fault?" Dead silence in the classroom.

Is your torts class like that, too?

well, probably since I'm sure we're using the same torts casebook.

No, my torts class consists of a large, old orthodox Jewish man who talks like George Carlin yelling "Where's the tort?! Where's the tort?! Are we punishing the kid because he intended for the lady to sit down?!"

I just read about the Hand formula and Posner's critique of Holmes's theory of fault about five minutes ago, by the way. Do you have the Tw3rski/Henderson casebook? Tw3rski is the orthodox jewish guy that teaches my class.

well, he wouldn't say "punishing," it being torts after all

Nah, it's Franklin and Rabin. All I hear in torts class is Posner this, Posner that. I get it, there's a modern theory of torts that has to do with economics.

Fuck a posner

Posner reminds me of the irritating Ivy-educated kid who sits behind me who raises his hand more than anyone else and makes ridiculous points in a hyper-articulate fashion.

Who knows, Posner could be our next SCROTUS

It will never happen

justice. Also, I'm reallllllly fucking stressed out now ... there's a lot of work, and it's doable, but the key is ... it takes a lot of time to both do the work and really do it well. like, really get everything that's going on and staying caught up. After 6 hours of class there's only so much time that can be spent on homework. Which I should probably be doing now.

law school is for people who don't have enough respect for their country to join the army.

In my case, that is wholly accurate.

After I pass the bar I'm going to set up a hipster boutique law firm where we all dress like Robert Downey Jr. from True Believer.

What the hell, there's embedding now?

i'm going to be embedding with you, burt