Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - fbartela

Pages: [1] 2 3
Current Law Students / Re: Sample Contracts Exam
« on: December 04, 2008, 01:56:43 PM »
There may be a problem with the detrimental reliance.  If you look at the facts there are two problems with the argument.  The first is that the guy was paralyzed and blind, which essentially won't allow him to seek many forms of alternative employment and it is therefore arguable that it wasn't his reliance that prevented him from seeking alternative employment but his handicap.  Second, if you argue that his reliance is evidenced by dependence on the money received, then once he starts to write the book, presumably to gain a profit, that could negate any reliance.  However, if you make the argument, the reliance has to be reasonably expected and the remedy can only be granted to prevent injustice.  So once the book is started and his reliance ends then you can argue that since the company stopped paying after his reliance was diminished there is no breach on that concept.

Current Law Students / Re: Free Law School Outlines
« on: November 30, 2008, 07:29:30 PM »

Current Law Students / Re: contracts. i want to scratch my eyes out.
« on: November 27, 2008, 08:20:33 AM »
E and E is awesome.

check out

General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: September 18, 2008, 06:36:00 PM »
haha wow, you are an angry human being

Where do you get these phrases like "ad lib donkees" and "Dove Seller"?  I don't think anyone is disparaging Sarah Palin because she is a woman or because John McCain threw a "monkey wrench" into the system.  These questions are because no one has any idea who she really is or what she really stands for.  We are supposed to just what the republicans tell us she stands for or against without questioning it?  When did it become wrong to ask questions and try to find out what someone stands for.  As to the assertion of sexism,are we to assume that when people question Obama and McCain they are disparaging them because they are men?  Sarah Palin represents no form of change unless you assume that change refers to a return to the culture wars of the 80's or that it means absolutely nothing at all.  Pro-life is change?  Shady political hirings/firings are change?  Consistently lying to the public and distorting your policy standpoints for the advancement of your platform is change?  These are the same politics we have seen since the inception of the Bush Era.

John McCain and Palin will shrink the government, cut taxes, protect our national security and fix the economy?  If John McCain is capable of all of these goals how come he couldn't beat the most unpopular president in our history in a debate in 2000.  Why does he consistently flip flop on the issues depending on the political climate of the moment? 

If Sarah Palin is the "efficacious embodiment of change" (whatever that means), how come she is under an ethics investigation?  How come she hasn't held a press conference or answered any really tough questions that are plaguing our country right now?  The truth seems to be that Palin bleeds republican red in the same way that George Bush and Karl Rove do.  She may be a gifted politician and may raise through the republican ranks, however, right now she is incapable of anything but reading off a teleprompter and repeating the same stump speech day in and day out.  She isn't any different from any republican, in fact she is essentially is the face of the republican base.  It is fairly evident that she was a political ploy used to take the spotlight off any and all of McCain's shortcomings.  You don't believe me?  Take it from your beloved Senior senator Chuck Hagel:  or maybe your still in disbelief, assuredly you wouldn't question the demi-god that is Karl Rove:

The truth here is that when Republicans lash out over issues like Obama's vote on the education bill in question they are essentially performing their lemming like duties and following the faithful over the ledge.  They are diverting the attention to what they believe matters and refusing to focus on the real issues.

You want to talk about Obama's support of a bill that provides education to small children so that they can identify when something has crossed the line of abuse?  You say, lets let parents educate their children?  What about the parents who are abusing their children?  Who are turning a blind eye while a family member abuses a child?  Just because you may have grown up in an environment with parents who educated you about important things like this doesnt mean everyone has that benefit.  Also, you probably weren't exposed to the internet at such a young age, this world changes every day and people need to keep an open mind.


General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: September 18, 2008, 01:19:16 PM »
Sure lets leave energy policy to the rebuplicants, maybe they'll do as good a job with it as they did with the economy.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: More than 3 prep tests a week?
« on: September 12, 2008, 10:34:14 AM »
Don't burn yourself out, the LSAT isn't the end of the world.  An important part of staying focused is not to freak yourself out or overstress yourself.  Good Luck!

haha get a life

Current Law Students / Re: Was the war in Iraq a war of choice?
« on: July 03, 2008, 05:13:16 PM »
I agree.  It could have been avoided.

Pages: [1] 2 3