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.

Topics - joshdelight

Pages: [1]
My school's law review ("LR") accepts the top 15% of 1L and up to 2 "write-on" students who didn't make the cut but nailed a writing/editing task distributed to interested 1Ls after finals.

I recently skimmed the packet listing the firms participating in on-campus recruiting, and saw their standards (e.g. top 20%, law review).

What position would a student who is in the top 50% but "wrote on" to LR be in?

I imagine that it could have one of several effects, but I don't know which is most likely: (1) no effect at all, (2) a recruiter would look twice at your name when deciding who to interview (as opposed to skipping over you entirely, or (3) a recruiter would see that you clearly "wrote on" to law review, and must therefore be a fantastic writer with excellent attention to detail, a student who would likely be an asset to any firm.

Any thoughts?

Current Law Students / How would you get an exam question thrown out?
« on: July 09, 2005, 08:38:00 AM »
There was a multiple-choice section on the torts exam that was a legal application of existential philosophy--i.e. Waiting for Godot in 20 questions.

Of course, MC tests are going to be tough, blah blah blah, best answer-not a right answer, blah blah blah. Spare me the trouble of these posts.  This MC section was a crapshoot, a lottery. It asked questions that were the legal equivalent of:

The sky is:
A) blue
B) white
C) blue and white
D) grey
E) none of the above

The point of my bitching is this: Is it possible to get a test question or questions thrown out? What would be the grounds for getting it tossed? If possible, how would one go about getting a question thrown out?

Current Law Students / "Errors" in Exam Questions
« on: December 06, 2004, 09:29:28 AM »
My K prof handed out a series of practice questions for his exam.  One of the questions contained a possible error that did not render the question inanswerable but completely changed the rationale.  He say's that it was an "obvious" error, and that I should have indicated as much in my answer.

Damn.  While I think he's wrong, he's the prof, so as the kids say nowadays, "Whevs."

Have any of your professors indicated what you should do if you encounter an error, be it possible or obvious?

Current Law Students / Detrimental Reliance Hypo
« on: November 10, 2004, 07:46:48 PM »
...Or "promissory estoppel," if you prefer.  :)  Either way, it's bound to generate some discussion.
A wealthy uncle promises to pay $10,000 to his niece upon her completion of the bar examination so that she may have a fine vacation.  After the bar, the niece travels throughout Europe and has a wonderful time.  She has not kept an account of her expenditures.  The uncle refuses to pay.  What is the niece's recovery?

Okay... this case calls for analysis using theory of detrimental reliance.  Therefore our rule is: a promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action on the part of the promisee and does in fact induce such action is binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise.  The remedy granted for breach may be limited as justice requires.

So, I see (1) a promise that is pretty damn sweet, and the uncle should reasonably expect the niece to act on it. (2) The niece did act on the promise, and had herself a fine vacation. (3) I am not so sure that injustice can be avoided only by enforcing the promise, as the niece's reliance was substantial in nature but because she did not keep records of her expenditures, there is a serious problem with how definite her reliance on his promise was. She might have spent $1000 for a European vacation package. Absent a reason to do otherwise, courts utilizing a detrimental reliance theory will generally only award reliance damages.  As she did not keep records, these damages are not determinable, and therefore, the uncle should prevail.

Tell me I'm wrong... I dare ya!  ;)

Current Law Students / K Hypo
« on: November 05, 2004, 01:27:40 PM »
An agreement was formed for the sale of real property for $8,500 with $100 to be paid at the time of the formation and the balance of $8,400 to be paid at the settlement.  The $100 was paid as required.  The writing contained the following provision: "in the event that the buyer *cannot* make the settlement, he may cancel this agreement without any further liability on his part, and the deposit money returned." 

The buyer sought to make settlement, but the seller refused to perform.  What result?

As I see it, the issue is whether the language of the agreement constitutes a freedom of termination on behalf of the buyer such that the buyer suffers no detriment for his promise to purchase; or, in other words, whether the language of the agreement shows a "mutuality of obligation" (consideration) such that the seller's refusal to perform constitutes a breach of K.

In this case, since the conditional language uses the word "cannot," this is forms a K with a term that conditions full performance on the buyer's ability to pay at the time of settlement.  This therefore is not a "free pass" giving the buyer a freedom of termination, and therefore forms a K.

If the language of the agreement had said "will not," than this would give the buyer a freedom of termination, and there would not be any detriment to the buyer in accepting the seller's offer. Consideration fails, and therefore no K.

Does anyone have any other interpretations?

Current Law Students / Stress, Law School, and Illness
« on: November 04, 2004, 12:38:18 PM »
I just got back from the doctor... I have *shingles*! WTF? The doc says that high stress is a major contributing factor in reactivating the dormant virus. 

Any one else out there who has become ill from LS stress?

Current Law Students / Best Legal Dictionary?
« on: June 04, 2004, 01:51:59 PM »
What is the best legal dictionary for a student of the law?

Pages: [1]