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 - annr

Pages: [1]
Online Law Schools / Re: Concord Law School
« on: August 20, 2004, 05:36:27 PM »
The folks at Concord were much more interested in when they'd be receiving my tuition check than anything else about me or my plans. When I expressed my misgivings about the high tuition, they actually suggested I take an equity loan out on my home to pay for it, and then called and emailed me relentlessly when I declined. Needless to say, I went with a different school.

Current Law Students / Re: No time to for study aids
« on: August 19, 2004, 12:44:44 PM »
Unfortunately I don't have a tape player in my car (I'm eventually going to change my tapes into CD format), but for anyone who does I'd recommend the Sum & Substance lecture tapes you can find at most legal bookstores. I think you can even find them used at places like and the like. Hope that helps!

Current Law Students / Re: Exam question
« on: August 18, 2004, 11:51:49 AM »
Thanks for your thoughts! I'm actually working on this question as part of a take home exam, so I'm not sure how much I can really discuss this particular situation without feeling like I'm cheating! However, in this exam, the call of the question is simply to discuss D's liability to the various parties--hence my uncertainty about how much to include. With something that broad, would it be wise to include information on negligence after a discussion of trespass? In short, D threw an object in an intentional attempt to strike another person, but missed and succeeded instead in entering a nearby property and setting off a chain of events (object hitting other object, knocking over a candle, causing a fire, etc.) that resulted in substantial damage to the property. So my discussion revolves around how the intent can be transferred from the battery attempt to trespassing, and how once a trespass is established, a trespasser can be held liable for all the consequences of his or her trespass, no matter how far-reaching. In a situation such as this, should potential negligence even be addressed? Thank you for your help!

Current Law Students / Exam question
« on: August 17, 2004, 11:39:49 PM »
Hi there:

I'm a 1L working on sample essay exams, and I'm a little confused about what to include and omit in some of my answers. One of my study guides warns never to include non-issues in an essay answer, but also warns never to forget potential ones. I'm aware of the whole "don't say anything you wouldn't say in front of a judge" guideline, but some of the essays seem a bit nebulous. For example, I'm working on one where there is clearly a case of trespassing (via transferred intent) which results in damage to the property. Although I feel confident that there is enough to prove this, should I also include a discussion about a potential negligence case? I ask because I've got this nagging comment in the back of my head from one of my study guides about how if there are five ways to prove liability and I only address three because I'm sure they'll succeed and they don't, then I've failed. Any ideas about this? Thanks!

Pages: [1]