Discussion
Resources
|
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.
1
General Board / Re: Recommended reading list for soon-2-be L1« on: May 26, 2008, 01:26:55 AM »
I read a few things in the summer before 1L. It was all a complete waste of time. Drink as much beer and party as hard as you can before you get into law school. Once you get in, you will have trouble finding time to do such things.
2
Pointless Arguments / Re: Use of "gay" on this board« on: November 16, 2007, 11:04:21 AM »
Why do you feel the insatiable need to respond to EVERY post in this thread? Get a life you flamer.
3
General Board / Re: Who Loves LexisNexis?« on: January 16, 2008, 07:42:51 AM »
Lexis points ARE awesome. If only they didn't lower the amount of points you can earn this semester
4
General Board / Re: Professor taught us one law, but it is completely conflicting with real law!« on: December 15, 2007, 04:04:49 PM »
Upon closer inspection of what you are saying here, it seems that both terms are being used differently by your professor and the flash cards. The actual Emanual's outline makes the law pretty clear when it comes to this issue FWIW. Respondeat superior is hardly such a complicated issue to get too confused about. In my torts class, we never used the word "frolic" to describe respondeat superior (or anything). I'd suggest you know which situations lead to vicarious liability under respondeat superior, and not get too hung up on ambiguous terms such as these.
5
General Board / Re: Professor taught us one law, but it is completely conflicting with real law!« on: December 14, 2007, 10:45:43 PM »
Your professor is right AND Emanual's is right. Emanual's does not say that a detour during a business trip leads to vicarious liability under respondeat superior.
6
General Board / Torts - Negligence Per Se« on: December 03, 2007, 04:37:57 PM »
A girl is driving 80 in a 60 cause she is in a rush to get to the airport. As a result, she crashes into some guy's wagon with a bunch of pigs inside. The driver is hurt, the wagon is damaged, and the pigs are killed.
Plaintiff asks that the statute (the speed limit) be admitted into evidence. Defendant claims that it is irrelevant. Should it be admitted? Assuming that it is admitted, how should the jury be instructed? (a) the staute makes the defendants negligent (b) If you find that Defendant was driving in excess of the speed limit, you may find that she was negligent (c) If you find that Marian was driving in excess of the speed limit, you must find that Defendant as negligent (d) No Jury instruction pertaining to the statute. Answer: It should be admitted, but the instruction should only be used as evidence that Defendant was negligent, and not negligence per se. Why is this? Somebody help me, before I kill myself! 7
Pointless Arguments / Re: Use of "gay" on this board« on: November 12, 2007, 12:39:05 PM »
I loled
8
Pointless Arguments / Re: Use of "gay" on this board« on: October 31, 2007, 09:16:07 PM »
Glad you understand
9
General Board / Re: Ya got in despite your GPA« on: October 31, 2007, 04:28:59 PM »
How did you manage that?
10
General Board / Where do you people find the time?« on: October 31, 2007, 03:01:08 AM »
Hey everybody.
There is only about a month left of classes before finals, and I have not yet begun outlining. It seems with all the readings, assignments, practice tests, etc., that there cannot possibly be enough time in a day to get this done. Yet, people seem to be getting it done. What do these people know that I don't? Should I just stop reading? Should I start pulling the fire alarm everyday with the hopes that they cancel classes and I can get more work done? All suggestions welcome!
|
