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 - dkast
« on: September 14, 2005, 10:23:21 PM »
Any smokers out there smoking an exponentially greater amount of cigs after starting law school.
I was smoking a pack a day now i'm up to almost 2.
I believe its a combination of staying up later as well as the fact that I tend to smoke more when I am at my desk for x amount of hours reading.
If i get lung cancer after 10 years this is so not going to be work it.
« on: September 14, 2005, 12:43:33 AM »
Just out of curiosity, has anyone noticed that too many people at or in law school us the word "sufficient" in matters that are outside the realm of its legal use.
If thatís the case, does it annoy the sh*t out of you?
Its really out of hand. You are having a simple conversation regarding going out for a beer after class and this word comes up. I dont remember the exact conversation i was having with this girl but it was something along the lines of having 2 drinks will be sufficient for me to still get home on time and finish my assigment.
People!! the LSAT is over, i'm glad you all scored really well on it to get into this school, please refrain from using the word "sufficient" outside of discussions where it is pertinent to the legal topic.
« on: August 25, 2005, 08:43:15 PM »
Has anyone compared the two?
I just downloaded the Lexis Outline and it seems pretty substantial.
If anyone recommends Emanuelís over it please let me know why.
« on: August 23, 2005, 12:40:00 AM »
Anyone here agree with me that Jawbreaker is the best band ever?
I do not believe there is a statute or common law precedent which we could reference negating said statement.
Any act, statement, or statute which is in contrary to the stipulation "Jawbreaker is the best band ever" is hereby declared, not binding and or persuasively biding.
Thank you and have a good evening.
« on: August 22, 2005, 08:07:08 PM »
Has anyone read this case yet, if so, did they see an issue concerning the conditional aspect of the alleged assault by Sapp?
The case book version of the decision seems extremely edited, the Court never analizes the immediate apprehension or fear element based on the condition that the wife "come around the table for some petting and loving".
The Court never stipulates whether the facts in the case consititute an assault or not.
She can avoid the apprehension or fear of an imminent unwanted intended contact by Sapp by merely not going around the counter. This act also does not inhibit her free will in the sense that she
does not have a right, obligation or need to go behind the counter.
The only other consideration is whether the placement of the condition, in and of itself, is an assault. The placement and her thought of the condition, which she does not have to abide by, can be construed as causing the apprehension, is it imminent?
It would not be imminent if she did not go behind the counter.
The condition is expressed quite clearly, and the avoidance of going around the counter should not have put her in apprehension of an imminent unwanted harmful or offensive contact.
I have too much work to do for my civ pro class to deal with this
anymore; but, if someone knows more about the case please let me know.
I'm finding law school to be a bit annoying in that you can not get into the true substantive nature of the cases. This requires an extreme amount of time and an in depth analysis of each case.
I can't seem to help myself in the sense that when i read a case I tend to analize it to the 10th degree.
Whatever, i'm going to take a break, drink a beer and relax.
« on: August 18, 2005, 11:12:55 PM »
Iíve been reading, analyzing and studying for about 10 hours today.
I've come to a point in which I find myself asking the question:
"Do they (meaning the university/professors) want us to actually learn the law and how to analyze fact situations and think, or simple breeze through the material so we can say we have done our assignment in which case you learn nothing?"
I like to take time and think about what I am reading, how it relates to the big picture, including an in depth analysis of how the court arrived at its conclusion based on applying rules of law to fact situations. Also thinking of arguments that could be made by both appelle's and appellant's counsel. Unfortunately, with the workload given at my university this is not really possible.
I'm going to continue to utilize this method even if its the case that i dont get the full assignment done. F THEM. My goal is learning analysis and legal methods, thinking. Not just blazing through it like the germans through poland in 1939.
1Ls or 2Ls please provide input and let me know if you are or have experienced similar thoughts.
« on: August 16, 2005, 02:52:24 PM »
Anyone share this sentiment.
I was in class today and a student was asked to recite the facts of a case. After every fact she would state "and I believe that this is wrong, i think that blah blah blah. I'm glad the professor eventually stopped her and told her just to answer his question.
Anyway, while i was sitting there listening to her go on and on about what she considers right and wrong I realized that I have so much work to do regarding learning the black letter law for torts and have to spend 3 hours tonight condensing and thinking out hypos in my primers.
Class is really getting in the way.
I see people in my classes going nuts with note taking like they are in a lecture course. I've taken about a 1/2 page of notes so far in the first week on some small points i missed and some legal terms my professor was emphasizing.
I think a laptop is important because the professor wont be able to discern what you're working on, what really is important, learning black letter law and analizing how the fact situations fall into those elements.
Let me know if any of you have experienced similar thoughts.
« on: August 16, 2005, 02:44:48 AM »
Any PLS readers here who have read most of the book and taken the suggestions regarding prep?
I followed the 6 week recommendations and so far everything in the book has been ringing true.
« on: August 11, 2005, 04:08:27 PM »
I have composed a list of what I believe are "Must Haves" for advanced entering 1L students.
Black Letter Law Outlines
ABC's of the UCC
Restatement of contracts 2nd
Restatement of torts 2nd
I would put the LEEWS tapes in the list but i have not researched it to the extend where i can make a qualified decision on it.
Advanced students please let me know if I am missing anything.
Thanks everyone and good luck with your study and analysis of the law.
« on: August 09, 2005, 08:05:01 PM »
I'm conteplating not buying the casesbooks for my class and either purchasing
the cd with some fellow students or just photocopying the cases we will be
assigned from the library.
Has anyone gone this route if so can you offer an opinion if this worked for you?
Being that these books will only be used for our classes
and will not do us much or any good when we become
attorneys i think its wise to just buy the cd and print
out the edited cases that we are assigned. Plus it will
be so much easier to reference in class.