Law School Discussion

evidence wasn't very complicated, but there was a ton of material that I needed to practice applying.  The law in a flash cards were too basic because the applicable rules were given away in the questions.  The Emanuel's and E&E's didn't have enough practice questions.  I think a book with a ton of multiple choice questions would be most useful.  There are also a few good hearsay Cali lessons.

Read Gideon's Trumpet.  Great book describing how the system works.  I read the E&E's for Torts and Civ Pro as well.  I understood the material better when firs introduced to it during class, but that doesn't really matter come exam time. 

I didnt do LEEWS, but I've yet to hear of anyone who did it say that it was a waste of time. 

I did LEEWS just as I started 1L and found it to be a complete waste of time.  It was too complicated.  On exams I've always just written everything I possibly can and have gotten an A on all but one exam.  Professors (at least mine) grade with a rubric where they award points for writing what they want and they don't deduct if you say something stupid.  If you write as much as possible, you have a better chance at getting more of the items on the profs rubric.  Note: I'm assuming how this all works and have no evidence other than my own experiences and my guesses about what the profs are looking for.   

from what I've heard, the RA positions don't help that much but summer clerkships can provide much better experience

the type of experience on the resume definitely makes a difference. My public interest background helped me at some firms, particularly those known for being liberal.  It definitely hurt my chances at other firms.