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 - USC313

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 11
Current Law Students / Re: Commercial Outlines/Hornbooks
« on: May 24, 2009, 04:23:46 PM »
People have different opinions on the utility of hornbooks/outlines/supplements. Personally I have found them useful in certain courses because they have been written with the beginning law student in mind. That is to say, most of the opinions you'll read in a your case book were written by judges for lawyers (and their clients, of course). Therefore, there is an assumption of a certain amount of background legal knowledge with regard to the area of law your reading about. Many cases will not neatly spell out or provide some black letter legal rule for you--and your left to your own devices and your professor's ability to teach to decipher any material you struggle with. For many students, this is fine. I've found that by reading supplemental material prior to the actual cases (i.e. being an active reader) it provides you with some basic and insightful background information that allows you understand/comprehend/and apply the case book material better. Granted this take up more of your study time--so part of it depends on your study habits and how devoted you are to actually learning the material.

As an aside, many law students recommend--and I agree--that Glannon's "Examples and Explanations" (E&E) for 1st year Civil Procedure is highly useful. Once your on campus you likely see many of your fellow classmates picking it up.

Current Law Students / Re: Robert Bork Book: "A Time to Speak"
« on: May 24, 2009, 10:53:09 AM »

Current Law Students / Re: Robert Bork Book: "A Time to Speak"
« on: May 23, 2009, 07:01:22 PM »
I disagree with most every opinion Scalia writes, but even though those opinions/dissents support some pretty absurd outcomes he definitely has the intellectual prowess to make me think twice (more like three or four times) about my opinion on a certain case.

It's difficult to take your thread seriously with a comment like that. Just what "absurd outcomes" are you referring to? Your opinion is an example of how people tend to throw words around too casually without thinking about their meaning. According to you, most opinions or dissents written by Scalia are absurd--commonly defined as "utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false." I'm failing to understand how a Supreme Court justice that compels you think "three or four times" about your own opinion on a given issue at the same time writes "absurd" opinions/dissents.

Keep a few things in mind: (1) If Scalia is writing a majority opinion, there's at least 4 other justices who agreed with his supposed absurdity. Why all the hate for one justice?; (2) As you go through law school, you'll realize that the bulk of SCOTUS's jurisprudence is not "hot-button" social issues, but fairly mundane, federal statutory problems that people can reasonably disagree on--without it becoming a wedge issue. True, a "conservative" or "liberal" sub-text/ideology may drive some of these opinions, but the consequences of their outcome are simply not as important to the larger American society; (3) You have to admit that Scalia does write some of the most colorful and intellectually rigorous opinions on the bench--something that has consistently frustrated liberals in their attempts to frame anyone of a conservative bent as uneducated & unenlightened; (4) Among those who actually pay attention to the Court's jurisprudence, those who blindly "hate" Scalia come across as the uneducated and unenlightened ones. Hating Scalia is a bandwagon issue for lay people. If Scalia really makes you second guess your opinions--don't be afraid to agree with them despite the fact that it may not square with your liberal script; (5) Many non-lawyer "intellectuals" don't like Scalia because he is unapologetic--he argues against certain "progressive" ideologies --and he does so forcefully and better than they ever could (i.e. a big F-U to the so-called liberal elite). When they can't match brains, they resort to brawn.

By the way, some opinions that Scalia has either joined in, or has authored that you'd likely agree with include: Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 and Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397. Have a look.

Current Law Students / Re: Contracts
« on: May 19, 2009, 11:35:43 AM »
Thanks for all your helpful recommendations.

Current Law Students / Contracts
« on: May 15, 2009, 02:11:04 PM »
A fellow student recommended a Contracts supplement to me by Chirelstein. Does anyone know if this work is reputable?

Current Law Students / SCOTUS on Testimonial Evidence
« on: May 12, 2009, 12:18:42 AM »
Has anyone else taken Evidence recently and is waiting to see how the Court rules in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts? Anyone have any opinions as to what the outcome should be?

« on: April 28, 2009, 10:52:36 PM »
I don't even think you have a viable 403 argument here. A clear example of non-hearsay is an utterance introduced to show notice or knowledge--when notice/knowledge of a person is relevant. So here, the utterance is relevant not to prove the fact of a broken elevator, but as indicating that the defendant gained notice/knowledge of its defective condition. The words spoken have legal significance independent of their truth. Actual proof of its defective condition would have to be proved by other evidence in the interim (i.e. between when the words were spoken and the resulting injury) You won't get anywhere with 403 because 'notice' triggers a duty in a negligence action. The words are prejudicial, but not unduly prejudicial.

Current Law Students / Re: Where do you get E&Es?
« on: April 04, 2009, 05:11:23 PM »
DO NOT BUY THE PROPERTY E& sucks. Any other supplement should do you better. Also, E&E's should always be available at your school's bookstore. It's sort of weird that no responses said that.

Avoid the Property E&E at all costs--it's absolutely horrible. I showed my professor some portions of it that I found troublesome, and she was surprised it was even published.

Current Law Students / Evidence
« on: December 18, 2008, 10:13:45 AM »
Can anyone recommend a well-respected, concise supplement for Evidence?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 11