I'm currently a 1L at Temple. I think you made a fine choice and shan't be disappointed. Let me know if you have any questions.
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 - mutual_biscuit
My class preparation certainly takes a knock during the final month. I generally do a pretty detailed brief for every case, but during the last few weeks i knock it down to the bare essentials. I also implement mandatory library time on the weekends.
Can a corporation be considered a citizen of three states for a diversity claim. Suppose, for example, they are incorporated in New York, they have their executive headquarters in Pennsylvania, and they have their manufacturing facility in Ohio.
Certainly they would be a citizen of New York, but would it be an either/or test between Pennsylvania and Ohio based the particular test ("nerve center" "place of operations") dependent on the jurisdiction?
House A is next door to House B. They are in very close proximity. Between them sits a garage that is attached to House A. However, the owners of house B have the right to use the garage and it's recorded in the deed.
I am correct in assuming this is an expressed affirmative easement appurtenant? What would make this a covenant.
Above poster is right. Remember a con law issue has a couple parts. The first part is determining what area of con law. If the statute seems to treat different groups of people differently you have an equal protection clause issue. The next issue is what standard of review to apply. If the class is problematic which is usually determined by three factors (1)History of discrimination (2)Whether the status is immutable and I forgot the third standard factor courts look at (I am a 3L I took con law two years ago). If its a problematic class then you apply strict scrutiny if its not problematic you apply rational basis review. Remember just because you apply rational basis doesn't mean you always will pass, the prime example is Cleburne where the state failed rational basis review. On the flip side occasionally the government will pass strict scrutiny despite having awful facts like in Koramatsu.
I thought this was an excellent and concise summary of equal protection analysis, especially seeing as how you've been away from it for two years. Would it be possible for you to provide me with one of those summaries for each major topic in Con Law as well as Property and Civ. Pro?
Thanks in advance.
Don't forget about "intermediate scrutiny" which arises in many of the gender cases. There the government interest in creating the category must be "important" and the classification must have a "substantial" relation to the interest.
Everybody on this board knows that you have a big law job lined up. . . . [N]obody cares and nobody thinks more highly of you because you do.
I do care 2L, but unfortunately I think less of you because of it.