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 - slacker

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 140
Current Law Students / Re: Cops (TV Show)
« on: May 10, 2008, 06:17:53 AM »
They'd need signed consent for anyone on TV. The occasional blurred face shows that not everyone consents, but a lot of people do.

One of the people in my crim pro class was a cop. He said they'd always do a weapons patdown, regardless, because the last thing they wanted was to be taken unaware by the person they were questioning. Not quite 4th A...but I can see his point.

Current Law Students / Re: Gearing up for the bar exam
« on: May 10, 2008, 06:11:59 AM »
The reality of it all probably won't really sink in until the 4th of July.


You don't have standing to allege infringement. The dean won't take action. I'd say you're out of recourse.

I also vote for Jacy's example over either A or B. Both of the OP's versions are conclusory. I think A is closest to what would work, but the rule still needs to be unpacked more from the fact and application to work.

Book? How about a coupon for a day at a spa; something she can use after her first finals.

I think they're very good...for the people who are running them.

Personally I'd say save your money and have fun this summer.

Current Law Students / Re: Easements vs. Covenants
« on: April 22, 2008, 07:04:20 PM »
On the subject of there a real easy way to tell the difference between executory interests which are contingent v. executory interests that are vested? I know that vested would require an ascertainable person and no conditions...I'm not looking for the definition but actual examples (If X grants to Y for life, and then B so long as B uses the land for a school, and if not to C).

I guess what I don't completely get is the difference between a contingent remainder v. a vested remainder subject to divestment.  Is it really just if the condition is in the clause granting the estate v. just after the clause granting the estate? 

Mostly, yes. The language is very important in determining the interest. Part also depends on whether or not every who could take currently exists. You can only have a vested remainder in an ascertained remainderman.

Here's a page that talks about that kind of stuff:

Current Law Students / Re: Hornbooks and E&E
« on: April 21, 2008, 09:19:08 AM »
Blonds Guides are also good for a quick review vs. wading through all the stuff in an E&E.

Current Law Students / Re: Rule Against Perpetuities.
« on: April 18, 2008, 05:11:17 PM »
As you'll hear a bunch if you take a bar prep course, a lawyer in CA was found to have not committed malpractice for getting RAP wrong in practice.

Current Law Students / Re: Master of Business Law
« on: April 18, 2008, 05:09:22 PM »
The ways things work now, the JD covers a few major doctrinal issues. These issues are also what is tested on the bar. I don't see any reason why those who dictate things now would go for any sort of limited license for just one area of law. Besides, the one area for this degree, business law, could still be affected by tort law, by constitutional law, etc.

If you want to study law but not for a JD, there are programs like this. If you want to sit for a bar but not get a JD, there are ways to do that, also.

Out of curiousity, when you say you have "MBA/CPA/CFA credentials", does that mean you've actually earned those degree/certifications, or are you talking getting what you would consider the equivalent.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 140