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 - Susan B. Anthony

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 668
General Off-Topic Board / Re: SFLSD: Oh! The inhumanities.
« on: August 01, 2009, 03:14:20 PM »
I got a haircut too!

Also, I went back to red. Also, in news that will baffle clasttt, we also tinted my eyebrows.

Also, in funny news, my stylist on the bar exam: Well, at least you didn't lose your gorgeous porcelain skin to the sun!

General Off-Topic Board / Re: SFLSD: Oh! The inhumanities.
« on: July 31, 2009, 02:13:28 PM »
Beautiful day to sit on the deck and play a game and drink iced tea though. Man my life is hard.

General Off-Topic Board / Re: SFLSD: Oh! The inhumanities.
« on: July 31, 2009, 01:49:04 PM »
Scrab with mom. Two seven letter words in my first to plays. She's not pleased.

General Off-Topic Board / Re: SFLSD: Oh! The inhumanities.
« on: July 31, 2009, 11:28:45 AM »
I have a brow appointment

I cannot adequately explain my male befuddlement with this sort of thing, but I immediately heard Nelson Muntz exclaiming "A doctor for your teeth? HA! Whats next, a lawyer for your hair?"

I'm, um, going into the office.  But only because one of my colleagues is leaving.

Maybe if you men stopped oppressing women we wouldn't have to go through such things and then we could all understand each other.

General Off-Topic Board / Re: SFLSD: Oh! The inhumanities.
« on: July 31, 2009, 10:47:42 AM »
It's like a drug

I have a brow appointment in an hour and 10 minutes and I haven't done anything other than feed the cat.

General Off-Topic Board / Re: Exile LSD: The Law School Years
« on: July 31, 2009, 08:15:51 AM »
I am so glad to be done with the bar. But now I don't know what to do with my time, I don't start work for anouther few weeks. I feel like I should be studying!

I have four months, and I've only managed to schedule a month and a half of that with vacations so far!

My life is so hard!

Transferring / Re: GULC w/ 10k grant or NYU/Columbia w/o grant?
« on: July 30, 2009, 12:55:03 PM »
I agree that Columbia is probably the best overall choice and is likely worth the money (if you are not too worried about the extra debt in the long-term). It has great legal prestige and excellent lay prestige (which people should not completely discount). Better in both regards than NYU and G-Town. However, don't listen to the guy talking about getting the "best legal education." The actual education will be very similar at all three (good profs and smart students). The places where you would likely learn the "most" and have the most accessible profs. are not the top law schools (where they focus mostly on their research and teaching is something they love but that is secondary). You have only good options here!

not true, columbia and nyu have smarter students, which pays off in terms of whatever you actually get out of the socratic approach. 

Without accepting the idea that there is a significant or appreciable difference between the intelligence of students at GULC and Columbia/NYU, which I find suspect, that is utter bull. If a professor has any skill at the Socratic Method/teaching in general, you will get out of class what s/he wants you to get out of class. In almost all circumstances, students aren't going to actually bring incredibly insightful realizations to the discussion that the professor didn't have in mind. And if the professor isn't skilled...the class will drag no matter how bright the students are.

The quality of the students is more important, perhaps, in seminars/discussion based classes, but that depends on the suspect assertion that there's a difference significant enough to matter.

General Off-Topic Board / Re: SFLSD: Oh! The inhumanities.
« on: July 30, 2009, 07:33:52 AM »
Things I have failed at:

1. Sleeping in


General Off-Topic Board / Re: SFLSD: Oh! The inhumanities.
« on: July 29, 2009, 09:49:52 PM »
<-early casualty

Current Law Students / Re: Critique my brief
« on: July 29, 2009, 04:50:21 PM »
You should always brief in a way that you find helpful. There's some discussion of briefing in this thread, though, that you may find useful.

Generally, at least at the beginning, people seem to find it helpful to organize their briefs via a template, rather than as more of a narrative, which can make it easy to find the particular information you're looking for when called on in class/while reviewing. The basic template I used in the beginning:

Heading: this includes the case name, what court the case is in, the date of the decision, and, if it's in your casebook, the page of the casebook (so you can easily and quickly refer back).

Parties: Identify the parties, both as plaintiff/defendant and also by their relationship to one another (e.g., Mr Jones: plaintiff/seller; Mr Smith: defendant/purchaser). This will help you keep them straight as you go through the reasoning/are questioned in class.

Facts: Give a brief (see? hehe) description of the important facts (in many opinions, the judge gives a statement of the facts before getting to the issue. In some opinions, the facts are scattered throughout the analysis). Sometimes the case will go into great detail about the facts, in which case you're going to want to figure out which facts were most important to reaching the decision. Sometimes the opinion will only give a few facts, and they might all be important. You'll probably figure out how to tell pretty quickly what's important; if a fact is directly referenced in the reasoning, you can probably assume that it's important.

Procedural History: This is what's happened (in court) in the case previously. Depending on what court the decision is from, this could be complicated (a Supreme Court case that's been remanded a few times) or virtually non-existent. You may also want to briefly note the reasoning of lower courts, if it's given and seems important.

Issue(s): This is the legal question that the court is deciding, and is often phrased as an is/whether statement. In many opinions, the author will come right out and say "the issue before the court is..." or something similar to indicate the issue.

Holding: The statement of law that comes out of the case. It's the answer to your issue statement.

Reasoning: How the court reached their decision.

Judgment: This will usually be something like affirming or reversing a lower court's decision.

Again, these should all be brief descriptions of what happened. Your goal is not to reproduce the entire opinion in a different format, but rather to have a tool to help you remember what happened in the case. Most briefs shouldn't be more than a page, but should hit the basics of what you discuss in class with respect to that case. Note anything that your professor spends time on that you left out of the brief, and pay attention to whether you're regularly including a bunch of stuff that you never discuss to revise your briefing technique (just because you don't touch on something in class doesn't mean it should've been left out of the brief, but if there's regularly a bunch of stuff in your brief that you don't talk about, it might not be worth your time to include).

The basics I've listed above are by no means the only way to write a brief; unless you've been given specific requirements for your briefs, move things around/combine things/add things/leave things out in a way that's helpful/makes sense for you. As with everything in law school, the important thing is to do what works best for you personally.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 668