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 - Jackson Smith

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 12
Current Law Students / Re: Clerkships and Bar Admission
« on: July 26, 2006, 10:26:54 PM »

Current Law Students / Re: PATENT BAR
« on: May 26, 2006, 11:36:04 AM »
Are all these degrees equal in demand? That is, would it be worth it to go and get a botany degree so as to qualify me for patent work, or would somebody with a mechanical engineering degree be more valuable?

Current Law Students / Re: LSAT craziness..I think I am going insane
« on: November 06, 2005, 02:08:52 PM »
I studied daily for about 3 months, and would regularly hit the mid 160's in practice tests; I ended up with a 160 on the actual LSAT. I was bummed because I KNOW I can do better. The test started at 9am and it sort of threw me off. I didn't get much sleep and my mind wasn't 100% clear.

Current Law Students / Re: Anyone make their own flashcards?
« on: October 29, 2005, 10:22:02 AM »
I started making my own and found reading, case briefing, outlining, & creating flash cards to be to time consuming.  I purchased Bar Cards and now just make my own cards for areas not covered by Bar Cards or where I want additional practice.

I stopped briefing cases about 3 weeks into law school.

Current Law Students / Re: tell me about exam taking
« on: October 27, 2005, 04:52:18 PM »
If you don't memorize the black letter law, how the hell are you gonna know what issues to spot on the exam? The first key to any of this is knowing the rule (black letter law) in the first place. You can't analyze what you can't spot.

Current Law Students / Anyone make their own flashcards?
« on: October 26, 2005, 04:41:53 AM »
As far as studying goes, has anyone made flashcards based on their outline? I'm doing it right now, and it seems to be a good way of memorizing my outline. Anyone else tried this?

Current Law Students / Re: Civil Procedure help!
« on: October 14, 2005, 04:58:25 AM »
Anyone know what the 2005 Grable decision does to this issue? My civpro prof seems to think it changes things, and creates a new standard...(just what we need  :P)

Current Law Students / Re: Hess v Pawloski
« on: September 09, 2005, 09:18:58 PM »
Pennoyer was hell to read. Just dreadful the way some of the older cases are written.

Current Law Students / Re: The study habits of others...
« on: September 06, 2005, 07:16:33 PM »
Ive typed up all of my briefs so far, but I am starting to feel that it is pointless and a waste of time.

Current Law Students / Re: Intentional Torts question
« on: September 06, 2005, 07:15:34 PM »
Hmm, are you sure this is the test the professor offered?  We just did the case with the chair being pulled out, and for us the test wasn't whether a reasonable person would find the act to be offensive, but instead whether a reasonable person would have known that the offensive contact would occur.

In other words, if D didn't mean for the offensive contact to occur, but knew that his actions would most likely cause the contact then D had intent...

This is what my prof said today about this:

D can be liable for battery if he makes offensive contact with P, even if he does not intend for it to be offensive. ie D pulls chair out from under P before P sits down. P falls and bruises back. D might not have intended the harmful contact, but a reasonable person would find the act by D offensive and is therefore liable for the injury that results from such contact.

D cannot be liable for battery if he makes harmful contact with P if he had no intent to harm and it was not considered offensive by a reasonable person. ie the man who grabs the falling man and he breaks his arm. A reasonable person would not find that contact offensive, and D did not intend to harm.

Well, I said her back becomes bruised, hence the "harm." I don't know the case. I have just heard it referenced. I'm just using it as an example.

I'm confused about your phrase "most likely." As I understand it, the child doesn't have the intent to create harmful contact, just to be funny. The reasonable person would see pulling the chair out from under someone as being offensive, which is the lesser standard to meet. It was probably a bad example.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 12