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  3 4 5 6 7 ... 12
« on: September 06, 2005, 07:52:54 PM »
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.
« on: September 05, 2005, 08:31:16 PM »
Battery requires 1) intent to make harmful or offensive contact and 2)harmful or offensive contact
Some fact patterns I see say that the defendant can not really "intend" to be harmful or offensive, yet it is still a 'battery.' ex. a man helps a woman onto a bus, and inadvertantly breaks her arm. CALI calls that a battery, simply because he had the intent to make the contact. But my torts prof says the intent that should be considered should be analyzed within the context. ex. a man grabs someone who is falling off a cliff, and as a result they break their arm. My torts prof would say that is not a battery, because the man had no intent to break the arm of the person falling etc. It becomes confusing. CALI seems to think that's a battery. My torts prof pushes me in a diff direction. which is it?
« on: August 24, 2005, 04:24:13 PM »
I'm still trying to figure out whether extensive note taking is even necessary. The only reason I can see it being important is so if you're called on, you can at least look like you're competent.
« on: August 22, 2005, 11:19:08 PM »
I just cant figure how reading the casebook and briefing the cases would prepare me for the final (which is a random set of facts, in which you have to spot the issues and analyze it from all sides). To me, it seems logical to learn the rule of law and the exceptions, and then just take a bunch of practice tests or something. Then when the final comes, youve had alot of practice at it. I guess making yourself an outline would help, but thats pretty much just learning the black letter stuff anyway. I will make my outline as I go along, and then probably revise it. Having an outline that's more than 30 pages for a subject seems counterproductive too. How is anyone going to remember all that anyway.
« on: May 01, 2005, 11:32:50 PM »
Hi I'm interested in knowing whether certain BarBri books would be good supplements to use doing your 1L. BarBri First Year Review? Conviser Mini Review? Thanks
« on: March 23, 2005, 09:35:56 PM »
Is the graduate level housing provided by UK the better choice? Or is the Lexington Theo Seminary, which is right across the street from the Law School, a better bet?
« on: April 24, 2005, 10:07:46 PM »
Crowded and dirty.
« on: April 18, 2005, 08:49:09 PM »
I withdrew from Pitt today. Good luck to all of those who are trying to get in.
« on: April 18, 2005, 08:47:27 PM »
The location (Lexington) is not too attractive. So I am not sure if I am going to accept.
All I did was to call and talk to the admission director a few weeks ago. It was more or less a phone interview.
Please, withdraw as soon as you can if you don't wish to attend. I'm on the WL there as well. Any little thing would help.
« on: April 11, 2005, 10:20:57 PM »
Any chance you could call or email W&L and possibly withdraw your application, FinerWoman? I'm waitlisted there, and any little thing could help.
Pages: 1  3 4 5 6 7 ... 12