Ditto - ask now!
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 - oscarsonthepond
Don't worry - everyone feels entirely overwhelmed after their first practice exam. By taking them you're already a big step ahead of the rest of the class....although, depending on your semester schedule, it's probably a bit early to be taking them.
-How did you approach the issues in the exam? Did your notes suffice or did you have to think outside the box ?
IMO you should have one outline summarizing your notes that contains everything you need to know on the exam. I don't think you really need to think outside the box...depending on what that means...but you do need to understand your outline and/or notes and understand how to make arguments on the different sides of all the issues discussed in class.
-Regarding the outlines, did you actually get to use them during the exams, given the time limit?
It definitely depends on the class. I'm assuming you are speaking only about classes where you are allowed to bring your outline in. In my experience, for professors that have a large multiple choice section, I hardly used the outline (maybe 15%)because they tended to be straightforward and I had most of it memorized from organizing my outline. For professors w/ smaller multiple choice or T/F sections where they were trickier, I tended to use it more (maybe 50%?). For essays, again it depends on the class but if it's just a straightforward issue spotter then it can really help to just go straight down your outline and type like a madman to get everything in that's relevant (of course not just getting the rule and the issue, but most importantly the analysis as well - and conclusion if the prof wants it). In some classes though this would be less useful - you'd need to take some practice exams to find out - and also find out about how the prof. grades.
-Were study groups an effective way to prepare for the exam?
I found them pretty useful for taking practice exams (particularly in the beginning) to bounce ideas off of each other and find all the issues you missed. Beyond that, I didn't use them and even in that narrow case I did use them I found them at times to be difficult as people wanted to spend a bunch of time debating stuff that wasn't all that relevant).
-If you were to do it allover again...what changes would you make in your study / exam preparation tactics
Stay on top of things more during the semester - but I think everyone always feels behind. Having said that, don't burn yourself out early - you really shouldn't be studying all that hard at least until a month before exams.
-If you had a high LSAT score, did that score correlate to your performance in your first year?
I had a 170 and was top 10% at a lower T1. I have a friend at my school who had a 156 and had almost the exact same grades as me (also top 10%).
Is it necessary to cite an actual section of the UCC?
Like someone else said, it completely depends on your professor - you should always ask all of your professors what matters on the exams. My K prof gave zero points for UCC/Rest. sections, Case Names, and Conclusions (i.e. he only wanted issues, rules, and analysis).
This last summer the firm I was at (~75 attorneys) didn't want upgraded transcripts. In fact, there was a 2L who wanted to give them because he improved, and they just didn't care at all (they did care for us 1Ls trying to come back for our 2L summers).
Next summer I'm going to a V10 and in their literature it said they need a transcript after the summer (2L grades) and after graduation (3L grades). Not sure how much they care about them, though.
In other words...if the defense is where the federal issue lies, then there is no subject matter jx. If the prima facie case is where the federal issue lies, then you must ask a number of other questions before you know for sure whether there is - but that's the only situation where you can have subject matter jx is when the federal issue lies in the prima facie case.
Writing is not required in this case. The contract won't take more than a year to perform. Of course accepting in the same way you received the offer is acceptable (section 65), but so is any reasonable method (section 30), unless of course they specify a particular method (section 60).
My statement was in response to your initial post:
you have to accept in writing somehow (remember Contracts?).
My statement had nothing whatsoever to do with giving a law firm advice about what type of acceptance it should accept from its offerees in light of potential litigation in case the offeree claims they didn't accept (which seems to be what your response is directed at). Instead, my post was aimed at correcting your incorrect statement that contract law would require a written acceptance.
Also, the sections I was referring to were from the restatement (2d) of contracts, not the UCC.
Below is the relevant portion of my outline (and then some). I don't remember all the details of this and I don't know that my outline sheds much light, but here it is FWIW:
ii. Concurrent Causes – multiple negligent Ds
1. Neither is “but for” because either alone would have done it (Anderson v. Minneapolis R.R.)
a. Cause must be a substantial factor
i. This is the only exception to “but for”
b. Result: Both are liable
2. One is “but for” – unsure which one (Summers v. Tice)
a. Result: Both are liable
3. All are “but for”, but none would have caused it on its own (Hill v. Edmonds)
a. Result: All are liable
4. Market Share Liability
a. Some courts: When many Ds negligent, but unsure which one caused harm to P, each is liable for the %age of Ds damages corresponding to the chances that it was the cause (Sindell v. Abbott Labs)
i. Rarely used beyond DES cases – lots of unclear issues