Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Delaney's Legal Reasoning  (Read 2059 times)

Mirage1959

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Delaney's Legal Reasoning
« Reply #10 on: July 14, 2005, 09:08:28 AM »
As a newbie starting school next month, I enjoy sitting back and reading the various opinions on "to brief or not to brief". It appears that the concensus is to brief in some form or fashion. But I've also read many posts about the best "method" of briefing: Delaney's, Law School Confidential's, LEEWS'.

Can you 2L's & 3L's sound off on your opinions?


jdohno

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 180
    • View Profile
Re: Delaney's Legal Reasoning
« Reply #11 on: July 14, 2005, 09:46:13 AM »
Wow Dressler sounds amazing. You're right starting off with canned briefs without knowing how to brief is premature. We both agree on this in different ways: briefing has little to do with first year grades. Well you said briefing well and I think exams require a different type of tool. Anyway we agree to disagree. Take care Todd.


jdohno

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 180
    • View Profile
Re: Delaney's Legal Reasoning
« Reply #12 on: July 14, 2005, 10:02:01 AM »
The LSC method doesn't translate very well to the actual classroom. People get excited after reading the book because it makes things seem easy or structured. I bought a casebook used from one of those LSC rainbow junkies. The book is a mess. I got it for under 20 dollars. You can tell the guy had no idea what the hell he was doing. After receiving the casebook, I wasn't surprised that he told me he didn't do well in the class. I know some people who took LSC's advice and made a system of their own. I don't know how they did. In law school people don't really talk about grades. You don't know who has done well (at least at my school) until law review is announced. In fact, I think LSC briefing method is close to book briefing. I don't think book briefing from the start is helpful. I don't know how other 2Ls feel about it though.

Delaney has the traditional style of briefing. He was a professor at NYU. I know how to do a Delaney brief. His Learning Legal Reasoning taught me how to do a brief intially and some of the stuff in there helps in legal writing. But those briefs are the 3 to 4 page elaborate brief. Some professors might require that you do the elaborate briefs in the beginning weeks of class to make sure that you know how to do it. But I think a lot of people get struck on their brief looking like the examples in the book. There's no such thing as the perfect brief. You might have 10 cases to read in a night for 4 different classes. You shouldn't care about writing the perfect brief. You should care about understanding what you are reading.

I used the Leews method of briefing. I thought it helped me pull out the most relevant things I need from the cases especially the landmark ones. It also helped me remember certain cases better and what area of the black letter they covered or were a variation of. A caveat: I wouldn't start doing the Leews style of briefing right away. Like Todd pointed out, you still need to know where the precedent and holding of the case are and what it is. It depends on you. You will come up with a system that works for you. You can read these posts for guidance but ultimately it's what makes you comfortable. After you received your first semester grades, it's also what made you successful.

As a newbie starting school next month, I enjoy sitting back and reading the various opinions on "to brief or not to brief". It appears that the concensus is to brief in some form or fashion. But I've also read many posts about the best "method" of briefing: Delaney's, Law School Confidential's, LEEWS'.

Can you 2L's & 3L's sound off on your opinions?



MidWestLawGril

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Re: Delaney's Legal Reasoning
« Reply #13 on: July 14, 2005, 10:30:09 AM »
I'd say your "method" of briefing doesn't matter one bit. As long as you write something down and know the holding.

I want to agree that briefing is important and all 1L's should do it until they get the hang of it. It will help you understand what is going on.  However, as we've said above -- doing outlines, reviewing classes and doing practice hypos and exams will actually get you a higher grade.  Reviewing is more important than preparing. Take it from someone in the top 10% of her class.

I knew a guy who read every case three times and briefed it perfectly, and his grades were not so hot.

lex19

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: Delaney's Legal Reasoning
« Reply #14 on: July 15, 2005, 09:49:02 AM »
tag

dft

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 519
    • View Profile
Re: Delaney's Legal Reasoning
« Reply #15 on: July 16, 2005, 10:51:21 AM »
good info

labamba

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Delaney's Legal Reasoning
« Reply #16 on: July 17, 2005, 11:59:38 PM »
Quote
Good briefs = good class participation, which counts for nothing.

Good outlining = good exams, which count for everything.

Period.

_/

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: Delaney's Legal Reasoning
« Reply #17 on: August 16, 2005, 06:48:57 AM »
Quote
For those in their 2/3L, were their any tricks you were able to figure out that made sorting through an 8 page case easier? Will it just take time?

There's no trick. You go and buy the canned briefs book and then you may wish to copy the particular case brief in a piece of paper.

Assuming you'll ever need that brief!

dkast

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 110
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Delaney's Legal Reasoning
« Reply #18 on: August 16, 2005, 09:24:55 AM »
Good briefs = good class participation, which counts for nothing.


You;re right the only bit i think you should add is that briefing is important to get you into the mind set of looking at how the courts apply the law to given fact situations, then it is up to you to learn this for legal analysis and apply similar methods in your exams.