Federal Rules of Civ Pro

[CoxlessPair]

I am in a week into this class and I am wondering how much, if any, of my studying should revolve around what rule corresponds to the respective point of law.
Is it worth my time to know that the rules for Summary Judgement can be found in Rule 56 or that 15(a) tells me how I can amend pleadings?

Some rules more important than others? Any advice would be apprecaited.

[jacy85]

I've heard suggestions that it's a good idea to tab your fed. rules and label each tab "Rules for S.J" or whatever is easiest for you to remember/recognize.  This way, You won't have to try to memorize what rule goes with what. You also won't have to flip aroudn looking for what you need, especially when time is of the essence, like in an exam. 

[rhapsody]

My prof told us we're not required to memorize the numbers of the rules, but that it's still useful since practicing lawyers often refer to them by number (and we may pick it up by osmosis anyway).

[mynameismud]

we didn't need to know the rule numbers, but we had to know the substance of the rules.  i found it easier to remember the numbers to organize them in my head, and never had to use my statute book on the final.  plus, it can't hurt to throw in the numbers of the appropriate rule on the final.  so no, you don't have to know the numbers of each rule, but it's not such a bad thing, and as you go through the semester, you'll probably find that you can't help but remember the numbers anyway, so don't worry about it.

[dkast]

rule 12

[squarre]

I don't necessarily think you need to memorize the rule numbers, but it is somewhat helpful if you are allowed to use your rule book during your exam.  Even saying that I don't necessarily think you need to sit down and memorize the numbers because in the course of doing practice problems and applying the rules you will just learn them. 

[Trancer]

When I think of Civil Procedure I touch myself... but seriously, i cant imagine having to learn all the number that coincide with the various joinder rules.

[inthesun]

I hate Civ Pro.  It's not hard, but it's BORING.  My teacher pretty much reads straight from the book, and no, I'm not talking about the casebook.  The RULE book.  Yawn.

[Trancer]

The highlight of civ pro had to be the Norton v. Snapper case where the guy rode the mower into a creek and amputated 4 of his fingers... other than that i agree civ pro is pretty boring.

[eray01]

Norton v Snapper. I love that case. The poor guy could be walking around with a permanent finger gun on one hand. Or maybe he lost all of them but his middle finger, so he's constantly flipping people off everywhere he goes. People are yelling at him, "hey buddy, f-ck you too!" He could have lost all of them but his pincky and he's got a permanent Dr. Evil pincky thing going on.

Have you read Houchens v. American Home Assurance. The woman's husband disappears in Bangkok and she tries to collect on a life insurance policy that only pays out when the death is accidental.

As far as knowing the numbers, alot of my profs use the numbers as short hand. Like instead of saying motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim . . ., They just say Rule 12(b)(6) motion. I think it's a good idea to know the lawyer code talk if you want to be in their little club.