Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Poll

which exam did u find easier?

LSAT
 1 (12.5%)
GRE
 7 (87.5%)

Total Members Voted: 7

Author Topic: Legal Writing Sucks  (Read 1588 times)

Budlaw

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
Legal Writing Sucks
« on: April 10, 2006, 01:23:02 AM »
Personally, I hated the class. It basically just got in the way of everything else. What does everyone else think?

brewha

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 145
  • I drank much of this after the Bar Exam....
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Legal Writing Sucks
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2006, 02:19:03 AM »
I'm partial because my LRW prof. selected me to be his teaching assistant for next year  ;D
pudding is delightful

Leaf2001br

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 526
  • My two cents.
    • AOL Instant Messenger - Leaf2001br
    • View Profile
    • Isaac Online
    • Email
Re: Legal Writing Sucks
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2006, 02:21:52 AM »
It was annoying.  It definitely interfered with other classes and was my least favorite to attend.  I spent countless hours pulling my hair out over it.

Yet, I still have to admit that it was useful.  You have to learn how to research and cite sometime.  Oral arguments also give you a first taste of advocacy to know if you love it or hate it.
"What is Legal?  What is Illegal?  What is 'Barely Legal'?"  - Ali G

Budlaw

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
Re: Legal Writing Sucks
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2006, 12:31:10 PM »
I'm not saying that it wasn't useful. It was probably the closest thing you have in lawschool to show you what you'll be doing as a summer associate, and it does build the practical skills that you need to do research. That being said...it was still annoying.


It was annoying.  It definitely interfered with other classes and was my least favorite to attend.  I spent countless hours pulling my hair out over it.

Yet, I still have to admit that it was useful.  You have to learn how to research and cite sometime.  Oral arguments also give you a first taste of advocacy to know if you love it or hate it.

QUAKER OATS

  • Guest
Re: Legal Writing Sucks
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2006, 12:36:25 PM »
I absolutely HATED it until the brief/oral arguments.  I thought that was pretty interesting and, dare I say, fun?

2005_2L

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Legal Writing Sucks
« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2006, 04:40:04 PM »
My LRW experience definitely sucked.  If I could have taken it with a different professor, I might have actually learned something.  My professor spent more time going over how many/where the federal districts are in my state than she spent teaching us how to write a good brief.  I wish I could have had a nickel for every time she said "when you're working in a firm this summer they will be SO impressed that you know where the districts are".  Personally, I think they would be more impressed by good memo-writing and legal researching skills.  Her idea of teaching us legal research was to dump us in the library for a class period while she hung out in her office.  Also, she accused one of my classmates of plagiarizing from the sample memo in the back of our book because the student used ONE WORD (and not an uncommon word at that) that was in the sample memo.  Needless to say, she didn't bother making formal charges against the guy - she just wrote at the end of his paper that he had plagiarized because he had used this one word that was in the sample memo, and she didn't think he was capable of coming up with that word on his own.  She wrote on the back of several students' papers that they would never become lawyers.  Fortunately I was lucky enough to avoid this criticism, and most of the students she did say it to have proven her wrong - they are doing quite well and are nearing graduation. 

For our ethics writing assignment, she had been telling us for weeks that she was working on writing the assignment.  When we finally got it, it was an exercise in writing point headers that she had copied out of a book.  Some ethics assignment...  not to mention that for our first brief her assignment had us representing both the debtor on a loan and the guarantor of the loan - people with obviously conflicting interests.  Oh, and she wanted us to argue that service of process was improper on a 17-year-old straight-A student who was about to go to college (the daughter of the guarantor) when we were finding case law that said service of process was proper on a young child (7 or 8 I think) and on someone who barely spoke English.  Can you say frivolous argument?  On top of that, she told us to completely ignore part of the relevant legal standard for the issue involved.

Don't even get me started on oral arguments - her idea of teaching us that was to e-mail us a link to what she considered to be a bad oral argument.  Then, when she graded our oral arguments, she gave a higher grade to a guy who muttered "Oh s***" while at the podium than to students (myself included) who remained calm and composed during argument.  Since this was one of the few assignments that was not blind-graded, and this guy was one of her pet students, I think this is a prime example of her playing favorites.

I feel like I got cheated out of 5 credit hours worth of tuition...