So this one goes out to you upperclassmen...
It seems like there is no one way to brief cases - just google "brief case" and you'll see that each author has a different method for briefing cases. It seems as though there is no "standardized correct" way to brief a case nor are there general rules set in stone (well, other than maybe to keep the brief as short as possible).
From my nascent experience thus far [during orientation], it seems as though you do what works for you - ok, I got that.
My question is (sorry it took a while to get here) the following: How do I know that what I've got is a solid synopsis of the case? How do I know that I'm not confusing the reasoning with the holding and the holding with the rule?
On a somewhat different tangent, some of the early cases I've briefed have not taken me much time...which actually worries me, yet at the same time I feel confident that my brief will take me to the promised land. Your thoughts?
Thanks - and best of luck to you!