To Brief or Not to Brief

[ericptk2000]

Hey guys,

I was wondering for classes in which you know that you are not going to get called on (alphabetic order), and where the professor is strictly by the elements of the law, does it really make sense to brief?  I understand the utility of briefing; however, if I can determine the issue, the rule of law and how it is applied, and my prof just goes by the elements, should I even brief?

Thanks.

[TheReasonableMan]

I'm down to briefing only for torts, and really there only because it helps me understand the cases a bit better.  In most classes, the profs seem to just hit upon the cases lightly and then spell out the black letter law.  In those classes, I can't see why I would ever study from the cases when I have the rule in my outline, so I just brief in the margins for class and move on. 

Ask me how I feel about that decision when I get my grades back :-)

[brightline]

I'm a strong advocate of LEEWS style briefs derived from canned briefs, and a skim reading of the text. Book briefing and long form briefs are a waste of time, in my opinion.

For what it's worth, I finished 1L in the top 5-10% of my class.

[agrooth]

Most students I know stopped really briefing by second semester of first year.

The payoff is just not worth it after you realize that most final exams have nothing to do with the contents of your briefs.

Depending on the contents of your prof.'s tests, you're probably correct to think that your time could be spent more wisely doing things other than briefing.