Anyone Else Really Dislike Contracts?

[mason123]

Initially I found contracts to be quite annoying, because I was under the impression that no matter what happens promissory estoppel will get you out of a bind.

There are really no hard and fast rules, with the exception of the codified UCC. A lot of contract law depends on the jurisdiction or body of law that applies in your particular case, essentially on the question of promissory estoppel. Seems like the tentacles of promissory estoppel worm their way into every aspect of contract law.

The only reason I liked civil procedure better was because it seemed as though interpretations of the FRCP can only deviate so far from the FRCP, apart from the more abstract concepts like minimum controversy requirements in diversity suits with multiple parties.

[goaliechica]

Man, contracts was probably my favorite 1L core class. Sounds like I am alone on that one.

[mason123]

Initially I found contracts to be quite annoying, because I was under the impression that no matter what happens promissory estoppel will get you out of a bind.

There are really no hard and fast rules, with the exception of the codified UCC. A lot of contract law depends on the jurisdiction or body of law that applies in your particular case, essentially on the question of promissory estoppel. Seems like the tentacles of promissory estoppel worm their way into every aspect of contract law.

The only reason I liked civil procedure better was because it seemed as though interpretations of the FRCP can only deviate so far from the FRCP, apart from the more abstract concepts like minimum controversy requirements in diversity suits with multiple parties.

[santropez]

How can anyone love UCC 2-207?  That's probably the most poorly written law I've ever read.

[goaliechica]

How can anyone love UCC 2-207?  That's probably the most poorly written law I've ever read.

Because it's like a puzzle! And it all fits together just so!

[,.,.,.;.,.,.]

Although I'm with you on the CivPro love, goaliechica (I also love CivPro, despite my classmates' hatred of it), I seriously don't understand Ks.

But.  But.  You did have a big picture professor who, from what I surmise, made Ks a very satisfying, non-hide-the-ball subject in which you asked big questions like whether a contract was made.

That . . . is not our Ks class.

My favorite 1L subjects:

1. CivPro
2. Property
3. Torts
4. Crim
5. Contracts (eww)
6. Elements

[goaliechica]

Although I'm with you on the CivPro love, goaliechica (I also love CivPro, despite my classmates' hatred of it), I seriously don't understand Ks.

But.  But.  You did have a big picture professor who, from what I surmise, made Ks a very satisfying, non-hide-the-ball subject in which you asked big questions like whether a contract was made.

That . . . is not our Ks class.

Interesting. Ours was definitely very big picture. That's why I liked it - it felt like a very cohesive and complete body of law by the end of it. I'm sure every prof does it differently, though.

My favorite 1L subjects:

1. CivPro
2. Property
3. Torts
4. Crim
5. Contracts (eww)
6. Elements

Hmmm. Mine were probably:

1. Contracts
2. Civ Pro
3. Torts
4. Crim
5. Property

The beginning of Evidence is reminding me rather unpleasantly of Property, despite a great prof. Hearsay reminds me of the RAP.

[wcombs65]

My Contracts professor was a visiting professor just out of an LLM program. It was her first class ever. She got a lot better as the semester went on but I had trouble in the beginning and never recovered.

[upgrade]

How can anyone love UCC 2-207?  That's probably the most poorly written law I've ever read.

Sure, but you know your professor thinks the same.  So you point out the ambiguities, make your analysis, and take your points.

[M_Cool]

Contracts was probably my favorite class.  We actually had a prof. with a lot of philosophy background teaching our class so it was interesting to have that stuff thrown in.  My other profs were just pure black letter law boringness.