|
MPRE seemed a little rough. There were very few questions I was 100% positive on. Lots of indecision between two close answers. Oh well. Doesn't seem like I really risked anything meaningful by not preparing.
Blakkout fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Nov 5, 2011 |
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 18:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 20:11 |
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:Words Just to add to this, the principle works in crim too. For my 3L exams I just got hold of some model jury instructions re: homicide, sexual assault, evidentiary issues, etc., and things went great. Btw update from north of the border: crim still owns. I'm sure in a few years doing almost nothing but drug and robbery crimes will get old, but for now it's a wonderful break from the drudgery of law school.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 18:18
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:If you make a roadmap for yourself, it makes everything else a little easier. You can pull it out before depos, to make sure you ask the right questions. You have a head start when a summary judgment motion comes in. How do you defeat the objection to the document that your client stole out of the front seat of his opponent's car (true story)? It is best not to get caught flat-footed at trial. This applies to law students too. It may be a bit late for the memo part, but for both classes go online and look up what the jury instructions are. My memo was on intentional infliction of emotional distress, so I looked up the jury instructions for my jx and it took 25% of the time to write the memo with the relevant cases. Lexis and Westlaw have tons of "model" stuff to use and you can always check out other people's briefs and stuff too. Great time saver.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 19:33
|
|
|
Ahoy. Since we're talking about "model" poo poo, who was it that said they absolutely loved Secured Transactions because they were able to map everything out? And would that person just love to share their beautiful procedural map they claimed help smooth out the process for finding the answers? I can set up a dropbox account or something. I mean, I've created one that is more or less up to date (sup: attachment, choice of law, perfection... just started priority), but there's so much poo poo here I'm sure I have recklessly skipped over things. God drat Art. 9 is more complex than when we dealt with the Code in Ks. Would love to compare mine with someone who actually enjoyed the class.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 20:57
|
|
|
Feces Starship posted:mpre was real hard. is it just that the curve is really forgiving? Blakkout posted:MPRE seemed a little rough. There were very few questions I was 100% positive on. Lots of indecision between two close answers. Oh well. Doesn't seem like I really risked anything meaningful by not preparing. Those loving Con Law questions were painful. "A, a lawyer in State A, tries to get admitted to the bar in State B, but they won't let him because State B only lets residents of State B practice law in State B. What does this requirement violate? A) The privileges and immunities clause of the constitution B) The equal protection clause of the constitution C) Some random answer I've forgotten D) Other random answer" I narrowed that poo poo down to A and B early, spent a solid minute or minute and a half trying to remember what the bastard from the BarBri video said, and then guessed wrong. Oh, and gently caress that "Which of the following is the best statement of the role of the Legislature, Judiciary, and Executive in the regulation of the legal profession" gently caress you, con law.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 21:16
|
|
|
Blakkout posted:MPRE seemed a little rough. There were very few questions I was 100% positive on. Lots of indecision between two close answers. Oh well. Doesn't seem like I really risked anything meaningful by not preparing. I'll admit to feeling the same way about a lot of the questions. You go in feeling like you were kind of tossing a coin on a lot of them and it comes back that you got them right about 80-90% of the time. Have some faith 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 21:45
|
|
|
prussian advisor posted:I'll admit to feeling the same way about a lot of the questions. You go in feeling like you were kind of tossing a coin on a lot of them and it comes back that you got them right about 80-90% of the time. Have some faith Yeah, I felt like I failed, but I got a 140 something somehow. Here's the thing, if you know the subject, it will be harder because you actually think about the questions. If you were worried about 2 answers you did fine. If you thought you knew everyone straight off or struggled between 3-4 answers each time you're in more trouble.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 21:56
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, there are people out there who don't draft a complaint without looking at the model jury instructions first? I'm not trying to be sarcastic - seriously, I thought that was common sense 101. I have an entire little checklist I run through whenever I pick up a new case just to make sure I don't fall into any traps for the unwary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 07:48
|
|
|
Erdricks posted:Holy poo poo, there are people out there who don't draft a complaint without looking at the model jury instructions first? What sort of moon school did you go to that "Common Sense 101" is a class? On this planet, and especially in this country, they literally do not try to teach you how to be a lawyer. At all. Our legal education is the literal equivalent of med school teaching doctors the pros and cons of leeching patients. Three years of the pros and cons of leeching. That's law school.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 10:22
|
|
|
I didn't go to moon school, but I do work in the Banana Republic of Louisiana, where fact pleadings are ok and failure to state a claim will never get you tossed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 14:19
|
|
|
Erdricks posted:Holy poo poo, there are people out there who don't draft a complaint without looking at the model jury instructions first? Sorry, it was not something that was covered in my law school, and it was quite a revelation when the tip was passed on to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 16:21
|
|
|
I'm a huge fan of books like O'Connor's Causes of Action where it goes through a checklist, how to calculate damages, and such. They're a little pricy but were really useful when I was drafting complaints at my old job. If your state has similar practice books, take a look at them.
G-Mawwwwwww fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Nov 6, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 16:37
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:Sorry, it was not something that was covered in my law school, and it was quite a revelation when the tip was passed on to me. Ignore the haters Grundy, the rest of us appreciate your wisdom.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 16:58
|
|
|
Holy poo poo this afternoon I had the privilege of going through some Madoff-related materials (one of our clients was an invester in a feeder fund that invested in Madoff). Here is a series of quotes taken from a document which describe the discovery process currently facing the Trustee and everyone else involved. ("The Trustee" refers to Irving Picard, the guy appointed to figure out the whole Madoff mess.) quote:The Trustee is in possession of a massive collection of [Madoff] data, consisting of more than twenty-eight (28) million documents (3.5 terabytes of data). quote:As part of his ongoing investigation, the Trustee has deposed approximately 108 individuals and has received over five (5) million documents from approximately 441 third parties. quote:Many third parties would not produce doucments without a confidentiality agreement in place. The court entered a governing Litigation Protective Order. Additionally, approximately seventy (70) Third Parties negotiated individual confidentiality agreements with the Trustee, each with its own terms and obligations relating to the tratement and disclosure of confidential documents. quote:The Trustee received document requests from defendants in the ordinary course of discovery. The defendants' requests seek every document received from Third Parties in the Trustee's possession. Additionally, the defendants have requested all dposition transcripts and document productions related to other adversarial proceedings. quote:The Trustee has performed an initial search of the Third Party documents that are responsive to several of the defendants' unobjectionable requests, and reviewed potentially responsive documents for possible production to the defendants. This initial search has yielded over 100,000 documents (over 2.2 million pages) from seventy-seven (77) Third Party productions in the Trustee's possession. Of those documents, more than 87,000 were designated as Confidential by the producing party. quote:Of the seventy-seven (77) Third Party productions identified as containing documents responsive to the defendants' requests, twenty-five (25) Third Parties had produced Confidential documents pursuant to Individual AGreements. Each of the twenty-five (25) Individual Agreement contains varying obligations with regard to further production of the documents pursuant to discovery, with some restricting any further production without a court order and others requiring approval from the producing party. Additionally, each agreement outlined obligations pertaining to notice and response time - all of which needed to e closely tracked. quote:Given that some of the doucments had originally be produced almost two years prior, many of the individuals listed as counsel for various Third Parties no longer represented that client. In those instances, counsel for the Trustee had to research who ucrrently represented that Third Party and send an amended notice ltter, which required additional time. quote:Without exception, each of the responding Third Parties requested to review the specific Confidential documents that the Trustee intended to produce to the defendants. quote:After the Third Parties were given amply time to review the Bates list, cousnel for the Trustee received countless follow-up calls and/or emails challenging the responsiveness of documents in the production, often on a document-by-document basis. This necessitated individiual re-review of certain documents and additional discussions and negotiations with many Third Parties regarding the relevancy of their documents that have taken weeks to complete. quote:Similar requests by additional defendants will require the Trustee to repeat this same process with potentially all 441 Third Parties, each and every time a new document request is received in the approximately 900 proceedings initiated by the Trustee. As more actions filed by the Trustee enter the discovery phase and Third Party documents are requested, the resources of the Trustee will quickly become overwhelmed by the notice process, at enormous expense, time, and burden on all parties involved. quote:Moreover, as defendants in the approximately 900 actions pending begin producing documents, the number of producing Third Parties and volume of documents will quickyl grow and it will become administrateively impossible to meet the notice obligations and requirements concerning documents produced as Confidential altogether. 3.5 terabytes of data. 5 million documents. 441 third parties producing documents - at this time. 900 proceedings entering the discovery phase in the near future. Jesus christ that is a lot of doc review.  There are going to be doc review attorneys whose entire career is going to begin and end with Madoff-related crap. Madoff may have been a real bastard but he has just managed to bump up employment statistics for lawyers by quite a bit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 19:14
|
|
|
I once had to get through 6 DVDs worth of discovery, ~650,000 docs, and my supervising partner flipped his poo poo when it took me about a month's worth of billing. I mean, it loving takes 20 days to count to one million, and that's just counting, not looking at documents for relevant poo poo that will gently caress you over if you miss it. I don't miss that job.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 03:13
|
|
|
Lilosh posted:Those loving Con Law questions were painful. Yeah I was a little shocked at the amount of Con Law and pre-bar law student questions. Although I do remember from the BarBri guide that it was the P and I clause that prohibits residency as a requirement for taking the bar in a state.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 04:13
|
|
|
Tetrix posted:Yeah I was a little shocked at the amount of Con Law and pre-bar law student questions. Although I do remember from the BarBri guide that it was the P and I clause that prohibits residency as a requirement for taking the bar in a state. During the exam, i just remembered that the irish guy from the bar video mentioned it was one of the clauses of the constitution that prohibited it, but I forgot which. I assumed that would be enough because why the gently caress would the MPRE go into that level of detail about that? I mean, how the gently caress does knowing that question even remotely make us better, more ethical lawyers? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 05:14
|
|
|
Lilosh posted:I mean, how the gently caress does knowing that question even remotely make us better, more ethical lawyers?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 05:17
|
|
|
http://lawyerist.com/how-lawyers-should-not-use-twitter/ This is awesome. Ambulance chasing 2.0.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 17:18
|
|
|
Sam Glover all over that poo poo
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 17:46
|
|
|
Green Crayons posted:Ahoy. Sup fellow law student who doesn't know what the gently caress in Secured Transactions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 22:50
|
|
|
After weeks of hitting f5 all day on the bar results page, the internet seems sorta empty now. I need something to compulsively check.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 23:00
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:After weeks of hitting f5 all day on the bar results page, the internet seems sorta empty now. I need something to compulsively check. Obituaries to see if any of your classmates didn't pass.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 23:08
|
|
|
Tetrix posted:Although I do remember from the BarBri guide that it was the P and I clause that prohibits residency as a requirement for taking the bar in a state. I got that one wrong. gently caress that con. law stuff, that was ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 23:22
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:Sup fellow law student who doesn't know what the gently caress in Secured Transactions. I don't have a flow chart, but if you haven't just sat down and read through Article 9, I would suggest doing that - I didn't understand Secured Transactions at all when Bar Bri explained it but in practice, it was really simple. The section's not very long. The hardest part about it is just wrapping your head around the vocab.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 00:56
|
|
|
BarBri's section on Secured Transactions is loving terrible, when I did bar review it was 3 days after I finished ST with an A, and after listening to the lecture I no longer understood anything about the subject. I ended up reading over my class notes for 20 minutes and magically got it all again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 01:00
|
|
|
I'm taking the class right now - It's just not clicking with me. Any suggestions on study materials to help?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 01:40
|
|
|
Speaking of impossible classes, what the gently caress is up with Administrative Law? It's the worst parts of Con Law and Civ Pro, wrapped into a vague and confusing package. And there's no BarBri lecture for it
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 02:30
|
|
|
Lilosh posted:Speaking of impossible classes, what the gently caress is up with Administrative Law? Administrative law was the most boring, impenetrable poo poo class I ever took in law school. Every minute of it was misery. Also, the teacher was awful. Are there bar exams that actually require this as a subject?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 03:00
|
|
|
prussian advisor posted:Administrative law was the most boring, impenetrable poo poo class I ever took in law school. Every minute of it was misery. Also, the teacher was awful. Are there bar exams that actually require this as a subject? My proudest moment in law school was making it 100% of the way through Admin Law without buying the text book. I just pilfered a few old outlines, took fantastic notes, and never participated in in-class discussion. Also, Wikipedia had all the cases that were important. It was glorious.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 03:02
|
|
|
prussian advisor posted:Administrative law was the most boring, impenetrable poo poo class I ever took in law school. Every minute of it was misery. Also, the teacher was awful. Are there bar exams that actually require this as a subject? Every law student I have known in my life has expressed all of these same things, almost word-for-word.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 03:14
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:Sup fellow law student who doesn't know what the gently caress in Secured Transactions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 04:09
|
|
|
IrritationX posted:Every law student I have known in my life has expressed all of these same things, almost word-for-word. My professor just spent 90% of the class time telling stories about her time in the congressional budget office.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 18:56
|
|
|
Lilosh posted:Speaking of impossible classes, what the gently caress is up with Administrative Law? I'm in Admin right this second. It will go down as the worst scheduling decision I made in all of law school. Loved Con Law, loved Fed Courts, loved Legislation, but I absolutely loathe Admin. Should have taken Evidence or IP or anything else. E: What else I could have done: Classes through the B-School. Classes through the Pub Pol school. Writing seminar. Research assistant. Any finance class. Stay home (didn't need the credits) and watch videos of Skyrim, sigmachiev fucked around with this message at 19:18 on Nov 8, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 19:14
|
|
|
sigmachiev posted:E: What else I could have done: Classes through the B-School. Classes through the Pub Pol school. Writing seminar. Research assistant. Any finance class. Stay home (didn't need the credits) and watch videos of Skyrim, Take (or teach) a spinning class with the undergrads! Undergrad babes who don't yet know the negative value of a law degree will swoon. And spinning class babes have the best butts, according to science.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 22:37
|
|
|
UIUC completed its internal investigation into its statistics reporting. The Dean of Admissions resigned Friday. The report came out Monday. My favorite quote:quote:Pless was instrumental in the development and implementation of iLEAP. In an October 28, 2008 email, Pless was asked by an acquaintance: “U of I doesn’t require LSATs anymore? Really?” App. 24. Pless’s response described one of the key objectives of iLEAP—securing the enrollment of students with high undergraduate GPAs and the resulting benefit from a USNWR ranking perspective: And here's that footnote: quote:During an interview with the investigative team, Pless denied that he computed the GPAs of iLEAP students for ABA reporting purposes based on their grades as set forth in their applications, and claimed, instead, that he relied on their final, post-graduation transcripts. The investigation found that this claim was false—that is, that Pless did not use the final transcripts of iLEAP students in computing median GPAs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 23:48
|
|
|
I am a maverick and a reformer, so I'm copying a rankings-gaming method from someone else to hide what a failure my school is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 23:52
|
|
|
Why does he have to resign?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2011 23:57
|
|
|
The support staff here keeps telling me how glad that I'm not like the other attorneys (which I assume means I'm competent, not forgetful, and know their names). How long til I turn into one of the "other attorneys"?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2011 00:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 20:11 |
|
|
Blakkout posted:Why does he have to resign? Submitting false numbers to the ABA and US News.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2011 00:04
|
|