100th post! and lingering questions
It’s a milestone kind of day here at Chez Ninja. This is my 100th post! Hard to believe. So, to celebrate, I’m completing a half-finished post from a long time ago while watching Get Smart with Ninja Kid and eating tons of leftover Halloween candy. Hey, don’t hate me cuz I know how to par-tay.
So we have about five weeks until exams. Five weeks! That’s 18 classes. Almost time for this:
We started some study group work on Saturday morning and I think it was helpful. We just worked on Torts and we went through some of the hypos in the E&E and answered them as a group. I haven’t really started doing any outlines yet and I guess it’s time to get that underway. I think I said that a couple of weeks ago here, and somehow I’m not any farther along now than I was then. I blame the open memo from hell.
How much fun is this PicApp thingy? Oodles, that’s how much.
Okay. So I’m realizing that there are some things I don’t know (shocking!). For example, will the world come to an end in December of 2012, absolving me once and for all of my law school debt? Hey, I strive to look for the silver lining. Half full, baby.
Ha ha ha.
No, really. I do have some questions.
1. How can you tell the difference between dicta and reasoning in an opinion, and is this really important? It all seems like reasoning to me, like the judge is just building a case and then making a decision. I didn’t think this was a huge deal until I watched the 2L/3L Moot Court final round and there was all this debate about the nature of a judge’s comments in a previous case. The justices were arguing that it was persuasive precedent, but the appellants were arguing that those comments were just dicta. I mean, I know what dicta is, as far as the definition, but to me it just blends in with the reasoning. Discuss.
2. The tutors keep telling us to mark up our FRCP book and our UCC/Contracts Restatement book, since those are the only things we can take into the final. (For Torts all we can take is a pencil or a computer, no books at all.) What does this mean? What am I supposed to be writing in said books? I mean besides copying my outline onto the blank pages at the back.
3. Is it normal that I’m still completely lost in Contracts? He lost me right after promissory estoppel and we’ve never gotten back on the same wavelength. Will I have a eureka moment for this class like I did for CivPro? Surely I will, right? Shirley. Anytime now, I’m ready.
Also, I’m going to start Getting to Maybe this week in my spare time. Haaa. After exams, I’ll do a book review. Don’t let me forget.
Any other general advice for exam preparation?
Tags: 1L, contracts, exams, law school
Yeah, I have had a lot of classmates hand write their outlines into the margins of their statutory supplements over the years. Ppl really do that.
On contracts, I thought Chirelstein’s Concepts and Case Analysis (http://www.amazon.com/Concepts-Analysis-Contracts-University-Textbook/dp/1587781972) was a succinct synthesis of the material. I read Chirelstein cover to cover in the couple of days before my Contracts final and it was a great help in getting me to the point where I could sum up the course (coherently). If you’re feeling lost, this book might help.
I think it helps to arrange your contracts outline in the way you would answer a question. At least that helped me see the course.
I generally feel like I should refrain from any and all advice since this would just be the blind leading the blind.
Paragon: OMG how stupid am I? I already have the Chirelstein book but I keep forgetting to read it! Seriously, I probably deserve to flunk out if I can’t get it together any better than that. Anyway, thanks for the book rec. I’ll try to actually read it between now and finals.
IDWSJ: That assumes that I’d know how to answer a K question. FAIL.
Hey LSN:
Go to the Ninja Outlining and the Exam Prep chapters in my book. There is plenty of time until exams, although I am seeing what you are feeling in my One Ls eyes.
Gary
1. Dicta is a bitch. Basically, dicta is anything not directly on point of the issue. For instance, I read a case recently where Scalia was answering the question of whether something was testimonial evidence or not. During the discussion, he said that a state could not make a law around a point. However, that was dicta because the precedence is based on the actual rule of the case, not an ancillary point. Just be careful using any discussion that doesn’t seem to DIRECTLY go to the holding. Like if they answer an analogous situation – the Q is about what is consideration, but they answer something about methods of conveying the consideration. If you have Q’s on specific cases, ask your prof.
2. I did not put an outline in my FRCP or UCC book. Instead, any rule that had underlying problems, I would note the possible outcomes. For instance, FRCP 8 – I included a short discussion of what was considered for “short and plain statement.” Anything you would like clarified in the book, put it in.
3. Contracts is simply a bitch. I never had an aha moment, but did fine. What got me through is knowing the basics (what’s a contract, what are the types of damages, etc). Know the basic rules cold going in and you can use your time trying to find the nuances.
Hope this helps. I know advice is highly individual, so don’t take anything here to heart. And Good Luck!
1. Eliza hit it on the head. We never had to do dicta/reasoning, but it came up in one class and we were all like WTF and the prof was like, yeah, whatever, no one really cares.
2. Mark up your FRCP maybe by jotting keywords next to each rule so that you don’t have to read all the subparts in detail to know the gist of the rule AND the numerous exceptions. As for UCC, I didn’t mark up a thing. I barely used the UCC. The pertinent passages were given to us.
3. I dunno, dude.
yes it’s definitely understandable to be lost in contracts. My blog post today was all about how I am just understanding contracts now due to a VERY helpful 2L at my school who knows contracts like the back of her hand. Def. read the Chirelstein. That’s what I’m doing right now … well apart from blogging
Contracts is an overwhelming topic if you don’t cut it up into the pieces. UCC is a good start for now. When you get to the real world, you’ll probably crap your pants, but don’t sweat it now. Don’t get wrapped around the axels over rules of estoppel. Know what it is and how it works.
I’ve been a contracting officer for the dod, nasa, dcma and the daf as well as those GD folks and a few others that aren’t on the books. Contract Law is a degree all by itself and when and if you go to the place where it’s practiced, you’ll find the pros who can teach it or you’ll go to the classes that are taught by the real contract writers. If you ever want to see what a real contract looks like, start googling OTA agreements involving Lockheed Martin and the Atlas V program. Wait till after your exams though. Just keep things simple and track the principles of what’s really going on. (the spirit of the thing). If you get in the weeds, you’ll get lost. Good Luck.
John