Contracts Outline 1L by dxt12439


More Info
									Preparing for and Taking
  Law School Exams…

 You may have purchased commercial
 outlines or obtained copies of outlines
 from other students.

 Even so, you should also spend some
 time conceptualizing and synthesizing
 the course material for your classes on
 your own. There is too much material for
 you to go back and read over the notes
 and cases to prepare for exams.
   You may be one of two kinds of students who
    has these thoughts about outlining:

   Type A:
    “My contracts outline rocks. I wonder if I
    can sell this to a 1L next year.”

                          OR
   Type B:
    “I can’t remember if I am up to date on my
    contracts outline. No…wait, have I been
    going to contracts?”

 Regardless  of what
 your approach to law
 school is, outlining is a
 very helpful way to
 prepare. It will keep
 you from “losing sight
 of the forest through
 the trees.”
          How to Outline

 Lookover the Table of Contents of your
 course books, in order to conceptualize
 your notes into the “big picture.”

 Starta daily routine of summarizing your
 case discussions and class notes into an
 outline daily. Be careful using hornbooks
           Preparing for Exams:
            The Six Weeks Plan
    As an ideal method of preparing for exams,
    you may wish to subscribe to the six weeks

   Under this plan, six weeks out from your first
    exam, you should pick one subject and
    beginning studying your outline and notes.

   Some students prefer to spend as much as a
    week on one subject before rotating to
    another. I recommend changing subjects
    from one day to the next.
         The Six Weeks Plan
    You may even wish to study for two courses
    a day, one in the morning and one in the
    afternoon but just be sure to give equal time
    to the other subjects.

   It may prove difficult to continue to prepare for
    class, to work on outlines and on top of all
    that , to study your outline and notes.

   If you run into problems, don‟t stop preparing
    for class. Exams seem to disproportionately
    address material covered in the second half
    of the term.
As 6 Weeks becomes 5,4,3…


   Six weeks plans are sometimes rescheduled
    into five week plans, or even four. But, unlike
    your undergraduate school, a good cup of
    coffee the night before the exam won‟t do it.
   Study tools: Old Exams

 Asexam time approaches, look over as
 many old exams as you can, especially
 ones with sample answers.

 But don‟t stress-out if, after looking over
 them, you feel lost. Work back from the
 sample answer and keep in mind that it
 probably includes materials you have not
 yet covered. Read the instructions; they
 will most likely not change much.
To Group or
Not to Group?

This just depends upon your personality:

Do not create a division of labor

If you are the desperado type . . .
    Preparing for Exams; Summary
 Study outlines--don’t try to reread cases
 Schedule your time
  rotate between subjects; don‟t try to study
  one subject until you have it mastered
 Use a study group, if you can.
 Study effectively for a set period of time
  and then take a break, plan for some fun.
 Don’t forget to eat , sleep and keep

     Thanksgiving   this year, will suck.
 Legal Analysis

Exam question:

   How many legs does a
   horse have, if you call a tail
   a leg?

Credit: Abraham Lincoln :)
             Answer #1:

 "Five."
 Grade: D

             Answer #2:
 "Four."
 Grade: D
 Answers  1 and 2 are arguable as
 conclusions, but they show nothing of
 the the knowledge or reasoning. A
 conclusory answer is nearly as bad as
 no answer at all.
                 Answer #3:
   “4, because calling a tail a leg doesn't
    make it so.“: Grade: C

   Answer 3 gives an arguable conclusion,
    and some, but not all, of the reasoning.
    The answer does not, however, show the
    knowledge upon which the reasoning depends.

   An instructor can't assume that you have
    knowledge that isn't explicitly articulated in the
    memo or on the exam. Some won't give credit
    even if some of that knowledge is implied in the
                Answer #4:

       "An ordinary horse has four legs and one
    tail. Assuming that we're dealing with an ordinary
    horse here, the issue that will determine how
    many legs it has is the effect of "calling" a tail a
    leg. If calling a tail a leg actually makes it a leg
    for purposes of leg-counting, then a horse has
    five legs. If calling a tail a leg does not do so,
    then a horse has four legs.
       The better view is that a horse has four
    legs. Horse tails and horse legs are vastly
    different in both appearance and
    function. Moreover, horse tails cannot
    perform the weight-bearing and locomotion
    tasks that are the primary purpose of horse
    legs. There is no reason to believe that
    "calling a tail a leg" (i.e., simply renaming it)
    could change these realities. Thus, even if
    you call a tail a leg, a horse has only four

   Grade: A
             Answer #5:

       "The better view is that, under the
    conditions specified, a horse has five
    legs. Admittedly, horse tails and horse
    legs are vastly different in both
    appearance and function. However, „to
    call‟ usually means „to label,‟ in the sense
    of „to place in a category.‟
      While a tail cannot perform the support
    and locomotion functions that a leg normally
    does, it could belong in the same category
    as legs for certain purposes, such as
    studying the extremities or circulatory
    system of the animal. Assuming a context
    similar to these, a horse has five legs if you
    „call‟ the tail a leg.”

    Grade: A
   Note that answers 4 and 5 contain the
    relevant information and use that information
    and valid reasoning to reach the conclusions
    while clearly stating all necessary

   The crux of the matter is not the ultimate
    conclusions that you reach in your answers
    so much as the relevant information and
    defensible reasoning contained in those
 Legal Analysis:

  What does this mean?

“The life of the law has not
been logic: it has been
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., The Common Law 1
(1881) Sorry, Spock
Thus, a legal discussion may
start with nice, clear rules . . .

Credit: Charles Calleros
and then present nice, muddy
facts .

To top