Top Law Schools

Flips88 wrote:anyone have an Nzelibe one?

Yes, but it is essentially all of the take-away slides copy/pasted into an outline format.

Holly Golightly wrote:

Flips88 wrote:anyone have an Nzelibe one?

Yes, but it is essentially all of the take-away slides copy/pasted into an outline format.

Ok that's basically what I was planning on doing. Is there any point to putting relevant cases on there?

Flips88 wrote:

Holly Golightly wrote:

Flips88 wrote:anyone have an Nzelibe one?

Yes, but it is essentially all of the take-away slides copy/pasted into an outline format.

Ok that's basically what I was planning on doing. Is there any point to putting relevant cases on there?

You probably don't need anything too specific about any cases but a basic fact/rule takeaway from the case could be helpful on the outline. On the exam the relevant restatement and UCC rules are going to be much more useful.

Anybody take any of these electives for 1L and have recommendations for or against them:
-Evidence
-Torts II
-1st Amendment
-14th Amendment
-Law and Social Change
-Business Orgs.

Flips88 wrote:Anybody take any of these electives for 1L and have recommendations for or against them:
-Evidence
-Torts II
-1st Amendment
-14th Amendment
-Law and Social Change
-Business Orgs.

Profs?

Flips88 wrote:Anybody take any of these electives for 1L and have recommendations for or against them:
-Evidence
-Torts II
-1st Amendment
-14th Amendment
-Law and Social Change
-Business Orgs.

the CTEC report thing said that Reed's section of Business orgs was all 2Ls last time it was offered

IAFG wrote:

Flips88 wrote:Anybody take any of these electives for 1L and have recommendations for or against them:
-Evidence
-Torts II
-1st Amendment
-14th Amendment
-Law and Social Change
-Business Orgs.

Profs?

Torts II is Shapo (who I currently have and generally like)
First Amendment is DeSanto
14th is Joyce Ann Hughes
Evidence is Koehler
Law and Social Change: Rubinowitz
Business Orgs: Barrack or Reed

homestyle28 wrote:

Flips88 wrote:Anybody take any of these electives for 1L and have recommendations for or against them:
-Evidence
-Torts II
-1st Amendment
-14th Amendment
-Law and Social Change
-Business Orgs.

the CTEC report thing said that Reed's section of Business orgs was all 2Ls last time it was offered

Pretty sure that is wrong. I know people who took Reed's business associations class last year as 1Ls.

bdubs wrote:

homestyle28 wrote:

Flips88 wrote:Anybody take any of these electives for 1L and have recommendations for or against them:
-Evidence
-Torts II
-1st Amendment
-14th Amendment
-Law and Social Change
-Business Orgs.

the CTEC report thing said that Reed's section of Business orgs was all 2Ls last time it was offered

Pretty sure that is wrong. I know people who took Reed's business associations class last year as 1Ls.

It's entirely possible that I was looking at the wrong thing...is that a recommendation for BA with Reed?

I strongly recommend 14th with Hughes. Not so much because the class is great, but because of the reinforcement it provides for con law.

bjsesq wrote:I strongly recommend 14th with Hughes. Not so much because the class is great, but because of the reinforcement it provides for con law.

There is some overlap but depending on the views of your professor it may not "reinforce" your con law class.

Flips88 wrote:Anybody take any of these electives for 1L and have recommendations for or against them:
-Evidence
-Torts II
-1st Amendment
-14th Amendment
-Law and Social Change
-Business Orgs.

Had Koehler for Evidence last year. Really like him. He is not a JD and does a bit more of a focus on practical (versus academic/theoretical) teaching. He will focus a bit on statistical evidence because that is his specialty. FYI, the final is not open book open note. You can bring one sheet of paper and he will provide you with a copy of the FREs.

D-hops wrote:

bjsesq wrote:I strongly recommend 14th with Hughes. Not so much because the class is great, but because of the reinforcement it provides for con law.

There is some overlap but depending on the views of your professor it may not "reinforce" your con law class.

True. It helped me, and I guess that is all I can attest to.

bjsesq wrote:

D-hops wrote:

bjsesq wrote:I strongly recommend 14th with Hughes. Not so much because the class is great, but because of the reinforcement it provides for con law.

There is some overlap but depending on the views of your professor it may not "reinforce" your con law class.

True. It helped me, and I guess that is all I can attest to.

Who'd you have for ConLaw?

Flips88 wrote:

bjsesq wrote:

D-hops wrote:

bjsesq wrote:I strongly recommend 14th with Hughes. Not so much because the class is great, but because of the reinforcement it provides for con law.

There is some overlap but depending on the views of your professor it may not "reinforce" your con law class.

True. It helped me, and I guess that is all I can attest to.

Who'd you have for ConLaw?

Epstein, who is now at USC. I dunno, dude. I don't know of any prof who didn't cover EP and Substantive Due Process, so it's your world, I guess.

I absolutely LOVED 1st Amendment. It's an amazing class, all of the readings are incredibly interesting, and DeSanto is probably the best professor I've had in law school. I was happy I took it all semester, and even taking the exam wasn't all that painful. I outlined straight from my in-class notes and only had to study for it for like 1-2 days.

Downside: because DeSanto is so amazing and explains everything so well, the curve in this class is always going to be very tight. That said, I was still incredibly happy I took it.

Holly Golightly wrote:I absolutely LOVED 1st Amendment. It's an amazing class, all of the readings are incredibly interesting, and DeSanto is probably the best professor I've had in law school. I was happy I took it all semester, and even taking the exam wasn't all that painful. I outlined straight from my in-class notes and only had to study for it for like 1-2 days.

Downside: because DeSanto is so amazing and explains everything so well, the curve in this class is always going to be very tight. That said, I was still incredibly happy I took it.

I'm thinking I'll aim to do 1st Amendment and Torts II with Shap-daddy. I read the CTEs for 1st Amendment and they were nothing but positive. Does the 6-9 class time ever feel like a drag?

Flips88 wrote:

Holly Golightly wrote:I absolutely LOVED 1st Amendment. It's an amazing class, all of the readings are incredibly interesting, and DeSanto is probably the best professor I've had in law school. I was happy I took it all semester, and even taking the exam wasn't all that painful. I outlined straight from my in-class notes and only had to study for it for like 1-2 days.

Downside: because DeSanto is so amazing and explains everything so well, the curve in this class is always going to be very tight. That said, I was still incredibly happy I took it.

I'm thinking I'll aim to do 1st Amendment and Torts II with Shap-daddy. I read the CTEs for 1st Amendment and they were nothing but positive. Does the 6-9 class time ever feel like a drag?

That is basically the only class that wouldn't drive me crazy during that timeslot. haha

Gah, just realized the classes I wanted to take are at the same time. I'm so dumb sometimes.

Didn't want to think anymore about this whole electives thing so I'm putting my faith in BJS. Guess I better love me some strict scrutiny three days a week.

bk187 wrote:I'm putting my faith in BJS.

LOL

bk187 wrote:Didn't want to think anymore about this whole electives thing so I'm putting my faith in BJS. Guess I better love me some strict scrutiny three days a week.

admiralakbar.jpeg

Well I think that one guy is going to wake up with 200 angry emails in his inbox and a couple administrators that want to talk him.

Flips88 wrote:Well I think that one guy is going to wake up with 200 angry emails in his inbox and a couple administrators that want to talk him.

Dude. What the fuck.

bjsesq wrote:

Flips88 wrote:Well I think that one guy is going to wake up with 200 angry emails in his inbox and a couple administrators that want to talk him.

Dude. What the fuck.

Ah man, he got banned from the list serv so he won't get entirely blown up, but he'll still probably have some admins looking for him tomorrow.

Who the fuck thinks it's good to mix racist jokes with mocking a tragedy and cc the entire school about it?