People think I know stuff

It's frightening, isn't it? how one little year of law school starts brother in law asking about his property problem or mom's contract problem or uncle's tort problem. It's also frightening that the school thinks I'm a model "law school mom". Yeah, I participated (as the voice of wisdom *snigger*) in a few 2L panels for the 1l orientation this last week. For the most part, it was a good experience. I do have some strategy for dealing with sick kids etc, but overall, I was a little concerned about the incoming class. They're so freaking quiet, except for their 2 class jerks. Seriously dude, don't ask in front of your whole class how to get yourself "hooked up" with a study group of the top students that were admitted. At least in my world, there are no "top" students once you start law school... not until your law school grades come out. LSAT and GPA mean crap. And some small, tiny, little person seriously is fixated on this? Gimme a break.

None of the questions were surprising. I think Law and Mommyhood had it about right when she said that the answer to all of the questions at these kinds of panels is "whatever works for you." I honestly don't think that I used any of the info or tips the 2Ls gave us last year, but I did have piece of mind after the panels. Just knowing that everyone does it differently and still survives was a nice security blanket.

I order the book that they forgot to tell us about from Barristerbooks.com. I'm the rep for them at my school, so I was able to use my rewards points that I earned to offset the cost of the book admirably well and have super fast shipping. So hopefully I will have it by Wednesday.

I'm about half way through my real estate transfer homework for the week, and so far it is really interesting. It's got my brain turning around why people use buyer's brokers at all. It would be tons cheaper for everyone in the long run if buyers just used an attorney. But that's a whole other topic.

Advice needed--keep commercial paper?

So, one of the blessigns of taking summer school is that I can slack off thereafter in terms of credits. One way to do this is just take 12 credits a semester. Another way is to take a really light fall, 10 credits-ish, and then take 13 or 14 to make up for it. After totally reorganizing my fall and spring schedule (and now I am MUCH more excited about my classes), I am taking (for sure) con law 2, real estate finance, and bankrupcty in the fall. I am currently signed up for commercial paper too. it's only two credits and it meets just once a week. My faculty advisor thinks that I should drop it. He pointed out that I will have a lot more going on with law review and interviews and that all of those classes are relatively challenging to really understand.

In my heart, I know he's right. And I am SO freaking tired right now. And my LR note has to be written by October 1. And it always takes me 2-3 weeks at the beginning of a semester to be able to read my cases quickly (there's just a huge upcurve on the lingo in a subject and deciphering what your prof thinks is imporant). The only reasons I want to take it are 1) I'm actually interested (I know, I'm a sicko), 2) I'm not sure if it will be offered next year, and 3) there are SO many interesting classes that I want to take and not enough time to take them in.

So what do you think?

Does anyone know if the rules for lawyers changes substantially each year?

Just wondering. One of the books I ordered used wa my ethics rulebook, but I got it and it is the 2005-2006 version, not the 2006-2007 version. Do these rules change substantially each year? Any advice here would be good.

ethical dilemma for law students and profs to weigh in on

So here's the ethical dilemma. I've come to find out that some people will write a verbose answer to a given topic in their outline like executive power or standing. Does everyone do this? Is it OK to do this. Most people that I've queried at my school say, well, you are allowed to bring in anything that is your own work product, so that would fit. But everyone seems to say that with an uncomfortable pinching look on their face.

Part of me says, well, great, if you want to put that much effort into your prep for the exam, go you. But the other part of me says, but wait, that saves them TONS of time on the test. They can't copy and paste, but they can transcribe quickly, which in the end might be unfair to people who come to the test with only an outline, which as I was taught in jr high, is not something containing complete sentences.

What do you tihnk? I'm really on the fence here. But I am leaning toward it not passing ethical muster. It's the gut reaction. It just feels wrong. I've found that siting down and taking timed practice tests are the only way to go because just writing it down once or twice helps me get started on the actual test. I'm not sitting there thinking I know this stuff, but how do I write it down best.

I truly welcome both sides here. Let me know what you think.

Meditations on mock trials and trials in general

So, I got to go and participate in a mock trial this last week for some 2 and 3 Ls who playing lawyers. It was actually really cool. And it was the first time that I thought, maybe, just maybe, I can do litigation. Part of this was that of the 4 law students participating, 3 were stellar. Just strong, incredibly bright, and quick-thinking. The last one, well, being nice, not so much. I don't know if it was just nerves, but man the opposing counsel sure seemed to know their stuff much better. And I guess that was apparent to the judge too, who granted the opposing counsel's motion to exclude some rather key testimony that I personally tihnk should have gotten in. But the unprepared guy just was not able to be persuasive. Oh, and temper, temper.

So, major takeaway for all genders there, be prepared, know the law and the depos and everything inside and out.

For the ladies: let's talk presentation. I realize this sounds sexist but short of a guy showing up to court in khakis or bermuda pants, it's hard for them to screw up. I've seen at least two times now where women lose the battle in court before they say a word, and I think they both thought they looked great. Tip 1: If you choose to wear a grey suit. And if you choose to wear one that is "chicly" cut (read: more form fitting that not) and if you choose to wear a blouse that is not meant to be tucked in, you've got to wear a jacket. Seriously, I though this girl was wearing grey jeans at first glance. She looked sloppy. Not chic. And honestly, I never thought I would be one of "those" people, but I had a hard time getting past that for credibility. She looked like she was playing lawyer, not actually a lawyer (or soon to be one). Tip 2: big hair=bad in court. I don't care if you had it done by a "professional" before you showed up to court. If your hair is the first and only thing I notice about you, not good. I observed a federal court proceeding about a month ago where this defense attorney came in and I couldn't a) see her face or b) take her seriously. It was long. It was elaborately curled (think little girl). It was hair sprayed within an inch of it's life and had about a 3 inch vertical from the top of her head to wear her hair stopped.

Throw things at me if you want. I feel like I am betraying the sisterhood, but really get several opinions about your outfit and hair (and not just the saleslady who is trying to make a commission) before you go with "that look". Eek.

The 1L person you don't want to be

I guess that I should say people because there is certainly more than one category that you don't want to fall into. Now that I have my oh so significant (whateveh) experience as a one L, I think I've got a handle on who you don't want to be (BTW--"queen" is used here asexually... I'm not just down on girls. We've got plenty of guys who fit into these categories too:

• personal gossip queen--don't be the one that no one wants to tell anything too because they know that you will say that Billy and Jane made out at jane's instead of going to Property. Just don't go there. A) it makes you look like you're 12 and B) no one cares except for you.
• grade gossip queen--don't be the one that makes it their mission to figure out who got what grades in each class and who the top 20 students in ranking order are. It's icky. People don't want to talk to you because they think you are always angling for some piece of info to fit into your sick puzzle. You also make people crazy, even the ones who aren't grade-centered. You have a disease and it's catching. Just shut up.
• Job gossip queen--don't be the one to tell me that billy bob has seconds with x,y, and z firms. Isn't that billy bob's prerogative to decide whether to broadcast? Even if you think you are talking to other job gossip queens, don't ask, don't tell. We all will get along a whole lot better. Oh, and don't whine about the one interview you didn't get when the people you are talking with would have killed for just one interview, any interview. And certainly don't be gauche and talk about the trauma you are having picking between offers. Puhleaze. One of these days, someone is going to shoot you, and everyone will clap.
• Teacher/course gossip queen--it's good to share knowledge like oh, he likes to test from the footnotes or he always tests commerce clause. But it is NOT NOT NOT good to take random comments like that and make inferences about them and then pass those on as gospel. Seriously, we've got people running around thinking they can't get As unless, fill in the blank. And it's pretty ridiculous stuff. But it goes the rounds as credible because we are all paranoid. It's also not particularly fair to the teacher.
• Dating queen--male or female, don't systematically date your class. Just ew. People will know you are a skank. Period. Preferably, just don't date people in your class.
  
• Study Martyr--I could give a rat's arse how many hours you study, how late, how many supplements you read. If you have something useful to share, share it. if you are trying to get sympathy or intimidation points, shut up.
• "I don't like so and so" person--this is the one that is hard, and I've been in this category, I think we all have, but it's just ugly, especially if you go to a small school. I don't care how big of an ass the person you don't like is... just keep your opinion to yourself. I promise it will get back to them, and you will look oh so jr. high. You can not like them all you want. And you can know that everyone around you doesn't like them too even if none of you ever say a word about it.
• Loud person in the library or study hall--Just don't. Have some respect. People might think you are funny at first. But they will all hate you in the end.
• Person who is only nice the day before they run for something--enough said
• wannabe gunner--this is the guy who comments every class but contributes virtually nothing, other than possibly derailing the whole conversation. Shut up. I dont' care what japanese philosopher Justice Scalia reminds you of. You wanna suck up to the prof, do it on your own time, not mine.

You'll notice that actual gunner is not on my list. At this point, he's my friend. If you ask intelligent, relevant questions or give thoughtful relevant comments, I am all about listening to you. After all, the more you talk, the less likely I'll actually get called on. Seriously though. I don't mind thoughtful participation even from the same person everyday. It's just the people who repeat what the prof just said or who ask about their condo rules that drive me batty.

Can you tell I've been feeling a little pent up frustration lately? really, I like 95% of my class. 2.5% I don't know and the other 2.5% I can't stand. But that's my little secret. I'm just tired and stressed. And I wish the stupid BS would stop. Fat chance, but still.

This all goes triple for one Ls going to small law schools or who go to school in a small law community. And it goes octuple (is that real?) for those of you who go to small schools in a small law community.

Now, true confessions... some of those categories are about people I can't stand, but some of those categories I only realized when I took a hard look in the mirror. Yowza. Self-evaluation is painful at times but totally necessary. Peace out.

BTW, rankings are leaked again. And I know they don't rule the world, but @^%&!$@ is all I have to say about it.

If I had to do it all over again...

I would forego buying my con law case book, and I would buy only the Chemerinsky hornbook recommended by Kristine. Seriously, my book is poorly organized and poorly written and completely unintelligble.

I love the hornbook. So clear. So pretty. So everything that I need. So late for me to figure this out. On my honor, I promise to guide 1Ls next year to a better way.

I still really really hate con law

But I have come to realize it's not the topic's fault. It's entirely my prof's fault. Someone shoot me please. I can't do this for anothe 7 weeks. It's like one disjointed history lesson, heavy on the war, light on chronological order.

Please someone help me! I hate this class.


On another note, I decided to give my laptop a vigorous shake on Sunday night and lo and behold the D started to work. Thank heavens for that.

Need a recommendation for a good Con Law I hornbook

OK, so let's face it... my con law teacher that I was worried about is the nicest man on the planet, BUT I am not learning con law. Can anyone recommend a good hornbook. I've got several supplements, but I think some hard hornbook reading would really help... anyone? anyone?