shot in the dark here but does anyone have any good bankruptcy exam studying material? practice questions, bar flashcards, outlines, or anything? frankly i usually use emannuel's for like every subject i can and it works really well for me (esp the exam tips at end of each section) but they don't seem to have an outline for this stuff and i'm struggling a bit. i know 99% of it is just learning to read the code well but any help would be appreciated. pm me if you have any materials or know where to find some. i searched reddit law school but not much help there. if you're in law school yourself i can probably send some things your way for other classes

even just simple advice would be appreciated as for whatever reason i'm struggling a lot studying in this class. wish i would have taken secured transactions before. lots of terms that have taken me a while to figure out what the hell they mean. don't feel very confident in my issue spotting for this class- my professor is just going to ask a couple exam questions with big fact patterns and "what advice would you give person or corporation x" so i'm trying to make sure i know where to hone in on

I made a bold move putting torts on the backburner because (1) it is "easy" and (2) I went all in on five credit civ pro exam.

Reading over my notes the past two days, I have a feeling mistakes were made.

what are you having trouble with

Just memorize the elements of negligence, apply them in a common sense way, and write in a way that is easy to read and makes sense. Boom done.

Oh yeah, don't forget to be reasonable.

Yeah, I do not think I'm having trouble with anything in particular - just it seems like a lot of material.

Exam is going to cover intentional torts, negligence, vicarious liability and strict liability (animals and inherently dangerous activities). Exam is in 13 hours just I'm just pounding out flash cards with the elements.

apply the law to the facts

apply the law to the facts

apply the law to the facts

apply the law to the facts

apply the law to the facts

We have a writing requirement that we have to do in either our 2L or 3L year that I've put off until this semester and I just absolutely cannot will myself to finish this goddamn paper. The 3L bore-you-to-death mantra is cutting deep.

I had a seminar-style paper to write 2nd semester of 3L and my submission was pitiful. Professor was leaving after being denied tenure, so I put zero effort in. As a final "fu" to the school, he ended up giving everyone like a B+ or higher lol. I ran white hot to get that grade, not that I gaf at that point.

Duty/breach/causation/damages yo


Nah, you'll be fine. Personally, I always felt like torts wasn't a difficult class, but it just had voluminous material. If you keep plugging away, you'll be good.

same boat here

1 down 5 to go.

re: Torts

Just remember that little kids can pull the chair out from under you while trying to sit down and the little ****ers can't be sued for it. Or can. I forget.

Only real clear memory is that spring actuated shotguns are bad mmmk pursuant to Katko v. Briney.

fyp

Let's goooooo mutigers!!!

My torts exam was so lol. Last day of class prof. Assigns abnormally dangerous activities and says she is going to lecture, no cold call.

Obviously no one reads or takes it seriously. First essay two page fact pattern on abnormally dangerous activity. Extremely lucky I read the cases night before and memorized the elements.

Second essay is a causation cluster fk car accident, gas tank leak, pedestrian lights a cigarette igniting gas, fire burns a tree down that falls on a house which closes down a street and a business loses profits.

Just hoping I made some lawyer like noises.

Law school so dumb in that 'let me rush through a bunch of **** so I can cram it on the final' way. I member covering 400 pages on the last day of Con Law b/c the professor spent the first 8 3-hr classes laboriously going over Marbury v. Madison. Sadly I had an issue come up over the last 6 months where the writ of mandamus (or MattDamon as my wife always says) was the appropriate mechanism to use and I didn't realize it.

I cited Wickard v. Filburn to a an attorney coworker of mine the other day. that one will always be burned into my brain. We were talking about the weed legalization stuff going on. Also mentioned the case from 2005 where Thomas dissented where the CA farmer grew weed just for himself, still counts as commerce.

exams in two weeks, I need to stop playing for this damn short period! What is your ''argument" to yourself when need to study but boredom could be cut like a rainbow?

wickard is an awful, awful opinion, as is raich, the other case you're referring to.

whenever i hit a wall studying in law school or needed encouragement, i watched this video:



your law exams are just like going into a big game. you gotta work hard, you gotta want it, and you gotta be ready to perform. and that work takes sacrifice.

i got through HS and college without studying at all. coasted no problem. law school was the first time i really had to study, and it was a struggle, but i just had to remind myself of what i was working for: game day. seems lame, maybe, but it worked for me as a big sports fan.

Do some searches about slackers on TLS forum and read those for like 10 hours to reassure yourself that everything will be ok and then learn each class in 5-6 hours of studying before the exam. Worked for me for the first two years, fingers crossed this semester went ok.

Also, if this is your first year, don't worry about what you don't know. Its just an exam. Go in with a frame of mind that you are going to do a good job with what you know, don't go in all nervous about feeling unprepared. You are there to take an exam armed with whatever knowledge you have, whatever knowledge you don't have doesn't matter, and worrying about it will only hurt you.

Agreed. It's why I brought it up. I kinda sorta maybe understand Wickard because war was going on, but no. Coworker had brought up Lopez so that's why we talked about all this.

working on a pretty fun case this afternoon...

Firm's client had a 60k judgment paid from the proceeds of the sale of real property. Judgment is satisfied and the satisfaction is recorded with county clerk for about a week.

This morning attorney for the party who paid the 60k calls and says that the judgment was not his clients, but rather the judgment belonged to his clients son who shares the same name and lives at same address. Wants our client to return the 60k.

Up to me to research and help formulate a response.

Pretty sure the law of finder's keepers precludes allegedly aggrieved father of having any recourse here.

Honestly, that is really starting to look likely to be the case. It seems wholly unfair to father, but he basically has a slam dunk legal malpractice claim against the attorney who handled his real estate closing so he can recoup his damages from a collateral source.

Can't he just sue his son on some reverse unjust enrichment tip.