I'm alive

It's been quite some time since the last post, but I've been avoiding the thought of law school over the holidays. In two weeks, I'll receive my first set of grades. I get more and more nervous as the day approaches. Maybe we'll receive our grades early so I can wash away the misery with some ice cold golden brown ale before next semester starts. Since I'm currently away from the house during the holidays, I am unable to share my "Notes & Quotes." In keeping this short, I'll leave you with one of my new favorite tips of advice from my Torts professor:

"If you stumble across a kid drowning in a pool, lake, etc., let him rough it on his own. Maybe he'll make it, maybe he won't. At least his parents can't sue you for a Tort. Remember, you have no duty to willfully act."

Combo

I have yet to compile together my quotes for the semester, so that'll have to wait until later. Instead I've drawn together a semester ending hypo that combines the knowledge I've gained in my first semester.

Alfred orally agrees to purchase Barry's whiskey still located on Chester's property for $12000. Alfred gives a $6000 check to Barry as a down payment. Barry fails to deliver the whiskey still and cashes Alfred's check. Chester decides to sell his property to Daubert. Alfred learns of the location where the whiskey still is located and goes to the property to pick it up. Daubert sees Alfred entering his property without permission and confronts Alfred. Daubert charges Alfred with a baseball bat. Using a flamethrower and leftover whiskey as fuel, Alfred toasts Daubert before Daubert can deliver a blow. The whole property, including the timber, went up in smoke. Amazingly the still is just as shiny as it was before the blaze. Chester learns of the still being on his former property and returns to take back what he believes is his. It is clear the contract value of the property sold to Chester did not include the value of an authentic Redneck still. Discuss the rights of all parties.

I would attempt to answer this, but my brain is still mush. Figure out the answer on your own. I'll provide my model answer at a later date.

Break time

The first semester is finished. I'm not sure what I'm going to do with my new freedom. I feel lost at sea searching for a beer...oops, two different thoughts blended together. It's almost like life just came to a sudden halt. It's actually uncomfortable. I'm not sure if I'd rather be in the bar or in the library. Maybe they should just put a bar in the library. Then we'd never want to leave. Most people worry more and more as the days roll by knowing that we will not be receiving any grades until the first week of January. I, however, see it from a totally different perspective. Receiving grades before the holidays will be analogous to receiving either (a) a lump of coal in your stocking or (b) a new IPOD. Neither is worth a crap. So why waste time worrying about it?

And this chapter comes to a close...

Meet you at the bar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fireworks in the sky...almost

One to go. Last night's exam was in Contracts and it proved to be much more difficult than my first exam. I finished it in about 2.5 hours as did most people. I felt like I did well. There's a chance that I got an A although slim. When I left the exam room, I felt like I produced B or B+ material. After discussing it with some of my peers, it seemed that they felt the same. It's advised that you don't discuss the exam contents with others because everyone catches issues that you didn't. On the reverse side of the coin, there are always a few issues that you catch and they didn't. Once again, it's now in the hands of the professor. Let us pray for the A. This professor has been around since 34 B.C. and his grade trends tend to be a little higher than most professors. Hopefully this works out in my favor. Monday is the season finale. I'll bless you with some comical relief after the exam periods are over. Be sure to look out for my notebook of quotes.

2 bottles of beer on the wall

The first exam has come and gone. Now I know what it feels like to take a real law school exam under real conditions. I must say it's the quickest three hours I've ever spent. It seemed like it was over as soon as it started. Maybe that's because my exam answers accumulated in length to be longer than my final writing assignment. Time is definitely an issue. Every single person in the exam room was working away up until the very last minute. I felt like I could have used another hour to expand my analysis of the issues. However, making due with the time allotted, I felt very pleased with my performance. I think I successfully knocked everything down. Even if I did, my grade will be weighted against my peers. I guess I'll just wait and see. Two more exams to go...I have an extra pep in my step now that I got that first one out of the way. It's a big relief to have that first one down. As soon as the exam was over, I grabbed a beer with a friend and then we hit the books to study for the next exam. If the other two exams go as well as the first, I'll be pretty damn happy.

Tick, tick, tick...

It's here. 16 hours until the first exam. Torts...and I'm ready! I intend on getting some good sleep, some good food, and browse my "skinny" outline just before the test. I'll arrive an hour early to setup shop and then we'll be ready to kick it. I'm sort of nervous, but not really because of the exam. Everyone has the option to either take the exam on paper or on a laptop. I've chosen to take it on the laptop since I can type much faster than I write. Plus, my penmanship sucks. For those taking the exam on the laptop, we must use this software package to prevent cheating (e.g., using resources on the computer). When you start the software, it reboots the computer locking everything but this test software which consists of nothing but a Word processor application. My fear is the crap won't work. So hopefully everything will go well and I'll end up with a good grade. Here we go...

Status Yo

Want some updates? Well here ya go. I've been working my tail off trying to prepare for this whole law school exam thing. The material is rather easy to comprehend, it's just that everything is so questionable. Nothing is ever certain. The law school stress that people talk about comes from the mass amount of preparation needed for finals. I wish it were like normal school where you get graded based on how well you do. Instead, it's how well you do against the other jokers. I know I repeat myself often on this topic, but I just can't stress how important it is.

What about me? I've been concentrating primarily on my first two exams as of late...and trying not to get mugged. There's been a lot of purse snatching in the news lately. Luckily, I don't carry a purse, only a backpack. I bet criminal defense attorney's enjoy the holiday season in this city.

I took a practice exam for Contracts and did pretty damn well compared to the model answer provided. I'm happy about that, but I still need to take a few more exams and brush through my outline a few more times. Luckily, or maybe not, it's my second final.

My first final is Torts. I wish it were last since it seems to be the most straight forward (if that's possible). I've studied a lot for Torts and I'm about 80% done studying. I'll be taking some practice exams for Torts tomorrow. I'll fill you in later.

My last exam is Property. It's the only Civil Law course that I have this semester. I started studying for it first, but have abandoned it somewhat to concentrate on the other two courses. I'm relying on the fact that we have an additional weekend to prepare for it. I want to knock out studying for Torts and Contracts before I revisit Property. I veered away from the 3-2-1 study plan. It worked well in the beginning (and I'm sure I'll reuse it next semester), but now I'm more concerned with refining my knowledge for next week's exams.

It seems I'm blabbering in this post. So I'll quit before I get further behind. Off to study for a couple more hours before hitting the sack. I'll keep you up to date.

Posting

I will be sharing my stress with you only sparingly for the next couple of weeks. One week from tonight is my first final. My new home contains many volumes of literacy works. I've found that the library on the main campus (for the non-law school majors) is open 24 hours during the final weeks of the semester. It's also nice and quiet. I forgot...undergraduates don't study, especially in the liberal arts. One of my friends clued me in on this new place. He said, "I found a quiet place on the main campus. The library. We don't have permission to park over there since we're not part of that campus, but it's worth the $10 ticket. I've accumulated one for each of the last 7 or 8 days." I'll just walk. The only problem is that part of campus is where all the students get mugged. Maybe if I walk with a gangster limp and Louisville slugger they'll leave me be.

Shhhh...

I'm studying.

Another fun hypo

For your enjoyment, here is a proximate cause hypothetical that we discussed in class (with some added humor on my part).

It's a bartender's duty to cut off someone before he gets too drunk. Suppose our bartender, Bob, keeps serving Julio beer well after Julio reaches the point of severe intoxication. Julio finally leaves the bar, jumps in his Yugo, and drives down the road side-swiping every parked car in his path (Let's call this drunkard Pong). Eventually Julio nails a light pole. The light pole falls on George's house injuring his daughter Peaches who sleeps in the den. Peaches is taken to the hospital and due to her severe injuries becomes a paralyzed vegetable. Her mother, Veronica, was working at the Watering Hole that evening and is now upset that she wasn't there to protect her only daughter. Subsequently, Veronica commits suicide because she can no longer handle the stress.

At what point is Bob, the bartender, no longer liable for negligence?

One link, Two links, Three links, Four

I have come to the conclusion that 96 hours is really a rather short period of time. Just a few minutes ago, it was Thanksgiving. Now it's 9 days prior to my first law school exam. Am I ready? Not yet. I still need another month or two to digest all of this nonsense. I'm getting closer though. I re-read all the Property and Contracts cases that we've covered in class. I have about 300 pages to go on Torts. Once that's complete, I'll review my outlines a few more times and start taking practice exams. I know all of the general concepts, but I still need to hack away at some old exams to perfect my skills of spotting legal issues. A lot of issues slap you in the face. Others aren't so obvious. It's the additional not-so-obvious issues that we'll need to catch in order to achieve that "A."

One of the topics we covered over the last couple of weeks in Torts was proximate cause. This is causing me headaches. Basically, proximate (or legal) cause is an element of negligence to determine whether or not the law will provide a remedy. The key is to determine when to break the chain of causation. For instance, say I pour gas into my cooler scooter and then light a cigar. After taking a few puffs, the scooter explodes and catches the house on fire. Due to my superhero-like capabilities I avoid harm, grab the beer from the cooler, call the authorities, and run to the street to view the fireworks. It's easy to see that I negligently caused the house fire, but could I foresee the neighbor's house burning as well? Most likely I'll be liable for negligence to the neighbor. Now, what if the next house caught on fire, and the next, and the next, etc.? Where does the causal chain get severed? Should I be responsible for all of the houses? Depending on the facts, the courts will likely break the chain of causation at some point. Some jurisdictions will break the chain after the first house. Some may go further. It also depends on whether people had insurance, etc. Hypotheticals like these will definitely be on the test (minus my creativity of course). Sometimes it's a pain in the neck determining proximate cause.

Electronic Disclaimer

This just serves as a notice and somewhat of a warning to not mess with me. I'm burrowing myself in a hole for the remaining days before finals. I will be avoiding the library like the plague when others are around. It's just a bunch of stress floating in the air. I don't want that hovering over my head. Instead I lock my doors, turn off all of the lights (except for a desk lamp and computer screen), and put the phones on silent. My only method of contact with others is self initiated. I do keep my email up at all times though. You never know when friends are going to send some absurd fat lady porn. It's a must that I keep messages like these flowing so others can enjoy. It's my duty to society and society's duty to me. Something has got to keep me moving during finals.

No cheese, just turkey

Other than a couple blurbs here and there, I was debating on writing anything during my final weeks of studying this semester. You're in luck though. Someone needs to hear me whine just so we all know that I'm still around. I heard that Coca-Cola was opening a new bottling plant down the road to help support my caffeine addiction during finals. I'm drinking more caffeine than beer. Now that's amazing.

In preparation for finals, I've finished re-reading all of the cases we've covered in Property and my outline seems pretty solid. Now I'm working on Contracts which is a heckuva lot more pages to read. The outline for Contracts is coming along well, but I can tell it's going to be rather large. Once my Contracts outline is polished to a degree that even a hooker would be proud, then I'll move onto Torts(the easy class). Torts is last but not because it's easier to understand. I'm using this method suggested by some of my professors. It's called 3-2-1.

Basically, you arrange your classes based on reverse order of when you take finals. Start with the last final and study for 3 straight days, then the previous final for 3 days, and then (for me at least) your first final for 3 days. Then do 2 for each class. Then 1 for each class. At the end, your last study session (which will wind up being for your first final) should fall on the day before your first exam. Rocket Science! Hence you should be prepared if you start well in advance...and I have.

I never used any special study techniques before in my college experience. Instead, I just worked on problem sets until I felt ready. I actually feel organized doing things this new way.

I'm going to study my balls off over Turkey weekend while everyone else gets fat and lazy. Back to studying for me...Maybe I'll provide a weekend update sometime.

And I thought law school was exciting

I traveled north this weekend to visit a place less infested with violent crime. On my way back through sticks of Mississippi, I was traveling on the interstate around 1:30 a.m. I seemed to be the only vehicle on the highway. Then, I noticed a car way in front of me. At the time it seemed as if I was getting closer. Then, pooooffff!!! He magically disappeared. It was in an area where the distance between exits can be as far as 10 miles so I was pretty sure he never exited. Shortly thereafter, I noticed a car approaching me from behind at a high rate of speed. He used his signals while changing lanes to go around me. I noticed his back window had some sort of sticker containing a thuggish phrase. He exited the interstate at the next exit but I didn't see him turn when he came to a stop. Then I noticed a car with flashing lights at the end of the upcoming on ramp. Several teens were waving lights trying to flag me down. One was even reaching out into my lane jumping up and down with what looked like a light from a cell phone in his hand. The hood of the car was up and several thuggish looking males were standing outside the car. I moved over to the left lane and flew on by. The car with flashing lights looked similar to the one that passed me and exited the interstate moments before. I kept looking in my rear view mirror to make sure these punks weren't going to chase me down. I laid on the gas and that was the end of it.

Now, here's my theory. I think the car with flashing lights was the same car that I noticed way ahead of me several miles back. I'm assuming the car that came hauling tail from behind me was friends with these fools. I think I was a target for a highway robbery. It just seemed awfully suspicious. First, why wave open cell phones in the air in an attempt to flag me down? If you have a cell phone, use it for its intended purpose. Second, why did the car behind me use signals to go around but fail to use a signal at the end of the off-ramp? Finally, what in the hell am I going to do that three or four other males can't?

How can I relate this to law school? Was I negligent? Well, I have no duty to assist others, so the answer is no. I only have a duty to act reasonably if I decide to do so. I've read too many cases in which people sued for damages when another person was simply trying to help. Plus, I'm not nice enough to help.

Eat the cheese

Tonight is about Legal Research & Writing. This evening was our last meeting for the class. Our final paper is due Tuesday evening 7:25 sharp. The good thing about tonight is that we got some cheese. The professor gave us a few tips...actually too many tips. She discussed each element of negligence and some hints as to what to include and what not to include. She discussed some precedent cases that we all should have discovered and the relevant statutes in the Civil Code. It provided a little more insight into what she expects to see, but I basically had everything she gave hints about. This somewhat irritates me because I noticed dollar signs in eyes of some of my peers as they quickly jotted down this new information. I kept thinking, "Would you please shut up? I am obviously a few steps ahead at the moment and now you're giving away all of my thunder." Most of these people wouldn't have mentioned some of the things she hit on. Now I have to refine my paper to make sure I have something else in my paper to make it stand out.

On another note, we've all been told time and time again that we're not allowed to communicate with our classmates about any of our papers until after they are due. I failed to mention this a few weeks ago, and since we're on the topic of this class it seems fitting to drop a few lines about some threats made to the class. Apparently, the professor has spies out to catch people cheating. Every time I go to the library I see groups of 1L day students with papers out in groups. They're obviously breaking the honor code. In class a few weeks ago, our professor mentioned that the faculty was discussing the possibility of giving the entire 1L class zero's for Writing Assignment 2 because it has been brought to their attention that some folks have been cheating. It seems obvious to me that if they really wanted to go catch the cheaters all they would need to do is drop in the library and open their freaking eyes. I think it was just a bluff. Personally, I don't give a monkey hole about giving the whole class a zero. That would be fantastic. Mathematics tells me that is equivalent to giving the whole class an A+ since the course is graded on a mandatory C+ curve. Obviously the professors overlooked basic mathematic principles. But heh, liberal arts majors have trouble passing pre-algebra.

By the way, no one received a zero.

Dreaming about the law

I read so much about the law that I now dream it. Most people have fantasies fulfilled or nightmares experienced during their sleep. I used to be one of those people. Now I dream about the law. I wake up in the middle of the night hearing some drunk fools stumbling home from the Pub next door and all I can think about is particular articles contained in the Civil Code. Was this a breach, was that a breach? Did the possessor acquire the land in good faith with the intent to possess as owner? It's law 24-7. I even catch myself reading material online and saying, "What? That's a Tort. Let me think about he'd win this case." Battery, Assault, Possession, Acquisitive Prescription, Breach, Statute of Frauds...It's all pounding in my head and I can't seem to get away. My blood pressure is on the rise, my temper has reached an all time high, my nervousness is getting worse...It must be close to finals. I've thumbed through my books so much that they look like I tossed them in a river and fed em to hungry bears. At least my dreams about the law reassure me that I'm actually absorbing the material.

Lucky you...two posts this evening

Hah!!! This is great. I often jot down great quotes that I hear during class, either from the professor or other students. I also jot down stupid quotes from stupid people during class for my later enjoyment. As I was studying this evening, I came across a page of notes and at the top I wrote (verbatim):

"Are there any supplements that tie all of these laws together?" Quote from Dumb-ass #2 (10/03/07).

This was in reference to the Louisiana Civil Code which is nothing but statutes...oh and by the way, they're organized by category. You're in law school dude...learn to comprehend.

I'll catalog my collection of this semester's quotes after finals. You'll be entertained by my note taking.

Three of my favorite quotes from professors this semester:

"Life sucks, get a helmet. While you're at it, grab a bag of Trail Mix and a canteen full of water."--In reference to sissies who sue.

"Don't be stupid. Eat the cheese when I give it to you. It's not a trap."--In reference to hints given for a writing assignment. Later in the semester, I noted:

Dumb-ass # 2 again: "Can we have more cheese?" 11/07

"They give you crack for free as a law student. You become a fiend and depend on it when you get out. Learn to use the stacks. During a clerkship, judges don't have money to waste on your lack of research efficiency."--In reference to not becoming too dependent on Lexis and Westlaw since they are very expensive online law library services.

Time keeps passing me by

Something about law school seems really strange to me. This semester is nearly over and I feel as if I just had my first day of class a couple of weeks ago. I remember that prior to starting law school I kept telling myself, "Oh great! Another four years of school. Will this ever end? I just want to relax and be satisfied with my education." Maybe it's the constant pounding in my head due to the severe stress caused by the law school experience. It's hard to notice years of my life slipping away as I'm reading endlessly into people suing other people. One thing I do have to give the law school experience credit for thus far is that I actually feel much smarter than I did 3 months ago. Not only can I argue with a brick wall now, I can do so intelligently. I feel as if I now have a certificate/license to argue. It's my duty to the public.

In high school, you just want to get out. You become legal, you're closer to the drinking age, and college partying is just a few steps away. In college, you drink yourself stupid and just want to get finished so you can start making some actual cash. Then you get out, and at least for me, you want to go back. In graduate school, you feel like you're almost there. Then, of course, comes the Ph.D which I've postponed for now. Now it's law school. I still can't wait to get finished, but for the first time in my higher education experience I look forward to going to class and learning more about the law. Maybe I've found my true calling. Although it's a major pain in the neck, I enjoy going to law school. I'm surrounded by some very brilliant people, many more than I encountered during my undergraduate/graduate experience. Law school is unique. Everyone is a Type-A personality...very aggressive and competitive. At the same time, however, there exists a camaraderie between the students. These are now my brethren. I look forward to kicking their tail in the court room and subsequently inviting them for a weekend on my yacht.

Highlighting at bar

I suggest for students in higher education to learn how to study in the bar. It builds skills needed to overcome distractions. It's not easy at first, but you'll learn to adapt. Here is a method that I gathered from various sources for bar study. In briefing cases, you need to be aware of the Facts, Procedural history, Issues, Rules, the Holding, and most importantly the analysis of the case at hand. You can't really take the laptop to the bar because you might spill your beer on the keyboard. The same goes for pen and paper. So your best option is to book brief and pray you don't soak the pages in suds. Use 5 different color highlighters. Yellow for facts and procedural history, orange for issues, green for rules, blue for analysis, and pink for the holding. When you get home, all you have to do is brief the cases on paper according to your color coded pages. Simple, eh? Genius it is, but I cannot take credit for inventing this method of study.

Warning: You will attract bar sluts that seem to think it's cute to study at the bar. Take caution though or I'll be representing you on your future negligence claim.

Can't discuss it now

I'll discuss my analysis of the facts in my previous post (yes I know I originally screwed up the aliases by mixing and matching them which may have confused you if you read it prior to 5 p.m. Wednesday, but it's fixed now) after my assignment gets turned in.

In class, we discussed the duty that our client's boyfriend owed to her in not disclosing his prior relationship before having unprotected sex with our client. First, he was aware of the fact that HIV can be transmitted via sharing needles with HIV infected persons. Knowing this, he still did the dirty-dirty with this whacked out drugged up chick. I think it's a slam dunk case, but that's just my opinion. I wanted to discuss the duty element in detail this evening, but I better not...just in case I negligently state something that violates our honor code. So I'll spare the details of my analysis until after the assignment is due. I know you were anticipating my comical analysis, but you'll just have to wait. I would apologize for getting your hopes up, but that would require me being nice. I don't see that happening.

I'm attempting to finish up the paper this evening so I don't have much time to discuss anything tonight. However, tomorrow I look forward to sharing my "Studying in the bar techniques" with you. Yes, I said "Studying in the bar" not "Studying for the bar."

Injection Please

Here's a little background on the facts for the final writing assignment that I've been busy working on. A chick (a.k.a "V" for self proclaimed virgin, although she may be a closet whore) met some dude in one of her college classes. The two began dating in January of 2004 and became involved sexually with one another shortly thereafter. In May of 2004, they were engaged to be married and the wedding date was set for May of 2005 after V finished her undergraduate degree. Shortly before May of 2005, the boyfriend requested to postpone the wedding so they could save up some money to buy a house together. V started pursuing a graduate degree. Upon finishing the degree, V broached the subject of marriage again. This time the boyfriend told her there could be no marriage because he was still in love with a previous lover in which he continued to meet on occasion during their relationship. He broke up with his previous lover before meeting V because his previous lover had a drug abuse problem. He often frequented parties with his former lover (a.k.a. "D" for druggie) and witnessed her shooting up with needles shared with some friends known to have HIV. He warned D about the risks of sharing needles with HIV infected persons, but D didn't listen. He never used condoms with V, instead claiming that he didn't like to use them. After stating to V that there could be no marriage, he admitted that just recently his former lover (D) had called to inform him that she tested positive for HIV. Obviously, V was upset. V went to get checked out and found that she too had contracted the disease. V comes to me (the kick-ass lawyer) to sue her boyfriend for negligence. Will she succeed on a negligence claim? Of course she will, I'm the attorney.

Although not verbatim, the above facts comprise a short synopsis of our assignment. Credit must be given to whoever wrote the assignment.

To be successful on a negligence claim in the state assigned to us, the plaintiff must prove the following elements:
(1) Duty
(2) Breach
(3) Cause in fact
(4) Legal cause
(5) Damages

Tomorrow I'll discuss duty as we argued it in class tonight. I have some rather amusing comments to make. It's against the honor code to discuss any independent research we perform that's particularly relevant to our paper, so I'll have to spare some of the more exciting details of my research results until after we turn in the assignment.

Efficiency

I'm satisfied with my weekend production. Usually I get a lot of crap done over the weekend, but I always get into bed Sunday evenings telling myself: I coulda, shoulda, woulda (or however that saying goes) done a lot more, yet I was just too damn lazy. To my surprise, this weekend proved to be much different. I spent Friday night finishing up the majority of my research for my final paper. On Saturday, I plopped my fat caboose on the couch in front of a muted TV at ~11 a.m. and stayed put for the majority of the day. I suffered 3rd degree burns on my legs from uninterrupted usage of this energy inefficient laptop. However, in doing so I managed to get half of my final paper finished. Carrying the energy of self-satisfaction into Sunday, I commenced to partake in the same routine. Around noon or so, I again refrained from any physical activities and instead grabbed a beer and started in on my studies. Other than grabbing a quick bite to eat in the late afternoon, I was able to stay on the couch throughout the day and get all of my reading done for this coming week. Finishing this week's readings today was essential. It allows me to concentrate on finishing my paper over the next few days and will allow me to devote the remainder of the semester to the three classes in which I have final exams to take. Instead of wasting any more time writing this post, I think I'll stop to get some quality rest tonight. Then again, if I go to bed now, I may just continue to question myself as to whether I 'coulda' done more.

Day before Friday

Thursdays are good. Thursdays are bad. No more school until Monday, but now I have 3 days of grueling research and writing for my final Writing assignment accounting for 60% of my Legal Research & Writing grade. However, before diving into my weekend studies I must still complete a full day of work. Work + Law School = Major Sux0r. To anyone debating the option of going to law school, I highly suggest to not work. Go to school full time and get it over with. Bite the bullet, go further in debt, and just pray it pays off in the long run. They say you can work full time and go to school part time completing the degree in 4 years rather than 3. They're full of crap. They make very little mention of the fact that in going part time 2-3 of your summers will also be spent studying the law if you wish to graduate on time. Having to work and study every day, including the weekends, is mentally draining. I enjoy doing the work that I'm doing now, so I refuse to give it up. At the same time, it's 30 additional hours a week that could be spent studying. I rarely get more than 6 hours of sleep at night during the week. I'm able to catch up some on the weekends, but that just keeps me from getting the opportunity to go outdoors and catch a fresh breath of air. On a more uplifting note, they claim that after the first year you have more time available. If that's the case, then 1/2 of the 1 year Hell is nearly complete. Yippeeee!!!

Happy Halloween

Halloween should be renamed National Frogger Day. The only difference is that tonight the cars are trying to dodge the frogs. Maybe Frogger Awareness Day would be more appropriate.

Tonight I would like to discuss irritations in the class room (my class room to be more specific). If I were a professor, I would ban all snacks during lectures. It's not a restaurant; it's a law school. It's annoying to hear noise in the background caused by the crackling of candy and snack wrappers...and if you're going to eat chips, learn some manners and keep your mouth shut.

I have no problem with those that speak up to pose questions or to give a response. However, if you're going to speak just hear yourself blabber on (which I do not suggest), then have the courtesy to think about what you're going to say before you start jabbing away.

Punctual class attendance is advised. Frequent entering and exiting of the class room is also distracting. If you don't want to be here, don't show up. If it weren't for the high probability of these folks being ranked at the bottom of the class (improving my rank), I'd suggest to resign from law school altogether. You're paying thousands of bucks. I understand the occasional "gotta take a leak," but try to drain the main vain before class starts.

I just had to get that off my chest. Thanks for allowing me to whine a bit tonight.

Cars and Broken Limbs

The Reasonable Person Standard. The basic idea is that the actor being discussed should be compared to the ordinary reasonable person for acts he commits. Here's a hypothetical that I'll make up on the fly: Grandma ran a stop sign (claiming she didn't see it) and t-boned George (who was 12 year old kid that just stole a car). After whipping George with a belt and breaking his left ankle, George's father (representing his son) brought suit for negligence against Grandma. Grandma was injured in the wreck and lost all feeling in her left arm. The doctor, being fresh out of med school from the wonderful state of Mississippi, operated on the wrong arm and caused her to become paralyzed in her right leg. Grandma now relies on a walker and/or wheelchair depending on how many doobies she smoked that morning. On a good morning, she believes she can fly like a bird and needs no assistance at all. Regardless, she is suing the doctor for negligence. In addition, George's mother (who is a prostitute) is suing his rich father for battery on behalf of George.

Here's how the reasonable person standard would be applied. First, Grandma is old. Should we have sympathy for her? Not in Torts. Grandma claims that she doesn't need to stop at the intersection, because she's never hit anyone while running the stop sign in the past. Although her knowledge and quality of judgment may be less than an ordinary person, the jury is going to be instructed (if it reaches the jury) to hold Grandma to a reasonable person standard. In other words, would an ordinary prudent individual stop at the intersection that Grandma cruised right through? The standard does not shift just because she claims she's not as smart as the ordinary reasonable person.

Did the fact that George was only 12 have any significance? Who cares? That's not why I constructed this hypothetical. However, when Grandma sues doctor, the reasonable person standard changes a bit. The standard is now changed to "what the ordinary medical professional would do." This alteration exists for good reason. Most ordinary people can't stitch up pants, much less the arm of an elderly lady. Details, details, details...This is taking up too much of my time.

I got to get back to studying.

Here we go

I've reached the back stretch of the first semester. It's time to gear up for finals and put normal life on the back burner. This is where it becomes balls to the wall in an attempt to be ranked higher than my peers. It sort of irritates me that half of my class doesn't work at all, yet they're enrolled in the evening division. I have to work that much harder to ensure top performance during exams. Not only must I begin studying for finals, I must also keep up with the increasingly difficult assignments as the semester comes to an end. In preparation, I've created a detailed schedule that demands 5 hours of study a night at minimum. That of course doesn't include my loss of freedom during the weekends. No beer, no football, no sleep...just studying. The next month is nothing but Hell. Kind of exciting, eh? The nerves are beginning to twitch, but I'm ready to rock-and-roll. Caffeine is now my best friend in much the same way that crystal meth is to economically disadvantaged redneck junkies who strip at the local Watering Hole in the presence of truck drivers and 80-year pedophiles. Wow, I can actually relate.

Boolean for Dummies

I'm now well versed in the two primary online legal databases Lexis and Westlaw. Over the past couple of weeks, we've received training in how to perform legal research using both databases. Basically, these services provide statutes, cases, regulations, and reference materials for nearly all jurisdictions in the US court systems. While it did provide knowledge useful for more efficient online legal research, I nearly fell asleep during the lecture discussing Digital Logic. For approximately 20 minutes of each session, we discussed Boolean logic and how it pertains to online searching. Apparently, they don't explain the differences of AND, OR, NOT, etc. in the liberal arts curriculum. It seems simple to me, but maybe that's because mastering these concepts is essential in the world of computing. Not to knock the intellect of the majority of my fellow peers, but including AND in a connector search should be obvious that it will return only documents containing both words included in the search. Likewise, OR should return documents containing either word/phrase. Simple, eh? Does it really take a rocket scientist to grasp these concepts? With today's usage of the Internet, I find it necessary that someone teach these educated folks elementary logic. My time would have been much better spent discussing more of the specifics of each service. Tonight lacks humor, so I'll be sure to go out on a limb on some future posts.

Nutrition for finals

It's just a little more than a month away from my first law school final. I've noticed that the library attendance is starting to rise. I hear that it fills up quickly as finals approach. I've started preparing my first round of outlines and can already tell it's going to be a major pain in the buttocks. I've been copying final exams from the library repository starting from 1978 and working my to present day. It's kind of stupid to make copies of every exam known to man, but at least I'll have an idea of the many different types of questions posed by various professors. I'll update my status as I move along.

Today I checked my email an hour or so before preparing for class and found out that classes were canceled this evening due to major flooding within the city. I think we've had 83 1/3 inches of rain today and we're supposed to get more as the evening progresses. So instead of going to school I decided to do a little grocery shopping at the neighborhood market. The store recently changed its name to "Breaux Mart" which I'm assuming is in memory of the local gangsters that have poured out a little liquor for their homies. The funniest thing about the new name is that the management seems to be Caucasian. For your entertainment, I've provided a picture of my grocery sack below. I hear that in celebration of grand opening, next week's ad may include $0.99 40 Oz. Colt 45's, 1/2 off on rolling papers, and buy-one-get-one free vanilla flavored blunts.

Soggy bottom boy

Here's a hypothetical for you(true story of course)...kinda like a law school exam question. Let's say you and I are pals. My truck is the shop having surgery. Since I don't want to walk to class today in the rain, you agree to drop me off at school and pick me up when class is over. In return I will provide you with some cynical humor to and from class. My presence is in itself worth a million bucks. When class is over I call to verify you're still picking me up. You don't answer. After previously turning down two different offers for a ride home, I get pissed and walk home in the rain trying to avoid getting mugged. I take a shortcut through the park and step in a knee deep puddle. My pants are soaked and my feet are squishing around in my shoes. When I'm halfway home, you call saying that you lost track of time because you were busy partying with co-workers. I now refuse to accept a ride home from you since I'm only a quarter-mile away. Have you breached the contract? If so what are the damages? Can I sue for negligence? Am I liable for contributory negligence for not accepting your new offer? Due to my severe stress, have you committed an act causing intentional infliction of emotional distress?

Should I rely on your offer to take me to pick up my truck tomorrow morning or should I call a cab?

I can feel the changes taking place in my transformation into thinking like a lawyer. I would have never thought of this crap in such a manner beforehand. At least my walk home tonight allowed me to review what I've learned so far in Torts and Contracts this semester.

The Walking Stick

Yet another great case...Some dude (who will subsequently be referred to as not-so-blind guy) was walking down the post-office hallway when a blind man, who operated a concession stand at the post office, was walking in the opposite direction towards him. The blind man was not using his cane, instead claiming that in familiar surroundings he relied on his facial senses and didn't need the cane. The blind man bumped into the not-so-blind guy causing him to fall and injure his hip. Not-so-blind guy then sued the Post Office for negligence on the part of the blind employee. In the end, the blind man was not found to be negligent since he was acting in a manner that a reasonable person would have acted if he were blind. My professor calls this, the "Life sucks, get a helmet" type of case. Why would this guy sue the post office instead of the blind man? My professor stated that sometimes people try to avoid the "piss-off factor for the jury" by suing someone else. The jury tends to sympathize with the less fortunate, so claims often get rejected by the jury due to this sympathy. Lesson: Don't screw with the handicapped.

Superman

Here's a funny case that I read the other day...Some old lady was driving home after dropping off her husband at work. She was following a car when she suddenly saw a bright light shining on the back. She was confident that it was God taking hold of the steering wheel and guiding her to safety. The problem was that she was driving down the wrong way of a two-way highway. Call me crazy, but I'm pretty sure God would have kept her in her own lane. Wait, it gets better. During the trial, her psychiatrist testified that she previously confronted him about her belief that God wants her to be the last person remaining when the world comes to an end. Back to the driving experience...As she was driving in the wrong direction down the highway, she noticed a large truck coming head-on. Pfff, no big deal; she stepped harder on the gas. Her assumption was that God was going to spring board her into the air and take flight to avoid the collision. She claimed that she knew she could fly, because Batman was capable of doing so. The driver of the truck sued for damages based on a negligence claim. Of course he won, but the courts actually gave consideration to her temporary insanity claim. The court held that when driving a motor vehicle, an insanity claim is only a valid defense if the consequences resulting from a particular act are sudden and unforseeable. In other words, it must be similar to a person experiencing a heart attack that has no prior history of ever having one. If a person has reason to believe that a grave danger is forseeable due to past history or the severity of the illness/insanity, then she is liable for damages on an insanity claim.

Batman wannabes shall be tossed in the looney bin. I say yank her license and buy her a cane.

No lecture today

Sorry, but I have no lecture to deliver this evening. I took a practice exam this evening in Property. The professor, from Germany (a Civil Law country), is a very intelligent and rather sincere dude. He understands that the rigors of law school are monumental. He attempts to be a "student's professor" in the sense that he tries to build relationships with each student and in doing so tries to take it slow to make sure we grasp all of the concepts before moving ahead. I'm not quite sure if I like this approach though. It may sound stupid, but I'd prefer some hard knock prof's that are going to drill me during the first year so that I'm well prepared for future classes. On the other hand, it's relaxing to know that we're not going to be drilled in his class. One of the great things the law school provides is all past exams from previous semesters are available in the law library. We are allowed to copy these exams to use as study aids. Since our Property professor is new to the university, we don't have any dirt on him. That kind of sucks. How are we going to know what his exams are like? Luckily, this guy gave us an ungraded practice exam to take this evening. Although it was tough, it seemed much easier than what I expected. Hopefully, the final is of the same format. Excuse the lack of humor tonight, my mind has been drained of fuel due to the paper I just turned in as well as the practice exam that I just took. Maybe tomorrow's post will be more exciting.

Privileges

Here's another free Torts review session. Who needs to go to law school when I can pay all of the money and let you smooch off me? Today we'll discuss privileges. A privilege does not mean that you haven't committed a Tort. It's simply a justification as to why you're permitted to do so. Let's get started...

Consent--I'm kicking your tail in a mixed martial arts competition such as the UFC. Even though you're a wimp and we all know I'm going to severely punish you, I'm not liable for Battery because your participation is consent for me to tear you apart. However, if my name is Mike Tyson and I bite your ear off, I am liable since it doesn't fall within the rules of the competition. If I accidentally poke you in the eye and you go blind, I'm still not liable because it's not a severe violation of the rules. A reasonable person could determine that this may occur.

Self-Defense--You walk onto my property attempting to steal my tractor. In return, I pump you full of lead with my AK-47. I'm still liable for battery in the world of Torts because a person is not justified to use deadly force in the protection of property. However, if you break into my house in the middle of the night and I think you're going to harm my family, then I have the privilege of self-defense to pump you full of lead...as long as my use of deadly force is reasonable. If you're just drunk, lost and stumble in my front door and I find you asleep on my couch snuggled up with my neighbor's goat, I cannot pump you full of lead. I must resort to non-deadly force or call the authorities. I do not have a reasonable belief that you're going to cause bodily harm; at least not to me or my family.

Defense of Others--If you're beating up my buddy who is a sissy, I may jump in using only necessary force (possibly a golf club) to shoe you away. I can only use force that would seem reasonable for my buddy to use in defense of himself.

Defense of Property--I place spring-loaded guns in my barn to deter thieves. A thief walks in and loses a limb due to my strategically placed traps. I'm still liable for battery because I'm not allowed to use force that may cause severe bodily harm to protect my assets. Note: I can do so in my own home only to protect myself and my family, not the home itself.

Recovery of Property--I see you snatch a purse from Grandma. I chase you down, tackle you, and return the purse to the poor old lady. As long as the pursuit was "fresh" and I didn't use deadly force, I am privileged to do so.

Necessity--I blow up your house to prevent a wild fire from spreading to other property. I'm the mayor so I have the proper authority. As long as it is of benefit to the much larger public population, I'm privileged to do so.

Authority of Law--I'm a bouncer. I have the right to commit a battery in detaining you before the police come to haul you off to prison and deliver you to Bubba. I guess you should have not gotten so drunk, eh?

Discipline--I'm a parent. Oh me, that's a scary thought...for the kid that is. I take my belt and leave welts on the little-uns leg. As long as the force is reasonable (the jury will decide), I am privileged to do so. Listen to me you little sissy...

Justification--I'm a school bus driver. Your little teenage kid is destroying my bus. I lock down the bus and go straight to the police station (yeah right, I'd kick his tail first). I'm not liable for false imprisonment because I was justified to resort to appropriate measures. If you don't like it, don't let your kid ride the bus. After all, he may fall out.

Negligence is coming up next. Stay tuned.

Papers and rain

This city is great for fun, uniqueness, and high murder rates. It's also great for slip-n-slide. It never stops raining. Either God likes to pee a lot on this town (maybe to keep the thugs inside for a few hours?) or the wild-fire fighting aircraft are often misdirected from California. I haven't figured out which it is, but it's certainly annoying as hell. Enough of that, this blog is supposed to be about the law school experience, not my lame day-to-day observations.

So, I have this big paper due tomorrow that's worth about 1/3 of my semester grade in Legal Research & Writing. This class is just a major pain in the ass. There is no final exam in this class. Instead, there's a crap load of research and writing exercises that have to be completed. This assignment is basically an inter-office memorandum about whether or not our fictitious client will be successful in a defamation claim against one of her peers. With that being said, I must state that the background of our client's story is quite amusing.

Basically we have this law student that is ranked in the top of her class and has had several prestigious clerking positions in the past. However, she is unable to land a job coming out of law school, because one of her classmates has acquired some intimate photos of her and has posted them on a public website along with some rather negative remarks. She claims that potential employers have googled her name and found these photos and comments. In my view, the simplest thing to do would be to advise our client that she ought to quit acting like a slut, but unfortunately I don't think I'd receive a good grade if I did this. The paper isn't all that difficult to write, it's just a pain making sure all of the citations are correct. We have this 100 and some odd paged book that gives rules about how to cite cases and statutes. Apparently, the profession is pretty strict when it comes to correctly citing authority. Simple things such as the correct spacing between abbreviations could knock us down a half-letter grade if we're not careful. I completed my paper Saturday, but every time I review it I find some other stupid citation error that needs fixing. I think I've caught everything now, but I still need to reread it 27 more times to be sure.

Stick with Coke Rewards

What if I told you that I'd give you 10 bucks for every fool you successfully recruit to read this boring blog? Would you expect me to pay out upon your successful performance? Of course not, I'm a poor law student with no disposable income. All of my dough goes directly to books, paper, pens, etc. The rest of my pocket change goes directly to tuition and beer. Hence, you'd assume that my advertisement is merely jest, not a valid offer binding me to contract. That's not what Leonard assumed when he viewed the Pepsi commercial advertising the possibility of winning a 23 million dollar Harrier Jet for a sum of 7 million Pepsi points. The commercial, as you may have seen, encouraged consumers to drink more Pepsi and earn points that can be redeemed for stuff. At the end of the commercial a kid was shown exiting the cockpit with a Pepsi and in the background, text was shown displaying that 7 million points was needed to acquire the jet. Of course everything comes with a disclaimer these days. Pepsi covered their tail by stating that consumers must refer to the catalog order form to obtain rewards. There was no mention of the jet in the Pepsi catalog, however it was noted that points could be purchased for 10 cents a point. Leonard realized that he would need to drink thousands of Pepsi drinks a day in order to accumulate enough points to earn the jet. Noting that this was impossible, he decided instead to come up with $700k through investors. Once the money was obtained he sent the order form to Pepsi along with a check claiming that he fulfilled his end of the bargain and demanded the jet in return. Pepsi's attorneys returned the check stating that the commercial was meant to be a joke and apologized for any misinterpretation of the commercial. Leonard brought suit for breach of contract and prayed for specific performance of the contract. To make a long story short, he lost. The court held that the advertisement was in jest and that no reasonable person would have concluded that it was a binding promise in exchange for performance. This is the kind of cool crap that we get to analyze in law school.

Hot Coffee Mod

Everyone has heard of the McDonald's hot coffee case, correct? If not, you're either deaf, blind, and mute; or just completely ignorant to current events. So, if you don't fall into one of the aforementioned categories than you have passed the first test. If not, then I'm curious as to how you managed to type in the address of this blog to begin with. Regardless, let's move on. When I first heard of this case, I thought, "What an idiot! Just another money hungry *expletive." Today, however, my view has changed. We discussed the case briefly in Torts this evening. I haven't read the case yet, but most of the details I learned of came from my professor who seems to be a pretty knowledgeable individual. The case from what I gather is actually quite interesting. Contrary to what many believe, the woman burned by the hot coffee was not zig-zagging in and out of traffic in her red sports car. She simply took an innocent sip. Apparently it was so hot that it burnt her lip and and startled her enough to cause the spilling of the coffee on her person. She suffered major burns that required multiple skin grafts. According to McDonald's policy, the coffee was to be kept ultra hot to avoid letting the coffee go bad. I'm not a coffee drinker but I'm sure coffee drinkers better understand. Personally, I think it tastes like dirt. Moving on...So she sued for what I'm assuming to be negligence, but I'm not positive. The 3 million dollars in damages seeked was not just an arbitrary large number. It's actually the estimated combined sales of coffee by all McDonald's restaurants on any given day. Eventually they settled for something around $400k. Of course, one can debate whether or not a reasonable person would have dropped the coffee after burning her lip and whether or not she should have realized how hot the coffee was. I originally thought, "Come on now. Even a tard knows coffee is hot." I don't know how hot coffee normally is when you brew it yourself, but it doesn't seem to me that it'd be so damn hot that it can burn through all layers of skin in approximately 7 seconds. I didn't pull that 7-second stat out of my rear either; that's what the experts determined. If these facts are all correct (provided to me via my prof.), then I'd have to say that I agree with the outcome of this case. Moral of the story: Brew it yourself.

Not proper attire

Upon entering the law school today, I noticed a lot of old people wearing suits and what not. So I figured it must be some kind of alumni relations event or something like that. Normally I head up the stairs to the 4th floor where all my classes are held. However, today I had my laptop bag and backpack full of books, so it was a genuine opportunity for me to be a fat lazy bum. I took the elevator. On the elevator with me was a caterer dude wearing his cool 6 ft tall cook hat. I wish I had one of those, but that's getting off topic here. During my elevator ride, the caterer dude said, "I must warn you man...It's a nightmare up there (referring to the 4th floor)." "What do you mean?" I ask. He said, "There's a lot folks here for a reception." As the door opens to the 4th floor, I notice tons of old folks drinking beverages and eating snack foods. I thought, "Cool! I'm hungry and wouldn't mind a drink." I commenced to making my way through the crowd. These people are looking at me like, "What's this kid doing? He doesn't belong here." Excuse me, excuse me, as I make my way through the crowd bumping people with my bags. What was I to do? I had a class to get to. As I approach my classroom I notice a sign saying, "*****'s Contracts class will be held in Room 3-something on the third floor this evening." I thought, "Oh great, now I gotta make my way through the crowd again." So I did. As I was walking back through the crowd, I noticed many liquor bottles and snacks sitting on various tables. Once again, liquor at the law school. This place is the heaven I've been dreaming of. Why go to class? Free drinks? Can't pass that up! The temptation to join the party was there, but I resisted and made my way down to the 3rd floor. When I got to class, I asked some of my classmates if they went to the 4th floor first as well. They said an email was sent out telling us our room was changed for the evening in addition to the plethora of signs at the law school entrance directing us to the 3rd floor. The one day that I decide to not check my email and ignore any signs hanging at the entrance...Oh well, my instincts must have been trying to lead me to the party. To top off the story, I was watching the evening news and apparently the law school was hosting some award thingy for a state Sup. Ct. Justice or something like that. At least they'll recognize me if I sit for the state bar.

Mow it weekly

In Property, we're currently studying possession, both corporeal(physical)/incorporeal(for lack of a better definition...mental) movables and immovables. It gets confusing at times keeping up with these rather strange terms. Why not use simple English? Without getting into the details of each type of 'thing', let's discuss corporeal immovables. In idiot terms, it's simply land or dwellings or other permanently attached things that can't be moved without damage to the thing or property it's attached to. Make sense? Good, let's move on Chief. I don't know how it is for other states, but according to the Civil Code in LA, just because you own and possess a tract of land doesn't necessarily mean that it's yours forever. Let me explain...According to the Code, one can obtain possession of an immovable through acquisitive prescription, in good or bad faith, if possession is uninterrupted for a period of one year. When concerning land, that simply means that if you own a piece of property you better make sure you check on it (or have someone else do so) at least once a year. If Johnny Boy decides to build a fence encroaching your land claiming it as his own and you don't take possessory action to repossess, it's his after a year. The judge doesn't care if you hold the title or not. That's why property gets confusing; at least that's the case in this neck of the woods. Lesson learned: keep an eye on your crap, but don't setup booby traps because that will just get you sued for battery. They say the law is there to protect the possessor. Oh yeah, which one? Me, the good faith owner, or the thief out to get me?

Give me more

Ah, the goodies. So much bait to go for in law school. Everywhere I turn, someone is trying to give me something for free. The two primary online "law libraries (Lexis and Westlaw)" are constantly having demo sessions at the school to teach you how to make better use of online research using their tools. They even goes as far as to give us points for each case/statute search we perform using their tool. These points are kinda like Coke rewards. You redeem them for a bunch of random crap. They offer free books, study aids, blockbuster rentals, beer, cars, planes...you name it, they got it. As my research professor correctly assesses, "They offer you guys the crack for free while you're in law school hoping you become a fiend. Then when you get out into actual practice, they sit back and laugh as you pay 150 bucks per search. Once you're hooked, you're screwed. That's why you need to learn how to research the stacks as well." Hmmm...Could there be a reason the law school is constantly offering free beer?

Another one of these money-sucking ho-bag companies is the Bar Review folks. They offer discounts if you sign up for the $1500 dollar course as a 1L. Each year thereafter, they tack on an additional 100 bucks.

Two posts for the price of one...or something like that

Ha, this is funny. Therefore I decided to publish 2 posts tonight. Actually this is just an observation of my site statistics...

Referring URL		http://blogsearch.go...ring=d&sa=N&start=30
Search Engine		blogsearch.google.com
Search Words		vasectomy
Visit Entry Page		http://sixfigurevaca...09/torts-review.html
Visit Exit Page		http://sixfigurevaca...09/torts-review.html

Poems

Many say that engineers are cut out for law school better than students with business and arts backgrounds. I concur. Among the many things that I'll eventually touch on to support my view, tonight I choose to discuss legal research and writing.

Let's start with the research. To support your case, you must find previous case law similar to the topic at hand. As time goes by, the common law evolves and judicial decisions tend to shift from earlier years. You start with cases that are binding on your case. Cases decided under the same jurisdiction will have precedent. Other jurisdictions can be very persuasive, but Judge Billy Bob from Arkansas ain't gonna tell ya wut ta do when it comes to cases decided in New York. Engineering is much the same. You perform your research to determine which mathematical theories and/or previous solutions will govern and/or guide you to the solution of your problem. You build on these theories, possibly creating new ones, to advance the state of the art. For lack of a better example, Gear Head theories produced by Mechanical Engineers will not likely be binding on the development of theories in electromagnetic fields. However, their methods may provide some insight.<--Ok, so maybe not; but you get where I'm coming from. Do you really need to know the ending of fantasy novel to write your own? This is why the arts folks are busy playing catch-up in the first year of law school.

Legal writing is another area in which engineers have the upper-hand. Of course, this only applies to the 1.5% of engineers that can actually construct a coherent sentence. For those who can, however, the process in legal writing is the same. On the other hand, English and history majors write fairytale-like documents. They don't present the meat of document until the end. Instead they feed you full of a bunch of B.S. and then randomly slap on a conclusion when they run out of ideas to blabber about. In the law, you state the conclusion from the get-go working backward to support your view. Engineering is similar...we know the problem we're trying to solve; now let's figure out how to get there. We're not going to hold you in suspense and then all of sudden tell you Mr. Potter fall off his magic carpet. We'll give you the solution and then present how we arrived there. He fell off of the carpet. It can be shown that this was due to a few too many cheeseburgers.

Then again, this is just how I see things. Power to the N3rDz.

Torts review

To rehash what we've learned so far in Torts, I will give short examples of each intentional tort. This is beneficial to me as well as you. By writing this, I help myself study what's been discussed so far. By reading this, you essentially go to law school for free. In the end, we're all happy.

Battery--I intentionally beat you with my bat and make you cry like a little sissy. My intent was to cause harm and severe harm was caused. I've committed a battery.

Assault--I intentionally make you think that I'm going to beat you with my bat and make you think that you're gonna be in severe pain...and I'm capable of doing so. I've committed an assault.

False Imprisonment--After I beat you with my bat, I toss you inside my fenced-in yard. I hire snipers to make sure you don't get out. You're under the assumption that if you leave, you'll be shot. I've committed false imprisonment.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress--Your mother watches me beat you with the bat. I'm aware of this and keep chuckling as I do so. Your mother had emotional breakdowns which led to a blood cot in her big left toe. I'm now liable for action under IIED.

Trespass to Land--I walk onto your land, but I thought it was my own. Who cares? I still had the intent to walk on the land. I've trespassed on your land. Now, if I shoved Johnny onto your land, he has not trespassed. However, I still have trespassed due to transfer of intent through the actor.

Trespass to Chattel--A bunch of people would like to beat you up because you're a moron. You own a bear for self protection. I kick the bear in his huevos. The bear can no longer protect you for a period of 3 weeks due to my action. I have trespassed on your chattel.

Conversion--After all of these verbal beatings I've placed on you, you now are in the hospital. I sneak into the hospital, take your records, alter them for you to undergo a vasectomy, and replace them. You are now shooting blanks due to the converted documents. I'm liable for conversion.

Lesson finished. Time to go onto another subject...

Easy now kids

I've had a few people say, "You haven't posted anything this week." I've been really busy with loads of reading, a research assignment, and a legal memorandum which I've yet to start on. I do have a few interesting tidbits to share when I get around to it. For today though, I'd like to assign you the reading of the Jena 6 story taking place in the small town of Jena, LA. Go grab it from your favorite news source and then come back to see what I have to say about it.

For those of you that are too lazy to read it for yourselves, let me explain. Apparently, Jena is a small town with a bit of racial tension. What do you expect though? It's the South and there are still those who firmly believe that the South will rise again.

Here's the short and sweet version with a few possible misstatements on my part. Go read it for yourself since my synopsis is most likely incorrect and missing some facts. At Jena High School, the white kids sat under a tree dubbed "The White Tree." The black kids sat on some bleachers elsewhere. One day, a black kid sarcastically asked the principal if he could sit under "The White Tree." The principal stated that anyone can sit anywhere. The following day, some black kids sat under "The White Tree." Shortly thereafter, three nooses were hung in the tree. The white kids responsible for the act were suspended for a few days. Racial tensions increased and fights ensued. Some days later, a white kid involved in the beating up of a black kid was bragging about the incident. The "Jena 6" (a group of black students) as they are so called, knocked his dick in dirt so-to-speak. Now the Jena 6 are being charged with attempted murder, battery, etc.

Now, of course, you have every activist group known to man rallying at the hearings. Al Sharpton and his followers are protesting racism. PETA is whining about the abuse of the tree and microorganisms that live in it. MADD is stopping by to make sure no one's leaving the rally drunk. Da, da, da, da, da...you get the point. My biggest issue with this is that rallying is stupid. I don't care who you are or why you are rallying; it's stupid. What good ioes it do? As unfortunate as it may be, it's not going to affect the outcome of trial. Even if the judges in Jena are racists and throw the book at the kids, an appeal to a higher court will solve those issues. In my opinion, those who rally are just talking the talk. Talkers aren't leaders, so why listen to them? My opinions are swayed by those who actually walk the walk. Letting your balls hang low goes a long way in my book. So if you're going to get involved, then do something meaningful. Rallying is not meaningful; people get the point already. The reason why I mention this story is because several of my law school classmates have been attending these rallies and going around soliciting attendance to others. Leave me out of it. I don't get involved in this nonsense. I'm here to study the law, not to rally. If I wanted to learn to rally, I'd become a hippie.

The Chair

I don't really have anything worthwhile to whine about this evening. I'm exhausted and ready to get to bed. I do however want to discuss my chair. First off, I'm paying thousands and thousands of dollars to go to law school. One would think, the tuition would include a chair that didn't cause my tail end to ache. Some rooms have lazy-boy-like comfort, while ours reflects that of metal bleachers in the nose bleed section. My main concern is that of my rear end falling asleep. Although it'd be amusing, I'd rather not pass gas in a non-volitional manner. The humiliation may prove to be too much to overcome. I gotta cut this short. I'm off to get some sleep.

Now you see it, now you don't

The weekends are too short. I decided to dedicate Friday night as a "No study" night. To get away from the whole law school thing, I went on a pub crawl with some friends. I woke up late on Saturday, drank plenty of water, studied a bit, watched the Trojans gain a few first place votes back from the Purple and Gold, and unexpectedly ended up at a putt-putt venue later that night. I'm no Tiger Woods, so I'll stick to artificial turf. Today, however, it was time to hit the books. I got up early, studied a lot, studied some more, and next thing I know...it's midnight. The weekend just vanished. Luckily, my reading for the week is near complete. Time to hit the sack.

The views change

I would like to steer away from the norm this evening and discuss my thoughts on higher education as well as career choices.

College kids--a breed of individuals, although in denial, attempting to delay their start to a real life.

Yep, that's still me. However, my title is somewhat fancier now: Senior Principal Vice President-like college kid. I'm higher up on the totem pole. I've graduated past the "Let's party tonight, struggle through classes tomorrow, and party again the following night." With that being said, my view on the typical fraternity/sorority college kid has somewhat become tainted. I've lived the Gung-Ho fraternity life as an undergrad and while it was fun, it's now just a thing of the past. I made it through the graduate degree, so why now would I want to continue? Most people get to this stage, settle down with a significant other, and start living the family life. For me, it's about the advancement of opportunity for putting myself in a lush position with hopes of becoming a wealthy individual. Screw the white picket fence. Sure along the way, I will alter my stance and switch gears into family mode. For now, however, I want to live like a rock star...monetarily that is--fancy house, fast cars, and lots of disposable income. They say money doesn't buy happiness. To that I partially say, B.S. (not the degree type). It is my perception that money amplifies the happiness. In synthesis, I conclude that money does buy happiness, but only in a sense. It is for these reasons, that I believe the advancement of my education will deliver success. So, what's next after law school? Well, of a course a good job, but don't think that I abandoned the dream of being called Doc.

St-st-udddderrrinn'

Usually, I have no problem knocking down questions thrown at me in class. However, for some strange reason, I have this issue in Torts. And what makes the issue worse is that Torts seems, at least so far, to be the easiest to comprehend. On the contrary, the nature of the court decisions in Torts seems to be much more subjective than the cases from my other classes. Here's the deal...
If my Torts professor randomly asks a question, I am more than capable of issuing a solid response. The problem arises with his method of attack. Unlike the other classes where the probability of a particular person getting called on is equal to his/her peers, my Torts professor assigns "On-Call" groups. Each "On-Call" group is assigned a particular section of the material to be discussed in class. So, it may be a couple of weeks in between each time that my "On-Call" group is singled out. During the next class session, my group is On-Call. There seems to be some awkwardness in my nervous system when my group is On-Call. After looking around at other members in my group, I've noticed that I'm not the only one. I tend to tap my pencil, bounce my feet up and down, thumb through my papers, and a lot of other weird crap when I'm On-Call. In addition, I seem to stumble over my first couple of words before settling down and delivering my response. This only occurs when I'm On-Call. I can't quite figure it out.
My buddy jokingly mentioned bringing in a bottle of Bourbon and distributing it amongst my fellow peers before class. That would obviously ease the tension, but then we'd all doze off. This law school thing sure seems to throw me into a strange mental state at times. I'm beginning to see transformations in character and thought process. It's a good thing, but at the same time it's very different than anything else that I've experienced.

Additional phase

Remember that three-phase weekend plan that I mentioned earlier this week? Well, now begins the "Drink a little" phase. Tonight, however, I first intend on adding an "Exercise a little" phase. Luckily for me, the "Bar review" is only twelve blocks away. Therefore, I will embark on a short stroll to the bar. I'm anticipating that this additional phase will help burn the calories packed on from those 12 oz. curls. Hopefully, the end result will be a set of six-pack abs, but that's being a little optimistic. Free beer with my fellow law school brethren. Hopefully, it's worth the strenuous physical activity that I'm about to undertake. Time to run.

Blah, blah, blah

Oh those that talk...It's amazing how some can just jaw away not knowing how much everyone else wants to whack 'em where it counts. If I'm going to be punctual in my class attendance, it should be worth my time, right? Here's the deal...We're sitting in class discussing Torts, Contracts, Property, etc. and it never fails that some douche-nozzle decides to bring up an issue relating to his/her own life experience. "Well, I was doing this. Does this constitute a Tort?" Who cares? I'm trying to learn the law. I don't care about you're boring life. It's detracting from my gaining of knowledge. My life is much more interesting, but you don't hear me jabbering away about how I fell out a bus going down the interstate. Not to mention the fact that I'm still here. I think some of these people just like to hear themselves talk. Enough with that, on to cooler crap...

The SBA is having its second "Bar Review" Friday night at the Balcony Bar. It's the perfect opportunity to get acquainted with the law school hotties. Count me in. Speaking of hotties, I think my neighbor likes to lean the other direction. That's a disappointment.

Gotta get some rest. I'll fill you in later.

Mo' money

In Contracts, we've been discussing the recovery of damages awarded for breach of contract during the last 2 weeks. It's still unclear to me as to why we'd study damages before defining the actual breach, but apparently there is some reason to this madness. The professor claims that we will better understand Contract theory if we are already educated in the various types of recovery. In the introductory cases, the breach is clearly stated so it seems somewhat easy. The damages, however, are quite the contrary. At times, the damages awarded seem to confuse the crap out of me and everyone else for that matter. Today, the professor introduced a scenario in which he was the bridge builder that just breached a contract with us being representatives of the City contracting him to build the bridge. He wasn't too clear in his example as he brought up the same old question, "Now what kind of damages does this seem to reflect?" No one answered. He proclaimed, "You're all sitting here staring at me as if I'm too fat to build the bridge. Your damn skippy. You'd be stupid to hire me as a bridge builder, but that's not the question. So, let me pose the question again..." This time several people answered at once with everyone producing a different answer. Luckily he didn't have to squint his eyes in disgust as he typically does. Class was over. We were off the hook. Sometimes the clock works in your favor.

Pick your poison

Drink a little, sleep a little, study a lot. That describes my weekend life. The weekends now suck. The professors use the weekend to pour on additional assignments. They firmly believe that weekends in law school shall be used to study the law. Did I think law school was going to be easy? No, but I thought I'd still have a social life. The substance of the material is not at all difficult other than looking up of every sixth word in the legal dictionary. The big issue is TIME. There exists not enough time in the day to perfect the study of law. If you throw work during the week into the equation, it breaks down like this: TIME - WORK = LESS TIME. I envy those who can afford to devote the whole week to the study of law. This weekend was the opening weekend for college football. Of the 16,734 games played, I saw one in its entirety. And that's only because it was played during the late night "Drink a little" phase. The rest of the weekend was devoted to "study a lot." Now that it's getting late, I think you can conclude which phase comes next. Zzz Zzz Zzz!!!

Beer sir?

Okay, so my professor is a whiskey connoisseur. There were a few of us in class tonight that had a few concerns regarding the cases we'd just discussed. One chick said, "He smells like Bourbon!" So in his office, (and yes we could all smell the Maker's Mark), we were interrogating him on the specifics of the law. One of the students in my study group mentioned, "Are we going to grab a beer tonight? It's Thursday. No class tomorrow" So of course, we agreed. The professor asked, "So where are you all going. I'll grab a drink or two." We went to a neighborhood pub swapping drinks and war stories. Like I said before, this is part of the profession. I never had an engineering professor willing to tip a few back. Oh, the life as a layman...soon to be lawyer.

Profiling keeps me from stealing

This case that I just read involves the invasion of privacy by the Wal-Mart greeters. Most of the greeters, as we all know, are a bunch of tard nuggets and/or extremely old senior citizens. In the case I read, the Wal-Mart greeter requested to see the receipt from a customer exiting the store. The greeter then conducted a search of the merchandise purchased. The customer sued Wal-Mart for invasion of privacy on the grounds that some very personal items were purchased and put on public display by the greeter as the bags were checked. The details here are not the primary reason for this post. Rather, given this background I'd like to discuss my latest experience with Wal-Mart.

Today, I went to Wal-Mart to purchase an ink cartridge for the printer. They of course had none in stock. So I thought to myself, let me go see if the have any drinks on sale. The Pepsi products were on sale so I grabbed a few 12-packs. After I paid for my 4 items, I proceeded to walk out of the exit. In front of me were some hoodlums with a cart full of electronics and, namely, a brand new computer. It was obvious, at least to me, that these chumps probably have never even used a computer. Yet, the greeter allowed them to pass. I, however, with 4 12-packs of "soda" was stopped. The dimwit greeter said, "Receipt please?" So naturally, as I'm known for, I threw a fit. I mumbled (and yes she heard me), "You mean to tell me that someone can walk out of this store with over 1000 dollars worth of electronics and you stop the guy with 10 bucks of merchandise in his hand?" That's b.s. She stated, "It's our job." I think Sammy Walton would be happier if you prevented the black market sell of brand new laptops. But then again, that's just my opinion. In analyzing this further, I came to the conclusion that I was being racially profiled. After all, this Wal-Mart is in the hood.

Insanity

In Torts class the other night, we discussed a case involving the issue of the intent of the insane. The issue was whether or not an insane person can form intent to cause harm. In the criminal realm, insanity is a scapegoat but that's not the case in Torts. Torts is cool because it doesn't matter if the crack pipe fried the brain of some tool. The tool(s) I speak of are still responsible. So if Grandpa Willie smoked three doobies and became insane, he's still liable for damages when he knocks you on the noggin with the butt of his rifle. If he could prove insanity in criminal law, he may walk away with 10 hours of community service. However, in Torts you go after his hard earned cash and are much more likely to win. The case we discussed was rather old and only referred to the Defendant as "insane." Nowadays, you're blessed with some special medical term that makes it sound less insane. It doesn't matter what kind of insanity a person possesses. In my book they're still a whack.

Civil law as I see it

There exists a big stink around the law school between the Civil law and Common law students. Common law students make their claim to fame about how the law changes so much more and that everything is based on judicial interpretation. Civil law students on the other hand complain of having to refer to the LA Civil Code jumping around from Article to Article before finally referring to judicial interpretations. Louisiana is the only state in the U.S. that uses the Civil code based on that of the Napoleonic code from the French. So basically, in Louisiana you must first find a governing Article. If one doesn't exist, then I guess you just make the crap up. Is that why this place is known for its corruption in politics? I would have figured that the Common law states would be more corrupt in the sense that it's based more on interpretation. Even though in Louisiana you must first refer to the Code, it doesn't seem to be much different than that of the Common law. In both systems, the judges tweak rules to fit the particular dispute before them. Nothing in this profession is ever a sure thing. For a lack of a better way of putting it, it's all about how you milk the gonads of a previous interpretation.

Jack & Coke please

I've opted to write a quick blurb before going to class since I'll be heading out of town as soon as I'm finished tonight. I'm second-guessing my choice of going to the live draft. Here is an excerpt from an email that I just received from the Student Bar Association:

...
Because you managed to survive the first week of law
school, SBA is kicking off the fall 2007 semester with
our first TGIF event, a Bar Review at the Gold Mine
Saloon in the French Quarter tomorrow night.

Food, beer, and sodas will be provided along with
$2 Flaming Dr. Peppers.
...

Once again, yet another drinking opportunity hosted by the law school. I'm beginning to think this must be the method of retention used by law professionals worldwide.

On another not-so-uplifting note, I still have yet to receive my financial aid. They must be a well endowed institution, because the Bursars office doesn't seem to care that I haven't paid yet. In talking with many others using financial aid, I've come to the conclusion that the Financial Aid Office is lacking in productivity. Then again, this is a form of HR isn't it? It's been 2.5 months since I started the application and I know they've had all of my materials at least a week before I arrived. Yet, two weeks in and they still haven't seemed to pull through. I've got bills to pay. Give me my money!

Signs of recovery

I don't have much to say about school today, other than it's time to dive into the casebooks...again. I do, however, have a few random observations to chit-chat about. As I was leaving the law school facilities this evening, I noticed two dudes sitting at a table with green vests on. I've noticed this on a few different occasions, but I never really paid it that much attention. Apparently, these guys are called law walkers. Now, just what is that? Well, after a little research I discovered this is a service of the university that provides complimentary "walks" to your vehicle. This is to provide, mainly the chicks, some safety walking back to their vehicles. I guess you never know if you're about to get shot and mugged in this city. It's not a bad idea being that even the 15 year-olds pack heat around here. In the news yesterday was a story about some young punks, referred to as the bicycle bandits, riding around on bikes looking for unlocked cars. On a few occasions, concerned motorists have stopped to confront them only to find out that they won't hesitate pop a cap (or several) in your fender. They have yet to be caught. On another note, I think we had 3 murders here yesterday. I'm sure that's well below the average, but nonetheless it's still a concern. I gotta cut it short to finish up my studies for the evening and get some rest.

Short == Sweet

Before I get started on this post, I must mention that I have over one hundred pages of reading assignments to do this evening. So yes, tonight really sucks. Some of the assignments are for Thursday's classes, but it's a must that I get them done tonight so that I allow for some much needed sleep tomorrow evening in preparation for my 6+ hour drive to the Fantasy Draft on Friday morning. More importantly, Black Beauty will be reentering my possession in good health this weekend. Wow, I'm gonna need a beer!

Now, a little about today's classes...Tonight was cut short by those chain smoking hippies from the liberal arts world. During the second class, the professor went around the room allowing us to introduce ourselves. We gave our name, where we're from, schools attended, undergraduate/graduate backgrounds, and the last book we read. Book? Who reads for enjoyment? I read because I'm required to do so. I don't have time for any other nonsense. We have an architect, a biologist, a M.D., and most importantly an electrical engineer in our section. It was amusing watching the jaws of the English and Business majors drop as we scientists revealed our studies. Just as the last person finished spewing his details, the fire alarm rang out. So, the professor said, "Ah just go home. See you on Thursday."

Remember that law school quote that I mentioned yesterday? Well, come to find out we don't need to wait until the third year for absolute boredom. We'll get a taste of that in 1st year Contracts. This guy is about...well he's just old. Someone mentioned before class, "My dad went to law school here and had this guy for Contracts in 1972." Sure enough, 15 minutes into the class and someone behind me was asking people for No Doz. Others were surfing MySpace and playing flash games on their laptops.

One up, one down

The first day of official class was today. I survived. The Socratic method was used by both professors, but since seats won't be assigned until Wednesday they elected to select volunteers from the crowd instead of randomly picking on those who may be unprepared. I did, however, hear from one of the other sections that the professor called out a name as soon as he opened the door without even setting up shop or giving an introduction. The student called upon was apparently drilled throughout the session with the professor pounding away at why he was wrong in so many different aspects. When the student was stuck with nowhere to go, the professor attacked another student. When the next student got stuck, he went right back to his original victim. So I guess I better be fully prepared for each and every session. My section had it much easier than that. The professors went around the room selecting those who sought out the competition. I decided to lay low (like many others) to get a feel for things. I want to know what to expect before I volunteer for punishment.

Apparently the popular saying around law schools is: "The first year they scare you to death; the second year they work you to death; and the third year they bore you to death."

I have a good law school vs. grizzly bear analogy, but I'll spare you the details until a later date.

Time to prepare for day 2.

The real deal begins

Today was the last day of orientation, so now it's time to hit the books for real. After a brief Q&A session with upper class students, we were invited for free lunch and outdoor activities. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention MORE BEER! It is my assumption that even the water fountains in this place dispense ice cold brew. I guess you can't host a volleyball tournament without providing refreshments. I didn't participate in the outdoor activities or beer since I had some administrative tasks to wrap up before the semester starts. Plus, it was too damn hot and muggy. What I found interesting today was that they were offering beer before giving tours of the law library. Bringing a lot of liquored up law students into the QUIET ONLY sections makes sense to me. I started this afternoon by chipping away at loads of homework due for the first class on Monday. 6 hours later and I'm halfway done.

I can already see that the orientation session met its goal of teaching me to start thinking like a lawyer. Let me explain...Today I used the restroom at the law school and couldn't help but notice the sign above the urinal staring me in the face: "PLEASE FLUSH URINALS. THANK YOU." I started interrogating the sign. When should I flush? Before? After? During? How many times? Can I wait until tomorrow? That solidified my stance on knowing that I'm prepared for next week.

My mentors

Wow, finally a night with no work to do. This won't happen often so let me take full advantage. For the orientation courses, I have three professors. One discusses statutory interpretation, the other discusses...well I don't know what he discusses, I'm still confused...something along the lines of synthesis of various cases, and the third professor discusses what to expect from law school such as the exams, time management, and how to be successful. Each one is interesting in his own way. One of them has some strange fetish about making jokes about bongs. Another is highly interested in throwing out random observations involving the debauchery and prostitution case. The last one...well he's a former Electrical Engineer that wasn't intrigued with scientific studies<--hey that sounds like someone else I know. What they all have in common is that each made it through law school and now their mission is to make my next three years a super pain in the rectum. This whole law thing is going to be a huge dedication. From what I've noticed however, I don't think it's as "difficult" as what they make it out to be. Maybe I'm wrong. It seems to me as if it's more of a lack of time to get all of this crap done issue. So to counter that, we'll turn you into a bunch of chronic smoking anorexics. The cigarette smoke floating around the law school entrance sets the fire alarms off at least 3 times a day. After decades of incoming students, they have yet to figure out that the smoke alarms actually work. Why do you need fire drills when you give the students 15 minutes in between classes? You think I'm joking? I've smoked 6 packs of second hand menthols this week. If I breathe, I get hazy. If I don't, I suffocate. No happy medium.

Stay in your state

Here's one for you. The White Slave Traffic Act of 1910 or some crap like that. Basically, this is a statute regarding the transportation of women in interstate commerce for the purpose of prostitution, debauchery, or some other immoral purpose. Interstate commerce in simple terms is a business deal across state borders. In the particular case we discussed in class, some dude had some woman taken to another state for the sole purpose of her becoming his mistress and concubine. To be more blunt, she was to become his sex slave. The facts in the case were already ruled on in a lower court, so the issue here for the Supreme Court was the wording of the statute itself. Is his transportation of this woman for an immoral purpose? It depends on how you define immoral. Was the intent of legislature here to describe immoral as something related to prostitution or debauchery? Is it the courts duty to extend the law based on what legislature intended it to mean? Or should the court base its decision on the specific wording of the statute? After all, making her his mistress isn't stated directly as being immoral. What if it was his wife and he intended to take her to some remote location across the state line to do the dirty-dirty in the Wal-Mart parking lot? Did she consent or does that really matter? What if it was a transvestite? This is just a snippet of what we discussed in class. It's all about teaching us to think like a lawyer.

I'm not going to dwell on the details in this post. Too many questions. Now you know why it takes so friggin' long to brief these stupid cases. But then again you can also see why I think this stuff is more exciting than The Harriest Potter collection. We get to discuss and argue about hookers! No broomsticks or magic carpets here!

Unpleasant surprise

As I'm walking into class this evening, I take a quick glance at my schedule to make sure I'm not supposed to be jazzed up in a suit for 1L pictures. Luckily, the check confirmed that's not until Thursday. But then I noticed, "Class 6 p.m. - 10 p.m." 4 hours of ungraded torture...great. Come to find out, Monday was just a 2.5 hour tease. The remainder of the week is 4 hours a pop. Not to mention, the grueling readings that will keep me up until 3 in the morning. Work, eat, class, read, and then it starts all over again. Where does sleep fall into this equation?

I've been told that these mandatory 1L pictures may be used by the professors as part of their Socratic teaching method. Whether it's true or not, I've heard that they use your name in conjunction with your picture to remind themselves of who the slackers are when determining who to belittle during the lectures. Most of the professors will randomly call upon an individual to state the facts, issues, rulings, analysis, and holdings of each case. If you're wrong, they'll be sure to let you and your fellow classmates know. If you're right, then they'll just find a way to prove you wrong. As nuts as this may sound, I'm actually looking forward to experiencing this. I've noticed that even with a lack of rest, I find myself zoned in on the lectures. It's much more interesting than scientific studies because there never exists a right or wrong. So as I see it...I'm always right. Then again, there was never any doubt.

I have some interesting thoughts on cases to discuss in future posts.