Jump to content
ProfReader

Ask a prof?

Recommended Posts

My understanding is that the first year curriculum of the JD program is pretty much standardized: Contracts, Torts, Property, Criminal Law, Constitutional Law, and Civil Procedure.  In your expert opinion, ProfReader, which of these six course(s) are the most difficult one(s) to do well in and which of these six course(s) are the most student-friendly (not that any of them are going to be easy)?  Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, the classes which are easiest for students to understand are torts, contracts, and perhaps civ pro (that isn't necessarily in the first year curriculum at many schools).  Of course this means that they are easiest to understand for everyone, so this can actually be a bad thing because it lulls people into a false sense of security because they think they know the material pretty well.  Some of property law can be pretty messy, particularly real property in certain provinces, but lots of the material is quite comprehensible.  Most people seem to find constitutional law and criminal law the most difficult.  This is just anecdotal though based on what students have said to me and faculty chit chat.  I usually only teach one first year subject (and did a second one once when they were in a pinch), so I can't personally compare across classes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, the classes which are easiest for students to understand are torts, contracts, and perhaps civ pro (that isn't necessarily in the first year curriculum at many schools).  Of course this means that they are easiest to understand for everyone, so this can actually be a bad thing because it lulls people into a false sense of security because they think they know the material pretty well.  Some of property law can be pretty messy, particularly real property in certain provinces, but lots of the material is quite comprehensible.  Most people seem to find constitutional law and criminal law the most difficult.  This is just anecdotal though based on what students have said to me and faculty chit chat.  I usually only teach one first year subject (and did a second one once when they were in a pinch), so I can't personally compare across classes.

 

I really appreciate you giving me your perspective on this matter, ProfReader; thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a follow up question, ProfReader, if I am already somewhat familiar with the Canadian Constitution and had touched on some of the landmark cases in my undergraduate studies, would it be better off for me to take Constitutional Law over Torts if I am actually given a choice?  Also, I have a great deal of interest in Contracts, would taking Property over Civil Procedure make more sense (again, if given the choice) since my sense is that Contracts and Property are sister courses (or at least have synergies) whereas some law students claim that Civil Procedure is very boring?  Thanks so much for all your valuable pointers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a follow up question, ProfReader, if I am already somewhat familiar with the Canadian Constitution and had touched on some of the landmark cases in my undergraduate studies, would it be better off for me to take Constitutional Law over Torts if I am actually given a choice?  Also, I have a great deal of interest in Contracts, would taking Property over Civil Procedure make more sense (again, if given the choice) since my sense is that Contracts and Property are sister courses (or at least have synergies) whereas some law students claim that Civil Procedure is very boring?  Thanks so much for all your valuable pointers!

 

There's no way you'll be given a choice to take any of those courses (except maybe civpro - my understanding is some places let you choose between civ pro and evidence).  Also, you could have taken 10 courses in undergrad that were tangentially related to the constitution, and you don't have anywhere near the base that law school will give you.  I would estimate that we covered close to 100 "landmark" cases in constitutional law.  If I were you, I would definitely put off taking civ pro as long as possible, since it will have more use the closer you get to practice (and it is super boring).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, your first year curriculum will be predetermined and you'll have to do property, contracts, criminal, and constitutional. You'll have to do torts at most schools (as far as I know, torts is mandatory at all schools but there is one, I don't remember which one, where you do it second year).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, your first year curriculum will be predetermined and you'll have to do property, contracts, criminal, and constitutional. You'll have to do torts at most schools (as far as I know, torts is mandatory at all schools but there is one, I don't remember which one, where you do it second year).

 

At Windsor you do torts in second year; you do Access to Justice in first year instead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no way you'll be given a choice to take any of those courses (except maybe civpro - my understanding is some places let you choose between civ pro and evidence).  Also, you could have taken 10 courses in undergrad that were tangentially related to the constitution, and you don't have anywhere near the base that law school will give you.  I would estimate that we covered close to 100 "landmark" cases in constitutional law.  If I were you, I would definitely put off taking civ pro as long as possible, since it will have more use the closer you get to practice (and it is super boring).

 

Yeah, your first year curriculum will be predetermined and you'll have to do property, contracts, criminal, and constitutional. You'll have to do torts at most schools (as far as I know, torts is mandatory at all schools but there is one, I don't remember which one, where you do it second year).

 

At Windsor you do torts in second year; you do Access to Justice in first year instead. 

 

Thanks for all the comments.  Would you folks say that Torts is equally boring as Civil Procedure?  Also, am I correct to view Contracts and Property are sister courses or am I completely out to lunch on that one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the comments.  Would you folks say that Torts is equally boring as Civil Procedure?  Also, am I correct to view Contracts and Property are sister courses or am I completely out to lunch on that one?

 

Torts is one of the most interesting courses in law school in my opinion.  I don't know anyone who's said the same of Civ Pro.  Contracts and Property are somewhat interrelated, but definitely very different.

 

ETA: I guess the best way to describe the similarities is that you might enter into a contract for property, but there are also a number of ways of acquiring property that are not contractual (gifts, finding).  Similarly, contracts might concern property, but they can also govern a vast number of other things.  Bottom line is, at least in law school, you're going to see a pretty stark contrast between the two, whereas it seems like in real life there might be a lot more interplay between them.  But that is true of all law that you learn in first year.  I think it will be rare when someone comes into your office and says "hi there, I have a torts problem, can you help me solve it?" It'll probably be more like "my neighbour's landscaper cut a tree branch that started on his side of the property but extended onto mine, and when it fell, it crushed my car.  I really like my neighbour but he is refusing to pay for the damage, saying it was the contractor's fault.  The insurance company won't pay it because didn't have comprehensive insurance.  And I really liked that tree branch - I thought it brought character to my yard. What can we do?"

Edited by sonandera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Torts is one of the most interesting courses in law school in my opinion.  I don't know anyone who's said the same of Civ Pro.  Contracts and Property are somewhat interrelated, but definitely very different.

 

ETA: I guess the best way to describe the similarities is that you might enter into a contract for property, but there are also a number of ways of acquiring property that are not contractual (gifts, finding).  Similarly, contracts might concern property, but they can also govern a vast number of other things.  Bottom line is, at least in law school, you're going to see a pretty stark contrast between the two, whereas it seems like in real life there might be a lot more interplay between them.  But that is true of all law that you learn in first year.  I think it will be rare when someone comes into your office and says "hi there, I have a torts problem, can you help me solve it?" It'll probably be more like "my neighbour's landscaper cut a tree branch that started on his side of the property but extended onto mine, and when it fell, it crushed my car.  I really like my neighbour but he is refusing to pay for the damage, saying it was the contractor's fault.  The insurance company won't pay it because didn't have comprehensive insurance.  And I really liked that tree branch - I thought it brought character to my yard. What can we do?"

 

Awesome, sonandera; thanks so much for your input!

 

One more thing, is it possible to tie Torts to Sports/Entertainment Law?  For example, if a hockey player (e.g., Steve Moore) suffers a career-ending injury (e.g., non-recoverable concussion) because he was wilfully attached by an opposing player (e.g., Todd Bertuzzi) on the ice for 'pay back' via a 'sucker punch,' can the injured player (Moore) sue the player who threw the punch (Bertuzzi) via Torts?

Edited by Neo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome, sonandera; thanks so much for your input!

 

One more thing, is it possible to tie Torts to Sports/Entertainment Law?  For example, if a hockey player (e.g., Steve Moore) suffers a career-ending injury (e.g., non-recoverable concussion) because he was wilfully attached by an opposing player (e.g., Todd Bertuzzi) on the ice for 'pay back' via a 'sucker punch,' can the injured player (Moore) sue the player who threw the punch (Bertuzzi) via Torts?

 

I think he already is suing him, and I assume it would be in tort for battery.  It's not often that would happen though, especially not at a professional level where the damages could actually be substantial and the other player wouldn't be judgement proof.  Most of sports/entertainment law is going to be based in contract and related areas (e.g. labour/employment).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he already is suing him, and I assume it would be in tort for battery.  It's not often that would happen though, especially not at a professional level where the damages could actually be substantial and the other player wouldn't be judgement proof.  Most of sports/entertainment law is going to be based in contract and related areas (e.g. labour/employment).

 

Nicely explained, sonandera; I think my interest in Tort Law just raised quite a bit since I have an interest in Sports/Entertainment Law even though you did mention that the Bertuzzi/Moore case is more of an anomaly in Torts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of sports/entertainment law is going to be based in contract and related areas (e.g. labour/employment).

And the sports/entertainment law that is related to torts won't be dealt with by sports/entertainment lawyers, but rather personal injury lawyers.

 

Nicely explained, sonandera; I think my interest in Tort Law just raised quite a bit since I have an interest in Sports/Entertainment Law even though you did mention that the Bertuzzi/Moore case is more of an anomaly in Torts.

Not to disappoint you, but it doesn't quite work that way.

 

You don't become a general lawyer that serves a certain type of person or client with whatever they need (torts cases, contracts, criminal cases) -- if someone suffers an injury and wants to sue, he goes to a personal injury lawyer. If someone needs a contract drafted, he goes to a contracts/corporate lawyer. If someone gets arrested, he goes to a criminal defence lawyer. You don't become a general lawyer that helps celebrities/athletes with whatever legal work they need.

 

Your interest is awesome (excites me actually compared to all the negativity about this profession lately), but I wouldn't get too caught up in figuring out/thinking you know exactly what you want to do until you are a bit deeper into it. That said, having an idea of your interests is fantastic because it will help guide your ECs in 1L and asking questions is always welcome!

Edited by 12192008
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neo, Steve Moore hired a personal injury lawyer. His case has nothing to do with Sports or Entertainment law, which are actually two different types of practice. They are very niche areas that not many lawyers practice, and are also difficult to break into.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the sports/entertainment law that is related to torts won't be dealt with by sports/entertainment lawyers, but rather personal injury lawyers.

 

Neo, Steve Moore hired a personal injury lawyer. His case has nothing to do with Sports or Entertainment law, which are actually two different types of practice. They are very niche areas that not many lawyers practice, and are also difficult to break into.

 

Thanks for clarifying, 12192008 and erinl2; very helpful information for those who will be entering law school in September :)

Edited by Neo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to disappoint you, but it doesn't quite work that way.

 

You don't become a general lawyer that serves a certain type of person or client with whatever they need (torts cases, contracts, criminal cases) -- if someone suffers an injury and wants to sue, he goes to a personal injury lawyer. If someone needs a contracts drafted, he goes to a contracts/corporate lawyer. If someone gets arrested, he goes to a criminal defence lawyer. You don't become a general lawyer that helps celebrities/athletes with whatever legal work they need.

 

Your interest is awesome (excites me actually compared to all the negativity about this profession lately), but I wouldn't get too caught up in figuring out/thinking you know exactly what you want to do until you are a bit deeper into it. That said, having an idea of your interests is fantastic because it will help guide your ECs in 1L and asking questions is always welcome!

 

I see, 12192008.  I was under the impression that big-time companies or big-time established people have 'their own lawyer' that take care of all their legal issues.  For instance, my impression is that the Toronto Maple Leafs and the Toronto Blue Jays have their own counsel (Gordon Kirke comes to mind) and Tom Hagen (played by Rovert Duvall) is THE LAWYER for the Corleone Family in The Godfather... But obivously, it seems that I am incorrect to think in that regard. :)

Edited by Neo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see, 12192008.  I was under the impression that big-time companies or big-time established people have 'their own lawyer' that take care of all their legal issues.  For instance, my impression is that the Toronto Maple Leafs and the Toronto Blue Jays have their own counsel (Gordon Kirke comes to mind) and Tom Hagen (played by Rovert Duvall) is THE LAWYER for the Corleone Family in The Godfather... But obivously, it seems that I am incorrect to think in that regard. :)

 

You're thinking of general counsel (aka the "in-house" team). They usually focus on day-to-day operations and business compliance issues. They also act as the 'point of contact' between the company and external lawyers.

 

Here's a short, general run-down: http://www.ccca-accje.org/fr/resources/PDF/The%20Evolving%20Role%20of%20General%20Counsel_R.Patzelt_posted%20Sept.09.11.pdf

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're thinking of general counsel (aka the "in-house" team). They usually focus on day-to-day operations and business compliance issues. They also act as the 'point of contact' between the company and external lawyers.

 

Here's a short, general run-down: http://www.ccca-accje.org/fr/resources/PDF/The%20Evolving%20Role%20of%20General%20Counsel_R.Patzelt_posted%20Sept.09.11.pdf

 

Very nice information... super useful, kenoshakid; thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was impressed with myself for not messing up multiquote, but then I went ahead and messed up the quotes by hitting backspace.  So I have just put it in quotation marks.

 

 

"if I am already somewhat familiar with the Canadian Constitution and had touched on some of the landmark cases in my undergraduate studies, would it be better off for me to take Constitutional Law over Torts if I am actually given a choice?  Also, I have a great deal of interest in Contracts, would taking Property over Civil Procedure make more sense (again, if given the choice) since my sense is that Contracts and Property are sister courses (or at least have synergies) whereas some law students claim that Civil Procedure is very boring?  Thanks so much for all your valuable pointers!"

 

First, this is a mistake I think students make...thinking the treatment of constitutional cases in an undergrad political science curriculum is anything like their treatment in law school.  Knowing the facts and the findings of a few big cases will not save you much time at all.  And sometimes when students think they know something about an area already, they aren't able to think about it in the same way that the professor is teaching it (they are too distracted by things that they already know about the case, in a way).  The same could be said for students who did criminology and criminal law.  This isn't universally true, of course, but in my experience some of the students with prior knowledge in an area actually struggle a fair bit, especially since that previous experience is often very theoretical in nature. 

 

I don't think of contracts and proeprty as sister courses at all.  I think of contracts and torts as sister courses.  Both primarily common law, much overlap (i.e. negligent misrepresentation, claims often framed in both contract and torts).  Property is quite unique and defies classification in some ways.

 

I'm not sure why you would ever be given any sort of choice unless you are taking an LLM program or something, in which case you should take upper year seminars, as they are much more interesting.  If you were, in some hypothetical universe, given a choice, civil procedure is fairly dry to most students.  However, I don't think I can advise between constitutional and torts as both are very interesting and both bear very little similarity to one another.  That would depend on your own interests.  And, if you are looking at pursuing an LLM, one is likely much more related to your research than the other.

 

"One more thing, is it possible to tie Torts to Sports/Entertainment Law?  For example, if a hockey player (e.g., Steve Moore) suffers a career-ending injury (e.g., non-recoverable concussion) because he was wilfully attached by an opposing player (e.g., Todd Bertuzzi) on the ice for 'pay back' via a 'sucker punch,' can the injured player (Moore) sue the player who threw the punch (Bertuzzi) via Torts?"

 

It is possible for torts to occur in the context of sports (just as it is possible for a tort to occur in any situation).  Yes, there could certainly be a tort claim (battery) for a hockey fight (with the defense being consent and the response to that being that the impugned conduct exceeded consent).  However, if your prof covers these cases at all, this will comprise maybe a couple of minutes in a full year class.  And, as the other responses suggest, someone specializing in sports law would not have the opportunity to litigate these tort claims. 

Edited by ProfReader
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was impressed with myself for not messing up multiquote, but then I went ahead and messed up the quotes by hitting backspace.  So I have just put it in quotation marks.

 

 

"if I am already somewhat familiar with the Canadian Constitution and had touched on some of the landmark cases in my undergraduate studies, would it be better off for me to take Constitutional Law over Torts if I am actually given a choice?  Also, I have a great deal of interest in Contracts, would taking Property over Civil Procedure make more sense (again, if given the choice) since my sense is that Contracts and Property are sister courses (or at least have synergies) whereas some law students claim that Civil Procedure is very boring?  Thanks so much for all your valuable pointers!"

 

First, this is a mistake I think students make...thinking the treatment of constitutional cases in an undergrad political science curriculum is anything like their treatment in law school.  Knowing the facts and the findings of a few big cases will not save you much time at all.  And sometimes when students think they know something about an area already, they aren't able to think about it in the same way that the professor is teaching it (they are too distracted by things that they already know about the case, in a way).  The same could be said for students who did criminology and criminal law.  This isn't universally true, of course, but in my experience some of the students with prior knowledge in an area actually struggle a fair bit, especially since that previous experience is often very theoretical in nature. 

 

I don't think of contracts and proeprty as sister courses at all.  I think of contracts and torts as sister courses.  Both primarily common law, much overlap (i.e. negligent misrepresentation, claims often framed in both contract and torts).  Property is quite unique and defies classification in some ways.

 

I'm not sure why you would ever be given any sort of choice unless you are taking an LLM program or something, in which case you should take upper year seminars, as they are much more interesting.  If you were, in some hypothetical universe, given a choice, civil procedure is fairly dry to most students.  However, I don't think I can advise between constitutional and torts as both are very interesting and both bear very little similarity to one another.  That would depend on your own interests.  And, if you are looking at pursuing an LLM, one is likely much more related to your research than the other.

 

"One more thing, is it possible to tie Torts to Sports/Entertainment Law?  For example, if a hockey player (e.g., Steve Moore) suffers a career-ending injury (e.g., non-recoverable concussion) because he was wilfully attached by an opposing player (e.g., Todd Bertuzzi) on the ice for 'pay back' via a 'sucker punch,' can the injured player (Moore) sue the player who threw the punch (Bertuzzi) via Torts?"

 

It is possible for torts to occur in the context of sports (just as it is possible for a tort to occur in any situation).  Yes, there could certainly be a tort claim (battery) for a hockey fight (with the defense being consent and the response to that being that the impugned conduct exceeded consent).  However, if your prof covers these cases at all, this will comprise maybe a couple of minutes in a full year class.  And, as the other responses suggest, someone specializing in sports law would not have the opportunity to litigate these tort claims. 

 

Amazingly helpful, ProfReader!  Any chance you can shed some light on which of the first-year courses are reading intensive?  My bet is that Constitutional Law would be one of them but are there any others that I should be aware of?  And as always, thanks for your guidance :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • 아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라아시아바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시아바카라
    • 아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라아시안바카라(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)아시안바카라
    • For Ontario Schools at least, on OLSAS you will have to input your LSAC account number which will send your score to OLSAS who will then proceed to forward the scores to the Ontario School(s) of your choosing. You also have to indicate on OLSAS any future LSAT test dates.  
    • 카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소
    • 카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소카지노주소(♂\ BAKA78.COM \♂)카지노주소
×