Ask a 1L — 2018 Edition

[ZineZ 442]

15 hours ago, harveyspecter993 said:

I'm thinking over whether I should sell my printer or bring it with me. As a law student, is there a lot of printing you have to do?

I got myself a black and white laser and I'm really glad I have it. A summary can be 120 pages+ and there's reprints etc if needed.

I went through 4000 pages since 1L (finishing 2L now). I'd keep it. 

[Rascal2017 10]

Would there be any need for a colour laser printer or should I just stick to a black and white one?

[healthlaw 1047]

1 minute ago, Rascal2017 said:

Would there be any need for a colour laser printer or should I just stick to a black and white one?

 I use a coloured printer for my summaries because I use different colours to indicate different things. Ie: cases might be one colour, legislation might be another. I’m sure you could get away with black and white. I wouldn’t advise attempting to print large coloured documents at school though as it would be really costly. 

Alternatively you could get away with printing your notes in black and white and just use highlighters and pens to colour code things. That would be more than fine and would likely save you the extra money

[BlockedQuebecois 4841]

21 hours ago, Rascal2017 said:

Would there be any need for a colour laser printer or should I just stick to a black and white one?

 

21 hours ago, healthlaw said:

use a coloured printer for my summaries because I use different colours to indicate different things. Ie: cases might be one colour, legislation might be another. I’m sure you could get away with black and white. I wouldn’t advise attempting to print large coloured documents at school though as it would be really costly. 

Alternatively you could get away with printing your notes in black and white and just use highlighters and pens to colour code things. That would be more than fine and would likely save you the extra money

The YFS print shop in york lanes is crazy cheap for colour printing. I get my summaries printed in colour and bound with front and back cover for ~$8/50 pages. 

[healthlaw 1047]

31 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

 

The YFS print shop in york lanes is crazy cheap for colour printing. I get my summaries printed in colour and bound with front and back cover for ~$8/50 pages. 

WHAT!?!!!!!!! I’m so mad that I’m learning about this in my last week of 3L. I’m actually mad lol. That hurts 

[LivePumpkin 85]

Just thought of a question. Considering the fact that most students get a “B”, in your opinion, what is it the “A” students do that results in them getting an “A” and not a “B”? Correct me if I am wrong but I assume most people would write somewhat similar ideas in the exam...? So is it a combination of things that the “A” papers have done differently (i.e., writing style, spotting more issues, actually answering the question) that results in the “A”? Thanks!  

Edited April 25, 2018 by LivePumpkin

[BlockedQuebecois 4841]

15 hours ago, LivePumpkin said:

Just thought of a question. Considering the fact that most students get a “B”, in your opinion, what is it the “A” students do that results in them getting an “A” and not a “B”? Correct me if I am wrong but I assume most people would write somewhat similar ideas in the exam...? So is it a combination of things that the “A” papers have done differently (i.e., writing style, spotting more issues, actually answering the question) that results in the “A”? Thanks!  

I’m travelling right now, but have a good answer to this. I’ll try to get a moment to respond in the next few days once I’m at a computer.  It’ll be more coherent that way  

[LivePumpkin 85]

1 hour ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

I’m travelling right now, but have a good answer to this. I’ll try to get a moment to respond in the next few days once I’m at a computer.  It’ll be more coherent that way  

Take your time and enjoy yourself!  

[ProfReader 2149]

19 hours ago, LivePumpkin said:

Just thought of a question. Considering the fact that most students get a “B”, in your opinion, what is it the “A” students do that results in them getting an “A” and not a “B”? Correct me if I am wrong but I assume most people would write somewhat similar ideas in the exam...? So is it a combination of things that the “A” papers have done differently (i.e., writing style, spotting more issues, actually answering the question) that results in the “A”? Thanks!  

Of your list, writing style is the least important.  Most exams are garbage stream-of-consciousness writing due to time constraints and the lack of editing time.  Actually answering the question is occasionally a problem, but most people don't totally miss the boat in that way.  The most relevant on this list is issue spotting, but I would put it differently.  Most people spot all of the correct issues, with a possible exception being an issue spotting exam with tons of little issues (often characteristic of a class like torts, as compared to something like constitutional).  With a B exam, most people are spotting the relevant issues and stating the law correctly.  Where A exams tend to be distinguished is in the way that they apply the law to the facts.  They will engage very deeply with the facts and pull every possible relevant fact and use it is every relevant way.  The As also tend to be better at engaging with counter-arguments.  They also tend to not just pull the legal rules out of the cases that were read, but have a superior ability to draw factual parallels between the exam problem and the cases read for class.

[harveyspecter993 836]

8 hours ago, ProfReader said:

Of your list, writing style is the least important.  Most exams are garbage stream-of-consciousness writing due to time constraints and the lack of editing time.  Actually answering the question is occasionally a problem, but most people don't totally miss the boat in that way.  The most relevant on this list is issue spotting, but I would put it differently.  Most people spot all of the correct issues, with a possible exception being an issue spotting exam with tons of little issues (often characteristic of a class like torts, as compared to something like constitutional).  With a B exam, most people are spotting the relevant issues and stating the law correctly.  Where A exams tend to be distinguished is in the way that they apply the law to the facts.  They will engage very deeply with the facts and pull every possible relevant fact and use it is every relevant way.  The As also tend to be better at engaging with counter-arguments.  They also tend to not just pull the legal rules out of the cases that were read, but have a superior ability to draw factual parallels between the exam problem and the cases read for class.

Thank you. This was very informative.

[ProfReader 2149]

Also, this certainly isn't a universal truth, but students often seem to become law people or fact people when they are rushed, panicked, or whatever.  That is, they gravitate towards talking about the law but leaving out the facts (i.e. describing the Oakes test at length but not really pulling in the facts to apply it) or talking about the facts but leaving out the law (i.e. talking about how someone's conduct is really annoying, persistent, of low value, etc. but then not really bringing in the law of nuisance).  Again, this isn't universally true, but after you get a set of exams back, see if you are one of these people and try to be aware of it.

[harveyspecter993 836]

1 hour ago, ProfReader said:

Also, this certainly isn't a universal truth, but students often seem to become law people or fact people when they are rushed, panicked, or whatever.  That is, they gravitate towards talking about the law but leaving out the facts (i.e. describing the Oakes test at length but not really pulling in the facts to apply it) or talking about the facts but leaving out the law (i.e. talking about how someone's conduct is really annoying, persistent, of low value, etc. but then not really bringing in the law of nuisance).  Again, this isn't universally true, but after you get a set of exams back, see if you are one of these people and try to be aware of it.

It's so great to have profs on here. This is basically office hours.

[BlockedQuebecois 4841]

2 minutes ago, harveyspecter993 said:

It's so great to have profs on here. This is basically office hours.

Except I actually come to these. 

[BlockedQuebecois 4841]

On 4/24/2018 at 6:07 PM, LivePumpkin said:

Just thought of a question. Considering the fact that most students get a “B”, in your opinion, what is it the “A” students do that results in them getting an “A” and not a “B”? Correct me if I am wrong but I assume most people would write somewhat similar ideas in the exam...? So is it a combination of things that the “A” papers have done differently (i.e., writing style, spotting more issues, actually answering the question) that results in the “A”? Thanks!  

Obviously, @ProfReader speaks with much more authority on this issue than I do, but I'm happy to say that their observations align fairly closely with mine. Of course, ProfReader gets their observations from actually marking exams, while I've drawn my conclusions from studying with others, so if there's a conflict I'd defer to them. 

With that said, here's what I've observed: 

Issue Spotting

As noted above, most students spot all the issues. That's particularly true in a class like constitutional law, where fact patterns tend to be a large, obvious issue that is then tested based on the right being infringed and balanced using the Oakes test. Constitutional law tests tend to be long, and one can easily spend an hour on the Oakes test analysis if they want to. 

Where this doesn't necessarily hold true are classes like contracts and torts, where there can be a lot of issues. Some professors will write their tests to include complex fact patterns with dozens of issues. If that's the case, the professor will be expecting you to spot the issue, provide a brief analysis, then do the same for each issue. Those exams tend to reward brevity and correct issue spotting, and depth of analysis is sacrificed. 

So what does an A exam look like WRT issue spotting? All (or almost all) the issues will be spotted and each will be addressed with the appropriate amount of depth — if there's one issue, you'll spend all the allotted time discussing that issue. If there are many, you'll want to spot all the issues and address each one briefly, focusing on addressing each issue concisely. In contrast, a B exam may miss some issues (say, was there acceptance while forming this contract) on an "issue spotting" exam, or forget to discuss a small portion of the test (say, the prescribed by law requirement of the Oakes test) on a "single issue" exam.

Facts and Law

As ProfReader noted, students tend to default to a fact-based or law-based argument when they're writing exams. They also do it when they're mooting. The best advice I can give for both is to learn how to weave the facts and the law together to create a story (note: this advice may have come from @Uriel in a past thread about mooting). 

As you enter law school, you'll realize that a lot of developments of the common law are the result of "policy considerations." Policy considerations frustrate a lot of students because it seems like the courts are just disregarding the rules to get the result they want, but it's important to realize that can work to your advantage. 

Say you've got this fact pattern (which is a very overt example of a question calling for policy considerations but still): 

Quote

100 years ago, Joseph willed his land "to St. Mary's Orphanage for Starving Children so long as they only help white orphans, with the right of re-entry to Douglas and his heirs." 

St. Mary's currently uses 1/4 of the land for their orphanage and a field, while the rest has been left undeveloped. St. Mary's would like to open their doors to orphans of all ethnicities (this would not expand their usage of the land). Douglas' heir, Rick, is a real estate magnate who wants to build a giant hotel on the entire property. St. Mary's expects Rick would exercise the right of re-entry.

 

I would tackle this problem in two steps. First, I would identify the interests each group has (so St. Mary's has a determinable fee simple, Rick has a right of re-entry, etc). Second, I would discuss the possibility of the condition ("so long as they only help white orphans") being void for public policy.

Now, most students would spot those two issues, but what I've noticed is the public policy discussion often fails to incorporate the facts. Sure, students will say "racism is bad so therefore it's probably void." That's true, and a perfectly fine answer, but it doesn't draw in the facts. You've got an incredibly sympathetic party — an orphanage trying to increase the diversity of those they help — trying to hold on to their interest, and an incredibly unsympathetic party — a real estate magnate building a hotel — trying to take it away from them. Bring it up! Say "racism is bad," but also say "the courts will also likely look favorably upon the orphanage due to its charitable nature, while the for-profit real estate magnate will be unsympathetic." That's what sets an average answer apart from an above average answer.

Nuance in the Facts

This goes along with the intertwining of facts and the law, but a lot of students miss nuance in their discussions. The law is, at its core, about balancing the rights and interests of individuals. In the above example, Rick really does have an interest in the land. A decision that voids the condition would strip Rick of that interest without compensation. It's important to remember that in your analysis, no matter how unsympathetic the person you're stripping rights from is. 

So if an A (or high B+) answer mentions that racism is bad and that Rick is unsympathetic, an A+ answer may mention that Rick is unsympathetic, but Rick's suggested use results in increased utilization of the land (a driving force in property law), which would weigh in his favour. It's likely not enough to sway the court, and my analysis would still say that Rick loses, but if I've said those three things then I've covered the strongest arguments on both sides of the issue. 

Nuance in the Law

Profs will mention a lot of cases, but many students will go into the exam knowing just the largest ones. Those will get you through the exam, but they likely won't get you an A. To get that A, I would recommend knowing all the relevant cases (some are so old or so clearly overruled that they're irrelevant). 

Take, for example, the seemingly different results in Hadley v Baxendale and Victoria Laundry. You'll learn about those cases in contracts, but at their core Baxendale said you get damages that were the "probably result" of breach of contract, while Victoria Laundry lowered the standard to damages that were a "serious possibility." Victoria Laundry was the latter case, but the House of Lords seemed to split on whether it had overruled Baxendale in another case (I think Koufous, but don't quote me on that). 

So, a B answer will cite one of those when discussing whether someone will be liable for damages. That's fine, and for a bunch of cases it doesn't really matter — if something is probable to result, it's definitely a serious possibility, so you could cite either one. But on an exam you likely won't get those clear cases. You'll get something in between, and your prof will be looking for you to say "the plaintiff will cite Victoria Laundry, arguing that the damages were a serious possibility of breach and the defendant knew this. The Defendant will cite Baxendale, saying that the damages were a possibility, but not a probability, and thus they should not be held liable. It's unclear what the court will do in this situation, but... *insert analysis of which you think is likely, etc*.

A B answer will look at the question, apply one of the laws, and move on. An A answer accepts the nuance in the law and argues both sides effectively while coming to a conclusion. 

Odds and Ends

Formatting

I like to format my exams properly — I indent paragraphs, use headings, and write a proper introduction and conclusion. I have no idea if that helps, but I've been told my exams are more readable than others. 

Citation

For some reason, a lot of people will apply the law without citing it, or at least they did in first semester. The entire point of reading cases is to be able to cite the authority from which the law is derived. If you can't remember a case or don't have it in your summary, most profs will accept a brief description for part marks: "In extraordinary cases, damages for breach may be measured by the benefit gained by the wrongdoer, instead of losses (The case with the double agent who wrote a book in England)." So in order of preference: (1) cite the actual case after providing the rule; (2) describe the case after providing the rule; (3) provide the rule without citation. 

Timing

Most law school exams have recommended times for each section on them. Stick to those timings. A lot of students end up spending 15 minutes on their policy question instead of the recommended 45 (or whatever) because they spent too much time in the other sections of the exam. That will hurt you in the long run. I like to use the timer in examsoft to keep myself disciplined with my answers. 

Quick Disclaimer

I used really obviously understandable examples of nuance, policy, etc. They'll often be a lot more specific. The contrast between Baxendale and Victoria Laundry is big and obvious, and you'll see it once you start studying them. Most students will pick up on that kind of stuff, so I don't think it will really set you apart. I used it here to show a really high profile example that all students will learn during their classes. A better example would have been McRae and Chaplin v Hicks, but not all students will learn those cases. So yeah, the general point stands, but the example is exagerated for your benefit.

[OzStudent 84]

The answer above is really good comprehensive advice. 

I screenshot this page from a US law school forum back when I was in 1L and tried to stick with it as best as I could through all my exams (recognizing time constraints etc.), to decent effect. 

For further nuance, I think what really separates the "B+" answer from an "A" answer is (once you have already identified arguments on both sides) a thoughtful evaluation of the relative strength of each argument and what ultimately the issue should "turn" on. Is it indeed a narrower set of facts that tilts us in one direction? Or an important policy consideration? Or a more persuasive jurisdiction, more recent case etc - and explain why. 

2004 Mich. St. L. Rev. 1 wrote:
5 - precisely identified issue, argued from facts, precedent and policy as appropriate, examined BOTH SIDES of arguments, evaluated relative strength of argument, noted relationship of issue to other issues and overall outcome

4 - clearly identified issue, noted arguments for BOTH SIDES but presented well developed argument for one side only, drew conclusion with some relationship to overall outcome

3 - clearly identified issue, argued one side only, drew summary conclusion

2 - identified issue, articulated but did not apply legal standards for resolution of the issue, drew summary conclusion

1 - identified issue and drew summary conclusion

0 - missed issue, stated rules without identifying issue

Edited April 26, 2018 by OzStudent

[LivePumpkin 85]

Wow, THANK YOU both for such thorough and insightful answers! 

[harveyspecter993 836]

On 4/26/2018 at 11:31 PM, LivePumpkin said:

Wow, THANK YOU both for such thorough and insightful answers! 

And thank you for asking the question in the first place.

[LeoandCharlie 288]

Haven’t even begun courses yet but I can already tell Osgoode was the right decision and that there exist a stong supportive environment among the students.

Thank you to you all for your gracious answers and for giving us your time. 

[LeoandCharlie 288]

Less a question strictly for those in L1 but, could anyone shed some light on what the selection of Osgoode apparel is like at the Keele Bookstore East? 

I was hoping to grab a few things for the summer months prior to school but noticed the bookstore at Osgoode closed for the summer as of April 9th. Is the selection of sweaters and such decent at the Keele bookstore east? 

[FoG 84]

1 hour ago, LeoandCharlie said:

Less a question strictly for those in L1 but, could anyone shed some light on what the selection of Osgoode apparel is like at the Keele Bookstore East? 

I was hoping to grab a few things for the summer months prior to school but noticed the bookstore at Osgoode closed for the summer as of April 9th. Is the selection of sweaters and such decent at the Keele bookstore east? 

I checked it out last week when I was passing by the campus. There wasn't much in terms of selection. Just a couple red hoodies with the school name on them!  Nothing special or even close to the variety available on the site at the moment. Your best bet is to place an order online IMO!