Synthesizing My Workload

So the first week of law school came and went, and nothing truly surprised me. I expected the workload to be heavy, which came to fruition quite quickly, even before school started, when I had to read two books during orientation. Diversity is lacking in the student body, but again, that is to be expected because I'm at a Connecticut state school. It doesn't bother me though, as I feel like I've grown past that stage of awkwardness.

Hartford is pleasant at the moment. The laid back atmosphere as compared to Boston is a welcomed change. I like how so many dining and shopping options are readily available, or at least within a short drive. I also am intrigued by the diversity that this town has - leaving me on my toes more often than none.

The hardest part of law school, on top of reading and processing the cases, is really to keep an open mind to the larger picture. Why are we reading these cases? Why are we reading this case (Pennoyer v. Neff in Civil Procedure) that has been overruled by the Supreme Court many years ago? How do they all fit in? The short answer to these roundabout questions is that I think the professors are trying to get us to think about how the policy of the law evolved into the elements of that particular law in the present day. Rather than focus on the minute details of the case facts (of course, that is important so that I don't look like a retard in class), I should really try to understand the case from a policy standpoint, as well as to make sure that I understand the black letter law that is applicable to other variations of the case. How can I change the facts of the particular case, or create one from my own imagination, so much so that the elements of the black letter law applies? How can I change it enough so that it no longer applies?

Planet Law School thus far has proven to be helpful in a sense that the book has allowed me to put my learning into perspective early. In fact, I hope that this mindset is exactly what I have to do (I'm banking on it!). I am yet to feel comfortable discussing the cases in a more thorough manner with my classmates as of the first week, most simply because I don't think any of us, myself included, have had enough law school to see what's going on. In the meanwhile, I feel that my writing these entries will help me understand the concepts of what I'm reading a little more. In a sense, this will help me synthesize my thoughts.

Civil Procedure:

So far, we've read Pennoyer v. Neff and a few other cases dealing with personal jursidiction. Pennoyer is no longer applicable, but it is seemingly the foundational building blocks of personal jurisdiction - when is it applicable and how can the courts use it? I think this course is following closely with Glannon's study aid, which will be helpful to get a different perspective.

Torts:

The cases we've read in the first week deal primarily with Duty: when does someone owe a duty to another person? Starting with Walters v. Walmart, we got a very basic taste of torts and quite frankly, and easy application of the duty clause: the employee admitted to the tortuous action.

Contracts:

We've read the most cases for this class, but many of them are short. The class thus far has touched upon the notion of privity, and a few elements of a contract (K = offer + acceptance and consideration). The first week dealt primarily with consideration, and what is required for consideration in a contract.

Criminal Law:

This class has been a blur to me. Professor Wilf has provided very little structure, yet he reminds me of Dr. Rotheim. Hopefully, I'll be able to develop some kind of commodore with him the same way I did with Rotheim. Quite frankly, I have no idea what's going on in this class, but I hope it will turnout great because of the subject matter.

Lawyering Process:

I was inspired to write this entry because of LP. The class assignments will be hard, and writing isn't necessarily my strong suit. But the class allowed me to look into the other classes with a different lense: Basically, we're looking at a few cases to formulate a 'black letter law' and its elements for the intentional infliction of emotional stress. In the same way, that is exactly what we're doing with all the cases in the other classes. We need to look at a set of cases to see where a particular law came from and how it was developed. As long as I keep that perspective, I think, in fact, I hope, I will have somewhat of an informed advantage over my classmates. But then again, I'm very open to sharing and collaborating.

Until next time.