ORDER OF PROCEEDING

• Logistics & Exam Structure• Exam Technique

– Generally– QI: Lawyering– QII: Short Problems– QIII: Opinion/Dissent– QIV: Issue-Spotter

• Questions from You– Exam Technique & Logistics– Substantive

Logistics & Exam

Structure

General Logistics

• I’ll post these slides on Course Page tonight

• Office Hours Tomorrow 9-1, 2-6

• I will respond to E-mail Qs (within reason) sent before 6pm tomorrow

• Written Assignments Not Available

Exam Coverage• Test can’t cover every issue in the course

• Something from every chapter (except 7)– See Info Memo #6 for coverage from each chapter– Look at Write-Ups of Assignments II, III & IV

• Statutes– If I want you to use FL landlord-Tenant Act, I’ll

attach provisions– You can use other statutes where relevant, but test

won’t require you to have memorized language.

Exam Coverage• Most of the major issues on test should be

familiar from written assignments, review problems and/or hypotheticals raised & discussed in class (e.g., Twice-Cooked Pork).

Structure of Exam• Choose three of four equally weighted Qs

• Four hours– One hour to read Qs, take notes, outline (no

computers or bluebooks)– Three hours to write answers (One hour per Q)– Stick VERY CLOSELY to allotted times

• Instructions page of exam available on Course Page to read in advance

• Closed book with syllabus attached. Copy of Syllabus on Course Page to practice with.

Using Your Reading Period

• 1st 15 Minutes– Read test – Hyperventilate– Choose which Qs to write & in what order

• Probably shouldn’t decide in advance which Qs to do

• Be thoughtful about order given your own strengths– Will you be more focused at beginning or end?

– Which format do you expect to be most difficult?

– Could be creative: e.g., short-long-short-long-short (A.D.D.!!)

– If you end up short of time in last hour, Q3 probably easiest; Q2 probably worst

Using Your Reading Period

• 1st 15 Minutes: Read Test; Choose Qs & Order

• Next 45 Minutes (I’d Recommend…)– Use about 15 minutes to prep each Q you are doing– Read it again carefully– Make rough outline by

• Listing major points you’d like to discuss

• Choose order in which you’ll discuss them

– Do last in reading period Q you want to write first

Aftermath

• By tradition, I’ll be on the bricks at the end of the scheduled exam time

• I’ll post grading progress on Course Page

• I’ll post when assignments are ready to be picked up.

Aftermath

• Once grades are posted, I’ll make available a packet for you to pick up with:– Copy of your test– Exam Questions, My Comments & Best Answers– Explanation of Grading & Your Individualized

Scores– Assignments not yet picked up

• I’ll set times to meet to review with you if you choose

Qs on Structure or Logistics?

Exam Technique: Generally

Exam Technique: Generally

• My Exam Techniques Lectures Available on Academic Achievement Website

• Some Repetition Here, But Focused on Problems Commonly Arising on Old Exams & Last Year’s Submitted Sample Qs (I’ll go Through Quickly)

Exam Technique: Generally

(1) Testing Ability to Use Tools, Not Knowledge of Them

• Don’t Simply Recite Legal Tests; Apply Them (as Soon as You Mention Them)

• Helpful (but not Crucial) to Refer to Relevant Authority (see old best answers)

• Make your reasoning explicit: Wizard of Oz (Because, Because, Because)

Exam Technique: Generally

(2) Draft, Not Final Product • No need for formal introductions &

conclusions

• Use abbreviations (names; recurring phrases)

• Can use telegraph English

• Use headings, not topic sentences

• Can use bulleted lists (e.g., of evidence supporting one side of an argument)

Exam Technique: Generally

(3) Be Concise. Regarding the recurring problem of wordiness,

almost all of the thirty-three otherwise diligent and competent students who last year took the time to submit a practice exam answer pursuant to the rules posted on the course page for doing so thoroughly demonstrated the fact that that they had a tendency to that problem as well as showing redundancy and continued difficulties writing in a concise, brief and to the point way.

Exam Technique: Generally

(4) Best Prep is Old Exam Qs • Do under exam conditions (esp. Q1/Q3)

• Review in groups if possible

• Read my comments

• Use model answers – to see organization/style I like – to see some possible ways to analyze– neither complete nor perfect

Exam Technique: Generally

(5) Dealing with One Hour Questions with Separately Designated Parts

• Assume Parts Are Roughly Equal

• True This Year of All Three Long Qs– Q1: Three concerns raised by client.– Q3: Two legal questions to address. – Q4: Two distinct sets of issues designated.

Exam Technique: Question ILawyering

Question I• Client Comes Into Your Office

• Gives You Relatively Limited Facts (insufficient info to argue or advise yet)

• Will Raise Issues From Several Parts of Course

Discuss the factual and legal research you would need to do in order to advise Carlos

regarding the concerns described below:

Question ITASK

• To Do List (in order to advise client)• NOT arguments re result (Q v. R)• Explain why things matter• Note what client has asked you

– Stick to legal topics raised by requests– NOT looking to you for business advice

Question IORGANIZATION/FORMAT

• All law/all fact often unsuccessful

• Can organize by major topics (use headings and subheadings)

• Can use paragraphs or outline form or bullets (drawbacks to each)

Question I

Issues with Multiple Rules• Check which rule applies in your state• Then: “If state uses rule X, check

[relevant facts]. If state uses rule Y…”• Cross-reference if overlap (“fact

research for materiality same as above)

Question IFactual Research

• Looking for specifics, not simply reformulating legal tests as Qs

• Indicate how you would locate facts (interviews, records, ask client, etc.)

• If not pretty obvious, briefly explain why the facts matter

Question IFactual Research

• Increasing Degree of Difficulty: – More detail in identifying possible

relevant facts– More detail in explaining how you might

get information

Question I

Practical Research• If arguably relevant, can ask re client

priorities or interest in settlement • Can investigate whether compromise

solutions are possible• Can investigate whether other parties

might want to settle

Question IPreparing

• Be aware of issues with multiple rules• Think about evidence necessary to

prove claims• Look at old comments/models & write-

ups of lawyering review problems• Do at least one under exam conditions

Questions on Question I?

Exam Technique: Question II

Short Problems

Question II• Four Problems; Choose any Three

– Three are topics you’ve seen in short problems

– One new topic for short problems, but based on issue discussed in class & in longer problem

• Can do in any order, but mark clearly

• Start each on new page if handwriting (can also do w exam program)

• 20 Minutes Each: Stick to Time!!!

Question II• Read Q Carefully & Respond to What’s

Asked• Often limited in scope. E.g.,

– Apply particular case (e.g., Shack, Nahrstedt, Stambovsky)

– Discuss one element of Adverse Possession– Sometimes really asking “What should legal

rule be for this issue?” (Mini-Q3)

Question II• Read Q Carefully & Respond to What’s

Asked• Some issues are implicit in wording of Q:

(public nuisance/standing).• Assume all facts there for a reason: legal

argument, cheap laugh, Section C1 names.

Question II• Problems Have No Clear Right Answer

– If you read a problem and are absolutely sure which side wins, don’t choose that problem.

• Find Best Arguments for Each Side

• Usually Not Helpful to Segregate Pro & Con Arguments– Eliminates possibility of dialogue

– Leaves no room for intermediate positions

Question II• Increasing Degree of Difficulty: Attack Hard

Qs/Identify Stronger Positions– Raise policy arguments that support one position

more than the other– Compare the problem to a case or cases we studied– Explain why that one side’s position is likely to have

more emotional appeal; or– Show how the result might turn on the resolution of

an ambiguity in the facts.

Questions on Question II?

Exam Technique: Question III

Opinion/Dissent

INSTRUCTIONS:Compose drafts of the analysis

sections of a majority opinion for the Gavalier Supreme Court, and

of a shorter dissent, deciding these questions in the context of the allegations in this case. …

Question III

Compose drafts …• As with issue-spotter, can include

headings, bullet points, abbr., etc.

• Present concise versions of arguments, not rhetoric (don’t get carried away with role)

• Don’t need fancy language, transitions, etc.

Question III

… of the analysis sections …• No need for – Introduction– Statement of facts– Procedural history – Separate history of the legal issue– Conclusion

• Do make clear which side would win

Question III

… of a majority opinion … and of a shorter dissent …

• Articulate best arguments for two different positions (doctrinal & policy). (I really don’t care who wins.)

• Each opinion needs to justify the particular approach it endorses (v. alternatives)

Question III

… of a majority opinion … and of a shorter dissent …

• Do 2 separate opinions (or big penalty)• Some flexibility in arranging arguments– Can put pro arguments in majority & con in

dissent– Can do back and forth in long majority, then do

very short dissent explaining different conclusion.

• May be helpful to write simultaneously.

Question III

… of a majority opinion … and of a shorter dissent …

• Increasing Degree of Difficulty: Each opinion should try to deal w other side’s best arguments

Question III

… for the Gavalier Supreme Court …• Fictional jurisdiction; other state cases are NOT

binding authority• Awareness that deciding law of the state, not just

case in front of you– Must defend positions taken even if consistent with

other cases in course (last year: unsupported cites to Funk for key points insufficient)

– Consideration of incentives re similar situations in future

– Consideration of effects on future cases & legal system

Question III

… deciding these questions …

• Two Questions; Treat as Roughly Equal

• Address both questions in both opinions

… Both your majority and your dissent should address both of the

disputed questions. …

Question III

… deciding these questions …

• Qs are very specific; read carefully

• Stay within any boundaries set by Qs

• Address arguments made by lower courts– Guiding you to some available arguments– At least have side that rejects say why

• Don’t avoid addressing my Qs by making cute legal or procedural arguments.

Question III

…in the context of the allegations in this case.

• Again read carefully

• Think about why particular facts & allegations are there

• Treat my facts/allegations as given (don’t argue with Question)

… For the purposes of these opinions, you must assume that the factual allegations in the complaint

are correct.

Question III

…in the context of the allegations in this case. • Can use facts/allegations from particular

case you’re given as example or as counterexample– “The case before us demonstrates why …”– “We think this case is not typical because …”

Question III

PREPARING• Be aware of policies supporting

particular rules or relevant to particular areas of law

• Look at old comments/models.

• Do at least one under exam conditions

• And finally ….

Question III

If you choose to name your judges (you don’t have to) …

Majority (Varitek, C.J.)… Simpson, J., Dissenting: …

Question III

… don’t use your name as the name of one of the judges!!Simpson, J., Dissenting:

Doh!

Questions on Question III

Exam Technique: Question IV Traditional

Issue-Spotter

Question IV

Traditional Issue-Spotter:

What I’m Looking For1. Identification of the Most Important

Issues

2. Quality of Analysis

3. Clear Presentation

4. Quantity of Relevant Points Made

Question IV

1. Identify the Most Important Issues• Not enough time to discuss everything

• Need to choose among topics

• Focus on most contested issues – Serious arguments on both sides– Look for topics with a lot of facts– If lawyers wouldn’t fight about it, address it

quickly or not at all.

Question IV

2. Quality of Analysis• Arguments for both sides of contested

issues.

• Try to use all the facts in the problem

• You can note missing facts/evidence that could help determine outcome (if not inconsistent with facts you do have)

Question IV

2. Quality of Analysis• Work with/compare relevant authority

• Defend key positions thoroughly

• Increasing Degree of Difficulty: Like “Limit”: Keep pushing toward resolution; don’t have to reach one. (See last QII slide for suggestions)

Question IV

3. Clear Presentation• Discuss one issue at a time

• Use headings to indicate transitions

• Make logic of arguments apparent

• Deal with overlap through cross-reference, not repetition

Question IV

4. Quantity of Relevant Points Made• Used primarily as tie-breaker if answers

otherwise similar

• A little bit of credit for quick citations to relevant authority, but thorough analysis of contested issues yields the most points

• To save time, use abbreviations, headings, bullets

• Outline at end if more to say

Questions on Question IV

Penultimate Slide

Qs on Exam Technique or

Logistics

Very Last Slide!

Substantive Qs?