Posted by TDot on Jan 15, 2012 in
NotFail Hey everybody! 
Sorry I’ve been MIA for nearly a month now, I’ve been sequestered in my own personal 3L Hell for most of that time and just haven’t had much opportunity to update the blog 
I’ll try to get things caught up some time this coming weekend, but for now I wanted to mention our 1L trial teams completely dominated the annual Kilpatrick-Townsend 1L Trial Advocacy Competition this year!
We had one team win 1st place, one team win 2nd place, and a third team (who was eliminated in a head-to-head matchup with the first team) taking #1 in overall quality points. Every single match where NCCU Law had a team — 6 total preliminary rounds, 2 separate quarterfinals, 2 separate semifinals, and the final round — someone from that team won the round’s award for Best Advocate.
So basically we’ve got the 3 very best 1L trial teams in the State of North Carolina 
Here’s the press release we put together and a team photo:
NCCU LAW 1Ls SWEEP STATEWIDE TRIAL ADVOCACY COMPETITION
Legal Eagles Take 1st Place, 2nd Place, Best Advocate Awards
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
DURHAM, NC (01/15/12) – Defeating trial teams from Campbell, Duke, UNC-Chapel Hill, and Wake Forest, 1Ls from the North Carolina Central University School of Law (“NCCU Law”) made history this weekend when they won both 1st Place and 2nd Place in the annual Kilpatrick-Townsend 1L Trial Advocacy Competition hosted by the UNC-Chapel Hill School of Law.
NCCU Law's three 1L trial teams for 2011-12
In just NCCU Law’s third year participating in the competition, the school’s three 1L trial teams advanced to the final round for the third straight time — a 100% record of reaching the finals.
But this year’s competition featured a twist: after practicing against each other for 6+ hours a day from January 2nd-11th, Legal Eagles dominated every other school so thoroughly that both finalists were from NCCU Law, guaranteeing a 1st Place finish in the competition for the first time in school history. The only team to beat NCCU Law was another team from NCCU Law.
“Hard work plus confidence equals success,” said Jonathan Savage ’14, lead counsel for the 1st Place team and winner of the competition’s Best Advocate Overall award. “The hours of practice were well worth it, and I’m so grateful to have had this opportunity!”
Going into Saturday’s quarterfinals, all NCCU Law teams were in the Top 8: the #1-seed team of Jeannelle Alexander, Emily Custer, Amelia O’Rourke-Owens, and Ernest Roberts; the #2-seed team of Helen Baddour, Stephanie Faris, Jason Howe, and Sonyé Randolph; and the #8-seed team of Molly Brewer, Christina Carter, Jonathan Savage, and Matt Wareham.
Based on bracket-style seeding NCCU was paired up against NCCU in the quarterfinal round, where Team Brewer edged past Team Alexander to advance to the semifinals, while Team Baddour knocked out a group from UNCCH Law to advance as well. Once in the semifinals, Team Baddour took down a squad from Duke Law while Team Brewer dispatched another team from UNCCH, setting up a second NCCU-vs-NCCU battle in the competition’s final round.
Before a packed courtroom with nearly 70 observers, prosecution Team Brewer faced off against defense Team Baddour in a highly polished championship match. In a close finish following extensive jury deliberations, Team Brewer was declared the winner with Matt Wareham winning the award for Best Witness and Jonathan Savage taking home the title of Best Advocate Overall.
With 32 teams competing, NCCU Law’s three teams made up just 9.4% of the participants — but 37.5% of the quarterfinalists, 50% of the semifinalists, and 100% of the finalists.
[Photo, from left to right: Bottom Row: Stephanie Faris, Molly Brewer, Helen Baddour, Jeannelle Alexander, Emily Custer; Middle Row: Molly Morgan, Jason Howe, Sonyé Randolph, Christina Carter, Amelia O'Rourke-Owens; Top Row: Ernest Roberts, Matt Wareham, Jonathan Savage]
###
It was an awesome closing match, with just short of 70 people in the courtroom watching — including 3 of our Deans, a half-dozen professors, a few alumni and tons of Legal Eagles 
I also had “a dog in the fight” beyond just school pride, because the results this year also validated my whole philosophy on how to approach this competition.
My 1L year we were left to our own devices to develop our case, as we’re supposed to do, and miraculously ended up coming in 2nd after going 5-0 before losing in a rematch against Duke Law. Last year our 1Ls came in 2nd too (against another Duke Law team), but the 3Ls tried to micromanage the process so thoroughly — over the objections of myself and other members of that 2009-10 team — that only a few of the 2010-11 1L team members came back for TYLA/AAJ as 2Ls.
Once there was new leadership on the Trial Advocacy Board, we changed things around back to how they used to be. In October all interested 1Ls had to attend a workshop on opening statements and closing arguments before trying out a couple weeks later, then once we decided who made the three teams we left them alone with one condition: they had to practice against each other from 9am-3pm from January 2nd-11th, plus extra practice as needed. During the formal practices one team would be paired against another with a third in the jury box, rotating so every team faced everyone else at least twice apiece.
The variety of opposition and frequency of the practice helped ensure they were comfortable and confident when they got into Chapel Hill. I got to watch two rounds of the competition on Friday night, and then the closing arguments on Sunday. I was absolutely tickled pink at how great they did — still several pages of things done wrong, but a level of polish on par with some of the 2L/3L teams I’ve seen and easily better than I was as a 1L.
Having made history for the law school once this weekend, I’m hoping they’ll stick around and make history over the next couple years too 
One day I want to see NCCU Law not just hitting up TYLA and AAJ, but making it back to some of the invitation-only trial advocacy competitions we used to win in the halcyon days the old folks talk about…
That’s it for tonight, I’m going back to a brief. Have a great week!
Tags: 1L, K-S 1L Mock Trial Competition, Legal Eagles FTW, NCCU Law, Trial Team
Posted by TDot on Dec 6, 2011 in
NotFail I know I usually wait to post entries until right before bed, but the November 2011 MPRE scores just came out…
…and I’m officially ethical enough to practice in any state in the country! 
Yay passing things!
Words cannot adequately convey how abjectly terrified I was when I walked out of the testing center expecting that I’d have to repeat the test again in February. I’m talking downright turrfied.
Thankfully all that stressing out was for nothing ::wipes brow::
Granted the score’s not exactly anything to write home about; the MPRE’s on a 150-pt scale, so basically I got a flat D if this were done on a traditional grading scale.
But I don’t care because now I’ve only got those minor speed bumps of “graduation” and “barzam” standing between myself and a law license!
That’s all for now, I’m still on finals grind mode and don’t really have time to type more. Have a great night y’all, and *CONGRATULATIONS* to all the other law school folks out there who passed!
Tags: 3L, Competence FTW, MPRE
Posted by TDot on Dec 3, 2011 in
NotFail I made it!
For the first time all semester, I got a Tax assignment turned in ahead of deadline with my final uploaded just before 4am this morning. Then headed to bed, slept ’til 8am, got up and promptly started studying for my 2pm Sales & Secured Transactions final.
To any 1Ls/2Ls who happen to read this: paying attention in Sales throughout the semester is certifiably A Good Idea™
Prof. Sales’s exam is intense, reflecting the fact it’s a 4-credit course. 10 questions on classifying collateral, 20 “short” multiple choice questions, 40 “long” multiple choice questions, and 2 essays on Article 2 and Article 9 respectively. By the time you’re done it’s like having an anvil lifted off your chest; it was, hands-down, my hardest exam of my law school career.
And even though I’ve got no clue how my grade will turn out, I think I actually might have done alright
The pre-Halloween weekend I spent catching up on Article 2 was time very well spent, and my Article 9 (mis-)reading helped me not be totally clueless on PMSIs, the Professor’s SCAPP analysis framework, and so on.
Though I did have a brief CivPro II flashback as I made it to the 2 essays with only 30 minutes left, put in 20 minutes on what had to be the quickest almost-thorough analysis I’ve ever done and then barely managed to outline a response on Article 9
No clue how much that’s going to hurt my grade, but I’m hoping I followed my historical pattern and banged out the multiples. Fingers crossed
Grabbed dinner and a drink with some fellow 3Ls afterwards, came home to knock out an extra credit assignment for Tax… and now I’m off to catch up on sleep
Have a great night y’all!
Tags: 3L, Exams, NCCU Law, Prof Sales, Sales, Tax
Posted by TDot on Nov 14, 2011 in
NotFail Good evening y’all!
Apparently mediation-related competitions exist in the law school arena? Definitely news to me
And the only reason I found out is because two Legal Eagles from NCCU Law took 1st and 2nd place in one of them! From the “Well this is something cool to get in my email inbox on a Monday morning” files (via this story at University of Houston Law Center):
North Carolina mediators sweep Abrams Competition
Nov. 14, 2011 – Leah Leone of the North Carolina Central University School of Law has taken the top honor at the Jeffry S. Abrams National Mediation Competition, held Nov. 11-12 at the University of Houston Law Center. As the winner, Leone received the Frank Evans Mediator Scholarship award, valued at $2,000.
Jeffry S. Abrams (L) and 1st place winner Leah Leone of NCCU Law (R)
“This has been an amazing experience for me,” Leone said. “From start to finish, the competition has taught me so much. The insight I gained and the lessons I have learned here in the great state of Texas from my competitors and all the judges has been invaluable.”
Presented by the Blakely Advocacy Institute and sponsored by distinguished Houston mediator and UH Law Center alumnus Jeffry S. Abrams, the competition allowed top law students nationwide to put their mediation skills to the test before a team of judges.
“The competition went very well. There were 11 student mediators and the national reach of the competition was evidenced by the fact that students from California (UC-Hastings) to New York (St. John’s) were in attendance. The competitors, and coaches, were high in their praise of the competition, stating that the opportunity to learn from experienced mediators (as judges) in the competition context was one of the best experiences of their law school career,” said Jim Lawrence, Blakely Advocacy Institute Director.
The final rounds saw Leone and Valoree Hanson, a student mediator also from the North Carolina Central University School of Law, being judged by Abrams; Tom Newhouse, University of Houston Law Center Professor emeritus; and the Hon. Frank Evans, generally recognized as the father of ADR in Texas. NCCU School of Law Professor Mark Morris was Leone’s and Hanson’s coach. Leone and Hanson came in a respective first and second place in the competition. Henson received the Jeffry S. Abrams Mediator Scholarship Award, which is valued at $500.
UH Law Center students presently do not compete in the Abrams competition.
The Abrams competition is designed to run in parallel with the Law Center’s Tom Newhouse Mediation Competition, where UH Law Center students participate as advocate/client in mediation. These intramural participants serve as the parties to the mediation rounds for the national competition. Team members Garrett Gibson and Frank Carroll won the Tom Newhouse Mediation Competition.
Very cool, and CONGRATULATIONS to Miss Leone and Miss Hanson (and coach Prof ADR)!
Have a great night folks!
Tags: ADR, Competence FTW, Houston Law, Legal Eagles FTW, NCCU Law, Prof ADR
Posted by TDot on Jun 8, 2011 in
NotFail Most of the 1Ls and 2Ls at NCCU Law finally got their last grades a couple hours ago, and I am totally stunned to report that somehow by the grace of God Almighty I managed to squeak my way onto the Dean’s List for the 2nd semester in a row!
At a 3.077 semester GPA, I’m not sure I could have cut it any closer than I did. But after a ridiculous 2L Spring semester featuring family drama, too many professional commitments, 2 trial teams, losing all of my Gmail for days, a campaign for SBA President, and academic obligations stretching longer and longer than I expected, I figured last semester was going to be a one-and-done aberration anyway.
Full semester breakdown coming at some point in the future — including one for 2L Fall since I just now realized I never actually did one of those.
Until then, good night folks!
—===—
From the grade-related archives:
Tags: Law Grades, NCCU Law, The Curve
Posted by TDot on Feb 22, 2011 in
NotFail Amid all these posts about my TYLA exploits in Charlotte this past weekend, I realized that I completely forgot to update y’all on how the NCCU Law 1Ls did in this year’s Kilpatrick-Stockton Mock Trial Competition last month!
Let’s just say the finals triggered flashbacks from 2010
The info’s a bit dated, but I wrote a summary for the law school’s website you can read at this URL. Here’s the copy/paste:
NCCU 1Ls TAKE 2ND PLACE, TIE FOR 3RD IN ANNUAL K-S MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION
Home > News and Announcements > Student News
Posted January 21, 2011
In only NCCU Law’s second year of competition, the Trial Advocacy Board’s 1L trial teams once again dominated the annual Kilpatrick-Stockton 1L Mock Trial Competition hosted by the UNC Chapel Hill School of Law on January 13-16, 2011.
Pictured (from left to right): Cheri Hamilton, Helena Kirland-Werts, Nikia Williams, Kevin Boxberger, Jennifer Turner (Team Captain, "1L of a Team"), Susan Dow (Team Captain, "The Whole Truth"), Deyaska Spencer Sweatman, Diane Carter; Not Pictured: Anna Love
The “1L of a Team” squad advanced to the final round and earned a 2nd place finish, getting edged out by Duke Law after an intense and hard-fought trial by both sides. There were also 35 NCCU Law students, professors and alumni in attendance, a 10x increase over the audience for last year’s competition. The other 1L team, “The Whole Truth”, successfully advanced to the semi-final round and tied a separate Duke Law team for 3rd place.
Not only did NCCU Law’s 1Ls take half of the spots in the Final Four, this now also marks the 2nd year in a row that NCCU Law has made the final round of the competition — setting a 100% track record of NCCU Law 1Ls advancing to the final round.
28 teams participated from 6 North Carolina schools (all schools except Charlotte School of Law), and NCCU Law’s 1Ls successfully beat teams from Campbell, Duke and UNCCH at various stages of the competition.
Everyone delivered an exemplary performance, and the Trial Advocacy Board looks forward to watching these 1Ls blossom into even stronger advocates over their next two years!
A belated-but-much-deserved congratulations to the NCCU Law 1L Trial Teams!
Tags: 1L, K-S 1L Mock Trial Competition, Legal Eagles FTW, NCCU Law, Trial Team
Posted by TDot on Feb 20, 2011 in
NotFail On the ride home from the TYLA regionals in Charlotte this afternoon, I got a text message from one of my 3L colleagues with the ranking results for the 2Ls.
Apparently we came in 9th!
Only the top 8 teams got to advance to the semi-finals — including both teams from Charlotte Law and the Emory Law team that beasted us on Friday — but to make the Top 10 of a 30ish team field, in the first full-scale competition any of us 2Ls have had (and my very first ever as counsel) sounds pretty damn good to me
To the folks who made the semis this go-round: be prepared next year, because you’ll be seeing me again
Tags: 2L, Charlotte Law, Emory Law, NCCU Law, Trial Team, TYLA
Posted by TDot on Feb 16, 2011 in
NotFail A couple days ago I posted an updated entry on how my 1L Spring grades turned out, and this entry is a follow-up with my summer school grades so y’all will have the “full picture” of how my 1L academic life turned out
====================
SUPERIOR COURT MEDIATION
====================
This 5-day, 40-hour pass/fail class doubled as a CLE for practicing attorneys and is required for all certified mediators in North Carolina.
Tagged by me as “Lobbying for Lawyers“, essentially we learned about various types of alternative dispute resolution and then plowed in-depth into various aspects of mediation, followed by a series of role-playing exercises where we rotated as mediator with other classmates acting as attorneys or clients.
The variety of ages and student-vs-practicing-attorney split made for a different dynamic than the other classes (in a good way). Even though there were some boring moments, I enjoyed it overall and feel like I learned some useful snippets from it. It certainly helped with my ADR Clinic experience
Expected final grade for class: Pass
Actual final grade for class: Pass
Synopsis: Useful topic + free food == #win
====================
ADR PROCESSES AND PRACTICE
====================
While Superior Court Mediation focused on teaching the various types of alternative dispute resolution and training people on how to be effective mediators, this class focused on ADR from the vantage points of the advocates.
The first day of class covered some of the essentials on ADR that I had already learned, but beyond that each subsequent class involved reading a chapter or two on negotiating styles, competitive tactics, and so on along with learning a new fact pattern. Then we’d have a mock settlement conference with opposing counsel for each of these sets of facts.
The professor for the course was hilarious and laid-back. I also surprisingly enjoyed the course textbook (even though it was dry in parts).
Final grades for the course were based on a journal maintained throughout the summer session and two essays critiquing the results of a negotiation session and a mediation session respectively. I figured I aced the essays but also lost points on the journal because I missed an entry or two. Luckily it wasn’t enough to alter my grade
Expected final grade for class: A-
Actual final grade for class: A
Synopsis: Good professor + good textbook == #win
====================
ADR CLINIC
====================
Most of my experiences in this class already got written about elsewhere on the blog under the ADR tag. Basically every participant had to mediate about a dozen cases, the bulk of which were in Criminal District Court in Wake County. We also mediated cases involving child support, 50(B) protective orders, Medicaid cases pending before the state’s Office of Administrative Hearings, and had to sit in on a session with Wake County’s Drug Court.
Clinic grades were based on performance/professionalism during the mediations, teaching a class on an ADR-related topic of choice, completing three different reflections on various mediations (mine were late), and compiling a portfolio including a résumé and pricing list for use if/when we became real mediators.
The main upside to the class was learning that I’m probably not cut out for mediation. I’m incredibly talented at it, but I’m also accustomed to having an opinion and I’m ill-suited to simply facilitating
Expected final grade for class: B-
Actual final grade for class: B+
Synopsis: Tangible experience + decent grade == #win
====================
RACE & THE LAW
====================
This class was the highlight of my summer
It’s a seminar course that focuses on the impact race has played on American jurisprudence, through the lens of 5 different groups (lumped together in the casebook as whites, blacks, asians, hispanics, and American Indians). In addition to examining the core case law — sizable chunks of which are still surprisingly considered good law, even though they were based on what we now know are inaccurate perceptions of race — the book then follows with looking at race-based cases as applied to issues such as free speech, marriage/adoption, immigration, political participation, and so on.
As you can probably guess, conversations in the class periodically got emotional but everything was kept at a high level of professionalism. It was engaging to hear the different perspectives based not only on folks’ own races, but also their age, socioeconomic status, sexuality, upbringing, military service and various other factors. I thoroughly enjoyed it, even though my somewhat-outspoken views aren’t exactly politically correct.
Final grades were based on two different group presentations and two essays. I had to give myself a crash course in constitutional law because all of the essay options included either First or Fourteenth Amendment considerations, but I anchored myself to a desk at the law school until I learned it and wrote solid responses. The effort was worth it
Expected final grade for class: A
Actual final grade for class: A
Synopsis: Engaging discussion + “A” in a 3-credit course == #win^2
====================
FINAL SCORE: SUMMER 2010 FINALS
====================
Expected End-of-Summer GPA: 3.523
Actual End-of-Summer GPA: 3.810
Actual End-of-1L GPA: 2.898 (Law school median: 2.000)
*****
I’ll be focused on the upcoming TYLA regional competition in Charlotte for the next few days so I don’t know when I’ll have a follow-up post, but once life settles down I’ll go through the Fall 2011 semester and I’ll finally be more-or-less caught up with things
Have a great night y’all!
—===—
From the grade-related archives:
Tags: 1L, ADR, Law Grades, QuietStorm, Race&Law, Trial Team, TYLA
Posted by TDot on Feb 14, 2011 in
NotFail Good evening y’all
As law:/dev/null exhibited the occasional sign of life over the past couple weeks, I had a trio of people ask me the same question: aside from my obvious elation at the ending GPA, how did my individual classes turn out during 2L Fall?
I’ve been meaning to post an entry explaining exactly that… but then realized I never gave y’all a final update on 1L Spring, or any update at all on 1L Summer
So to properly bolster my reputation of being totally open about my law school grades, I’ve copy/pasted my previous Spring grades entry and revised it with the exam info The textual updates are [bracketed], bolded, and preceded by “Update:” for readability.
I’ll post a separate entry on summer school grades some time this week, and then 2L Fall grades after that — I thought about rolling all that info into this one entry, but considering I haven’t managed to string 3 consecutive entries together for awhile now I wanted to make sure I’ve got easily-editable stuff in the queue
Without further ado…
********************
1L SPRING REVISITED
********************
[Everything below is a copy/paste from this entry except for the updates and the final exam grades. You've been forewarned, so any resulting confusion is your own fault! 
]
====================
CIVIL PROCEDURE II
====================
MDG switched things up from the usual final, giving us a set of multiples but then providing documents from a mock court case to review for the essay. Our objective was to review the documents and craft a letter to the client discussing the numerous FRCP-related concerns that existed.
It was during that portion of the exam that I stopped watching the clock and had time called before I got anywhere near finishing it
CivPro II Final Exam Grades
The multiples were a challenge, with MDG describing them as “nuanced” and mentioning that even a fellow CivPro instructor missed a couple. The highest correct was 15 out of 20 multiples (75%) with the class average at 12 (60%) — high enough to pass the Bar, which is definitely a good thing given the difficulty.
The chart to the right shows how the final exam grades broke down. There was a +19-point curve.
My final grade for the course turned out slightly higher than anticipated, so my guess is I did well on the multiples. But I’m kicking myself for choosing a UNC Board of Governors meeting over an extra credit assignment we were given shortly after midterms though — the extra 5 points would have bumped the final grade to a B, bumping my 1L GPA above a 2.7 (eligible for some NCCU Law merit scholarships).
Lesson learned :headdesk:
[Update: I found out from MDG that I tied for top score on the multiple choice, which let me know I completely bombed the essay -- so I didn't bother picking it up ]
Midterm exam grade: A-
Final exam grade: C
Expected final grade for class: C+
Actual final grade for class: B-
Synopsis: Worse performance than last semester, but given how gratuitously I choked on the essay I’m satisfied with how it turned out. And now I know to do all available extra credit in the future
====================
CONTRACTS II
====================
Not a whole lot to say here: Contracts clearly isn’t my thing.
The downside is that I now have to explain to future employers how I barely passed a core class two semesters in a row.
The upside? I never have to take Contracts again until the bar exam
[Update: This was the first (and thus far only) exam where I've underperformed on the multiples compared to the essay. According to Prof Ks, I got 33 of 50 possible essay points and was comfortably above the class median. But I somehow had the 3rd lowest score on the multiple choice Still glad the class is over...]
Midterm exam grade: C-
Final exam grade: C
Expected final grade for class: C-
Actual final grade for class: C
Synopsis: I passed
====================
CRIMINAL LAW
====================
If my perpetual flailing in Ks killed any briefly-nurtured dreams I had of going the intellectual property route, CrimLaw coupled with 1L Trial Team have convinced me to follow my heart and go the criminal prosecution route professionally. It’s something I had wanted to do for years, but never seriously considered since public employees don’t make much salary-wise.
But based on my grades it seems like the only thing I’ll be qualified to do
The really crazy part? This was my best grade all year, and it was in the one class where I didn’t study for the final exam because I had a UNCASG meeting that weekend
Professor CrimLaw sent me an email making sure I knew that (i) I earned the grade I got but (ii) I shouldn’t make any professional decisions based on one course. He’s got a valid point but I don’t feel like I’m doing that here — I really, truly, and deeply hate Contracts too so technically it’s based on three courses
[Update: I missed a trio of the multiple choice, and had a few points taken off on the essay. For an ever-so-brief period of time I thought about arguing with Prof CrimLaw over some of the missed points -- including a section where he wrote that I misread the fact pattern, even though myself and every other classmate I spoke to "misread" the same thing -- but I was sufficiently happy/stunned to have at least 1 A-range grade that I didn't bother contesting it.]
Midterm exam grade: A-
Final exam grade: A-
Expected final grade for class: A-
Actual final grade for class: A-
Synopsis: I’m 90% sure Professor CrimLaw isn’t a TDot fan, but I still enjoyed the course. And I’m glad I finally have something other than B’s and C’s populating my transcript
====================
LEGAL RESEARCH & PERSUASION
====================
Along with not watching the clock in the CivPro final, this was my other instance of taking a strong starting grade and pissing it away through truly stunning incompetence.
Note to the pre-Ls: read directions!
Then when you’re done: re-read directions!
Then after that: re-re-read directions!
Trust me
[Update: The professor said my final memo was excellent and would have earned me an A- had it not been days late. Le sigh. #kanyeshrug]
Cumulative grade after midterm: A-
Final memo grade: C-
Expected final grade for class: C
Actual final grade for class: C
Synopsis: It could have been worse I guess. At least the research skills we learned actually turned out to be useful. ::headdesk::
====================
PROPERTY II
====================
This was the only final exam where I didn’t have a gut feeling one way or the other on how it turned out. I’m not sure if it was from the stress of the looming Contracts final two days later or what.
My performance was worse than the midterm, but high enough that I ended up with the exact same grade I got in the Fall.
And I don’t remember any of it already
[Update: The final for Property II was "meh" all around. Lost a few points on the multiples. Lost a few points on the fill-in-the-blanks covering future interests. Lost a few points on the essay. If anyone has any particularly compelling insights to glean from that performance, let me know ]
Midterm exam grade: A- (and in Top 3)
Final exam grade: B
Expected final grade for class: B+
Actual final grade for class: B+
Synopsis: At least I’m consistent
====================
TORTS II
====================
Professor Torts is currently in Costa Rica with our Study Abroad folks, so I won’t know how the final exam turned out for a long while.
But I know enough to know I blew it 
Back on the midterms I ended up with the #1 score out of the class on the multiples-only exam, so to end up with a final grade below even last semester’s I must have quite thoroughly FUBAR’d the final. And I feel fairly certain I did well on the essay, meaning I can only assume I botched the multiples.
Meh. Was never a fan of this class either…
[Update: Didn't do as well on the essay as I thought, completing missing 1 of the issues and losing a point or two on a pair of others. Also didn't do as bad as I thought on the multiples... but someone nailed everything so there was no boost at all in the typical curving of grades ]
Midterm exam grade: A (and in Top 3)
Final exam grade: C+
Expected final grade for class: A-
Actual final grade for class: B-
Synopsis: This was the only bona fide disappointment for the semester, but at least it’s over. I will most definitely not be taking Advanced Torts
====================
FINAL SCORE: SPRING 2010 FINALS
====================
Expected End-of-Semester GPA: 2.756
Actual End-of-Semester GPA: 2.733
Actual End-of-1L GPA: 2.678 (Law school median: 2.000)
*****
So that’s the final word on 1L Spring. Info on 1L Summer coming soon (really! )
Have a great night!
—===—
From the grade-related archives:
Tags: 1L, CivPro, CrimLaw, Exams, Ks, Law Grades, LRP, MDG, NCCU Law, Prof CrimLaw, Prof Ks, Prof Torts, Property, Torts
Posted by TDot on Jan 18, 2011 in
NotFail I did it y’all! 
Ever-so-slightly lower than what I was hoping to get, but high enough to get me where I wanted: 3.333 for the semester, bringing me up to 3.026 overall — and making the NCCU Law Dean’s List!
On a C curve!
For the first time since 2005!
Sorry I’ve been gone y’all, life’s been crazy — a bunch of semi-drafted posts to upload at some point this week including a thorough semester review too. Have a great night!
Tags: Law Grades, NCCU Law, The Curve
[
