Posted by T. Greg Doucette on Jul 25, 2012 in
The After-3L Life [CORRECTION (07/28/12): Madame Prosecutor informed me that the +$125 extra that computer users get charged is actually the ExamSoft licensing fee, and not extra cash going to the NCBLE as I surmised near the end of the Day 1 rundown. I’ve left the original blog entry as-is for posterity but wanted to ensure the wrong info was corrected. 
]
***
And that’s a wrap:Â after 3 years of law school — including extra summer sessions both summers, plus bar prep every day since graduation — I’m officially done with the 2012 North Carolina Bar Examination! 
It was also apparently an unprecedented clusterf*ck 
DAY 1:Â “Electricity? You mean, that’s important?”
Things started out pretty well on Tuesday morning. I had taken Samson down to a pet-sitter in Raleigh on Monday night, checked in to a hotel a few minutes away from the test site, and took the evening to relax. ((Dropped my diet for a 72-hour window by eating McDonalds, then sitting in the bathtub for an hour reading through some essays and collecting my thoughts, then sleeping.)) As I left my room the next morning ((After indulging on a delicious breakfast from room service 
)) I saw a guy all the way down at the opposite end of the hall getting ready to leave as well. Â I hate waiting for the elevator myself, so I decided to hold the elevator for him. He got on, asked if I had any exciting plans for the day, and when I told him I was taking the bar exam he goes “Just remember, there is no failure. The only failure is not doing it.”
It was a random encounter, but good vibes heading over to the test site.
When I got to the NC State Fairgrounds around 7:15am there were already hundreds of other test-takers already lined up at various entrances to the Jim Graham Building, sorted by starting letter of everyone’s last name. I wandered around until I saw some NCCU Law classmates and we waited in line for an hour or so as folks eventually got checked in. Most of our professors were there talking with Legal Eagles in the different lines, including The Chief and our new Dean, ((I’ll come up with an adequate nickname for her at some time down the road )) encouraging all of us not to stress out and to do well.
After checking in — and getting fussed at because I had inadvertently kept my NCCU Alumni hat on ((Trying to make sure my bald scalp didn’t get sunburned! )) — I found my seat near the back side of the Jim Graham Building and waited through nearly an hour of instructions on the documents we were being given, what needed to get filled in where, and all the other oodles of stuff the NCBLE is required to announce to ensure everything is done fairly (even though most of it was in printed material sent to us before we showed up). Then we got to open our essay packets and get to typing.
The essays were split into four parts, with two parts per session (AM and PM). For the morning session we were tested on: ((I’m using the delta symbol and pi symbol for defendant and plaintiff respectively; these should show up regardless of your browser and operating system, but if they don’t let me know and I’ll revert to D and P.))
- Civil Procedure:  π files a wrongful death suit against a company on the day the SOL expires, then later amends to add that he’s suing as representative of the estate and names two additional ∆s; lawyer for ∆ company opposes arguing they’re futile due to SOL lapse. Which, if any, of the 3 amendments should be allowed?
- Contracts:  Underage ∆ (claiming he’s 19) enters into referral agreement with temp employment agency Ï€, who gets ∆ a job as a photographer for a child porn syndicate. Can Ï€ recover the referral fee ∆ was due to pay?
- Evidence (2-part):  ∆ charged with second-degree murder following accident while intoxicated says during interrogation “I’m not drunk”; ∆’s lawyer tries to get the statement in during cross-examination of the police officer, and prosecutor follows up by trying to introduce ∆’s prior DWI to prove malice. Which, if either, of these two items should be excluded?
- Family Law (3-part):  ∆ and wife separate; wife has 1 child not adopted by ∆ from prior marriage, 2 more children with ∆, and doesn’t work because she and ∆ agreed at time 3rd child was born that she’d be a housewife until child starts kindergarten.  Does ∆ owe support for unadopted child, can he force wife to go back to work to support kids, and what of ∆’s various items of income will be used by the court in determining child support?
- Professional Responsibility (2-part): Â Prosecutor loses bond hearing against defense counsel; within minutes he finds a state statute (partially quoted) after returning to his office, then approaches judge ex parte to ask for new hearing under the statute, and gets original bond reinstated. Did he violate the RPC in asking for the new hearing and/or getting the bond reinstated?
- Property: Easement on parcel of land recorded 75 years ago; BFP acquired parcel with no mention of easement in deed. Can successors in interest of owner of the dominant tenement enforce the easement?
I finished the first set of essays about 45 minutes ahead of time, then we had a break for lunch until 1:45pm. The law school had a particularly tasty selection of deli sandwiches, sweets, fruits, drinks, and so on. It was unexpectedly good, and filling — I’d been expecting something low-budget in light of the state’s budget cuts but was pleasantly surprised.
After lunch we all filed back into the warehouse for the afternoon session. In that one we were tested on:
- Criminal Procedure: DV victim consents to search of apartment for abuser boyfriend; officer discovers marijuana in cigar box under the bed and charges DV victim with possession. Should the cigar box contents be suppressed?
- Torts: π loses medical malpractice case against doctor. What does he need to prove to succeed in a legal malpractice claim against ∆ lawyer?
- Constitutional Law: Kelo v. City of New London question; city condemns Ï€’s property under eminent domain as part of economic development project getting turned over to private developer. What are Ï€’s odds of successfully enjoining the condemnation?
- Agency: President of ∆ corporation enters into contract to buy expensive equipment from π, even though bylaws prevented her from doing so, π knew of bylaws restriction, and Board voted to defer all equipment purchases until next year. Is the contract enforceable?
- ZombieLaw: Pastor owns rental properties as tenants by the entireties with mentally incompetent wife, joint checking account with right of survivorship with one son, life insurance policy naming both sons as beneficiaries, and modest home; son holding durable power of attorney changes life insurance policy to name himself as sole beneficiary; pastor’s will splits estate between both sons; pastor dies with mountains of debt. Who gets what?
- Secured Transactions: Creditor 1 finances ∆ company in exchange for security interest in all of ∆’s after-acquired personal property; Creditor 2 finances piece of equipment in exchange for Purchase-Money Security Interest, but doesn’t file a UCC-1 until months later; ∆ defaults on both loans. Who has priority over the piece of equipment?
It was in the middle of this second session when things went to hell in a handbasket testing-wise.
You see, this part of North Carolina has a long-standing history of late afternoon summer thunderstorms — even confirmed scientifically by my alma mater NC State and the State Climate Office back in 2001. ((They suspect it’s because of the geological makeup of the region.)) The day starts out great, then around 4pm the clouds form, you have 20 minutes of the worst rain, wind, and lightning that you’ve ever seen, and then the sun’s out again.
Well in the middle of my ZombieLaw essay the power went out the first time. It lasted for about 7 minutes before things came back on, and the proctor announced that everyone would get an extra 7 minutes of time. I’d ensured my MacBook Pro battery was fully charged the night before the exam so I wasn’t phased by the outage and just kept on working.
Then, as I’m a paragraph away from finishing my Secured Transactions essay around 3:30pm, the power goes out again. And stayed off this time
I finished my essay and turned in my forms about 5 minutes later, but found out that night that power stayed out for nearly an hour and folks were given an extra 45 minutes to finish; the essay portion that was supposed to end at 5:11pm stretched out until just before 6 o’clock. Bear in mind no electricity also meant no air conditioning — on a summer day, in 90º+ heat, housed in what is essentially the livestock barn for the State Fair each year. 
Maybe it’s just because I was a computer scientist before I was a law student… but contingency plans for a loss of electricity seems like something you’d have for an event like this. I can only imagine the number of threatened lawsuits that are going to crop up when results are released and people who failed the test argue it was/is because of the stressful testing environment.
Did I mention that the NCBLE makes us pay an extra +$125 to use our laptops? Multiplied by the number of laptop users, that’s well over $100K going to the NCBLE just from laptop users alone. Surely they could drop $5K (or more) on a durable industrial generator. 
After leaving the building I continued my non-diet indulgences by getting Zaxby’s for the first time in ages, went back to the hotel and swam for a bit, then did a hundred practice MBE questions while watching television.
DAY 2:Â “What the hell is that sound? And did that rat just piss on your foot?”
Wednesday was the Multistate Bar Exam multiple choice questions, covering ConLaw, CrimLaw/CrimPro, Evidence, Ks, Property, and Torts in two 100-question chunks. Things started around 8:15am and it was as dull and mundane as 100 multiple-choice questions sounds.
I’d been averaging around a minute per question practicing all summer, and did about the same on the exam wrapping up a couple minutes after 10am. The lunch break was absolutely dreadful the second time around because it was so… @#$%ing… long. It was already slated to last two hours, and me finishing an hour early added to it. Most of the time I was debating whether or not I should do more practice multiples, and didn’t eat lunch until the tail end of the break because I was still full from breakfast.
Oh and I forgot to point out there was a rat running around a quadrant of the testing area in the morning session, that staff captured on the lunch break by throwing a trash can over it One of my classmates had the misfortune of it running across (and peeing on) her foot.
Things got back under way just after 2pm for the next batch of questions. Throughout most of the afternoon I kept hearing a loud noise outside, wondering if there was another thunderstorm going on — and turns out there was a wood chipper running full blast for hours. 
I tuned out the noise and kept grinding on the questions, finished about 3:55pm, then picked up the dog and headed home. ((Didn’t get to celebrate being done though, because Samson puked shortly after dinner which prompted me to take him to the 24-hour emergency vet. 
Instead I got home just after 11pm, ate Bojangle’s for dinner, and working on this blog entry. ))
So how did it go?
I have no clue 
On the essays, I thought they were a lot “easier” than I expected. That word’s in quotes because I have -0- clue if I actually got the answers right; it just wasn’t nearly as difficult coming up with words to put on the paper as it had been during bar prep. I know for sure that I railed the Agency, ConLaw, and CrimPro questions, had only a partial clue on the CivPro and Prof Resp questions, and was somewhere in the middle on all the rest. NCCU Law has a supplemental bar prep program called “Invest in Success” that exclusively focuses on the essay portion of the exam and I’m thinking that was instrumental in getting me prepared.
The MBE, on the other hand, was inordinately difficult across the board.
My practice scores jumped, but the MBE was still far more difficult
My scores had improved dramatically on the practice multiples I’d been taking from BarBri so I went into Wednesday expecting it to be a piece of cake. But wow. I could narrow most questions down to two choices fairly quickly but would have no idea which of the two was correct.
Taking everything overall, and the 60-40 split NC uses on the essays-vs-MBE, if I were a gambling man I’d put my odds of passing somewhere around the mid-60% range. I feel OK but not comfortable. And now I have to find a way to put the test out of my mind for five weeks until we get the results…
That’s it from me for tonight y’all! Now that I don’t have class or studying I’m going to try to get law:/dev/null up-to-date (seriously!) and work on getting NC SPICE off the ground. Thanks to all of you for your support the past couple months, and have a great night!
Tags: Agency, Bar Exam, Bar Prep, CivPro, ConLaw, CrimPro, Evidence, Exams, Family Law, Ks, NC Board of Law Examiners, NC SPICE, NCCU Law, Post-L, Professional Responsibility, Property, Samson, Secured Transactions, Torts, ZombieLaw
Posted by T. Greg Doucette 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. Â 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 T. Greg Doucette on Apr 30, 2010 in
Randomness Get your wisdom teeth taken out while you’re young, folks.
A random point, I concede. And yes I’ve officially degenerated into one of those politico-types who talks about frivolous @#$% like good oral hygiene when I could be talking about taxes or education or world peace ((How eminently appropriate is this emoticon when it comes to a post on dental health? ))
But after a morning trip to the dentist and a half-dozen x-rays — apparently they’re digital now? — I was told I need to have my wisdom teeth removed, because now at 29 years old they’ve finally hit the point where they’re starting to screw up my other teeth.
I’ve got two problems with this:
- Law school means limited gainful employment, making this one of the most cash-poor periods of my life; and,
- I’m studying for my Torts final exam tomorrow, which includes analyzing wonderful hypos like Patient Smith going to Dr. Oral Surgeon to get his wisdom teeth taken out, getting put to sleep by Dr. Anesthetist… and then never waking up. ((Pop quiz: who can you sue, and for what? ;)))
Needless to say when it comes to TDot’s Great List of Things To Do While In Law Schoolâ„¢, wisdom teeth removal doesn’t rank terribly high. Or rank at all actually.
That’s it for tonight since I’ve gotta get back to studying. Not gonna count this entry as a bona fide TDot’s Tips, but take it from me folks — get rid of those wisdom teeth early!
Have a great night everybody
Tags: #fml, 1L, About TDot, Exams, Torts
Posted by T. Greg Doucette on Feb 9, 2010 in
Randomness Another Tuesday. Another day below freezing. And this time with howling winds.
Ended up scrapping the usual post-Torts run with Rico because it was so damn cold.
I’m so ready for summer to get here…
Tags: Gotta Be NC, Rico, Torts
Posted by T. Greg Doucette on Jan 26, 2010 in
NotFail 
An anthropomorphic analysis of 1L Fall
::headdesk::
If I had to pick 1 word to describe my 1L Fall semester, that’d be the one
Even though NCCU Law takes pride in sticking with its strict-C curve, I figured things couldn’t get that bad. Â Between midterms going well and studying my socks off for finals, surely the 3.0 GPA I want wasn’t unrealistic, right?
::headdesk::
So with several of my law school colleagues last week posting their own tales of joy, not-quite-joy, and not-quite-anything-yet, here’s my own report card for the 1L fall semester.
====================
LEGAL REASONING & ANALYSIS
====================
My grades were erratic, my distaste emphatic, and my mood post-completion? Ecstatic.
The only positive thing I can say about this class is that it’s over.
Grade at midterm: C+
Expected grade pre-memo: C
Actual grade post-memo: C
Synopsis: No surprises here. I hated this class and thought the material we were taught was completely useless… a point publicly echoed by at least one of the other professors. Hopefully Legal Research & Persuasion will be better.
====================
CIVIL PROCEDURE I
====================
This was hands-down my best class of the semester, and the grade still hurt.
After thinking I nearly failed the final, the curve boosted my exam grade by 22 points. Combining that with the midterm grade I ended up with a B+ overall… an unfortunate (and painful) 0.5 points away from an A- 
I jokingly emailed MDG asking if I could successfully argue for that half-point. His 2-word response: “LOL. no.”
Midterm exam: A
Final exam: B
Expected grade pre-final: A
Actual grade post-final: B+ (0.5 points away from an A- )
Synopsis: Still kicking myself a month later for being so close and blowing it. This is still my favorite class, and I’m determined to do better this semester.
====================
CONTRACTS I
====================
Ever heard the phrase “like an albatross around your neck”? Instead of thinking about the Mariner and an actual albatross, think more like my GPA and good ol’ Contracts
I got the grade for this class a few days before the final exams were returned, and even though I figured I got thoroughly mauled minutes after finishing… I didn’t think it would turn out as bad as it did. I went to talk with the Professor about the exam, and the conversation went something like this:
TDot: Professor Ks, I was wondering if I could talk with you about my exam.
Prof. Ks: Sure TDot. What’s your exam number?
TDot: [####]
Prof. Ks: ::flipping through Scantron report:: Hmmm. You did better than the class average on the multiples, so that must mean your essay…
TDot: (in unison) …must have been really bad…
Prof. Ks: (in unison) …must have been really bad.
At this point Prof. Ks starts flipping through a stack of essays.
He goes through the 70s… and keeps going.
Goes through 60s… and keeps going.
Goes through 50s… and keeps going.
Finally he pulls one from a stack of 40s, flips through it, pulls up his Excel gradesheet, and goes “Ohhhhh yeah I remember this one”… not a good sign
Prof. Ks: So this spreadsheet is my rubric where I break everything down, so we’re going to go through it section by section and hopefully you’ll see what you missed.
TDot: OK.
Prof. Ks: ::points at essay:: You mention here that you’re going to talk about promissory estoppel. Show me where you actually talked about promissory estoppel.
TDot: ::flips pages:: Â ::blank stare::
Prof. Ks: Exactly. OK so here ::points:: you mention that you’re going to talk about fraud in the inducement of the contract. Show me where you actually talked about fraud in the inducement.
TDot: ::flips pages:: Â ::blank stare::
Prof. Ks: Yep. And then ::points:: here you mention needing to analyze which meaning of [term in contract] should apply. Show me where…
TDot: [expletive]
The conversation shifted to ways I could improve this upcoming semester, but basically I totally FUBAR’d the essay by not re-reading my material closer before turning it in. Maybe it’s time I start overanalyzing after all…
Midterm exam: B
Final exam: D+
Expected grade pre-final: B
Actual grade post-final: C-
Synopsis: ::headdesk::
====================
TORTS I
====================
Nothing much to say here. I came in needing a strong final exam to counteract a disastrous midterm and I got it.
Torts Final Exam Scores
Just like the Contracts final though, there were some really obvious blunders that I should have noticed — for example, detailing the differences between the local, same-or-similar, and national standards of care without ever discussing which standard would apply in the jurisdiction contained in the hypo
But after coming off that C+ on the midterm, I’m more than happy with what I got.
On an unrelated note, one of the cool things about Professor Torts is that she provides statistics for her exam scores. Her essays are “auto-curved” (she picks the best one and grades all the others against that top essay) but the multiples are raw, so graphing the final scores you can tell by the trendline that folks really stepped up their studying between midterms and finals — compare the chart at the right to the graph from midterms.
Midterm exam: C+
Final exam: B+
Expected grade pre-final: B
Actual grade post-final: B
Synopsis: Recovered nicely from the midterm, now getting ready to (hopefully) breeze through Round 2.
====================
PROPERTY I
====================
Basically the same thing that happened with Civil Procedure happened with Property.
Same issues on the essay too, e.g. detailing the factors affecting a Statute of Limitations calculation without actually analyzing what the SOL would ultimately be for that particular segment of the hypo.
So after nailing the midterm, I ended up with a mid-range B on the final — and keeping the A’s out of reach as a final grade.
Midterm exam: A (and in Top 3)
Final exam: B
Expected grade pre-final: A-
Actual grade post-final: B+
Synopsis: This one hurt, though not as bad as CivPro. I’m already lost in Property II with all the concurrent estates discussion but hopefully I’ll be back on track by midterms.
====================
FINAL SCORE: FALL 2009
====================
Expected Fall GPA: 3.071
Actual Fall GPA: 2.619
T1-inflation-adjusted Fall GPA ((JUST KIDDING! I don’t seriously inflation-adjust my grades, and I know the academic environment is different, “the students here are better” (allegedly), blah blah blah — I just put this in to antagonize my friends at UNCCH Law :*)): 3.833
—===—
So that’s the rundown
I know it could be much worse and I’m not in a position to complain — after all, I already know at least 1 classmate who’s dropped out as a result of their midterm grades, and another 3 who are on their way out at the end of the year without a miraculous turnaround.
But even with my good fortune, it’s frustrating having to explain to Nan that even though my undergraduate and professional GPAs are only a few hundredths of a point apart, the former meant I was in the bottom third of my class while the latter means I’m safely in the top third.
And it’s almost equally difficult to accept that I can’t really freak out about my grades and overhaul my study habits, because I objectively learned+recalled the material. Yet at the same time I can’t not freak out about them, because had I done comparably sloppy work in actual practice I’d likely be facing a malpractice claim and a grievance filed with my former employer.
Sooooo… yeah.
::headdesk::
Here’s hoping 1L Spring brings some improvement… along with warmer weather
Off to bed so I can be up for Ks on time in the morning. Have a great night folks!
Tags: #fml, 1L, CivPro, Exams, Ks, Law Grades, LRA, MDG, NCCU Law, Prof Ks, Property, The Curve, Torts
Posted by T. Greg Doucette on Dec 22, 2009 in
The 1L Life I shamelessly borrowed the concept for today’s post from this entry by Miss Julie Anne Ines (aka the Blawgirl), so if you haven’t checked out her segment of the intarwebs yet, please do so now because it’s Good Stuffâ„¢
As my fellow Legal Eagles and I enjoy the agonizing wait for our grades — one section got their Contracts grades back; that section was not mine — it’s easy to forget just how far we’ve gone down the road to lawyerhood (attorneydom? JDness?).
So to illustrate the point, here’s a quantitative look at the semester
—===—
Number of pages read in Civil Procedure with MDG:
~238
—===—
Number of pages read in Torts with Professor Torts:
~360
—===—
Number of pages read in Contracts with Professor Ks:
~439
—===—
Number of pages read in Property with the Traveling Professor:
~187
—===—
Number of useless writing assignments in Legal Reasoning & Analysis:
11
—===—
Number of supplements consulted:
4 (an Emanuel’s for each class)
—===—
Number of visits to the law library since orientation:
-0- (see next item)
—===—
Number of searches on Lexis-Nexis:
212+
—===—
Number of Lexis-Nexis Points earned:
2,630
—===—
Number of times overheard swearing in class at WestLaw/TWEN’s poor website coding:
7+
—===—
Number of days waiting for grades:
12, and counting…
—===—
Imagine where we’ll be 5 more semesters from now
Have a great night folks!!
Tags: 1L, Blawg Love, CivPro, Damned Lies and Statistics, Ks, Law Grades, LRA, MDG, Prof Ks, Prof Torts, Property, The Traveling Professor, Torts
Posted by T. Greg Doucette on Dec 10, 2009 in
The 1L Life It’s over!
After pummeling that Torts exam like it stole my baby brother’s lunch money, 15.91% of my law school career — also known as the 1L fall semester — is officially done!
I’m off to enjoy a needlessly excessive celebratory dinner (with the requisite intoxicating beverages), finally get around to putting up the Christmas tree, and then… well… I don’t have to think that far ahead from now until January 11th
Have a great night folks, and GOOD LUCK to all the 1Ls who still have exams left!!
Tags: 1L, Exams, Torts
Posted by T. Greg Doucette on Nov 9, 2009 in
Drama As the semester has progressed, I’ve turned into something of a recluse when it comes to my fellow Legal Eagles. It’s not intentional of course — like I mentioned last week, it’s a combination of trying to avoid drama and utilizing an apartment that’s catered to my learning style. Madame Prosecutor and I occasionally talk outside of class to study, and DMoff mentions ASG business every now and then. But since the whole study group thing didn’t really pan out and I’m hardly ever at the law school aside from class, I don’t have many non-class friendships among the 1Ls
I’ve got one exception, a young lady who I haven’t actually come up with a nickname for yet. We’ve got one of those friendships where we’d probably be perfect for each other romantically, but we also both have pre-existing interests so instead you end up with the bona fide respect and admiration of two competitive people going through a common struggle. She basically keeps me in check when my exasperation gets out of line and has occasionally been my conscience vis-Ã -vis law school.
That backstory is the preface to a conversation over the weekend, where she informed me that several folks (and by “several” I mean 3; any guesses on who?) have started referring to me as one of the class “gunners” because I posted my midterm grades here at law:/dev/null.  Professor Torts inadvertently helped that narrative on Friday when no one volunteered to brief the only case we had (an easy one, Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co. (248 N.Y. 339)), so in the interests of getting out of class I offered — and got referred to as “one of our favorite volunteers” in that not-quite-sarcastic-but-not-quite-not-sarcastic tone that makes someone think they’ve volunteered one time too often
For the sake of brevity, we’ll ignore the general silliness that goes with the secrecy around law school grades. As much as people claim school is all about competition, markets grow over time and everyone is better off collaborating than competing. Â Basic economic principles.
The point that really threw me is that my grades were decisively unimpressive. I’m in 5 classes — I did really well in 2 (CivPro and Property), really bad in 2 (Torts and LRA), and I’m firmly in the middle for the 5th (Contracts). And while we all know gunners don’t necessarily have good grades, the logician in me thinks good grades would need to be a prerequisite if posting them is going to be treated as a criteria for gunner-hood.
So my grades are essentially average. I don’t volunteer unless it helps us get out of class sooner. I’ve crashed and burned on numerous occasions when I am called on. I’m rarely at the law school, not involved in school-related activities, and stopped over-dressing after orientation.
If that makes me a gunner, y’all have really lowered the standards. jsyk.
Anyhow, I’m off to bed. Â Marine Corps’ birthday is tomorrow, meaning an extra-grueling PT session in the morning. Night everybody!
Tags: 1L, DMoff, Law Grades, Madame Prosecutor, Prof Torts, Torts
Posted by T. Greg Doucette on Oct 21, 2009 in
The 1L Life Did the MythBusters lie to me?
We’ve been covering negligence in Torts, and the section on proof starts out with a sextet of slip-and-fall cases. What do the folks in the first 3 cases slip and fall on?
A banana peel.
Seriously.
For some reason I thought people slipping on bananas were a comedic device. Â But from Goddard v. Boston & Maine RR Co. (179 Mass. 52) (no liability since no evidence Defendant could have known banana peel on the floor) to Anjou v. Boston Elevated Railway Co. (208 Mass. 273) (liability since condition of banana indicated it was there long enough that Defendant should have known its presence) to Joye v. Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Co. (405 F.2d 464) (remanded since jury could not determine how long banana had been on floor based on evidence presented), not only do these banana cases apparently happen in real life — they’re actually cited by one of the widest-used Torts textbooks.
And that’s no monkey business… ((Thanks for indulging me with the puns 
))
Tags: 1L, Amusement, Torts
