A Tale or Two (Whales and Foxes and Property Laws)
Property: I like the topic and I can understand the cases. The prof puts key notes on PowerPoint. But she is new and I heard some bad things about her exams. So far we discussed such titillating topics as: what is property (insert Locke's labor theory) and how do you make it yours (see fox hunting case Post v Pierson and whaling case Ghen v escapes me at the moment )These deal with who has the right to the animal, the person who hunts it or kills/takes the corpse. The answer - as you will fin with almost all legal scenarios - it depends. In the case of the fox hunters, the farmer that kills it get the fox over the sportsman that chased it. This allowed me to say "release the hounds! and have a reason to say so.
Contracts: My prof talks like Kevin Costner. Seriously, and he has a sense of humor to boot. He played a clip from Talladega Nights because we read a case out of Talladega. We've read a lot of cases in this class where people have sued family members (Thompson v Thompson and Kirksey v Kirksey) and the infamous hairy hand case Hawkins v McGee. Its a three page case and a interesting read.
Torts: I like the prof. She has a small sense of humor and is easy to understand. But she talks too fast and I don't like to take laptop notes, so my hand is moving furiously throughout. Sometimes shes not totally clear, but I get it eventually. We read cases about Wal Mart filling the wrong chemo scrip and Buik that made a car with a faulty wheel that ended in an accident. In 1918 Buick made a car that had a whopping top speed of 50mph. Inherently Dangerous vehicle indeed. And wooden wheels? This case may be antiquated but the ruling is important for product liability claims.(There were complimentary cases about machinery, coffee pots and unstable scaffolding).
Civil Procedure: This is a class about how to file things, jurisdiction and the kinds of background work that goes into a civil suit. Discovery and things of that nature. I think that it will be easy to grasp, but the first case Neff v Ponnoyer was a doozy. What started out as an open and shut case about not paying lawyers fees became anything but whether the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection is concerned. I learned the three kinds of subject matter jurisdiction, how to serve someone in these three instances and how property can be attached for seizure, always before the act, not after. I think of all the classes this will be the easiest to get. Prof calls on people randomly but she helps them out and doesn't make a big deal when the don't know something. But you answer wrong in too many classes and your going to get some participation points taken off. This goes for the other classes too.
LAWRW (Legal Analysis, Research and Writing: So far, we haven't done much. We've read some cases, learning how to analyze them and we've talked about the weight that cases have based on what court they come out of. We have three memo assignments and some research projects, but not much. Since I won't have to worry about the writing skills I can focus on the legal skill I need to write a good memo. Prof is friendly if a bit ditzy. Still like her though.
Class are 1.5 hrs twice a week, except for LAWRW which is two hours monday and one hour on Wednesday. The schedule is not a regular MWF and TTh, but more like. MW, TTh, WF, TF and I don't mind, but I get out of class at a different time each day. That I don't like. Alas, I met a lot of people at orientation that are in the other sections. I liked most of those people better. So, now I've got to make a new effort to meet people. Again.
Being on an urban campus now the parking is a mess and robbery/assault is an everyday kind of occurrence. I'm not a morning person, so I have to adjust to getting up so early. Thankfully I am on campus until no later 4:30 and I stay on campus. The crime occurs just on the outskirts. Easy undergraduate targets who've never been away from home before.
So, I like parts and I don't like parts and Socratic method doesn't scare me. So there is my first week.