NUMBERED DAYS

There are very few days left in the semester. There is nothing left to learn for the semester. We review this week, and then pay next week.

HERE WE GO AGAIN

Once again two of my fellow classmates failed to respect the seriousness of our Contacts professor. While this interaction was not of the, "it's not rocket science," variety, it was not a performance I would call "pride-worthy." Incidentally, the rocket scientist has since polished his once tarnished name, and the first guy to screw up has decided that law school was not for him (we hope he can live with himself knowing that he ruined the 10% below C- area of the curve for someone who decided to stick with it -- thanks pal). (Although, I could care less, because I don't count the variety of people who come to contracts class unprepared as competition or needed fodder to pad the fall at the steep end of the, big L on the forehead, loser side of the curve. Again, not to say that they are really losers, but God bless them for being who they are.)

LEXIS V. WESTLAW

I use both. I like the Lexis briefs, and West's organization. In a perfect world there would be a Lexis-West mashup, but no further than that.

SECOND AMENDMENT CASE

This week the Supreme Court will probably be looking at District of Columbia v. Heller, which involves the DC gun ban. It's a pretty big deal because it could have an affect on the way state laws have to respect the Second Amendment.

UTSA MAKES NEWS

Maybe not the way you want your undergraduate institution to be in the news... well... I guess you have to have your niche. UTSA, where I completed my undergrad, looks like it may be getting its very own porn club. nice -- as in, "Hey isn't that the school that..." kind of nice.

JUDICIAL HUMOR

I found a pretty good list of examples of judicial humor at the University of Washington Law Library's page. Some of my favorites include:

United States ex rel. Mayo v. Satan, 54 F.R.D. 282:

Mr. Mayo want to sue the Chief Fallen Angel for his downfall, but the court can't find jurisdiction in Hell.

Bradshaw v. Unity Marine Corporation, Inc., 147 F. Supp. 2d 668:

In the opinion judge Kent writes, "[b]oth attorneys have obviously entered into a secret pact--complete with hats, handshakes and cryptic words--to draft their pleadings entirely in crayon on the back sides of gravy-stained paper place mats [...]"

There is more, but that's my favorite part.

Denny v. Radar Industries, Inc., 184 N.W.2d 289:

The opinion is short, as in: "The appellant has attempted to distinguish the factual situation in this case from that in Renfroe v. Higgins Rack Coating and Manufacturing Co., Inc. (1969), 17 Mich.App. 259, 169 N.W.2d 326. He didn't. We couldn't. Affirmed. Costs to appellee."

If you can't find the complete text of any of these (and want them) let me know and I'll run it through Lexis or Westlaw for you.

PITTBULL V. LAWYER

According to the Southeast Texas Record lawyer wins. That and other legal humor here.

MY CHANGE IN APPROACH TO PREPERATION

I have gone from briefing and re-reading to a "why is this in my casebook" approach to my reading. This goes along with a greater concentration on developing my outlines. It has become increasingly apparent to me that no matter how dumb one sounds in class, so long as they are moderately prepared, it has no affect his final grade. In keeping with that theme I recited yesterday. The best part of that was it was a case that I had only read once, and did not brief. LexisNexis covered my brief, and I still managed to do well with it. I will admit that there were about to points that I stumbled through, but in the grand scheme I know the work I was doing on my outline is worth much more. Didn't even sound dumb... I wasn't even really called on -- I volunteered myself.

That being said I still read the crap out of anything for Contracts.

WELL, THAT'S THE PLAN

Apparently, legal education appears to be lucrative.