SPRING 2015 FINAL EXAM

Harry PotterHarry Potter

and theand the

Bundle of Sticks Bundle of Sticks

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 on Course Page Tonight:– these slides

– link to PodCast

• Remaining Office Hours – Tomorrow 1-6

– Sunday10-1, 2-6

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

General Logistics

• Remaining Feedback– 2d Redwood, Yellowstone, Biscayne

Critiques

– Sample Exam Answers: Rev. Prob. 5E

• When Ready, I’ll Send E-Mails & Post on Course Page

• Retrieve from me During Office Hours

Exam Coverage• Each chapter (except 4) Tested in 2 Qs/problems

– For purposes of counting to 2 Qs: Treat E-by-P as Part of Adverse Possession (ch. 5)

– See Info Memos on each chapter for coverage details

• Test can’t cover every issue in the course

• Major issues on test should be familiar from review problems and DQs discussed in class

• One Harry Potter book and multiple Harry Potter references in every question/problem.

Exam Coverage: Statutes

• On Q1 (Lawyering Question) Often Sensible to Check if Relevant Statutes Address Issues, but None Specifically Provided

Exam Coverage: Statutes

• Need to use specific statutes in Q2D and Q4Need to use specific statutes in Q2D and Q4– Statutes Provided:

• On same page as Q2D

• On pages immediately following Q4; tear off to use

– All Provisions Directly from Course Materials, Slightly Edited

• to Remove Some Language Not Relevant to Exam Qs

• to Clarify or to Fit Problem (e.g., length of AP SoL)

– See Info Memos on Chapters 1, 3, 5 for Lists of Statutes that Might Appear.

Exam Coverage: Statutes

• Need to use specific statutes in Q2D and Q4Need to use specific statutes in Q2D and Q4– Must recognize relationship between statutes & Must recognize relationship between statutes &

common law, which varies.common law, which varies.• Mutually Exclusive: FL MW Statutes v. Mutually Exclusive: FL MW Statutes v. ShackShack• Overlapping: NY Adv. Possession Statutes & CasesOverlapping: NY Adv. Possession Statutes & Cases

– Must recognize where statutes are clear and Must recognize where statutes are clear and where they are ambiguous.where they are ambiguous.

– Must be able to apply statutory language Must be able to apply statutory language correctly.correctly.

– Ask Qs if unsureAsk Qs if unsure

Exam Instructions

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

• Important Instruction for students doing exam on computers:– Between each Question, put in a hard page break

(hit Control + Enter), so that each question begins at top of a new page.

– Saves Tina Sutton much time and stress!!!– No need to do this between Problems if you do

Question II

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 to allotted times (as if your best friend will be

harmed if you go over time)

• 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

• Next 45 Minutes (I’d Recommend…)– Use about 15 minutes on each Q– Read it again carefully– List major points you’d like to discuss– Choose order to make rough outline– Do last in reading period Q you want to write first

Starting to Write

• New Suggestion for Students Typing Exam – to Maximize Benefit of Reading Period – to Help Organize Your Answer

• Might make first step for each Q to type in a sequence of headings & subheadings– Makes Organization Clear to Me & to You– Reminder of What You Want to Cover– Places to Stash Ideas Arising While You Work

Qs on Structure or Logistics?

Exam Technique: Generally

Exam Technique: Generally

• My Exam Techniques Lectures Available on Academic Achievement Website & Slides on Course Page

• Some Repetition Here, But Focused on Problems Commonly Arising on Old Exams & Submitted Sample Qs

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 to Include Reference to Relevant Authority

• Show All Work

• Wizard of Oz (Because, Because, Because)

Exam Technique: Generally

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

• Might think of each case and each chapter as a box of different kinds of tools

– Don’t try to generalize in advance about which of the tools you’ll use.

• E.g., Should I lay out the facts of cases I am citing? =

• Is a screwdriver a good tool to fix things? (Depends)

• Is a wire whisk a good tool for cooking? (Depends)

– Choose tools based on the particular task and the particular materials I give you.

Exam Technique: Generally

(2) Draft, Not Final Product • No need for formal introductions & conclusions• Can use abbreviations (names; recurring phrases)• Can use telegraph English• Can use headings to replace topic sentences&

transitions• Can use bulleted lists (e.g., of evidence supporting

one side of an argument)

““I know you like…”I know you like…”

Exam Technique: Generally

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

almost all of the twenty-five otherwise diligent and competent students who 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 (even if no time to do a particular Q)

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

Exam Technique: Generally

(5) Reality TV Challenges • Use Pre-Selected Components to Complete

Assignment in Unrealistic Time Frame

• Don’t Try to Make Easier Than They Are

• Do the Challenge– Specific Task Given– Specific Ingredients Given– Time Frame Given

• If you are well-prepared, you’ll do fine

Exam Technique: Question I

Lawyering (Order of the Phoenix)

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

[CLIENT] regarding the three concerns (labelled a, b, and c) described below.

… The three concerns will be weighted roughly equally, so allot your time

accordingly.

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

[CLIENT] regarding the three concerns (labelled a, b, and c) described below. Assume Felix’s preliminary legal Assume Felix’s preliminary legal

research is correct. research is correct. The three concerns will be weighted roughly

equally, so allot your time accordingly.

Question I: TASK • To Do List (to advise client)• Not arguments re result (Q v. R)• Make clear why things matter

– through structure of answer OR– with brief explanation

• 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)

• Look at Old Models for Ideas

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 I

Factual Research• Looking for specifics, not simply

reformulating legal tests as Qs• Indicate how you would locate facts

(interviews, records, ask client)• If not obvious from context, briefly

explain why the facts matter

Question I

Practical Research• Where relevant, 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 (as House-Elves) Problems

2A: 2A: Philosopher’s Philosopher’s

StoneStone

2D: Deathly 2D: Deathly HallowsHallows

2C: Chamber of 2C: Chamber of SecretsSecrets

2B: Prisoner 2B: Prisoner of Azkaban of Azkaban

Question II• Four Problems; Choose any Three

– Three are topics you’ve seen in short problems

– One is new topic for short problem but involves application of legal standards we’ve worked with in other forms

– One requires application of statute

• Can do in any order, but mark clearly

• 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., Kelo, Shack, Marcus Cable)

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

rule be for this issue?” (Mini-Q3)

• Assume all facts there for a reason.

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• 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 (Goblet of Fire)

Procedural Posture1.1. Cedric Christopher files Complaint with List of Cedric Christopher files Complaint with List of

AllegationsAllegations

2.2. State Trial Court Dismisses on the Pleadings, Saying No State Trial Court Dismisses on the Pleadings, Saying No Valid Cause of Action AllegedValid Cause of Action Alleged

3.3. State Appellate Court Would Allow Cause of Action, So State Appellate Court Would Allow Cause of Action, So Reverses & Remands for Trial; Concurring/Dissenting Reverses & Remands for Trial; Concurring/Dissenting Judge Would Only Allow Limited Version of ClaimJudge Would Only Allow Limited Version of Claim

4.4. The Lave Supreme Court Granted Review to Decide re The Lave Supreme Court Granted Review to Decide re Cause of Action: Cause of Action:

Disallow, Allow, or Allow Limited?Disallow, Allow, or Allow Limited?

INSTRUCTIONS:

Compose drafts of the analysis sections of both a majority opinion for the Court, and of

a dissenting opinion, addressing these questions. Each of your draft opinions

should adopt and defend one of the three positions noted in the lower courts.

Remember that, in this procedural posture, you must treat Cedric’s allegations as true.

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 (Just “Affirmed” or “Reversed”)– 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 dissenting opinion …

• Must be 2 separate opinions

• Articulate best arguments for two different positions

• Each opinion should try to deal w other side’s best arguments. (OLD DF: FOUR SETS OF ARGUMENTS)

• I don’t care who wins!!

Question III

… of a majority opinion … and of a dissenting opinion …

• 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

… for the [Lave 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– Consideration of incentives re similar situations

in future– Consideration of effects on future cases & legal

system

Question III

Each [opinion] should adopt and defend a different Each [opinion] should adopt and defend a different legal standard to resolve that question legal standard to resolve that question … …

• You must choose two legal standards that address specific legal Q presented

• Each side must provide a range of policy arguments supporting its choice. E.g., – Rule best furthers substantive policies in field– Rule best incorporates relevant considerations– Rule easier to Use/Administer

Question III

Each of your draft opinions should adopt and defend one of the three positions noted in the lower courts.

• Disallow, Allow, or Allow Limited Version of Disallow, Allow, or Allow Limited Version of Cause of Action?Cause of Action?– Pick any twoPick any two– Can attack the third in each, but also attack each otherCan attack the third in each, but also attack each other

• Defense of the Chosen Rules is the KeyDefense of the Chosen Rules is the Key

Question III

Remember that, in this procedural posture, Remember that, in this procedural posture, you must treat Cedric’s allegations as true.you must treat Cedric’s allegations as true.

• Don’t argue with allegationsDon’t argue with allegations• Problem doesn’t ask you to apply your rule to Problem doesn’t ask you to apply your rule to

allegationsallegations• Can use particular allegations you’re given as example Can use particular allegations you’re given as example

or as counterexample in main analysisor as counterexample in main analysis• ““The case before us demonstrates why …”The case before us demonstrates why …”

• ““We think this case is not typical because …”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 give names to your judges (you don’t have to) …

Majority (Sophocles, J.):Dissent (Homer, J.)

Question III

Don’t use your name as the name of one of the judges!!

D’oh!

Majority (Sophocles, J.)Dissent (Homer, J.)

Questions on Question III?

Exam Technique: Question IV

Traditional Issue-Spotter

(The Half-Blood Prince)featuring

SEVERUS SCHNABLYSEVERUS SCHNABLY

Question IV takes place “in Tediana, a little-known American state, so the Tediana statutes provided at the

end of Question IV apply where relevant.”

Tediana =Ted + Deanna

Question IV

Traditional Issue-Spotter:

What I’m Looking For1. Identify the Most Important Issues

2. Quality of Analysis

3. Facility with Statutes

4. Clear Presentation

5. 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 (even Harry Potter references)

• 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

• Push toward resolutions (Limit)

Question IV

3. Facility with Statutes• Use Statutory Skills Noted in

Coverage Section

• PLUS Matching– Recognize which parts of the statutes

provided address issues raised by the Q– Recognize which issues in the Q might be

governed by the statutes provided,

Question IV

4. 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

5. 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, you can use abbreviations, headings, bullets

• You can outline at end if more to say

Questions on Question IV?

Penultimate Slide

Qs on Exam Technique or

Logistics

Very Last Slide!

Substantive Qs?