Law School Exams Are Different

1. Law School Exams Are Different • Not “regurgitation” of class discussion topics: “Discuss the court’s decision in Hamer v. Sidway and its impact on the doctine of consideration.” • Generally not pure “policy” questions related to policy discussions held in class: “Discuss the doctrine of consideration and the advantages and disadvantages of using consideration to determine which promises to enforce.” • Not pure “knowledge” questions: “What is consideration?” • Not even direct questions: “Does consideration exist in the following situation.”

2. What are Law School Exams? • Stories – like a client would tell an attorney when seeking advice [fact patterns]

3. QUESTION I (60 minutes; 60 points) Unlike many of his contemporaries, Bob was content to “stay on the farm” rather than seek fame and fortune in the big city. Of course, he didn’t actually live on a farm. He lived and worked in town, but spent most of his free time before and after work and on weekends helping out on his uncle’s farm just outside of town. His uncle paid him small amounts of money for his work, and occasionally some larger amounts when the harvest was good, but Bob did the work not for the money, but to help out his uncle and because he loved farming. His dream was to save enough to buy his own farm, or maybe buy his uncle’s farm when his uncle was ready to retire. One day over coffee at the Chatterbox Cafe, Bob and his uncle had a heart to heart conversation. Bob’s uncle urged Bob to pursue his education; he feared there was no future in farming. “I appreciate all you’ve done for me Bob. I know I haven’t paid you near what the work you’ve done is worth, but I only want what’s best for you. Go get a law degree. Once I know you’ve got choices I’ll feel much better. The farm will always be here for you. I’m sick of farming; when you’re done with law school if you still want the farm I’ll rent the place to you. I’ve always planned to leave it to you in my will. I don’t have any family and I know how much you love the farm. If it hadn’t been for your help all these years, I probably wouldn’t have been able to keep it.” Bob took his uncle’s advice and went to law school. When he finished, he appreciated the knowledge he’d gained in law school, but it hadn’t dampened his enthusiasm for farming. He was shocked to find, however, that the farm was not “there for him” when he returned. His uncle had made tentative plans to sell the farm to developers. “I planned to keep the farm,” he told Bob, “but you can’t believe what these developers are willing to pay. I’ve got to look out for myself. I can retire to Florida and live quite comfortably on what these guys are paying me. You’ll be better off using that law degree you earned, Bob, there is no future in farming.”

4. Needless to say, Bob was extremely disappointed. He wanted to farm, but the dream looked impossible now. To buy a farm comparable to his uncle’s, Bob would have to pay more than $300,000, money he didn’t have and probably couldn’t borrow. He had financed his entire law school education and now owed student loans of more that $75,000. It wasn’t as if he had given up a good job when he went to law school (he was making about $18,000 at the local Wal-Mart), and he likely could find a legal job that would pay at least $30,000, but he wanted to farm. Bob’s disappointment turned to anger as he began to believe he was misled by his uncle. Bob felt he did what he asked and was entitled to the farm. When Bob expressed his feelings to his uncle, explaining that he felt he had done what his uncle asked and that he was entitled to the farm, his uncle replied, “ I understand your feelings Bob and I’m sorry my plans changed. The offer from the developers was too good to pass up, but I hate to have bad blood between us. I did pretty good selling the farm, why don’t I make it up to you by paying those law school loans. That way you can start fresh and maybe buy your own farm.” Bob felt much better after his conversation with his uncle. It wasn’t everything he wanted, but it lifted him out from under the law school debt he had incurred at his uncle’s urging and gave him hope that he could pursue his dream of owning a farm. Unfortunately for Bob, his uncle died a few months later, before Bob even became obligated to begin repaying his loans. The executor of his uncle’s estate refuses to pay Bob anything; his uncle’s will left everything to the United States Government to be used to reduce the federal debt. He calls you, his law school classmate, for your opinion on his options. (By the way, Bob’s uncle received $500,000 from the developers for his farm.) Discuss Bob’s options. Does he have any claim against his uncle’s estate? Be sure to explore and discuss any claims Bob may have and any defenses his uncle’s estate may raise.

5. What is your role? • Read the fact pattern (the “story”); identify issues (categories) raised by the story • Explain to the reader—issue by issue (category by category)—what the law (rule) is and how it applies to the set of facts provided

6. Elements for succeeding on law school exams • Ability to Spot the Category • Knowledge of the Law (Rules) • Ability to Analyze (Apply law/rule to facts) • Demonstrating Ability to Analyze – Writing an effective exam answer

7. Short Outline Long Outline These are your categories (issues) for your exam Prepare for exams by preparing outlines Each category—Rule (1-3 sentences)

8. The Big Categories • Contracts • Torts • Property • Criminal Law • Civil Procedure

9. THE CATEGORIES FOR YOUR CLASS/EXAM • Introduction • General Theories Obligation • Remedies • Agreements and Promises

10. General Theories of Obligation • Agreement With Consideration • Justified Reliance--Promissory Estoppel • Unjust Enrichment • Promises for Benefit Received • Tort • Statutory Warranty • Statute of Frauds

11. Consideration • Consideration is a bargained for exchange of performances or promises. Each performance or promise must, at least in part, induce the giving of the return performance or promise. A performance may be an act, a forebearance from acting, or the creation, modification, or destruction of a legal relation. • Past Consideration • Illusory Promise • Mutuality of Obligation • Promissory Estoppel • A promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce reliance, and which does induce reliance, is binding if injustice can only be avoided by enforcement of the promise. The remedy may be limited as justice requires. • The promisee must show that she relied on the promise reasonably and to her detriment, that is, she is . . . .

12. What is your role? • Read the fact pattern (the “story”); identify issues (categories) raised by the story • Explain to the reader—issue by issue (category by category)—what the law (rule) is and how it applies to the set of facts provided

13. I R A C S S U E N A L Y S I S O N C L U S I O N P P L I C A T I O N U L E

14. You are house-sitting for your friends, including taking care of their young children. On a hot, muggy Friday at 3:30, the children ask for ice cream. Earlier in the day, they washed the car and mowed the lawn, but then they went to Super America without asking permission and bought candy. Dinner is planned earlier than usual (4:30). The children did not get ice cream yesterday, but did the two days prior to that. SHOULD THE CHILDREN BE PERMITTED TO BUY ICE CREAM?

15. Because it was a hot an muggy Friday, the end of the week, it is only fair that the children should be permitted to purchase ice cream. Because it was a hot an muggy Friday, the end of the week, justice demands that the children should be permitted to purchase ice cream.

16. Monday “NO, you haven’t earned it.” Tuesday “Sure, it’s only 3:30” Wednesday “O.K. Dinner isn’t for another hour and a half.” Thursday “No, you got ice cream yesterday and the day before.”

17. Rule • Generally, the children may purchase ice cream if they have been well behaved and it is sufficiently early in the day such that it will not ruin their dinner. However, purchasing ice cream must remain a special treat, not an everyday expectation.

18. Treats-Entitlement to Ice Cream Privileges - Sleepovers

19. Consideration • Consideration is a bargained for exchange of performances or promises. Each performance or promise must, at least in part, induce the giving of the return performance or promise. A performance may be an act, a forebearance from acting, or the creation, modification, or destruction of a legal relation. • Past Consideration • Illusory Promise • Mutuality of Obligation • Promissory Estoppel • A promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce reliance, and which does induce reliance, is binding if injustice can only be avoided by enforcement of the promise. The remedy may be limited as justice requires. • The promisee must show that she relied on the promise reasonably and to her detriment, that is, she is . . . .

20. Treats-Entitlement to Ice Cream Generally, the children may purchase ice cream if they have been well behaved and it is sufficiently early in the day such that it will not ruin their dinner. However, purchasing ice cream must remain a special treat, not an everyday expectation.

21. What is your role? • Read the fact pattern (the “story”); identify issues (categories) raised by the story • Explain to the reader—issue by issue (category by category)—what the law (rule) is and how it applies to the set of facts provided

22. On a hot, muggy Friday at 3:30, the children ask for ice cream. Earlier in the day, they washed the car and mowed the lawn, but then they went to Super America without asking permission and bought candy. Dinner is planned earlier than usual (4:30). The children did not get ice cream yesterday, but did the two days prior to that. What should happen?

23. Treats-Entitlement to Ice Cream IRAC Generally, the children may purchase ice cream if they have been well behaved and it is sufficiently early in the day such that it will not ruin their dinner. However, purchasing ice cream must remain a special treat, not an everyday expectation.

24. Application (Analysis) is identifying facts that demonstrate (arguably) that each element of the rule is met/not met IRAC

25. Elements of the Rule Generally, the children may purchase ice cream if they have been well behaved and it is sufficiently early in the day such that it will not ruin their dinner. However, purchasing ice cream must remain a special treat, not an everyday expectation.

26. Elements of the Rule • Children must have been well behaved • It must be sufficiently early so as not to ruin dinner • Ice cream must remain a special treat; not an everyday occurrence

27. Application (Analysis) is identifying facts that demonstrate (arguably) that each element of the rule is met/not met IRAC

28. Think Law; Write Law; Integrate the Facts into the Law 0 Law = 0 Points

29. Children must have been well behaved • Because the children completed chores early in the day (washing the car and mowing the lawn)they have been sufficiently well behaved to be entitled to ice cream despite going to the Super America store without permission.

30. Treats-Entitlement to Ice Cream Generally, the children may purchase ice cream . . . . Because the children completed chores early in the day (washing the car and mowing the lawn) they have been sufficiently well behaved to be entitled to ice cream despite going to the Super America store without permission. In addition, because they asked to buy ice cream at 3:30, relatively early in the afternoon and a full hour before dinner was planned, it is unlikely that the ice cream will ruin their dinner.Finally, because the children did not get ice cream the previous day, buying ice cream today will not make it an every day occurrence; it will remain a special treat. Therefore, . . .

31. Treats-Entitlement to Ice Cream Generally, the children may purchase ice cream . . . . Because the children went to Super America without permission, they have not been sufficiently well behaved to entitle them to purchase ice cream.Moreover, although they asked to purchase ice cream relatively early in the afternoon, because dinner was planned earlier than usual (only an hour after the ice cream request) the ice cream likely would ruin the children’s appetite.Finally, although the children did not purchase ice cream the previous day, this would make the third time they purchased it in a week, making it an everyday occurrence rather than a special treat. Therefore, . . .

32. Because the children completed chores early in the day (washing the car and mowing the lawn) they can argue that they have been sufficiently well behaved to be entitled to ice cream despite going to the Super America store without permission.In addition, because they asked to buy ice cream at 3:30, relatively early in the afternoon, it is unlikely that the ice cream will ruin their dinner. The fact that dinner is planned earlier than usual is a problem, but the purchase will still be a full hour before dinner.Finally, the children can argue that because they did not get ice cream the previous day, buying ice cream today will not make it an every day occurrence; it will remain a special treat. They will have to overcome the counter argument that buying ice cream three times in one week, and three out of four days, makes it virtually an everyday occurrence, not a special treat.

33. Promissory Estoppel Rule? In this case, because Bob’s uncle unequivocally said, “I will pay for your law school education,” he made a promise. Because he and Bob had a close relationship, and Bob frequently helped on his uncle’s farm for no pay, Bob’s uncle could reasonably have expected that Bob would rely on the promise. Because Bob did enroll at the more expensive private school, he relied on the promise to his detriment. Because Bob’s uncle has the benefit of Bob’s work, and because Bob incurred substantial debt that he otherwise would not have, injustice can only be avoided by enforcing Bob’s uncle’s promise.

34. “Becauseappellant's expensive home and car and position as a successful business owner made it appear as if he was fully capable of keeping his promise to pay respondent's law-school expenses and because appellant had bestowed his generosity on respondent several times before he promised to pay her law-school expenses, appellant reasonably should have expected his promise to induce action by respondent. The promise did induce action by respondent and left her with a substantial debt when appellant failed to keep his promise. Respondent quit her job and attended law school with the expectation that appellant would pay her law-school expenses and she would not be in debt for these expenses when she graduated. Becauseit would be unjust to require respondent to pay a debt that she incurred in reliance on appellant's promise to pay the debt, appellant's promise is enforceable notwithstanding the statute of frauds.” Conrad v. Fields, 2007 WL 2106302 (Minn. Ct. App. 2007)

35. Common Missteps IRFC Treats-Entitlement to Ice Cream Generally, the children may purchase ice cream . . . . In this case, on a hot, muggy Friday at 3:30, the children asked for ice cream. Earlier in the day, they washed the car and mowed the lawn, but then they went to Super America without asking permission and bought candy. Dinner was planned earlier than usual (4:30). The children did not get ice cream the previous day, but did the two days prior to that. Therefore, the children were good enough to be entitled to ice cream.

36. IR_C • 1. Make the argument (point to facts that demonstrate rule/element of the rule is either met or not met). • 1. Arguments are too conclusory. They do not fully utilize facts in developing reasons for reaching a particular conclusion. Too often the students settle for issue spotting and stating a summary of the legal doctrine applicable. • Lack of factual analysis/discussion (application of law to fact pattern presented)

37. 2) not enough factual analysis—some students had a tendency to give me I, R, and C, instead of using the facts in the question. For example, the discovery question had a request for physical and mental exams. The question said the plaintiff had been in a mental institution and had been dragged away from a door frothing at the mouth. Those facts should have appeared in the answer, but maybe only about half mentioned them.

38. The children can argue that they have been sufficiently well behaved to deserve ice cream and that it is early enough that it won’t ruin their dinner. They can also argue that ice cream will remain a special treat not an everyday occurrence. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7uvttu8ct0

39. The children can argue that they have been sufficiently well behaved to deserve ice cream and that it is early enough that it won’t ruin their dinner. They can also argue that ice cream will remain a special treat not an everyday occurrence. Defense will argue the children have not been sufficiently well behaved and that it is too close to dinner. They will also argue getting ice cream today will make it an everyday occurrence.

40. Because the children completed chores early in the day (washing the car and mowing the lawn) they have been sufficiently well behaved to be entitled to ice cream despite going to the Super America store without permission. In addition, because they asked to buy ice cream at 3:30, relatively early in the afternoon and a full hour before dinner was planned, it is unlikely that the ice cream will ruin their dinner. Finally, because the children did not get ice cream the previous day, buying ice cream today will not make it an every day occurrence; it will remain a special treat. Therefore, . . .

41. IRAC Whether the children are entitled to ice cream in this case is a close question—there are reasonable arguments on each side. However, based on the overriding policy in favor of children enjoying the summer months, the children should be entitled to ice cream.

42. Elements for succeeding on law school exams • Ability to Spot the Category • Knowledge of the Law (Rules) • Ability to Analyze (Apply law/rule to facts) • Demonstrating Ability to Analyze – Writing an effective exam answer

43. Exam Day • Take time to read and think • Big picture • Categories/issues • “One word” outline of issues • Write

44. Special/Extra Rules • Begin with arguments for the party with the burden of proof • Consider organizing by party • Criminal Law • Torts • Don’t cut and paste • Okay to cross-reference/incorporate rule w/in question • Do not cross-reference/incorporate rule across questions