LSAT Kung Fu Blog / LSAT Kung Fu Blog
LSAT Kung Fu Blog
The Bluebook, or as the French call it, the Bleubook (nope. Sorry I wrote that. I take it back, and please convey my condolences to the senses of humor I killed by typing it). Where was I? Oh, yeah:
You guys will learn to love the Bluebook.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha . . .
. . . [Deep breath, wipes eyes] . . .
No, I’ve got a grip now. I’m good. It’s OK.
The legal Bluebook is the manual for proper legal citation. It is even less good than you’re thinking right now. Because probably, you’re thinking “Well, OK. I mean, I’m sure it’s not riveting reading or anything, but it’s just a set of rules for doing legal citation. What’s the big deal?”
Well, I’m on Spring Break and I’m writing this instead of, like, wrestling smallish alligators in a kiddie pool filled with caramel pudding, or heli-skiing in the Alps, or doing three-legged-races and trust falls as part of the Yakuza’s “team-building getaway 2018,” or playing tuxedoed high-stakes Baccarat in Monte Carlo, or bespoke-suited Texas-hold-‘em in Las Vegas, or even track-suited Pai gow in Atlantic City, all because of my steely resolve and unwavering commitment to you, dear reader.
The whole reason I’m writing today instead of taking the week off is that I was supposed to hear back this week from the two offices where I applied for summer internships. But I have not yet heard back from them.
This might mean that neither place has decided to hire me! Or it might mean that they’re struggling to decide between many talented applicants (and me), or it might mean that they’re just really busy and hiring a summer intern is just sort of not the highest priority. I don’t know! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
So, next week is Spring Break at my school, and I would normally take that week off from writing a blog post.
I’ve recently done some interviews for possible summer law jobs, and I’d like to write about those. However, I expect to hear job offers (or people declining my services) this week. So I’m going to take my break this week, and I’ll be back next week with my thoughts on the interview process, informed by my success—or lack thereof—at doing interviews.
We’ll talk soon.
Hours for the week: Class = 15.75 / Study = 3.25 / Other = 2.5 / Total Time on Schoolwork = 19 / Total Time on Campus = 39 [Ugh this schedule SUCKS]
Questions? Comments? Complaints? Post them below, or shoot me an email.
Be good to one another, for we need it now more than maybe ever,
P.S. Looking for a smoking hot Velocity LSAT discount code? Use this code: DAVE10 at checkout to get 10% off your enrollment in any course! That code will work throughout 2018.
It happened again. I could write that sentence over and over and it would always be true, will always have been true, is true now and will be true forever into perpetuity, amen, unless…
Unless we change something.
[And I’ll say this right up top. Some of you maybe want me to shut up and dribble, and I swear to god next week I will. But I have a little boy and a little girl who are sitting in public school classrooms as I write this, and as long as I have to worry a little bit about whether they’re safe from being shot to death while they’re at school, I’ll reserve the right to write about it to whatever audience I have left. That’s just how I can sleep at night. If you disagree with the solution I present here, sock it to me in the comments. I promise I’ll engage if you will]
Last week, the President of the United States of America suggested that what we ought to do in order to limit gun violence in schools is, we ought to put more guns into schools, specifically by arming public school teachers. Today, we consider that proposal.
You know what you are going to
love hate when you get to law school? PROPERTY. It is the absolute best, if by “the absolute best” you mean “the doctrinal course that is so far most full of arbitrary naming conventions, precise but capricious defining characteristics, and counter-intuitive notions (and we’re talking about it in the context of an entire course load of classes that are just chock-full of all the foregoing, mind you).” If you do mean that, then (1) you are insane. Say what you mean, you freaking weirdo; and (2) I completely agree with you.
There is one thing that’s kind of cool about Property (at least from my perspective); it functions in some ways that are heavily analogous to the approach I teach to the Games section of the LSAT.
Saints preserve us (this whole thing will be a bit of a diversion from our neatly-charted course of normal conduct. But I have to tell you about it. It’s too, too preposterous not to write about).
Did you guys know that there is a real, active, and apparently widespread prejudice among lawyers against the word “since” as a synonym of “because”?
This delightful nugget of lunacy has been explained to me by two different people (both of whom I would ordinarily love and respect, but I have a strict “kill the messenger” policy when it comes to matters of desperate nonsense, so they’re dead now) as being related to the fact that “since” can refer to a measure of time.
So, sort of a “good news/bad news” kind of a week. My Mock Trial team did not succeed in our attempt to win the Regional competition. But I did learn a lot! I’m tempted to make a Pros and Cons chart and leave it at that, but it sort of feels like cheating. I mean, if you tell somebody you’re going to write a blog, you can’t make a chart and consider your duties in the matter to have been fully discharged. What I’m saying is, I’m trying to keep up my end of the bargain here (I think this matters to me because I feel like the sense of duty to each other is being lost. We owe each other something. At the very least, we owe each other to deal squarely. As it happens, I think we additionally owe each other the benefit of the doubt. People make mistakes; that’s almost the operational definition of a human, right? Let’s cut each other some slack. And while we’re on the subject, I think we owe each other at least as much kindness as we’d like to be treated with (GOLDEN RULE, DAVE. NOT ORIGINAL). We probably have some sort of sincerity duty: I mean, we should generally tell each other the truth. But not the whole truth all the time! (I don’t want to hear that you find my facial features offensive. You can keep that tidbit to yourself, thank you very much).
This week I had an epiphany about the nature of contracts. I spent an entire semester laboring under a misapprehension about them, and this past week, I figured something out that has helped me understand most of what I found confusing or terrible about the subject. Now, some of you will roll your eyes after I write this and think to yourselves, “Dang, Dave is slow. I’ve known that LITERALLY FOREVER,” and all I can say to you is well, yeah. But this was new to me, and there may be some of you who find it as revelatory as I did. Here’s the big idea: The essence of a contract is NOT the document that you sign. The essence of a contract is instead the underlying agreement that you make with someone else. The document that you sign is just an attempt to codify your agreement.
We did an exercise in class last week that was intended to illustrate the gray area surrounding the application of any rule.
In it, we divided into small groups and talked about a family vacationing with a 15-year-old babysitter. Parents agree to pay Babysitter $150 for the week, in exchange for which Babysitter will watch the children when Parents want/need her to. While on the trip, Babysitter is invited to family dinners, at which Parents pay for her meal. One day, Parents invite Babysitter to go horseback riding, which Babysitter accepts. Afterward, Parents say that the cost of the ride was $20, which they will deduct from Babysitter’s pay.