Legal Muse

Insert witty tagline here…

Archive for August 2008

At a Loss

with 4 comments

At dinner tonight, I tried to explain Contract Law to Sam. I began by extolling the millions of interpretations of whether a hypothetical sign across the street could actually form a contract with the consumer who views it, and if the store that the sign is in is contractually bound to sell those Maine lobsters for 4 dollars to the consumer.

She stops me after 3 different interpretations or so:

Sam: “I guess that’s the thing that I hate about law. There are so many different interpretations.”

Bill: “That’s what makes it awesome! You just have to argue your viewpoint best.”

Sam: “Yeah, but it’s hard to argue with stupid people.”

My only relevant response was “Well, I think this will make a good blog post.”

Advertisements

Written by DMN

August 31, 2008 at 11:03 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with ,

Contracts and P. Diddy

with one comment

Most ridiculous mnemonic I’ve run into so far in law school:

DSQQWPP – “ducks say quack quack when passing people.”

I believe that this stands for “duration, subject matter, quality, quantity, work to be done, price and payment.”

I also believe that these are supposed to be requisite in order to have mutual assent between parties in a contractual agreement.  But then again class is such a haze that I might imagined all of that, including the part about the ducks.  Honestly, that almost seems more likely.

From the Blum “Examples and Explanations”, page 78.  I think this was an attempt at humor.

“Instead of authorizing acceptance in the form of words, the offeror could demand a nonverbal signification of acceptance.  The offer could state, for example ‘I offer to sell you Bleakacre for $2 Million.  If you wish to accept this offer, you must stand in your underwear at the corner of Main and Broadway at 2 P.M. today.  This is the only way that you may accept this offer.’  By performing the act, the offeree signifies assent and impliedly promises to perform the consideration (payment of $2 Million) demanded in the offer.”

In other news, P. Diddy is complaining about gas prices on his Youtube blog.  Apparently, he is beginning to find it cost ineffective to fly his private jet everywhere, and is now reverting back to commercial airlines.  And I quote:

“I want to give a shout out to all my Saudi Arabian brothers and sisters and all my brothers and sisters from all the countries that have oil, if you could all please send me some oil for my jet I would truly appreciate it.”

Written by DMN

August 28, 2008 at 11:17 pm

Wrong on the Internet

with 2 comments

People who have avoided slashdot.org, top-law-schools.com, abovethelaw.com and other various opinionated internet communities probably haven’t had the same problems as me…

I’m not proud of it, but it’s true.

Written by DMN

August 25, 2008 at 4:59 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with ,

Excerpts from Google Chat

with one comment

6:17 PM me: does any of this have anything to do with the class?
Veto: nope
not in the least
me: just making sure
Veto: why are we talking about this??
are we seriously asking this?
6:18 PM because they can in our society we can sue
so they can
enough
———————————–
me: i don’t feel the need to take notes on this

Veto: the incentive issue is interesting
me: true
6:25 PM Veto: but from what i understand this is the case that made ptsd
and that is huge!
and we are mysteriously not talking about that…
me: lol
——————————–
Veto: dude i have dirty mind
Veto: contract, performance, injunctive
ways to use a contract and injunctive relief to get someone to do something or not
6:31 PM me: you may be able to create a whole new branch of law…
Veto: of sex contracts?
6:32 PM me: yes
Veto: love the dog photos, you’re feeding your dog beer?!
me: we could file for injunctive relief regarding that dude who keeps interrupting the class with his inane hypotheticals

Written by DMN

August 22, 2008 at 12:09 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with ,

Adding to the Divorce Rate

with one comment

Shamelessly ganked from ATL.

And another

Heh. Heh. Heh.

Class Notes:

A lot of times we have individuals in the class who like to flex their mental muscles out loud by proposing outrageous hypotheticals using the principles that we’re learning. This is a highly annoying action that holds up the class and causes a significant amounts of eye rolling from offended classmates. However, occasionally someone will rise to the challenge and end a hypo with a succinct statement that causes clear finality.

EXAMPLE:

Gunner: But why did they only sue Pittston? Clearly both entities were at fault. Buffalo Creek Mining Co had some of the fault, and so did the parent company Pittston.

Student 1: Because Pittston has all the money

Gunner: But why didn’t they sue Buffalo Creek Mining Co too? It’s a matter of…. (about to launch on long hypothetical argument that has nothing to do with where we’re going in the class)

Veto (girl who sits behind me): Because PITTSTON, has all the MONEY. *glare*

Gunner: Oh.

Well done Veto!

As of right now, Veto is really the only one who’s stepped up (though mostly through Tourette Syndrome apparently) and put these offending individuals in their place.

I, for one, recommit myself to do my part in stopping this epidemic.

Written by DMN

August 21, 2008 at 7:17 pm

Law School Day 3

with 4 comments

Notes:

1. “Predictability is the hallmark of progress.” LRW Prof

I’m not sure if I really agree with that, or even if that makes sense. After she said it, she gave us a little smirk. Maybe she was kidding.

2. My civil procedure professor has 11 cats, the names of which include “Spirit”, “Equality”, and um, others I don’t remember. My colleagues and I feel that she should have one named Due and one named Process. The supreme overlord cat should be Constitution of the United States (was that it?) and the bitch should be Common Law.

EDIT: The anonymous internet star/classmate has written me with a list of the names we decided on for the cats:

1) liberty

2) justice

3) equality

4) spirit (Top 4 named by Prof. From here on, names are ours).

5) Due Process

6) supreme law of the land (whichever the pimp cat is)

7) common law (the bitch runt one) – she always seemed to scoff at common law in class

8.) unnamed

9) liberal

10)Un-named

11)Un-named

My sincerest apologies for having a horrible memory!

Fellow law student quote of the week:

“law school is just killing time between happy hours….”

the follow up

“yea and international law and tax law are just ways to figure out how to import the stuff cheaper. ”

Silly thought of the day:

If I enter into a contract with you where I pay you 50 dollars for you to enter into a separate contract with me where you pay me 50 dollars and I in turn sing a song, and I reneg on the initial contract, does the second contract stand?

Wait, what?

Favorite Quote from Jonathan Augustus Black while rereading what I have:

“I awoke the next morning to the blaring of “Stars and Boulevards” by Augustana, my emo/angsty ring tone that tells everyone that I’m in touch with my emotions.”

Written by DMN

August 21, 2008 at 12:32 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with ,

Legal Excerpts

with 3 comments

Taken from “Legal Research and Writing”, Foundation Press, 2006 p. x

Why would anyone want to write like a lawyer!?

My text states : By now, you may be asking yourself, “Why would I want to write like a lawyer? Lawyers are terrible writers!”

It continues to talk about how the common perception is that language is used by lawyers to hide the meaning of things in legal documents and to generally confuse everyone.

My textbook begins it’s response by stating: “The root causes of the basic complaints of prolixity, excessive complexity, and dishonesty or obfuscation are many and varied, but the problems can be targeted and eliminated.”

Heh.

Written by DMN

August 20, 2008 at 2:18 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with