Wrapping things up

I wore my suit twice over the past three days, and neither occasion was for church!

On Saturday, I produced the ICCA South region's third quarterfinal. It was a pretty good show, and certainly my best produced. I'm finally starting to get the hang of how to run these shows. Looks like I won't be able to make my own Semifinals, though, so Rosa has kindly volunteered to run it for me! Which is really cool.

We awoke to the phone ringing on Sunday morning. Surprise! Church was cancelled. This wasn't such a big surprise, given that the weather reports were calling for nearly an inch of ice to cover the area. Nasty. So after hanging up the phone, we ran to the window, only to discover that there was no ice, and barely any snow. The snow wasn't even sticking to the grass! Charlottesville is definitely the most paranoid city I've ever lived in, when it comes to cold weather. I think the city has like one plow.

And Monday, I did my off-brief oral argument for the intramural Lile Moot Court. That's my final argument, this round of Moot court is over! If I advance, that would be incredible, since only the top 1/4 of the teams from this round advance. And it would also mean I get to put "Quarterfinalist" on my resume. On the other hand, if I don't advance, I don't have to write another brief! I'll find out my fate on March 31. 'Til then, I think I'll just enjoy this post-ICCA, post-symposium, post-Moot Court break.

Time for a nap.

My new article posted on casa.org: A Case for Competing

"As a former competitor, current adjudicator, and current competition producer, I am constantly fascinated by people’s reactions to a cappella competitions. I know some people are strongly against, and most are strongly in favor, and some lie in between. But that’s not what gets me. What astonishes me is the reactions people give at the end of the competition.

"Some people lose competitions with unbelievable grace and poise. These people practically deserve an award just for their professionalism. Other people..."<continue reading>

UVA Law article re: symposium investor panel

Institutional shareholders are increasingly taking an activist approach to investing by trying to influence how corporations govern themselves, but panelists at a business law symposium Feb. 16 agreed that more involvement by such groups will pay off for shareholders in the end. Representatives from institutional investor groups responded to scholars who spoke on the phenomenon during a Virginia Law & Business Review and Virginia Law and Business Society symposium, “Corporate Governance: The Impact of Institutional Investors,” held in Caplin Pavilion.... [Full article and mp3 podcast available here]

What a week!!

This was one of those weeks where you only sleep a couple hours at a time. I seriously was staying up until 2am working on my moot court brief, then I'd sleep for a couple hours, work from 4am-5am, then sleep again for a couple hours. And that was my night. That was the process a few nights this week. Crazy!

I'm happy to report that the moot court brief got completed, and it was not late! (I turned it in one minute before the deadline) But my partner and I are pretty proud of it - we hope to advanced past this Second Round to next semester's Quarterfinal Round.

Then, as if that wasn't crazy enough, my big symposium happened on Friday. Have you ever prepared for something for so long that the date just gets engrained in your mind? This was like that. I wrote "Friday, February 16, 2007" in a thousand emails over the last eleven months, preparing for this day. Then all of a sudden, it arrived! We had professors from around the eastern US, and several representatives from the institutional investor community (together representing many trillions of dollars). What an experienced, professional group! It was an amazing experience to eat dinner with them all on Thursday night (and sit next to the Dean of the law school), and then even more incredible to hear from them all on Friday. Our professors shared their research and insights with us, and the investors sat on a panel and fielded questions about fund activism within corporate governance. From my side of things, it couldn't have gone better for me; I was so lucky - catering was on time and delicious, microphones all worked, weather was gorgeous.

So by the time that was all through, I was ready to collapse. What a week!

Fortunately, this weekend I had basically nothing planned, so I was able to just relax.

In other big news, our bishopric was changed on Sunday. Great men were released, and new great men took their place on the stand behind the pulpit. We're sad to see the old ones go, but we welcome the new with open arms. And the rest of Sunday was really fantastic. What a day.

What a week!!

Our symposium is next week!

Things are really heating up for our journal's symposium next week. I'm excited to see it all culminate in a wonderful event. I've put over a hundred hours into this thing over the past ten months. I'm looking forward to it. The law school just posted a news story about it. Check it out:

http://www.law.virginia.edu/html/news/2007_spr/corpgov.htm

Stella Awards

The 2006 True Stella Awards

Issued 31 January 2007

(Click here to
confirm these are legitimate.)

#5: Marcy Meckler. While shopping at a mall, Meckler stepped outside and was "attacked" by a squirrel that lived among the trees and bushes. And "while frantically attempting to escape from the squirrel and detach it from her leg, [Meckler] fell and suffered severe injuries," her resulting lawsuit says. That's the mall's fault, the lawsuit claims, demanding in excess of
$50,000, based on the mall's "failure to warn" her that squirrels
live outside.

#4: Ron and Kristie Simmons. The couple's 4-year-old son, Justin, was killed in a tragic lawnmower accident in a licensed daycare facility, and the death was clearly the result of negligence by the daycare providers. The providers were clearly deserving of being sued, yet when the Simmons's discovered the daycare only had $100,000 in insurance, they dropped the case against them and instead sued the manufacturer of the 16-year-old lawn mower because the mower didn't have a safety device that 1) had not been invented at the time of the mower's manufacture, and 2) no safety agency had even suggested needed to be invented. A sympathetic jury still awarded the family $2 million.

#3: Robert Clymer. An FBI agent working a high-profile case in Las Vegas, Clymer allegedly created a disturbance, lost the magazine from his pistol, then crashed his pickup truck in a drunken stupor -- his blood-alcohol level was 0.306 percent, more than three times the legal limit for driving in Nevada. He pled guilty to drunk driving because, his lawyer explained, "With public officials, we expect them to own up to their mistakes and
correct them." Yet Clymer had the gall to sue the manufacturer of his pickup truck, and the dealer he bought it from, because he "somehow lost consciousness" and the truck "somehow produced a heavy smoke that filled the passenger cab." Yep: the drunk-driving accident wasn't his fault, but the truck's fault. Just the kind of guy you
want carrying a gun in the name of the law.

#2: KinderStart.com. The specialty search engine says Google should be forced to include the KinderStart site in its listings, reveal how its "Page Rank" system works, and pay them lots of money because they're a competitor. They claim by not being ranked higher in Google, Google is somehow infringing KinderStart's Constitutional right to free speech. Even if by some stretch they were a competitor of Google, why in the world would they think it's Google's responsibility to help them succeed? And if Google's "review" of their site is negative, wouldn't a government court order forcing them to change it infringe on Google's Constitutional right to free speech?

And the winner of the 2006 True Stella
Award: Allen Ray Heckard. Even though Heckard is 3 inches
shorter, 25 pounds lighter, and 8 years older than former basketball
star Michael Jordan, the Portland, Oregon, man says he looks a lot
like Jordan, and is often confused for him -- and thus he deserves
$52 million "for defamation and permanent injury" -- plus $364
million in "punitive damage for emotional pain and suffering", plus
the SAME amount from Nike co-founder Phil Knight, for a grand total
of $832 million. He dropped the suit after Nike's lawyers chatted
with him, where they presumably explained how they'd counter-sue if
he pressed on.

©2007 by Randy Cassingham,
StellaAwards.com. Reprinted with permission.

Un-pause

OK so, as my commenters note, things have been busy. I got a whole MONTH off of school (one of the few benefits of not going to BYU), and somehow Rosa bargained for a full month off of work, and we spent Dec 22 - Jan 21 in Utah. Although our trip there and back was a horrible airplane/rentalcar/delays/overbooking/generally huge mess, both ways!, the time in between was absolutely delightful. Lots of relaxing, visiting with family, visiting with friends, wonderful Christmas, multiple birthday parties, BYU basketball game, Vocal Point performance, Noteworthy weekend retreat at our house, a Noteworthy alumni party, helping my folks clean the storage, and even a little skiing. Oh! And Rosa got her driver's license (she had her purse stolen a few weeks back, and now it's all restored!). So all in all, it was a marvelous month off.

Now I'm back in full swing, preparing four ICCA competition shows, one school-wide business law symposium, and trying not to get behind in school. It's only been a week, but so far I'm still caught up in reading. Let's hope it stays that way!!

We've got a handful of pictures from our trip. Now if I can just find that USB cable...

Woohooo!!!

Took my last final this afternoon!! Criminal Adjudication. The professor wrote it, intending we'd take it in about three hours, but he allotted us four just so we'd have plenty of time. I know so little about criminal adjudication that I took the full four hours, right up until the last second. Hahaha

But now I'm done!!! The semester is over, which means three down, three to go. As my parents told me tonight: I'm "half a lawyer."

The other reason I'm cheering today is because I advanced to the second round of our intramural moot court competition! Yeehaw! There were over 150 entrants in this first round; I survived with a combined brief and oral argument score high enough to make it into the magic 64. I did this round on my own, but all future rounds will be with a partner. I'm thrilled to be working in the next round with my buddy Jeff Miller. The guy's phenomenal. Mark my words: we're taking this thing all the way! The second round begins at the beginning of next semester (end of January).

Now Rosie and I just gotta clean up this place, pack, and hit the road!

Yay! Just one left!

Finished my Copyright final this afternoon. After my first two finals this semester, I felt mostly numb - not sure if I had done well or not. But after today's exam, I actually felt really good. There always could be something you didn't see, or forgot to include, but on this exam, I felt like I really touched all the bases. Woohoo!

Now I just have to wait 'til February to find out how I did...

Last final tomorrow: Criminal Adjudication.

Gordon on Exams, Part 4 of 4

The exam questions are usually absolutely hilarious fact situations that just slay students and send them into paroxysms of helpless laughter. Law professors learn how to write these witty exams at a seminar for new professors, "How to Make Up for Your Humorless Teaching Style on the Final Exam." Try not to let the laughing get out of hand.

If your professor has stressed theory all semester and has insisted that there are no legal rules and that only an idiot would believe that there are rules, her exam will test you on the rules and the rules alone. These rules are printed in heavy black typeface in the commercial outlines, and are therefore called "black letter law." Do not confuse them with black letter theory, which will do you no good whatsoever on the exam.

You should use the "IRAC" method on the exam. "IRAC" stands for Issue, Rule, Application, and Conclusion. Be sure to discuss each part of the formula, except that you can skip the Conclusion, because it doesn't matter which way you come out. Also, there is no time to do the Application, because the exam is so chockful of issues that you barely have time to list them and try to state some semblance of a rule using only key words. It shouldn't really be called the "IRAC" method, but "IR" looks kind of stupid and makes it sound like law school exams test only memorization skills. Which, of course, is what they do.

Be sure to confront any ambiguities in the exam. They probably wound up in there accidentally, but the professor will never admit this and will insist that they were deliberately placed there for pedagogical purposes (a phrase you will hear a lot). For example, suppose Don throws acid at Pat. (Notice that "Don" begins with a "D," as does the word "Defendant," and that "Pat" begins with "P," as does the word "Plaintiff." These professors are geniuses.) The exam doesn't tell you whether the acid made contact--i.e., a harmful or offensive "touching" (what a moronic word)--with Pat. You should confront this ambiguity and write the following:
The facts don't say whether the acid touched Pat. If it did not, it was an assault. If it did, it was a battery. Of course, it was clearly a battery if it was--battery acid!!!
Professors just love humorous asides like this, and will probably give you several points of extra credit.

After the exam, do not review--or "post-mortem"--the exam with other students. This is very depressing--especially if you can't even agree whether it was a torts exam or a contracts exam. On the other hand, if some persistent bozo absolutely insists on reviewing the exam with you, be sure to point out several issues that were not on the exam. This will cost him several days' sleep and, probably, thirty pounds.

Gordon on Exams, Part 3 of 4

[Editor's note: Although this section is somewhat outdated as far as technology, the anxiety described is unfortunately spot on.]

Then the two-week exam period begins in earnest, and the typical student begins to feel like a nine-lived cat run over by an eighteen-wheeler. To take their minds off the crush of exams, students engage in a variety of activities, such as:
Trying to concentrate while panicking.
Having anxiety attacks while panicking.
Having diarrhea while panicking.
Panicking while panicking.

I strongly recommend that you type your exams instead of writing them. There are several advantages to typing. For instance, you can bring a "memory *1694 typewriter," and when the exam begins you can push a button and your typewriter will reproduce your entire outline. This is very handy.

You might find it a little difficult to concentrate in the typing room, because all those typewriters pounding together sound like a herd of elephants doing an impersonation of Gregory Hines. If somebody starts typing before you have even finished reading the first paragraph, don't get upset. It probably means nothing, except that someone is a genius and how are you supposed to compete with a genius and what are you doing in law school anyway!!! Take a deep breath. Take several deep breaths. Now you are hyperventilating and are going to pass out. Cease breathing.

The sound of the typewriters is not the only reason you're having trouble concentrating. You have not slept or eaten for two days. Also, you have not changed your clothes or bathed for a week, and things are beginning to get a little bit itchy. You are wearing a hat to hide the fact that your hair looks like the La Brea tar pits.

Try to hum a tune (to yourself, so that the person next to you doesn't bash you on the head with his typewriter) to help yourself relax. Suddenly--and you have never noticed this before--you realize that "La Bamba" has exactly the same chord progression as "You've Lost That Loving Feeling" and "Twist and Shout." This will probably be hard to do, but let it go for now. You can think about it later--like during your next exam. Twist a little closer to your typewriter, and try to write something quasi-intelligent. Do not shout.If there is a power failure or your typewriter breaks, don't panic. Calmly remove the paper from the typewriter, gently pick up a pen, and scrawl across the page in ink mixed with blood: "TYPEWRITER BROKE!!!! I WRITE NOW!!!!"

Then pass out. To avoid power and equipment failures, you might want to bring in a wheeled cart with about seventeen extra typewriters and a twelve-volt car battery. Better yet, drive a pickup truck full of typewriters into the exam room and open the hood for access to the battery. It would be thoughtful to place a drip pan under the transmission. Also, be sure that the carriage on your typewriter is working, so that you don't end up typing 2,000 letters in one very black spot. This can make your answer hard to read.

Gordon on Exams, Part 2 of 4

Since professors won't tell you how to do well on your exams, I will. Because you cover so much material, you need to make an outline for each class. You can do this alone, assuming you have about an extra thousand years to kill. An easier way is for your study group to divide up the classes, with each person outlining one class. This differs from the prior approach in that it is humanly possible. You are likely, however, to open up your study group's contracts outline the night before the exam and find a sentence like this: "An offer is the manifestation of gooberness to enter into a something or other (I didn't catch what the professor said here) so made as to justify another person in understanding that [illegible] is invited and will gyre and gimble in the wabe. Or something like that." You then realize that the classmate who wrote this dropped out six weeks ago and is inaccessible by telephone, and you run around the room screaming like the lunatic that you are. So it's really better just to buy the commercial outline and forget it.

Then, memorize the outline. As you pour it in the top of your head, most of it will run out your ears. Keep scooping up the stuff that runs out your ears and pour it back into the top of your head. Eventually, a little of it will begin to stick. You should also use acronyms, or "pneumatic devices," to help you memorize. For example, the prima facie case of a tort action for negligence has several elements: an Act or omission, a Duty, a Breach, Actual cause, Proximate cause, and Damages. The first letters of these elements are A, D, B, A, P, and D. Now, think of a sentence using words beginning with those letters. For example, Ann Drop-kicked Bunnies And Pretty Duckies. See? You will never forget the elements of negligence again. You can use this technique to remember everything you learn in law school. Using this method, one student was able to reduce his entire civil procedure outline to one word, and finally, to one letter. Then he forgot the letter.

Next, get some of the professor's old exams from the library and try to answer them. As you read them, note that you don't have the foggiest idea what they are asking. You can't even tell what the subject matter of the class was. Put the exams away. This year's test will probably be easier.

Gordon on Exams, Part 1 of 4

Exams can be really stressful. Every second you spend away from your studying, you feel like someone else is getting ahead of you. But 18 hours/day can be draining, so you really do need a break. Hence when I recently got my hands on a hilarious article by Professor James D. Gordon, of BYU law school, it provided some much needed comic relief. This article was amusingly published in the prestigious Yale Law Journal back in 1991. The theme of the piece is the silliness of law school; Gordon pokes fun at nearly every aspect of law school life. Though his style can occasionally be a bit over-the-top for my comedic taste, I have to admit I roared as I read through his section on exams. Maybe it just hit a little close to home this week.

In an effort to lighten the mood for all my classmates who read this blog (and hopefully for you others as well), I'm going to post the exam part of the article here in installments over the next couple of days. And since I'm studying for my copyright exam right now, let me make the disclaimer that I'm posting these sections on this blog for fair use purposes; I invite any comments on Professor Gordon's remarks. This is totally academic, not infringement.

Without further ado, I bring you installment #1:

Studies have shown that the best way to learn is to have frequent exams on small amounts of material and to receive lots of feedback from the teacher. Consequently, law school does none of this. Anyone can learn under ideal conditions; law school is supposed to be an intellectual challenge. Therefore, law professors give only one exam, the FINAL EXAM OF THE LIVING DEAD, and they give absolutely no feedback before then. Actually, they give no feedback after then, either, because they don't return the exams to the students. A few students go and look at their exams after they are graded, but this is a complete waste of time, unless they just want to see again what they wrote and have a combat veteran-type flashback of the whole horrific nightmare. The professors never write any comments on the exams. That might permit you to do better next time, which would upset the class ranking.

Another reason that law professors give only one exam is that, basically, they are lazier than three-toed sloths. They teach half as many hours as other professors, are paid twice as much, and get promoted three times as fast. Then, they whine like three-year-olds because they have to grade one exam per class. I mean, this is every single semester, year in and year out. The constant grind is enough to kill a person, I tell you.

Halfway home

Took my second final today. It was a nice short 2-hr exam for my seminar class, "Jury Trials in America: Understanding and Practicing Before a Pure Form of Democracy." Yeah, the title takes longer to write than the final.

No, but seriously, it wasn't too bad. Since we've already had lots of readings, discussions, practice sessions, and papers, the exam was just more of the same. And it was only worth 60% of my grade. That may sound like a lot to my undergraduate readers, but remember that normally in law school, the semester grade is calculated thus:

000% Reading
000% Attendance
100% Final Exam
100% TOTAL

So as you can see, finals are a big deal. So this one was refreshing in some sense. Now I've got two down and two to go. Up next: Copyright.

One final down!

I took my evidence final today. Four hours of hearsay exceptions, character witnesses, expert testimony, conditional relevance, and more! Yikes! Before you ask, I have no idea how I did. In fact, my grade reflects not so much how I did, but how everyone else did. Yay for grading curves!

One down, three to go! Up next: Jury Trials in America.

Holiday Jazz

There's a lot of great internet radio stations out there. I just found a new one that has a bunch of great holiday music, including a really hip Holiday Jazz station. Check it out.

Vocal Point on YouTube

This is a clip of 2005-06 Vocal Point rehearsing for a back-to-school performance early this fall. The song, "He is Born," was written by one of Vocal Point's alumni, Aaron Edson, and honors the birth of Jesus Christ. The group performed this song in their championship-winning ICCA set. I love these guys.

December = Decisions

December 1 is a huge day for second-year law students all around the country. According to National Association for Law Placement standards and official timeline, all offers made by law firms must be accepted or rejected as of December 1. So the 98% of us who are pursuing work in the private sector, mostly at big firms, are now all locked in. We've signed our lives away. All decisions are now made, so we can now ask each other where we're going.

So where am I going?

Weil, Gotshal & Manges [while, gott-shull, and man-jz] is a New York -based law firm with over 1,100 attorneys across the US, Europe, and Asia. I've received and accepted an offer at their New York office for an internship next summer. The internship will last approximately 12 weeks, and will ideally end in a permanent offer of employment for the following fall (post-graduation). Find out more about Weil on the firm's website.

So Rosie and I are headed to Manhattan next summer! Crazy, huh?!

Getting Gigs

After a brief dry spell, I've managed to squeeze out another article on the CASA website about directing groups. Check it out.

Noteworthy on YouTube

The great all-female a cappella sensation has a big concert this coming Saturday night, including the release of their hott debut album, On The Horizon. In honor of Noteworthy, here is an awkward video of them performing at BYU's annual celebration, Friday Night Live. You can hear their greatness through the mismatched video and sound. Check it out: