Spot On: Strategies for Acing Law School Exams

*Adapted from Getting to Maybe by Richard Michael Fischl

and Jeremy Paul (Carolina Academic Press 1999).

How come Student X did better on the (contracts) exam than I

did, even though I studied twice as hard and knew the material

much better than she did?

SHOW WHAT YOU KNOW: Your job is threefold.

1. Identify discussable issues in fact pattern

2. Give the law applicable to each issue

3. Call upon facts in question to solve problem

Exploit the ambiguity

Its what you do with what you find inside the question that counts the most.

What you will find inside the typical law

exam question is ambiguity. Learning to search it out and exploit it is the key to doing well.

Forks in the Road Issues =Forks in the Road

Just like a fork in the road, each issue on an exam presents you with a choice between two (and sometimes more) paths leading in different directions.

KEY POINT: Not only do exam forks permit you to travel in different directions at the same time; that is precisely what you should do. The more paths your analysis explores, the better your answer will be.

Two Categories of Issues: You cant even begin a search for forks in the

road on an exam until youve grasped the material taught in the course. There are no shortcuts.

Fork in the Law Law splits = law unsettled

Fork in the Facts Fact splits = multiple interpretations of facts

Types of Forks in the Law Traditional Rule vs. Modern Rule

EX: Common Law permits offeror to revoke any time before offeree completes performance. Restatement 45 protects offeree against revocation once performance has begun.

Majority Rule vs. Minority Rule

Common Law Rule vs. Statutory Rule EX: Contracts common law mirror-image rule v. UCC

2-207

Tips for acing rule vs. counter-rule issues:

Do not ignore rule vs. counter-rule

situations Watch for the unidentified or imaginary

jurisdictions

Types of Forks in the Facts Rule v. Exceptions

EX: Option offer is revocable, unless: 1) payment for option; 2) UCC 2-205 firm offer; 3) offerees reliance on promise

Sequential categories EX: preliminary negotiations v. offer OR mere

preparations v. performance

Elements of rule

Evaluative EX: Analyze whether a partys actions were in good

faith

Strategy for identifying issues and organizing analysis:

1. Read call of question 2. Actively read question and look for discussable

issues 3. Start outlining process by identifying major

centers of discussion 4. Allocate time 5. Begin precise analysis 6. Weave in facts into discussion 7. Use headings and underlining appropriately

How to practice efficiently Use old exams Stick to 25% rule

7-8 minutes for 30-minute question; 11 minutes for 45 minute question; 15 minutes for 60-minute question

Identify key issues Outline answer

It takes self-discipline to refrain from writing for long enough to organize your thoughts. Every prof prefers an organized essay.

Verbalize issues with study group Train yourself to argue facts.

Mistakes to avoid: Not following directions Misreading / making up facts Overall organization (no legal roadmap) Missing/ignoring issues Not defining terms Not applying facts Being too conclusory Strong language Not arguing both sides

Example Answer to Q1 Whats Wrong?

Since the offer letter specifically addressed how to manifest acceptance (i.e.Nina was to go to his home, use a key .), dispatch rule would not apply. Acceptance would have been to perform the tasks listed.

Graders Comments:

Does not define terms: offer, acceptance. Does not apply the facts: Matt made an

offer because Too conclusory: Just makes a statement

without supporting it with the law.

Example Answer to Q1 Whats Wrong?

No, there is not an enforceable contract. Matts offer gave explicit terms on how the offer was to be accepted. To accept the offer, Nina was to go to his house. Because Nina sends a letter to Matts home, she is not following the instructions for acceptance per the contract and, therefore, there is no enforceable contract. The offeror has the right to state in the offer how a contract is to be accepted and Nina did not follow those instructions. This was an offer based on performance to accept and Nina did not perform the required task.

Graders Comments Overall organization (no legal roadmap): Think of an

exam answer as a road trip. 1. Figure out where you want to go (enforceable contract). 2. Decide how youll get there (offer, acceptance, consideration

(n/a here) = contract). 3. Get in your car and actually go (walk me through the facts and

tell me which ones of them apply to which element and why. 4. As on a long road trip, make pit stops along the way (quickly

explain the mailbox rule and an indifferent offer).

Does not define terms: offer, acceptance Show what you know: You told me what a unilateral

contract was, but never actually used the term.

Example Answer to Q1 Whats Wrong?

In order for there to be an enforceable contract both parties must mutually assent to an exchange of promises. To put it more simply both parties shall agree to an exchange of a something for a something. In this case Matts something is the promise of $5000 in exchange of Ninas something which would be the editing and cite-checking of Matts book.

Graders Comments

Does not follow directions: This is an analysis of consideration, which Professor said not to discuss.

Example Answer to Q2 Whats Wrong?

Had Nina only gotten 1% through the editing and cite-checking process or only made a copy of the manuscript but not began editing and cite-checking at all then Matt would be able to revoke without the need to allow a reasonable amount of time for Nina to complete the task.... If she continues working but only reaches 99% of the manuscript before she stops for some reason, she cannot demand enforcement of 99% of the pay as she would not have completed the requirements of the offer.

Graders Comments Making up facts: Had this happened, If,

then Never go into alternative fact patterns. There are no points to be had for these alternative answers, so time should be used to fully define terms and fully analyze the facts that you are given.

Caveat: KNOW YOUR PROFESSOR: If your professor wants a brain dump of every piece of information you know, provide it.

Example Answer to Q2 Whats Wrong?

I think Matts argument fails contemporary contract analysis, as Ninas 45% completion of the edits, coupled with the other tasks listed in the offer, illustrate substantial performance on the project as a whole. Thus, without a discussion of consideration (which appears to exist), there is an enforceable contract.

Graders Comments

Not arguing both sides: Try to stay unbiased. Dont use the words, I think. You want to analyze the law and apply the facts to argue both sides of the issue.

Not following directions: Professor said not to discuss consideration.

Example Answer to Q1 A contract is a manifestation of mutual intent to be bound and consideration. To have a contract usually there must be offer, acceptance and consideration. The offer is the manifestation of intent by the offeror to induce the offeree to accept the proposal and be bound by its terms. The offer had a clause for acceptance by action making the offer unilateral.

Graders Comments

Good definition of terms Know your professors magic words!

Example Answer to Q1 I: Whether the contract is enforceable would depend on whether there was a valid offer and acceptance. R: In order to have an enforceable contract there has to be a manifestation of mutual intent to be bound. A: i: Offer r: An offer is. a: In this instance, Matt made an offer because i: Acceptance r: The mailbox rule says that an acceptance occurs when. a: As the offeror, Matt is the master of the offer and can dictate the terms of the acceptance. Matt stated how Nina was to accept. Nina must accept by the steps stated in the offer. C: No contract. Ninas act of sending the letter does not comport with the steps for acceptance specified in the offer.

Graders Comments

Good Overall Organization & Analysis Use IRAC even if your professor says it

doesnt matter: it will help you wrack up valuable points.

Spot On: Strategies for Acing Law School ExamsHow come Student X did better on the (contracts) exam than I did, even though I studied twice as hard and knew the material much better than she did?SHOW WHAT YOU KNOW:Your job is threefold.Exploit the ambiguityForks in the RoadTwo Categories of Issues:Types of Forks in the LawTips for acing rule vs. counter-rule issues:Types of Forks in the FactsStrategy for identifying issues and organizing analysis:How to practice efficientlyMistakes to avoid:Example Answer to Q1 Whats Wrong?Graders Comments:Example Answer to Q1 Whats Wrong?Graders CommentsExample Answer to Q1 Whats Wrong?Graders CommentsExample Answer to Q2 Whats Wrong?Graders CommentsExample Answer to Q2 Whats Wrong?Graders CommentsExample Answer to Q1Graders CommentsExample Answer to Q1Graders Comments