Perhaps Even Worse ... Congress

Still in the Torts cases. [Forever in the Torts cases!]

AI: Joinder of Parties in Civil Procedure...

Me: Now you're just messing with me on purpose...

AI, mid giving me the asked for takeaways from a Torts case: Summary Judgment standards...

Me: IF YOU SAY ANYTHING OTHER THAN 'NO GENUINE DISPUTE OF A MATERIAL FACT' SO HELP ME...

Happy Thanksgiving to all suffering IIED from law school.

Management sent us a box of carbs for Thanksgiving.

On the bottom is a whole layer of not-diet pop and juice.

Tossed two in the fridge.

Tonight we outline Torts with ultra hazardous quickness! 🤣

The woman I reached out to with the Academic Success program has been *so* helpful in offering support and techniques for dealing with exam anxiety.

She also immediately clocked my hero worship issues re: Civ Pro prof and gave a respectfully grounding example of how no one is perfect.

Bless.

Civ Pro prof: Have a Happy Thanksgiving!

Me, to KJD: WHAT RULE IS THAT?! 😂

Shoutout to professors offering reassurance to the neurotic masses today.

I needed this so badly from Civ Pro prof that I had considered going to office hours to try to elicit it. 🙄

Much more satisfying sua sponte.

The number of attorneys on TikTok that are targeting panicking first semester 1Ls going into exams with "Everything you need is linked in my profile!" and it's something you have to pay for that could be found for free in its entirety elsewhere is why the profession has the reputation it does.

"Necessary parties were those who should be part of the action, but are not so essential that the action cannot continue without them."

There's that word again
Y'all still struggling w/ the definition

I'm no textualist, but it does seem that words do indeed have meanings and should be used as such

Coworker selling train tickets: Did you know you can rent a car?

Outstanding.

After more diagraming than took place in any math class I ever managed to pass, he says:

"This is how the LSAT relates to law school!"

SIR.

You may have gone to Georgetown, but I got a full ride w/a 157.
WE'RE NOT ON YOUR LEVEL. 😭😂🤦‍♀️

Meanwhile, same class, same sharp mind declares:

"This is fun! And not just because I brought a toy!"

He really did have a toy.
It's too much to get into.

I don't know how I'm going to make it all make sense in my notes for my KJD who DECIDED NOT TO ATTEND TODAY. 🤦‍♀️

Just witnessed the arguably worst student in the class raise her hand to tell the sharpest mind I've ever encountered that there was a typo in his PowerPoint.

MA'AM. ☠️😭☠️

The meaning was not in question.
We all saw it. There's a reason the rest of us didn't point it out.

STAY IN YOUR LANE.

It wasn't until I started pulling the multiple choice questions out of the PowerPoints to study that I realized that Civil Procedure professor uses two spaces after a period.

This is a dying art form.
Bluebook calls it a "stylistic error." 🙄

PROTECT PRECIOUS CIV PRO PROF AT ALL COSTS.

Guy on TikTok posting after taking the MPRE:

"I hear people say just do what Jesus would do and you'll be fine. ...what's Jesus gonna do with work-product doctrine?!"

🤣🤣🤣

Not Richard Freer of Barbri Civil Procedure video fame just putting out there that the lowest grade he ever got was in Professional Responsibility.

"Not my lowest grade in law school. My lowest grade IN LIFE."

Sir. 🤣

Typing up the Torts notes too quickly.

Re: Products Liability case...

"...anchored in the Second Amendment..."
Wait, WHAT?

"Second Restatement"
That makes more sense. 🤦‍♀️😂

Electronic AND hard copy submitted.

Too early for a drink? 🥃 🍸🍹

I mean, probably.

I’ve got Civil Procedure in an hour. ⚖️

🤷🏻‍♀️😂

Back to reading for Torts until then! 📖

To be honest, case summaries are MUCH more concise and read more clearly. There were, however, entire points of analysis that I had no choice but to completely remove.

Keep thinking about Civ Pro prof (the undeniable MVP of this semester) re: "What can be inferred from silence?"

The way my heart sank when I formatted this memo and realized I needed to cut SIX PAGES.

I briefly considered writing an addendum and citing to it as an unpublished opinion. ...but that's ... ridiculousness inspired by desperation.

Due in 3 hours.
Says A LOT LESS now.
...but it's DONE. 🙌😭

Went to the bathroom at work. Looked in the mirror.

I LOOK like it's been memo week 🤦‍♀️

I'm so close, though.
One more counter argument/response, wrap up conclusions, then a day of editing.

Gave up on "concomitance"
Turns out it's also some kind of reference to the Eucharist.
Could do without that.

I'm going to get fired.

I don't work for Target, but this trend is untenable.

Moreover, as a customer, I'd rather just be left alone, thanks.
Required smiling makes us all uncomfortable.

I often wonder if this is policy for our local Metroparks workers. They ALWAYS wave. I don't trust it. 😂

Daily Goal: Work the word 'concomitantly' into this godforsaken memo

Civ Pro prof thought he'd keep us from finding out he wrote the supplemental reading he provided by keeping his name off it.

Sir.

Issue = Factual Dispute
"Concomitantly" = Georgetown for "Simultaneously"

Taking notes on the case summaries I've written for my memo in order to build the analysis section.

Thinking about the kid that gave me shit many MANY years ago, in MIDDLE SCHOOL, about reading something I had just written.

Wonder what he's up to these days.

You can't meaningfully engage with folks that feel entitled to their own version of reality.

It's not a moral failing to protect your peace.

Status quo has been break the law and then let the lawyers deal with it. HAVING the lawyers doesn't impact the propensity to break the law.

And, ultimately, regardless of legality, it's only going to matter to these folks if the law is ENFORCED as they have no respect for anyone/thing of value.

Rep. Yassamin Ansari has set up a table and this sign outside Speaker Johnson’s office.

If sandwich shops don’t start offering a sandwich named “the acquittal” then what are we even doing

Sacrificed the potential for a 6-hour marathon memo writing session for 4 hours of sleep.

THE CORRECT CHOICE WAS MADE

My mind is so much sharper and the writing is coming so much easier… 🙌🏻😭

There's an alarming lack of awareness in suggesting that the legality of something has any impact at all on the the actions of this executive.

Torts Prof: How do we know that we need to consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party?

Me: BECAUSE CIV PRO PROF SAID SO

Look, no one is PROUD of this response, but it remains factually accurate

Civ Pro prof spent 20 minutes on negligence today
My life is a mess 🤷‍♀️

As I'm going through my notes, I find that I would like to know who organized the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure [don't say the Advisory Committee, I repudiate that response], and, as Torts professor likes to inquire about illogical things generally, how much alcohol was involved.