Oral Advocacy

I went out of my way to arrange my schedule to take oral advocacy. It offered my only good opportunity to take a class taught (or at least co-taught) by Professor Osler--I'm not about to take one of his criminal practice classes. It also offered another good opportunity to be uncomfortable. And it did, though apparently not enough to keep me from agreeing to more uncomfort.

The class has a number of virtues, including some perspective from someone somewhat removed from law. Dr. Gloer from the Truett Theological Seminary came across the street to co-teach the class. A professor of preaching, Dr. Gloer has some useful insight into how to craft a persuasive argument.

There is no final exam. Grades are based on two presentations and responses to the weekly reading. Reading alternated between Aristotle and Just Say the Word, a text on preaching. The former, of course, is abstract philosophy. The latter is a collection of stories and sometimes-contradicting advice. We were supposed to keep our responses short, but conforming posts were the exception. Most were a few multiples of the prescribed length, if you can draw any conclusions from that fact.

The class is mostly lecture, but Professor Osler builds on responses to the reading and both he and Dr. Gloer involving the class in the lecture. Be prepared to contribute. In many ways the class feels like an ongoing discussion, so your experience of it is likely to depend on your classmates. In one particularly memorable discussion we had, I was interested to learn (and disappointed) that seminary students didn't see the theological implications of anthropomorphizing the ram in the story of Abraham and Isaac.

Arbitration

Arbitration is the rare elective that I took for a reason other than my interest in the subject. I took it because it is the only opportunity to take a class taught by Professor Noley Bice. I was not disappointed. Some characterize the class as merely storytime, and the review session is a great summary of the course, so maybe you can simply drift through. But if you pay attention, you will have an excellent grasp of the law pertaining to arbitration agreements.

Professor Bice will require you and a partner he assigns to present a case to the class and provide a handout for it. You also need to have two lawyer jokes ready at any time in case he calls on you to share one. Part of the grade is class participation, so read the cases and have questions to ask your classmates when they present.

Most students will agree that you can do without the assigned text as all the cases are on Westlaw and Lexis.

Secured Transactions

Secured transactions is toward the negotiable instruments end of the spectrum.

Professor Bates called on a few people, but only the students he knew best. The reading is not at all onerous, but don't take that to mean the class is easy.

All the points were on the final, in which you are allowed a copy of the Uniform Commercial Code. Any copy is acceptable so long as it doesn't have explanation beyond the official commentary and your own annotations.

Advanced Legal Research

Advanced Legal Research is hard work and time intensive. I "billed" just over 70 hours, and that doesn't include the considerable time I put into research logs, self analysis, and billing statements.

Professor Cordon allows students to work individually or with a partner. Partners are supposed to do all the work together, which should mean it takes as long as the slowest partner plus the time it takes to coordinate. What actually happens in most (if not all) cases is that partners eventually divide assignments between them in order to get everything done. If you tell someone who's taken it that you don't have a partner for ALR, they'll probably indicate you're crazy.

The class is graded on research, research logs, self evaluation/cost-efficiency analysis, and billing statements for (1) the 10 assignments from the second quarter of Legal Analysis Research and Communication, except that this time you create the questions as well as answer them; (2) 20 advanced assignments; (3) a final project; and (4) an additional project. Advanced Assignment 1 is a memo that is due a few weeks into the quarter. All of the other assignments are due at the end of the quarter. Professor Cordon allows an extension on the final due date, but it is a bad idea to rely on it.

If you dare to take the class, at the end of it you will by necessity be cozy with resources you had not before known existed. And, at least in the past, the curve has been good.

Reducing Ambiguity

I have a two piles of paper that I don't want to confuse. One stack I have already read, so I put a note on that one which said, "read."

The other stack I have yet to read. On that stack I put a note instructing myself: "read."

Troublesome Elected State Court Judges

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co. I became aware of the decision after reading this headline: "In a 5-4 ruling the Supreme Court finds that an elected judge who received $3M in campaign contributions should have recused himself from a case involving the donor." With the issue framed that way, the only interesting thing is why the majority wasn't greater.

Upon finding the opinion, I found the dissent makes some excellent points. To correct the injustice in this instance, the majority extended Due Process to introduce a new and difficult standard into an area of settled law. Having judges decide cases involving their campaign donors is obviously problematic, but the states can pass legislation to address bias in those situations.

I am curious to see what effect the opinion will have.

Boom! Dinosaur!

The discussion of Sonia Sottomayor's qualifications for Supreme Court Justice brought my attention to the best argument for the election of state court judges I've yet encountered: state court judges have the ability to "discover" new common law, so the citizens of a state should determine who has that power. On the whole, I still think justice would be better served with judges a step removed from direct election, however.