How to Succeed in Law School Student Guide #2

Kindly provided by Bo Weng (Arrow). Published August 2009, last updated March 2011.

Introduction
I am writing this thread in hopes of helping out all 0Ls out there on TLS since I received excellent advice
on TLS. This is not a thread on the best method of studying, it is simply what I did. Most of the "how-todo-well threads" come from people in the T14, so this thread is perhaps more geared towards those
attending schools outside the T14 (since I am not in the T14). Good luck to everyone in overcoming the
unique challenge of law school. My first year in law school was the most fun I have ever had that I never
want to do again.

Background
I just finished my first year at Loyola Law School (Los Angeles). I was ranked top in the top 1% with the
highest GPA in my section both semesters. Also, I went to an Ivy undergrad but had a dismal ~3.4/159. (I
decided to go to law school too late and had a science/engineering background). Based on my success
at Loyola Law School I was able to transfer into many top ten law schools, including Berkeley, which is
where I choose to attend.

0L Prep (Summer before 1L)

I realized I had performed poorly in undergrad and on the LSAT (relatively speaking) and decided to take
the entire summer prepping for 1L. I went the typical gunner route and read all 6 Examples and
Explanations (E&Es) books
(0735562415, 0735570337, 0735540241, 0735570310, 0735562431, 0735562113), Getting to
Maybe, Law School Confidential, Planet Law School, did LEEWS, and Delaneys Logic for Lawyers. I took
a simple front desk job at my summer dorm where I would have tons of time (during work) to read since
all I had to do was give people their keys if they forgot them.
The value of 0L prepping is highly controversial. The E&Es took the longest time to read but gave me a
solid background and introduction to thinking about the typical questions that come up. The number 1
ranked student at my school last year read all 6 hornbooks as a 0L, but I personally felt that reading the
E&Es were more efficient. Getting to Maybe is a great introduction to legal thinking (i.e., through its
forks analogy) and has a great policy section. Law School Confidential is a great introduction to law
school. I read this book first, and, while it does not offer much helpful information, it does provide a
general background as to what law school is all about and what people generally do. Planet Law
School is not the most positive book, but it has much truth to it. The book describes, perhaps, a darker
side to law school, but it also provides useful and unique advice to overcome this dark side. LEEWS
probably cost the most (since it is not a book), but it was the most helpful in my opinion. Delaneys book
was short but equally great on legal thinking.
I also read just about every website/blog/thread on TLS on how to do well.
I read every word in every book listed above from beginning to end. I read Law School Confidential first,
then Planet Law School, then did 3 E&Es (started with the Glannons Torts/Civ Pro, which were the best
of the series), then read Getting to Maybe, then another 3 E&Es, followed by Delaney's, and finally
LEEWS right before school started.
If you choose not to do all this prep (and I assume many will not), I would recommend LEEWS, Getting to
Maybe, and Delaney's in that order.

Did I enjoy my summer? Totally. The material was generally super interesting, and I spent about 6-10
hours reading it everyday, planning out my schedule to make sure I would be able to finish everything.
Okay, I am lying. I wasted my entire summer since I did not travel the world and party every night (unlike
some of you, or so you claim).

Location Matters
I strongly suggest you live near the school (within walking distance). Loyola is a commuter school, but I
chose to live about 1-2 blocks away. It took me literally 3-5 minutes to walk to school, and I felt that this
provided a bit of an advantage. I heard about many people wasting many hours in traffic or spending 30+
minutes commuting. This may not seem like much time, but shortening one's commute (along with many
other time-saving techniques) adds up over time.
Living near the school gives you more motivation to attend classes as well. I have found that people who
live farther away lack motivation to drive to campus if they wake up a bit late or are less in the mood to go
to school. Needless to say, out of the people I knew, people who lived within walking distance of the
school were far more likely to end up in the top 15%. Actually all 4 people I knew who lived within 3-4
blocks of the school were in the top 10%. (Obviously, this could just be a coincidence.)
The only downside is that we lived in the ghetto.

Focus on the Exam

This is the one thing you must do from the first day of class. You must realize that the exam at the end of
the semester counts for 100% of the grade, so, if it is not on the exam, do not waste time studying it. Do
not do something simply because others are doing it. Thus, when I say focus, I mean only study it if it is
going to be on the exam. I will emphasize this point again and again.
If you did your 0L prep, then you should have an idea what exams look like. My 0L prep greatly helped me
focus on the law since I kind of knew what to look for. I looked up my professors' old exams when school
started just to make sure they were the typical fact pattern issue-spotting exams and focused on them
from day one.
You need to have this focused mindset in deciding what to study. There are tons of materials out there,
and people will tell you again and again that you have to study smart (and not just study a lot). If you are
not sure if you need to study something, think about whether you would write it down on the exam.

Case Briefing?
The answer is no. I did not brief the way people normally do (with facts, procedure, rule, holding, etc). In
fact, I followed the LEEWS method. I would have two columns in my word document. On the left column, I
would have the name of the case, with one sentence stating the rule and one sentence stating the facts in
each box. I usually just pulled this information from online briefs or briefing books. It gave me enough
information to get through class and for reference later on. In the right column, I would take notes on any
important information the professor gives during class.
This is all the briefing I ever did. However, I would always do this before I read the actual case. There
were a few times where I could not find a case summary/brief summary online, and had to do the minibrief after I read the case. (Note that Lexis and Westlaw generally have mini-briefs of all the cases.)
You must understand that the typical case briefing method (with the facts, procedure, rule, holding, etc) is
likely useless and an enormous waste time. This idea may be hard to accept, but do not get sucked into
the group mentality that says otherwise. Other students will talk about briefing and lecturers will suggest it

during orientation. You must understand that case briefing is an antiquated concept. Case briefing is a
matter of tradition, but more importantly, it is a trap that lures the masses to mediocrity. The cases do not
teach the law, and the notes that come after the cases confuse more than educate.
I will acknowledge that a small percentage of people will read cases, see all the twists and turns, and
naturally know the law. These are probably the naturally talented, and I personally did not bank on myself
being one of these.

Case Reading
Did I read the cases? Yes. I read just about every case assigned. However, I did not read it with a
meticulous level of detail. I fast read every case, and skimmed cases that were unnecessarily long.
Remember, the cases are nearly NEVER tested on the exam. Only one professor wanted me to cite
cases. In the other 5 substantive classes, I never cited a single case (other than landmark cases, or
cases which have rules named after them) and received A's.
Because cases are generally not specifically tested, do not waste too much time reading the casebook. I
only used the casebook for the relevant black letter law it sometimes held. Generally, the reason a
particular case is assigned is simply to show the origins of a one sentence rule of law. I almost always
skipped reading the notes that came after it (unless they discussed black letter law).
I usually would read the assigned reading 1-2 weeks in advance during the weekends and occasionally
during the week if I could not finish. It would usually take me about 1-2 hours to read each assigned
reading per class and do the mini-briefs.

Outlining
Outlining is probably overrated. Everyone tells you to outline, but really it is just like in undergrad: you
take notes on what is important and study from it. The process of making an outline from every class
takes an enormous amount of time, but I still highly recommend you (in a sense) make your own.
First, put ONLY what is tested on the outline. This generally means only the black letter law and its
nuances go on the outline. I did not insert case summaries into the outline because they were never
tested. I did not even put the names of the cases on there unless I felt that the professor wanted us to
mention the name or the case name was also the name of a rule.
Second, outline early. Everyone knows to do this, but nobody does it. You will run out of time in the end,
and I would recommend outlining near the beginning of the semester. Seriously, outlining a class takes
forever.
Third, try to save time by using old outlines and just copying and pasting from them. I was able to obtain
access to every clubs outlines on campus. I was in two clubs, obtained passwords to their outline banks,
and exchanged passwords with others so we all were able to access the outline banks. I also asked
certain upperclassmen, who were friends of mine, for outlines (most of them said yes, so dont be shy).
These old outlines are a gem. Some were very useful for following along in class (and provided answers
for me when called on). I even used some of the old outlines to learn the material since past brilliant
students may have figured it all out already. Others had case briefs (which I used to do my mini-briefs).
Some had exam tips. I pasted parts of these old outlines and continued updating and rewording them into
my own version throughout the semester. My school actually has an honor society for the upperclassmen
in the top 15%, and the society shares its outlines for free to 1Ls, which is great.

Finally, keep your outlines short. Otherwise, they take too long, but all of my outlines were under 20
pages (most were around 10-15) single spaced, size 12 font.
Oh, and, in case anyone was wondering, for every class I had three word documents. One was for the
minibriefs and case notes, one for outlines, and one for exam prep/hypothetical practice.

Analyzing the Professors

You must get inside your professors head. I would say this made the difference between an A- and an A+
(like one to two grade differences). The professor grades your final exam and has a final say on your
grade, so you must figure out what he or she wants.
The best way to do this is by going to class, going to office hours, and looking at old exams.
The problem with going to class is that some (maybe all) of the professors do not always test what they
teach. This is obvious enough. You talk about cases in class and what do you see on the exam? A big
long fact pattern that often does not mention cases at all.
However, pay attention to how they phrase things during class. If your professor uses Powerpoints or
words the law in a certain manner, USE THAT WORDING (not the supplements wording) by putting it on
your outline and later on the exam.
I used office hours as a place to both bond with the professors (by talking about non-academic things,
usually by asking them about career/their backgrounds) and to get my questions answered. I would
usually come in with a list of questions. Basically I would run into questions and concepts from reading
the supplements/reviewing notes (that I was confused by or go beyond what was taught), write it down,
and ask them during office hours. Other times, I would just ask the questions via email, but I felt going
there in person created a bonding experience that would greatly help if I needed recommendations.
More importantly, office hours allowed me to further probe their brilliance. It would help me analyze their
style and personality to figure out how they like to test students. Were they a hide-the-ball type? Did
they like to trick students? Were they straightforward? Did they only test what they taught or do the
opposite? Did they like to write long fact patterns or were they lazier (or, more likely, busier) and preferred
to give shorter ones? More importantly, how did they want us to write the exams? Did they want us to
cover seeming non-issues and make arguments that relate more indirectly to the problem? Their old
exams also offer clues to their testing style.
I was surprised that most of my professors were extremely helpful in office hours, and nearly all of them
loved hanging out with students. I even discovered some that were a little strict/boring/mean in class
turned out to be nice/exciting/fun/relaxed outside of class.

Supplements
Supplements constituted the bulk of my reading. The number one rule is to always use your professors
supplements if THEY wrote them.
Generally I used the E&Es and sometimes the hornbooks if the professor was more policy-oriented. The
E&E's are generally amazing since they give the law first and then give practice questions to go along
with it. I read the hornbooks just because they were so well written, clear and very comprehensive in
covering specific areas of law. E&Es and hornbooks were definitely the main supplements, for they teach
the law and its nuances, which is what is tested. The E&Es were the only supplements I read more than
once as the problems they have are very helpful.

Of course, I only read the relevant sections once school had started. I would usually read these to go
along with the course. Basically I followed along with the syllabus and read the relevant sections either
before or after a class on the same subject. I feel as though these books are the actual texts of the
course and what you should be reading.
I also used CALI lessons as supplements, but used them exclusively for test prep. (I did the problems
right before the exams.) I think this is an underrated supplement. The questions quiz you on much of the
nuances of the law, but only if you already know it pretty well (which is why I saved it for exams). The
problems allow you to think (like the E&Es), and the lessons give you answers with great explanations.
Some of the lessons are very helpful for clarifying some of the more difficult legal doctrines (Rule against
Perpetuities, Proximate Cause, Offer/Acceptance).
I read other supplements as well but not as much. The next most used were the Emmanuels and Gilberts
commercial outlines. These were definitely helpful, as they basically outline all of the black letter law. I
only used them in 3-4 of my classes (Property, Contracts, Civil Pro) since the other classes had better
supplements. I would also pull much of the law/nuances from these two series and put them on my
outline.
I also never bought any supplements other than the E&Es, which I bought for 0L study. The rest I
borrowed from the library. I also checked out and read the relevant portions of many other outlines
(Roadmap Series, Q&A series, BarBris 1L review). I read these only when I was unclear after reading the
hornbooks or as a review for test prep.
By the way, I am sure most people realize that different professors and different supplements say different
things. This is true, and you should always use the wording/approach used by your professor. However,
supplements supplement your understanding of the field of law. You will realize that after reading about
5-6 supplements on one subject, it all kind of sounds the same. Yes, each supplement will word the exact
elements of battery a little differently, but the concept behind it will be the same. Moreover, even if your
professor takes the majority view of a subject, he will likely be impressed if you say something like in a
minority of courts, judges have adopted the Andrews standard for proximate cause because. I also feel
that reading the law in different words/formats from different supplements will greatly enhance your
understanding of some difficult legal doctrines. People take different interpretations of the law, but overall,
it is still the same law.
Also, be sure to adjust which supplements you read. There is no one supplement for every class.
Remember to focus on the exam. So, if your professor uses multiple choice questions, use the multiple
choice supplements (Q&A series, and Glannon Multiple Choice guides). If your professor doesnt do
multiple choice, then, by all means, skip those supplements.
Some of the best supplements, in my opinion, are Glannons E&Es on Torts and Civil
Procedure, Chemerinsky's Constitutional Law, Chirelsteins Contracts, Prossers Hornbook on
Torts, Farnsworths Hornbook on Contracts, Dresslers Criminal Law books, and of course various CALI
lessons.

Legal Thinking/Thinking Like a Lawyer

Legal thinking and analysis is the key to success. This idea of thinking like a lawyer is so important, yet
it is so enigmatic that many law students do not understand it. It took me over a semester to truly master
it, and, if anything, this one skill makes the BIGGEST difference on exam grades. In fact, I think mastering
this skill distinguishes the A grades from the rest. Learning to think like a lawyer will greatly help you
both in your legal writing class and in your legal career.
Legal thinking can be defined in different ways. Delaney calls it an interweaving of facts and law. A
Southwestern professor calls it using creative arguments to tie the facts to relevant laws. LEEWS calls it

nitpicking the facts and arguing both sides. Getting to Maybe describes it as forks in a road. I think that
legal thinking encompasses all of these. It is really just attention to detail. Some smart people get this
naturally, but the rest of us have to practice.
LEEWS is, in my opinion, the best method to learn legal thinking. For that reason, I think it is the best and
single most important supplement. (You should do the audio program before law school). In addition, the
methods it teaches for exam success are unparalleled. I would also read Delaney, Getting to Maybe, and
any other sources on it that you can find.
LEEWS recommends you practice hypotheticals every week, and this is exactly what I did. I did any
hypothetical I could find (provided it had an answer to learn from). It takes time to be able to analyze the
law and nitpick the facts while recognizing all the legal nuances. I realize you can only do this after you
have learned some law, so I started doing this a lot one month in, after I had learned some laws and
written some rules in my outlines. Make sure the hypos that you are practicing have answers so you can
learn and compare. It was actually hard to find too many hypos to practice in, so I sometimes used old
exams (usually midterms) from other schools that tested the subjects we already learned.
Legal thinking is what every professor wants to see, and after you master the skill, all you really need to
know is the law, and I honestly think you will be set. After the 1st semester, I stopped practicing extra nonclass related hypotheticals, and I received the same grades 2nd semester.

Getting through Class and the Socratic Method

This is another trap for the unwary law student. You will get called in class, and you will mess up, but you
need let it go. Do not let this fear drive you into reading cases. Yes, I got ripped apart when reciting the
facts, but since I read the supplements and knew legal thinking, it usually sounded impressive according
to my classmates. (I always thought I sounded dumb.)
I also developed a habit of guessing wildly irrelevant answers or even funny answers. For example, my
professor asked me, What is the difference between the first son and the second son? I had no idea
since the fact was certainly not going to be tested. I am pretty sure I just blurted out, I think the first son
was a genetic son and the second one was a bastard child from when the mom had an affair.
Anyhow, the takeaway is to not let the Socratic Method scare you into losing your focus on the final exam.
Do not let it change your study habits.
During class, you should be thinking, not writing down everything. Yes, when other students around you
take a ton of notes, it gets to you (but, trust me, it will pass). Every once in a while, the professor will give
you the law or something useful for the exam. (For instance, she might go over felony murder and tell you
that you need to cover a certain aspect of felony murder). WRITE THIS DOWN. These gems of
information are few, so you should be taking very few notes every class. I wrote all of this "in class" stuff
down in the right-hand column of my notes. (Remember that the left hand column was my mini-briefs.)
Also, make good use of class time. When your professor is going over the law or going over something
exam related, pay attention. The rest of the time, try to figure out if it is important. If it is not, do something
productive. Sometimes I would skim a case or review it in case I was called on. Other times, I would
usually just work on the outlines. If the professor says something super important, you do not need to put
it in your notes and later transfer that into your outlines. SKIP that step, and just put the law (as your
professor states it) directly into the outline.
Also, when the professor is going over on a tangent or going over facts of the case (generally not useful
information), go work on your outlines. I usually spend this time reading over old outlines and pasting
relevant portions into my own outline.

Finally, do not worry too much about class participation. Our professors can give +/- 3 points for
participation, but apparently this barely mattered, since I sucked at it and still did okay. Also, I noticed that
people who raise their hands too often did not generally fall towards the top of the class. It was usually the
quiet ones in the back that tended to hog the A's.

Mindset/Motivation
My mindset was that basically I was going to spend every waking moment on law school. This obviously
was not literally true, but it was the general idea. I would study 8-12 hours a day, which was actually not
that bad. If you have this mindset, I do not think you will have trouble doing all that 0L reading, or reading
all those supplements during the school year.
Now, a huge obstacle is motivation/inspiration. I imagine that many students may get burned out after
studying so much. You need to overcome this. The law is very interesting, but there are boring parts as
well and you need to get through them (Cough*ConLaw*Cough).
One great motivation fact is that you should realize that the first year means EVERYTHING. It literally
determines your life (or at least you should think this way). Your job depends on first-year grades and
grades alone (plus a good interview). Your grades alone determine if you can transfer, if you can make it
onto law review, if you can go to big law, or if you get a scholarship the next semester. Most people seem
to realize that grades are important, but it just does not seem to hit them (especially if they already have
money or connections, etc). First year grades pave the way for continued success in your legal career,
for, if you succeed in your first year, you likely will get a good job for your second summer and receive an
offer from that firm. Work hard in your first year and coast in your third year if desired.
I tried to motivate myself in so many ways. I got these techniques from these random self-help books
back in the day. Basically I would think of things that motivate me, like how my family depended on me or
how others ridiculed me (for not going to HYS). I also pretended I was one of those brilliant legal
scholars.
I also drove myself to study through fear, by thinking about how screwed I was if I did not end up at the
top of my class. This was not hard (especially in this economy) since I literally did not have money or
connections like many of my classmates. This was all or nothing for me. Heck, reading Above the Law or
other blogs/threads about non-T14 prospects motivated me. I even vilified my own law school (I love
Loyola, by the way), but at that time, I repeated to myself in my mind that I would not get a job out of
Loyola unless I did well (all in the name of motivation).
Other times I motivated myself by appealing to my love for science fiction/fantasy. I remember times
where I pretended I was Harry Potter or Raistlin Majere and that I was studying tomes of magic. I
analogized studying law to magic and thought about all the cool power and intellectual satisfaction it could
bring. Silly perhaps, but it worked and I continued studying.
Sometimes I would sit near good-looking members of the opposite sex in the library to motivate me
(actually I am not sure if this motivated me or distracted me). Other times I would listen to different music
to study. I am sure everyone has their own way of studying, but whatever it is, you do need to find proper
motivation to get past the laziness and burnout.
Remember, when you are drowsy, your competitors study hard.

Study Groups
If you ask me about study groups, the answer is a resounding no. Study groups are a huge time sink,
but I will admit that I tried them out and they are much more enjoyable than studying alone.

I did sometimes use my own version of study groups. Basically I studied with 2-3 people NOT from my
section. In fact, we all just sat in a room and studied quietly. Maybe every couple hours we would all stop
and chat for about 5-10 minutes. I really liked this "silent" study group and used this quite often since it is
just nice to do things with people.
I also found it was hard to explain to others my method of studying. My advice to not study the cases was
often met with disbelief. Thus, I strayed away from the traditional study groups where you sit and discuss
stuff. I would not even recommend groups for discussing practice exams/hypotheticals (it is just too slow).
You read a lot faster than you can talk (or listen). In addition, if the practice exams did not have answers, I
went to the professor, not to my fellow students (who may or may not know the answers).
If I knew who else was going to do well on exams, I might have considered studying with them, but no
one knows this until after grades come out.

The Final Stretch (What to do about 1 month before the exam)

About a month before finals, you should formulate a plan and stop partying (or at least heavily cut back if
you are a social animal). I pretty much stopped going to social events, because this is a time where you
solidify all information.
By this time, I usually had finished reading all assigned cases in nearly all of my classes. Sometimes I
could not complete the reading because the professor did not give us a syllabus or would make last
minute changes, so I had to adjust accordingly. Also, by this time, I had generally finished most of my
outlines or was close to it.
I think formulating a plan is important. I assigned like 3-4 days just to one subject, and then another few
days to the next, and so on and made sure I had plenty of time for each class. Basically during these
days, I would review materials and start going over all the supplements, practice exams, and Cali lessons.
Next, the best thing I think I did that made the biggest difference was that I put the black letter law from
my outline into an exam paragraph format. Basically I put the black letter law into short simple
sentences, along with any nuances, into paragraphs and practiced memorizing it by typing it out.
Basically I would have a heading then the next paragraph would be the law as if I would type it on the
exam if the issue came out. It would look something like:
Battery
Battery is the 1) intentional infliction 2) causing 3) harmful or offensive 4) contact (the rule).
Intent is purpose or desire. Intent can be transferred or established by substantial certainty. (further
defining the rule/nuance).
Causation can be direct or indirect.
Contact can be without physical contact of the skin. No awareness necessary. (further defining the
rules/nuances).

Assault
and so on

Note that this is EXACTLY what I wrote on the exams. I practiced writing these rules out before the exam,
over and over again, so that on the exam, when an issue for battery came out, I wrote that first paragraph
EXACTLY, then proceeded to analyze the issue. For example, on an exam I would then write something
like this (note how I added analysis here):

Blueberry (B) v. Cherry (C)

Battery
Battery is the 1) intentional infliction 2) causing 3) harmful or offensive 4) contact.
Intent is purpose or desire. Intent can be transferred or established by substantial certainty. B had
purpose to harm C because C punched B, C tickled him, and B stated that he hated C. In addition B
targeted Cs face, which is a vulnerable but small spot on Cs body. Thus, B had intent.
Causation can be direct or indirect. B caused Cs black eye because his fist came into contact with Cs
eye. This is direct (but for) causation.
Contact can be without physical contact of the skin. No awareness necessary. Contact is established
even though B was wearing a glove because skin on skin contact is not required. The surface of the
glove physically touched the skin of C, which is sufficient
Thus, B likely committed battery.

Assault
and so on

Loyolas first year classes all require memorizing, so this was an ACTIVE method of memorizing the law
(a passive method would be simply reading your outline) by writing it out over and over again. I practiced
writing out the law in my Exam Prep/Hypo document, and I would basically type the black letter law and
nuances in every class like usually 10+ times until I had it memorized cold.
Another option is to create a flow chart type outline where rules flow from the larger rule to the smaller
rule and application of the rule. But whether one writes outlines or creates a flow chart as a supplement
to the outline, they should be concise and already known well.
If you have a closed-book exam, I highly recommend doing this. It helps you memorize exactly what you
will write on the exam, and gives you A TON of extra time on the exam. In fact, this was the difference
between an A- on one of my midterms and an A+ on the final. (I figured out how to do this after the A-.)
If I sent you a copy of my exam prep document for each class, you would see that I have the black letter
law written down (in non-outline format) about 10+ times each. Each class had a black letter law summary
of about 2000-3000 words, and, while this took a bit of time to memorize, it was well worth it. Therefore,
when the exam came and I had to state a rule, I could recite it instantly and clearly as well as recognize
any nuances of the law.
Everyone knows you have to know the black letter law cold. I think if you practice typing out the black
letter law over and over again, you will have it down cold. It is not enough to simply stare at your outline
and read it. You need to actively think. I realize that memorizing was my personal method and may not

be for everyone, but I think everyone should practice exams in the way I describe in the next section. If
your exam is open book and open outline then less memorization is required.
During the final 3-5 days before the exam, I would write out the entire black letter law as prepared for the
class 2-3 times a day, do maybe one written practice a day if I had any time left, issue spot more practice
exams, read a review of the black letter law (usually the BarBri one because it was short), and do the
CALI lessons.

Practice Exams
You should have already looked at these at the beginning of the semester to focus on the exams, but
you should definitely go through them again when exam time rolls around.
Everyone knows you have to look at and do practice exams, and so you should. However, make sure
they have answers, or they can become a huge waste of time. I usually wrote out only about 4-5 practice
exams so that I could get the general idea. Many people recommend doing 10-20 practice exams per
class. I think this is helpful but unnecessary. Once you understand how to think like a lawyer and nitpick
the facts, you do not NEED to do that many practice exams. I felt like this was a bit time-consuming but
also necessary for my own comfort.
A few of my professors were new, so I basically found other professors with similar syllabuses (generally
from my law school) and did their exams instead.
Once you have practiced writing out a few exams, practice issue-spotting past exams. I would take old
exams and just practice writing the basic outline of issues as recommended by LEEWS (this is the mini
outline you make after you read the exam fact pattern and before you start writing). Just practicing issuespotting is a lot less time consuming, and I would just make sure I recognized all the nuances and issues.
I would generally just do this for 10-20 exams. No writing, just issue-spotting. I would compare the answer
with my basic issue outline to make sure I covered everything. By the way, this practice of issue spotting
actual exams is basically what I was doing all semester along with hypotheticals, but now I specifically do
it for the professor's past exams.

Final Exam
I just wanted to make a few points about writing the exam itself. Basically, the exam requires memorizing
the law plus analyzing (which you should be prepared for since you memorized the black letter law and
practiced legal analysis). One other thing that is super important is organization and format. Half of my
professors denied its importance, but I believe it subconsciously affects how they view the exam.
Thus, use headings and use new paragraphs (LEEWS teaches this), though I did not italicize or underline
to save up time. I always spell checked (this was quick), and I usually had more time since I type fast plus
I could recite the law quickly.
By the way, when I was going over a midterm with one of my professors, he openly admitted that I had
discussed an issue but he did not spot my discussion and thus failed to give me points for it. Though it
would have made no difference (since I got an A on the exam), he said that he did not recognize it
because it was buried in a longer paragraph. The lesson here is, make a new paragraph every time you
have a new issue or law (like LEEWS says, new law, new paragraph). I am guessing this is true for all
professors. They will miss issues if it is buried in a long paragraph, so use a lot of headings and new
paragraphs.
Another thing I did is make a list of issues and wrote it down when the exam started. It was the first thing I
did on every exam. This list of issues lists everything covered in every course along with some easily

missed issues. As LEEWS recommended, I would scan the list and double check to see if I missed any
issues as I read the exam and at the end. I used simple abbreviations and was able to write out the entire
issue list in about one minute of every exam.
There was only one issue that I think I missed but shouldn't have. Unsurprisingly, I forgot to put it (the
Rule of Infectious Invalidity) on this issue list. I thought I could have spotted the issue because it was so
obvious and that I would remember it (which is what students normally hope will happen). Silly me. It
came up in my exam but was not on this mini-list that I had prepared, so I missed the issue.
One other thing: I think typing fast is very important. Most exams have more issues than you can spot or
write. I felt as though being able to type fast was a huge advantage. People say that writing more is not
always better, but if you are writing on topic, within the call of the question, and writing sound legal
analysis, then you are on the right track. On average, I would pound out 8000-9000 words for every 3
hour exam and averaged about 700-800 words every 15 minutes. (I would take about 10-20 minutes to
read/outline the issues.) I went over exams with some classmates, and I noticed a trend that if you wrote
more, you generally received better grades, but I am sure exceptions exist as always. I never had to
practice typing, but I noticed a few other dedicated people did, so you should perhaps consider practicing
typing if you type slowly. Always type your exams instead of writing your exams if you are a decent typist.

Subjectivity/Luck
As you all know, there is luck in grading exams (OMG NO WAY). However, your overall range of grades
will be fairly consistent. I received nearly all As with two B+s. I use the same general approach described
above (adjusting properly for each class), but sometimes I received an A- and other times an A+. I
honestly believe it is just partially luck, but I nearly always stay in the A range.
Other times, you just get screwed by the curve. My B+ was in legal writing, which had a class of 20
people. When I went to see the professor, she told me I had the 3rd highest grade in the class, and the
two people above me got A-s. My other B+ was from a new professor. She had no past exams, gave us
no problems, and I assumed she would give us a typical fact pattern on the exam, but apparently not. She
gave us an exam that asked us for our opinions on a topic, and I guessed she graded more on writing
ability instead of analytical ability. You might get a crazy professor that give you a hard or unique exam
that strays from tradition, but if you do the LEEWS method (which I did by applying legal analysis), you
should still come out okay (I did, as a B+ = still top 15%-20% here).
Seriously, you can always blame your bad grades on luck.

Work/Life Balance
Go to social events! It will be fun. There are a few things I always did no matter what. I would always go to
the gym and work out. I would also play pick up basketball games on campus at least once a week. I think
being physically fit is essential for being mentally fit.
In addition, I would go to various social events on Friday/Saturday nights once or twice every few weeks
(Bar review, Club meetings). Networking is important, and you still have to do it even with intense
studying going on. Plus the free food was nice. We all have to eat, so I recommend socializing while
eating. Having a good work/life balance is important in keeping you sane. Also, having human interaction
is an important skill as a lawyer (and totally fun), so be sure to meet your amazing classmates.

Recommendations
I also recommend reading the following threads, which have been very helpful.

Xeoh85's Advice
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=36635
Advice From Students After Receiving Grades
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=22536
"If you could ONLY buy one Commercial Supplement"
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=26949
"Things I'd do over"
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=19378
Common 0L Questions
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=26949