I was working on some torts questions tonight and found several of them pretty funny, for no reason other than just the ridiculousness of the situation. Since I wouldn't want to spoil the fun of anyone who may be doing them concurrently, I will just reveal the highlights of the fact patterns rather than the actual questions.
One of them dealt with a cat defecating on a rosebush. Another had a store employee tell a fat customer that they didn't have the dress she wanted in hippo size. The third had a guy drink a dead mouse from his milk container. Perhaps because I was distracted by the hilarity, I got none of these particular ones right. Nevertheless...
Still another question dealt with a fast food customer who was irate that they wouldn't serve him food and so he shot at the employee. Ironically, this short tale is similar to the guy who flipped out and shot a Wendy's employee for not getting some extra chili sauce a couple of weeks ago.
More barbri fun videos tomorrow. Super fun!
Also, I've gotten two emails in the same number of days from PMBR requesting me to fill out a satisfaction survey. They claim it will only take seven minutes of my time. I'm not bothered so much with their desire for free research as I am that I got a reminder not even a day after they sent the first solicitation. Give me a break.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
fun with torts
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Bar review week 2
I noticed today that some (but not a lot) of my fellow bar reviewers are wearing various t-shirts and clothes with (presumably) their various law schools on it. I find this sort of funny, but only if it is being done intentionally.
I also have found that my patience for sitting really starts to wear out after the three hour mark. These videos and lectures that run longer than three hours have become a real test of mental fortitude. I think I'm going to go shoot some hoops and try not to think about what liability I would incur if I accidentally threw a basketball at someone.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
One week of bar review down; eight or so more to go
So for the first time in a long time (and by long time, I mean ever), I am spending Memorial Day studying. It sucks. Bar review is worse than finals because you have the stress of finals for two straight months. I'm probably going to take tomorrow off though just to try and recharge.
And I love how some of these PMBR questions say "C or D" or something like that. While the real test may have two correct answers as a matter of statistical analysis, PMBR's questions should be more centered and focused. For the most part, they appear to be; I may try to do 50 barbri today just to mix things up and see if they are any better.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Lost: Through the Looking Glass (2) - Season finale quick review
Spoilers abound.
I thought the finale was great. With about five minutes left, I realized that it might have been a flash forward and sure enough it was. There were about five or six storylines that were happening, but over a two-hour span, it played out well. Charlie, prior to his drowning death (which seems somewhat pointless), talks to Desmond's Penny and has just enough time and just enough magic marker to warn Desmond that Naomi (the parachuter who most people didn't believe was genuine) was "not [from] Penny's boat." Unfortunately, at the same time Charlie's death was happening, Locke had shot Naomi, and Jack made contact with "the bad ones" (to paraphrase Ben, who seemed pretty helpless at this point, having lost control of half of his camp).
Walt, aged a solid 2-3 years in teenage years, saved Locke, which would purport to indicate that perhaps him and Desmond will be able to prevent the future that we saw Jack in. The writers all along have been saying that this storyline will make perfect scientific sense, and perhaps it will, but I think the finale has taken it into a new direction, it's well worth watching, and if you had given up on Lost for whatever reason (including it's bonehead move to 10 PM, which hopefully will change back in Feb. 2008), you need to get the season 3 DVDs and sit through them. The storyline gets better and with only 36 episodes left (a long three more seasons when you think about it), one can only hope the writers are on a path to somewhere, as opposed to aimlessly drifting as they had in parts of season 2 and the earlier parts of season 3.
The fact that we have to wait almost seven months to figure out what happens next should drive most fansites up the wall with speculation, which is probably good for ratings next season.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Bar review days... are not too much fun
So the first couple days of bar review have consisted of watching videos and re-learning fun things like parol evidence and statute of frauds. At least Epstein tries to make it interesting and has kept me focused for at least 50 out of each 60 minute video. That being said, it certainly is draining after three-plus hours.
If you watched any of the Barbri videos during your first year, the content is largely the same, but by now you should understand it (and if not, you should be smart enough to figure out how to understand it in the next couple months).
Now, to work until either dinner or the Lost finale. Or both.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Heroes Season Finale quick review
I haven't seen the 24 season finale yet (and for me it will be the 24 series finale), but I did watch the Heroes season finale, How to Stop an Exploding Man. This entry definitely has spoilers, so don't say you weren't warned.
For how much the show has developed over the last eight or nine episodes, I found the ending (including the Hiro part) a little lame. And by a little, I mean, it epitomized anti-climactic.
First, I thought it was going to be two-hours, so by 9:54 or so, I was thinking, things are set up well, the next hour is going to be great. And then the whole thing with Nathan picking Peter up and flying with him? Lame. Wouldn't a nuclear bomb going off in the atmosphere be about a thousand times worse than it detonating in a city? The invisible guy knocked Peter out with his hand, couldn't they have done the same (or similar) thing? Peter going back in time to talk to the old guy was the best part of the episode; I guess he did absorb Hiro's power after all.
With all the set up though (in the episode and prior to it), everything resolved itself far too quickly. I don't think comic books would have done it like that in one fell swoop, and the fact that the show resolved that story line in that particular manner shows an utter lack of creativity. And while they attempted to set themselves up for a worse villain than Sylar for the next season through the girl (who was scared he would see her), they also had Sylar crawl away into a manhole so he didn't really die either. Hopefully Sylar kills the new villain or vice versa.
In the end, I stand by my belief that Heroes was one of the best new shows on television this season, primarily for being original. But if they were trying to move away from doing a serialized show and wrap everything up in one neat bow with some carry over for next season, they did a piss poor job. Very unsatisfying. Even if they had just had Peter stop glowing and everyone just walk away that probably would have been better than what they did.
Hopefully the previews for "volume II" are a little bit better than seeing George Takei fighting people in seventeenth century Japan and Hiro appearing in the middle of the conflict in the final scene. Hopefully they abandon that storyline pretty quickly, but after tonight's episode, it would be difficult to predict with any certainty how they could change the storyline. Or maybe Hiro's father's "gift" is that he lives forever, like the guy in Highlander, and Volume II will copy that show much like it did to the X-Men. Regardless, the last five minutes were the worst of the season and hopefully didn't completely kill all of the momentum the show had gained over the past few months. So, if you didn't see the last five minutes and turned it off, you will probably get as much out of your imaginary ending than you would for the real thing.
Back to reading bar outlines.
Jericho cancelled? And Katie Couric stays?
Only had to pick up the dozen or so 100+ page books for bar review today, and so after lugging them back to my car, I have the rest of the day off. Which is good since (a) I can hit some golf balls and (b) there are still new tv shows to watch and talk about (at least for a couple more days). Speaking of which...
I saw the other day that Jericho got cancelled. See CBS ends 'Jericho' in new schedule. My recent comments on Jericho should emphasize my disappointment in this turn of events, although with its ratings being mediocre at best, I am not that surprised.
It's a shame really because Jericho was probably one of the more unique and creative shows on television as of late. And for a network that is already struggling to bring up the rear in the ratings, they probably do need to cut their losses. Oh well. For me it will be one less show to get hooked into. And with 24 getting the boot from me as well, that frees up even more of my time to be spent on whatever clerkship type work I'll be working on.
What I really get a kick out of from CBS's announcement that Jericho got the ax are these humorous lines from the article:
"CBS' only new show that is heavily serialized, "Swingtown," will start in midseason and run uninterrupted until the end of the season. The series is set in the shag-carpeted 1970s, with Chicago-area couples navigating the sexual freedom of the era."
"To counter its stodgy image, CBS has scheduled a handful of edgy new shows for the fall: a drama about a vampire, a musical and a drama about a Cuban-American family running a sugar business in Florida."
I can state with absolute certainty that Swingtown will flop based on that description for wont of a target audience, a drama about a vampire will flop faster than that buffy show, a musical needs no commentary about its success on network television, and a drama about a sugar business in Florida will do as well as a drama about watching paint dry. If this is what they are banking on to get their ratings up, they must be operating in the bizarro world. Maybe it's time for the board of directors of Viacom or CBS to put the pressure on Les Moonves to open his golden parachute to make room for some new blood.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
PMBR conclusion thoughts and hearsay about practicing these multiple choice questions from a NY atty
Most of my sentiments from the PMBR halfway post are still the same. I think that if you are disciplined and can study on your own, the 6-day course isn't worth it. The 3-day course is probably worth it just to get the workbooks, but again, I think you can save your money and time and just get the books on ebay and work through them on your own.
The lectures are solid and useful. Although I found myself disagreeing with many of the points on technical grounds, and I also believe that several of PMBR's questions and answers have erroneous and misleading clauses to them, I have no reasonable basis to believe that the MBE isn't the same way (although I would think that as a professional multiple choice test, it would not have such patent ambiguities on certain questions).
So, if you don't take the 6-day course, don't worry, you didn't miss anything. If you do take it, it certainly won't hurt you, and probably is helpful to put you in the mindset of studying that you need to be in.
On another related note, from speaking to one of my friends who passed the NY bar last year, he (surprisingly) said that Barbri's questions were closer to the real thing. He did qualify that by saying that it's not so much the questions but the repetition of practicing 33-50 questions a day and just getting used to the law. He said that PMBR's questions were harder and, as a result, less indicative of the real thing, but at the same time were good since it made the real thing more bearable. He also said that regardless of whether you concentrate on Barbri's or PMBR's questions, stick to one system and just follow their study schedule. Hopefully that works for me as well.
Bar review starts tomorrow. Hopefully I can get in a quick 9 before my life disappears for the next two months.
Friday, May 18, 2007
PMBR day 5
I had to go to a baseball game with a bunch of my friends so I chose to prioritize that over PMBR day 4. I hear it was as enthralling as the first four days so I don't think I missed anything.
Day 5 was just as fun as the other three days. As far as actual test takers, it was pretty empty, but that made it nice and quiet. Of the 50 today, I hit 28 or 29, which according to the lecturer makes me "a super all-star." I beg to differ, but I'll take the compliments where I can get them. Someone else in my row got 32, so obviously they must be a "super super all-star."
I wonder how many of these mneumonics I'm going to actually remember. I tend to remember the mneumonic but not what it actually stands for. Hopefully that changes over the next couple months. Only one more day to go. The fact that it's on a saturday morning just sucks.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
PMBR 6-day (halfway through) evaluation - don't do it!
I've now gone through three of the six days of the 6-day PMBR course. Here are my initial thoughts: The six-day course may be overkill. I would go as far to say that if you have carried above a B average in law school, you probably don't need it. In fact, I would say that unless you either need a good kick in the butt to study, have some sort of delay between graduation and barbri and have some psychotic studying fetish or simply that you need some sort of wake up call, you probably are just as well off just doing the 3-day.
Since I got suckered into the PMBR six-day course though, here are my thoughts so future law students can make a more informed decision.
First, as I mentioned, if you have any discipline at all, the 6-day course is overkill. Do the 3-day course and get the workbooks with all of PMBR's infringing questions and answers and do an hour's worth a day as they recommend. I realize that in saying the 6-day course is overkill that perhaps the 3-day is also, but I will reserve comment on that until I have taken it. Regarding the six-day course, I will give the lecturer props for giving some helpful mnemonic devices, but I've seen some of them before, and I am sure that Barbri will give similar if not identical ones. Perhaps not.
In the alternative to buying from PMBR, a used book for the pmbr 6-day course with the same questions you'll be doing in the six day course is probably available on ebay at the relevant times of the year, so I'm sure you can save some money if you look around long and hard enough. If you are doing the 3-day course, you get the workbooks anyway and if you can do 33 questions (1 hour) a day, that should be good enough. If not, they are on ebay also. The other bonus items you get with the 6-day course is all of the MBE PMBR cds (29) (I think you get your choice of three subjects with the 3-day course). But you can find all of the pmbr cds on ebay also. In the alternative, you can just buy the PMBR materials from PMBR without doing any of the courses, and I think they charge close to $400. For that, you may as well just do the 3-day course and get them from them.
Second, if you do take the course, and have any discipline to do the test on your own, you should not waste your morning taking the test in PMBR's setting. I'm not sure how realistic it is to have students walk in late and leave early for the real MBE, so you may be better off just going to your library for 1.5-2 hours and doing the test on your own. You can always come in later to hear the lecture. Each day has experienced a significant drop in attendance in the morning testing environment, so I'm telling you in advance to save yourself the time and hassel. On the other hand, if you need to get used to waking up early or have a long commute, it certainly doesn't hurt to go in and take it under their setting either.
Third, the lecture basically emphasizes what is in the answer book and doesn't really add that much to it, so I'm not even sure how worthwhile the lecture is. In listening to the lecture, I've heard several times now where the lecturer represented that "we recreated the problem from last July's MBE." Apparently PMBR isn't following the terms of their injunction, which can be found in the hilarious E.D. Pa. opinion, reported in 458 F.Supp.2d 252. The full opinion can also be found for free here. Oh well. Good for those with the PMBR materials I guess. That being said, I will say that hearing the various high points about the subjects is somewhat useful.
Fourth, I find myself disagreeing with some of the multiple choice answers and some of them distinctly have two right answers, so I'm not sure what PMBR is aiming to get at. I have a strong suspicion they make these questions overly technical and difficult to simply scare people into using their materials, which is probably a good thing overall, so I can't complain about that. For the most part, however, the answers appear to be correct.
While doing through these answers, I am finding myself wondering (more and more) how many of PMBR's questions are actually representative of the real thing. Obviously based on the PMBR lawsuit some of them are copycat questions, but others seem pretty hypertechnical for a typical standardized test. I guess I'll know for sure in July.
Fifth, I haven't taken the 3-day course yet, so I can't comment intelligently on it...yet. It may be worth it, but again, if you have the materials and are disciplined to do the work on your own, it's probably not worth the money. It may be worth it to do a dry run of the MBE in June or July (as PMBR schedules), just to gauge where you are.
Conclusion: I would NOT recommend the six-day PMBR course if you have any sort of discipline to study on your own. Obviously it is a good wake up call for a lot of people. For me though, I am upset at myself that I got suckered in and second, that am going to count as a PMBR statistic when I pass the bar. I'm assuming that PMBR just looks everybody's name up and cross references them so I can't avoid them short of suing them to not count me, which would be a sure loser (and snoozer) of a suit.
All for now. These 50-question exams are killer for a number of reasons, but at least I'm done by 3:30. It's not going to be as bad as some of my friends who are going to suffer through dual days of Barbri and PMBR for the first six days of bar review. Sucks to be them...
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
PMBR day 2
PMBR continues to suck, but luckily I am a good guesser. Hopefully I am able to get some right simply by process of elimination since a lot of them seemed to be things I had never heard of today. And some of these fact patterns, sheesh. Nonetheless, by dumb luck, I got 27 or 28 right today, so I'm a little better than mediocre, but 3/5 right is still pretty bad in my book. I think I need to get 75% right or thereabouts for the bar, after the curve, so hopefully it goes up.
I think there were less than half of the number of people taking the test this morning, and I would be one of them if my commute wasn't so bad. I will have a better assessment of PMBR after I am halfway done tomorrow.
As far as the lectures go, they are pretty well structured. It's not substantive like you would get in law school, but it's pretty intense. After all, they are professional test lecturers, so I would expect nothing less. At least they get you out on time. Lecture score so far = A-/B+.
Monday, May 14, 2007
PMBR day 1
As I mentioned before, I decided to take PMBR 6-day and the 3-day course despite my better judgment. Part of me figures that multiple choice has never been a super strong point, so what the heck. Out of the 50 questions today, I got 24 correct. Since that's failing by most standards, I felt pretty stupid. According to PMBR though, failing is fantastic. Go figure.
I disagree with at least four of their answers, and at least one of questions has two correct answers, so I'm not sure what to think. Needless to say, I'm a little skeptical. I'm also not sure why they would give you two hours to take an exam that in real life is supposed to take only 1.5 hours, but I guess it's a good wake up call. At least I'm back in time for PTI.
Sunday, May 13, 2007
Boston Legal: The end
I know I said the other day that I would watch Boston Legal until the end of the season (and I probably still will since there are only two episodes left), but after watching this past week's episode, Guantanamo By the Bay, I'm not sure if I can keep stomaching the left wing drivel that the show spews out. But it's not the content that bothers me as much as the procedural comedy of errors that is used to deliver the liberal agenda the show is premised on.
I haven't had the PMBR con law session yet, but I'm pretty sure any suits against the United States have to go into federal court. Maybe I'm wrong. Further, a motion to dismiss like that would be briefed and probably not decided on simple oral argument (since everything in the law is decided on oral arguments...). But maybe that's how fictionalized Massachusetts does it. Lastly, I haven't had the PMBR evidence session either, but I'm pretty sure you can't simply argue during cross and then finish by asking "right?" Something tells me PMBR's multiple choice questions won't be so cut and dry.
Friday, May 11, 2007
Finally done with law school
Finals are done, papers are turned in, and short of failing out of law school, I am now a juris doctor (almost officially). I get a couple days off before PMBR starts up and subsequently, graduation and bar review class. Life is good. I can start stressing out about the bar after the weekend (and by that, I mean until after the fourth of July). Read more!
Thursday, May 10, 2007
ABC's Traveler Pilot: Travel On
I sat through about 30 minutes of ABC's new show "Traveler" and finally had to turn it off. Here are my quick thoughts of what I thought could have been a pretty unique show, sort of like a modern The Fugitive (eventually made into the movie, The Fugitive). Eleven word conclusion: The Fugitive it is not. Don't bother. Watch something else. Anything.
From what I saw, the premise of the show is about three Yale graduate students who just graduated and are about to embark on some sort of road trip. One graduated from law school, and is "not quite a lawyer" (and somehow is going to work for a high powered firm in the fall but doesn't have to take the bar in July). The other is going to do something else and his father is some high powered attorney. The third is their roommate Will Traveler, who is some sort of chemical engineering major. Yale should be proud of such fine students.
The trio decides to do a "Summer of George" of sorts before embarking into the real world. On the first day in New York, Will convinces them to go to some art museum and rollerblade from the top to the bottom without being caught. They do, get caught on camera in the process, and as soon as they get outside they call Will, who proceeds to apologize. Their confusion dissipates moments later when the art museum is blown up. Not knowing what to do, they run back to the hotel.
In the interim, the only surviving surveillance footage from the museum is just enough to show them rollerblading through the museum and turning to look at the camera. These pictures are placed on the television and the FBI and every other NY agency has assembled to figure out who these two clowns are. The news even reports them as terrorists. So the law student does the right thing and calls the FBI to tell them who they are, how they aren't involved, and how their friend may have still been in the museum. He throws out a couple of legal sounding words (reminiscent of a scene in Legally Blond, but a little more apt), and they ask if he is a lawyer. At least he wisely says he is not. Needless to say, it may be safe to assume that being a suspected terrorist would be grounds to revoke any offer he had at whatever big firm he was planning to start at.
Meanwhile, the other friend calls his lawyer dad to figure out what to do. His legal advice? Get out of the city and avoid the police because some sort of big stock trade relating to the museum happened the day before. And further, they are looking to point a finger at the two in the video as soon as they can positively identify them.
All this time, the law student is still yapping away on the phone, giving the FBI the ten plus minutes they need for their antiquated tracking system to hone in on their position. They send every cop in the area to the hotel, but, as a result, the two suspect students were able to see the police cars arrive just in time. And, although dozens of FBI and police storm the hotel, they are able to sneak out of the hotel with the help of a bellhop who alerts them to a secret passage laundry chute out of the hotel in exchange for a shiny watch. In yet another slap to NYC security and the FBI, they escape.
The last part I could stomach before turning it off was that the FBI still wasn't able to track them down despite having their location within a confined building and knowledge of both of their cell phones. I thought that maybe they had turned them off, but that was not the case. So, with no cell phone tracking system, no reason to question the other kid's dad (who has now told his son how to access his personal emergency black AMEX card), and no record that their friend Will Traveler ever existed, the only hope of their innocence (one would think) would be with turning themselves in. But what kind of action packed tv would that be?
I remember from the preview that they have eventually discover they have no pictures of their third roommate. I'm sure they will also escape the city without being caught, and the show will continue in Fugitive-esque style. In a post-911 world, however, I'm not sure how two well-to-do Yale grads with limited resources and money will succeed if everyone knows what they look like. Didn't they catch the runaway bride in just a matter of days?
Last, if they are so innocent, wouldn't this evidence be pretty clear after a day of evaluation? Is it so hard to believe that the justice system actually works? What are they teaching over at Yale?
Given how ridiculous this show makes this ivy league law student, and how absurd the security of NYC is made to look, I can only hope that the show is just so far-fetched that nobody believes this sort of thing could ever happen. I'm just glad this show is so bad that I won't get sucked into it while I'm studying for the bar. My advice is to not waste your time with it either when it officially premiers at the end of the month.
Lastly, if that Yale law grad (one of the top 5 in his graduating class apparently) had been studying for the bar as I'm sure most of them will be, he wouldn't have been caught in such a stupid situation.
Bottom line: Don't waste even 30 minutes of your time on this one. Pass.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Hilton's request for Gov. Schwarzenegger's pardon
After a solid minute of laughing, the only thing I'm going to say about Paris Hilton's plea for a gubernatorial pardon is that this has to be the most ridiculous request I've ever heard of. Although Gov. Schwarzenegger didn't give a second glance to "Tookie" Wilson's clemency requests, I'm sure that this appeal of a 45-day DUI sentence will go straight to the top of his "to do" list. The fact that Yahoo news reported that her myspace petition believes that the sentence is "cruel and unfair" and "compares a Hilton pardon to Ford pardon of Nixon" is even funnier.
I have my suspicions of where or from whom Hilton has come up with the idea that rich people are above the laws, and I can only hope it isn't from her attorney. Legally, I'm not sure what her attorneys can argue in good faith is an abuse of discretion, and I doubt that whatever appellate court is going to hear this is going to somehow view her circumstances as more unusual than any of the other thousands of people who argue that their sentence is unfair. But maybe there's some magic incantation that works on the west coast. Hopefully they also raise some sort of 8th amendment issue so the US Supreme Court can take a crack at it. Or a sufficiency of the evidence argument, since that one always works. Hopefully the clerk on this case posts something on his or her blog about it for our collective benefit and humor.
Apparently Hilton has also rehired her publicist, who admittedly gave her "erroneous advice." That is equally as newsworthy. If only she has channelled these efforts into something productive, such as sticking to the terms of her parole. At least she'll have 45 days to think about it.
Monday, May 07, 2007
TV recap
Although I have comments regarding PMBR, I will save them for tomorrow or later this week. Similarly, I will reserve comment on next week's two cent raise in stamps and the idea of the "forever stamp." And Basso's admissions regarding the cycling doping scandal are just sad for the sport. In the meantime, however, I want to do a quick recap on tv shows, since Lost has now been renewed for three more (short) seasons.
So, here is a quick recap of my top shows on TV that are worth watching:
Top 4 (in no particular order):
Jericho on CBS: I wrote an entry about this show a while ago and predicted that it would do well. The long and the short of it is that the civilized world as we would know it has been destroyed by a series of nuclear bombs and the town of Jericho, Kansas and its surviving citizens are struggling to piece together exactly how to keep functioning.
Over the past few episodes, it has become partly a story of what happened and partly a story of what should happen next (as far as society as a whole). The latter story has become the focus of the show as of late, focused on the town of Jericho, and is pretty entertaining television. The finale looks pretty cool - the short of it is that the town of Jericho and its neighboring town of New Bern are about to go to war, as I would expect would eventually happen in a real life situation. The entire season is still available online through the CBS Innertube website; I would say that this is probably one of the top two new television shows currently on television.
Heroes on NBC: If Jericho is the best new show, Heroes is second by less than a length. While I have given this show a lot of slack in earlier reviews, I think the plot has definitely solidified and focused over the past few episodes. While I'm not a huge fan of their whole time traveling idea (and also because I think the show has created an unresolvable paradox), it is entertaining and the group of friends that I watch it with have declared it the superior Monday night show (passing 24, which has and after this season will have dropped off my list). In true comic book fashion (remiscent of Unbreakable), the remaining episodes will finally pull all of the Heroes together and good with face off with evil in one explosive finale.
I believe that next season is supposed to be an entirely new storyline with some carryover characters (which may or may not come together by mid-to-late season), and I think that's a gutsy idea (that I hope works out for the show). Too many shows have become too involved; perhaps a regular changing of the guard is a good thing.
Lost on ABC: While I had my doubts about this show after the start of season 3, it certainly has picked up the pace over the past few weeks. The backstory (or at least part of it) regarding the Others is finally going to happen in the next episode and maybe by season's end we'll see something never before seen on television. I only hope that Season 4 doesn't introduce another section of the plane that we somehow overlooked. Things I'd like answered: Rousseau's backstory with regard to Alex. Wasn't she born on the island? I am just not clear as to how Rousseau's pregnancy and the mysterious illness that started to kill her crew off fits into the big picture. And how will they explain Walt aging three years in three weeks? Hopefully the writers have good answers to these questions, and they are answered next season.
I regularly read EW's write-up about the show after the fact and while I feel that Jensen's writeups border on intentional misdirection, I do agree with his assertion that the story has taken it up a notch. Three more seasons may be asking a lot, and I hope that ABC takes it back to the Wednesday 9 PM timeslot. I guess the idea of having the finale as a movie is out if there will be a season 6.
The Office on NBC: This show is possibly the funniest show on television. There are unbelievable amounts of quote-able lines that appear in most episodes. It takes two or three episodes to sort of get into it, but it is definitely something anyone could just pick up and start watching. Plus, it's Pam and Jim storyline is much more entertaining than Ross and Rachel.
Bottom 3 and losing ground quick:
My Name is Earl on NBC: While this show had a great first season, they must have changed writers or something because this season sucked. The good thing is that it exposed me to the Office. Maybe the Office will take over its timeslot next season and NBC will come up with something even funnier for the 8:30 timeslot.
24 on Fox: While I stand by my earlier convictions that seasons 2 and 4 were the best, this season is just a continuation of last season's mismash of action and executive incompetence. While I did appreciate the fact that President Clinton announced that he enjoyed watching 24, the show has gotten too slow and too far-fetched, even for someone who loves action-adventure shows like this one. I had to be talked into watching 24 this season; that mistake will not be repeated if it is picked up again next season. The mistake the writers made was pretending to fake Jack Bauer's death at the end of whatever season that was. Not sure how this show can be saved; perhaps it should not be.
Boston Legal on ABC: While I enjoy the show solely for its humor value, I wish someone would come up with a blog about how they would object and rebut any of the ridiculous arguments that are spewed out on this show. I will finish up this season and call it a series. I do like some of David E. Kelley's work; hopefully whatever the next series he does will be get back to what makes a tv show good: character development. I can only hope that he is somehow involved with Supreme Courtships, but I highly doubt it.
That's it. The saving point to all of this is that once these shows are over, I have no excuse for not studying for the bar.
Sunday, May 06, 2007
Monkey Target High Score: 1540
One of my friends has a Nintendo Wii and one of the games that wastes tons of time is Super Monkey Ball Banana Blitz. One of the features of the game is "party games" which has 50 games for 1-4 players. The best one is Monkey Target. I'm no good at it, but the guys that play it the most routinely get in the 900-1100 range.
We tried to look online to figure out the record for the Monkey Target game but no such luck. The record was set first last night with a score of 1260, then shattered with a score of 1540. So, the world record for Monkey Target appears to be 1540.
I am sure, however, that there is some five year old out there who has doubled that score, but he or she isn't online, so I will claim the record on behalf of my friend.
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Paris Hilton goes to jail
Splashed over the Drudge Report's front page, I couldn't help but notice that Paris Hilton was sentenced to 45 days in jail. Having worked in a prosecutor's office one summer, I am not at all surprised. See one of the hundreds of write-ups about this here.
Fact. Hilton had already had been placed on probation prior to this incident for an unrelated DUI case.
Fact. Hilton was pulled over nine months later for speeding and making an illegal left turn. At the time of this arrest, her license was suspended as part of the original probation. Her driving privileges were suspended again.
Fact. Four months later she was pulled over again, again in contravention of her suspended license. This time she was given a warning.
Fact. A month later, still within the period of her suspended license, she was pulled over again. A written warning was given.
Fact. A month later, she is pulled over again.
I'm not sure how many of these times involved DUI, but at least one of them was. At all times she was pulled over, her license was suspended. Her attorney's "ignorance of the law" defense surprisingly didn't work, and I'm sure whatever first year DA that was given this traffic case could not have asked for an easier one to prosecute.
What makes this case even funnier is that she didn't even express any remorse (since that always works) and then blamed her attorney and a host of other people, save herself (a second, even better move). Given that she had several warnings and had already failed to comply with her first probation on multiple occasions, I would think 45 days is well within the statutory guidelines. Further, if this case was anyone else, it wouldn't even make the local news. If anything, it's a rather routine second sentence for a repeat DUI offender. Hopefully Hilton's attorney has advised her of what the potential consequences are if she is to be pulled over again.
The crowning hilarity of the case (for me anyway) is the fact that her attorney says he will appeal the decision. What a sound bite. While I have no familiarity with the swiftness of California's legal system, I am pretty sure that (a) they have no basis in good faith to be granted an expedited appeal; and (b) even if they did appeal, she would be out of jail and the case would be mooted before it even got part way through the appeal system.
Result: Guilty. Conviction: Affirmed.
Lastly, in response to her mother's "waste of tax payer's money" comment, I'm pretty sure that is exactly what they are paid to do. Want to do something about it Ms. Hilton? Use the power of the democracy and vote to change the statute. Or, in the words of Jim Carrey in Liar, Liar, tell your daughter to "stop breaking the law!"
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Humor on the library front
I briefly stopped in to the library to print out some stuff and overheard this loaded question being asked: Do you think business judgment rule is going to be covered on today's final? I remember the prof telling us something about it in class.
While this was funny only because it appeared to be asked in the context of several contracts questions, in which case it probably would not be covered, this panic conversation reminded me of a story that one of my friends told me that he overheard the day before our civ pro final. Two people were supposedly going through the syllabus and one asked the other, "It looks like we covered personal jurisdiction, do you think that's going to be on the final?" Yikes.
Read more!
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
Ah, the 1L final freakout
I decided to do some studying for my last final this morning, so I graced the library with my presence for a short while. Needless to say, it did not take very long to notice the swarms of first years freaking out about their con law and contracts finals (and whatever other finals are going on). I must have heard ten different people talking about strict scrutiny and its application to the mailbox rule (granted, these obviously were overlapping conversations). I keep waiting to hear about the current acts of Congress and how they border on a violation of the separation of powers doctrine, but I guess the mainstream media hasn't picked up on any of this yet. Regardless of any position on the war, I still do not see how the legislative branch's attempt at test driving the executive powers isn't an impermissible SOP violation. But I digress.
It's easy to say now that those first year classes are meaningless and whatever you didn't learn back then you will during the bar review. Even now, I certainly remember the stress level and the fear of uncertainty. It makes me wonder what the stress is like over at Yale, where they supposedly don't have finals the first year.
I also saw that the Supreme Court decided the KSR-Teleflex gas pedal case, but for some reason this potentially important IP case didn't make CNN headlines. Well, now to catch up on my weekly Boston Legal fix.
Read more!
And now Barbri has my money also
I think I've spent more in the last couple weeks than I ever have in the same two week period before (other than buying a car or big ticket items like a car). To complete the two-step process, I've now paid the $2000+ for Barbri to basically sit and watch a bunch of videos for the next two months. Hopefully between the $3000 in review materials, I can learn (or re-learn as it purports to be) exactly how to study to pass this bar exam the first time around.
I'm beginning to think that I'm going to be doing a lot more studying on my own and listening to these videos/lectures will simply be reinforcement. I've never found the Barbri videos that useful in the past (particularly the "10-minute break" that pops up every hour or so where the video actually shows a sign with the minutes changing for 10 minutes rather than simply a notice to pause the video and take a break). I guess Barbri assumes the pending crop of lawyers doesn't know well enough to operate a vcr.
I've also concluded that Westlaw is the superior search engine to Lexis. I make this statement because Lexis held very few, if any, training programs this entire year, and Westlaw's one or two more was enough to convince me of its superiority. I can only imagine how many first years Lexis lost through its own incompetence in marketing. I will give Lexis its props for its superior rewards program though.
Still one final to go. I'm going to play some Monkey Target in the meantime.
Read more!
