CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE 7:45) Beethoven Violin Sonatas (Kreutzer & Spring) Itzhak Perlman, Violin & Vladimir Ashkenazy, Piano PERFORMANCES

SPRING 2011 SECTION C Torts (Fenton) MTR :20 U.S. Constitutional Law I (Casebeer) MTR 2:00-3:20 Criminal Procedure (Bandes) MW4:00-5:20 L.Comm. (8-10 1x/week) Elective SECTION E U.S. Constitutional Law I (Corbin) MTR 11-12:20 Criminal Procedure (Bascuas) MW 2:00-3:20 Contracts (Paulsson) MTR 4:00-5:20 L.Comm. (8-10 1x/week) Elective

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE The most important decision you will make …

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE The most important decision you will make on Tuesday.

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE The most important decision you will make on Tuesday. Maybe.

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE You are picking one course out of the 20 or so electives you will take in law school.

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE You are not picking a spouse.

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE: OPTIONS (LOTS) Analysis of Evidence (Anderson/Twining) Civil Procedure II (Stefan) Comparative Law (Wagner) Environmental Law & Policy (Williamson) Family Law (Stewart) Financial Accounting (Mundstock) Housing Discrimination (Fajer) Legislation (Blatt) Philosophy of Law (Nickel) Substantive Criminal Law (Mahoney)

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE: CONSIDERATIONS Past Student Evaluations – Check Circulation Desk for Paper (Spring ‘08 & Earlier) – Check with Tent Fellows re Electronic (Fall ‘09-Present) – Read Carefully; Grain of Salt Logistical Issues Substantive Concerns

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE: CONSIDERATIONS Past Student Evaluations Logistical Issues – Method of Evaluation – Size of Class (Estimated) – Likely to Be Offered Later? – Non-1L Students in Room? Substantive Concerns

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE: METHOD OF EVALUATION ALL ON FINAL EXAM COMPARATIVE FAMILY FINANCIAL ACCTG SUBST. CRIM. OTHER METHODS + EXAM ANALYSIS: 2 BIG PROJECTS CIV PRO II: PROJECT & QUIZ ENVIRONMENTAL: 2 PROJECTS HOUSING: 4-5 SHORT ASSMTS LEGISLATION: 1 WRITTEN ASSMT PHILOSOPHY: MIDTERM & PAPER

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE: SIZE OF CLASS (TENTATIVE) IN BIG ROOMS ANALYSIS CIV PRO II FAMILY FINANCIAL ACCTG SUBST. CRIM. SMALLER CAPS COMPARATIVE (uncertain) ENVIRONMENTAL (25) HOUSING: (60) LEGISLATION: (35) PHILOSOPHY: (8-10)

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE: HOW FREQUENTLY OFFERED? EVERY SEMESTER CIV PRO II FAMILY SUBST. CRIM. EVERY YEAR COMPARATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL* SOMETIMES UPPER LEVEL FINANCIAL ACCTG HOUSING PHILOSOPHY?? USUALLY 1L ONLY ANALYSIS LEGISLATION

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE: non-1Ls IN THE ROOM? ALL 1Ls ANALYSIS CIV PRO II FAMILY FINANCIAL ACCTG LEGISLATION SUBST. CRIM. * SOME UPPER LEVEL COMPARATIVE HOUSING OTHER DEPTS ENVIRONMENTAL PHILOSOPHY

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE: CONSIDERATIONS Past Student Evaluations Logistical Issues Substantive Concerns (Course by Course) – Prerequisite/Introduction to Other Courses – Particular Skills – Fit Into Career Goals (see advice on my home page)

ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE (ANDERSON/TWINING) Inferences & Proof of Facts Meets Evidence prerequisite for Litigation Skills; Prof. Anderson uses to help choose students for trial teams Especially helpful for litigation, but analytic skills help everywhere; some intro to evidence rules on bar exam (but most students take Evidence) Anderson & Twining team teach, together and in break-out groups

CIVIL PROCEDURE II (STEFAN) Continuation of Civ Pro I Helpful Generally for Upper Level Non-Criminal Courses Probably should take at some point if considering non-criminal litigation Stefan used to teach here; superb teacher and litigator with specialty in Mental Health Law

COMPARATIVE LAW (WAGNER) Compare Legal Systems (Civil/Common Law) Now in a Very Small Room; He’s Trying to Move Helpful Intro to Comparative/Int’l Courses Good course for int’l careers and for gen’l understanding of law

Environmental Law & Policy (Williamson) Complex Statutes; Not Trees & Squirrels Intro to Upper Level Environmental Courses This course = Intro to major environmental statutes, plus some introduction to International Law. More policy than basic intro course + interaction with graduate students from other depts. Field is relevant to public interest, gov’t, or business advising practice

FAMILY LAW (STEWART) Basic Intro to Important Area of the Law Marriage & Divorce; Child Custody, Visitation & Support; Non-Traditional Families Helpful Background for Other Practice Areas: E.g., Tax; Estate Planning; Criminal Law Prof. Stewart works in Children & Law Clinic; likely very practical approach

FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING FOR LAWYERS (MUNDSTOCK) Intro to Accounting (Legal Perspective) Helpful Intro to Financial Statements and Business Law for Students w/o Business Background Can’t Take as 1L if More Than One Prior Accounting Course Prof. Mundstock is Quirky and Very Funny

LEGISLATION (BLATT) Intro to Techniques for Working With Statutes Really Useful for Wide Variety of Practice Areas Focused on Complex Statutes (E.g., Bankruptcy; Civil Rights; Commercial Law; Communications; Environmental; Intellectual Property; Tax) Prof. Blatt Involves Virtually All Students in Every Class

PHILOSPHY OF LAW (NICKEL) Philosophy as Tool to Explore Legal System & Moral/Legal Issues Opportunity to Get Some Perspective on Issues Raised by Law School Through Lens of Another Discipline & Including Voices of Non-Law Students Really only opportunity to participate in discussion seminar and do extensive reading in non-legal materials. Prof. Nickel in both Law School & Dept. of Philosophy Only class that doesn’t meet WF 11:00-12:20

SUBSTANTIVE CRIMINAL LAW (MAHONEY) Elements of Crimes & Defenses Intro/Prereq to Upper Level Crim Electives; Good Synergy with Crim. Pro. Many Students Go Into Criminal Law, But Comes Up in Every Area of Practice, Notably Business Law (e.g., Antitrust, Securities), Family Law, Immigration, Sports Law Prof. Mahoney is a popular 1L teacher with strong interest in Public Interest Lawyering

HOUSING DISCRIMINATION (FAJER) Legal Responses to Housing Discrimination & Segregation Intro to Civil Rights Statutes & Policy, Especially re Race and Disability Lot of Exercises Providing General Intro to Working with Statutes (Less Thorough/More Focused than Legislation) Operation of Class Mostly Similar to Property; Might Consider Trying Out New Profs Before Taking Me Again.

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE: LOGISTICS Registration Time & Significance – Check MyUM Before Registration Time Learn the Procedures Wait Lists & Add/Drop

CHOOSING YOUR 1L ELECTIVE: QUESTIONS?

ASSIGNMENT #3 Due Tuesday/Wednesday Next Week Defining & Using Technical Terms Order of Presentation: – Help Reader Understand What Would Occur – Can Do Statutes in Order IF You Think That Helps Questions?

FINAL TEST NOTES: SUBSTANCE Mostly Repetition/Slight Alteration of Old Qs Read Carefully – Positives & Negatives – Changes from Old Qs Arguments Supporting – Must be correct – Must logically support position

FINAL TEST NOTES: PREPARATION Do Old Qs & Check Answers – Try to do at least one of the complete tests under exam conditions – Look hard at the questions that are slight variations on the same grant. – Check with me if answers/explanations don’t make sense Run the slides when tired/worn out

FINAL TEST NOTES: LOGISTICS Office Hours (Location & Time on Course Page) – Today: Afternoon & Evening – Tomorrow: Morning & Evening All Contact Stops 9 p.m. Tomorrow Room Assignments on Course Page Test Starts at 8:00; Plan to Arrive 15+ Minutes Early Bring Number 2 Pencils Bring Number 2 Pencils

FINAL TEST NOTES: EMERGENCIES If something occurs that prevents you from taking test on time: Talk to Deans of Students, NOT ME If a problem arises in exam room: Talk to Registrar or Deans of Students, NOT ME

RETURN TO 7O

(7O): 1st QUESTION: ARGUMENTS? “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.” Life estate determinable or fee simple determinable?

(7O): 1st QUESTION: ARGUMENTS? “ To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.” Life estate determinable or fee simple determinable? Presumption of Fee Simple Use and Benefit Sounds Like Life Estate Condition is Consistent with Intent to Support Reasonable to Think Archie would try to Protect Gloria (not Edith’s daughter)

(7O): 1st QUESTION “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.” Majority: E = Fee Simple Determinable A  G? (Remaining Future Interest in Archie passed to Gloria through residuary clause in will)

(7O): 1st QUESTION “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.” Majority: E = Fee Simple Determinable A  G = Possibility of Reverter

(7O): 1st QUESTION “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.” Some: E = Life Estate Determinable A  G ?

REVIEW: DEFEASIBLE FINITE ESTATES Can create conditions cutting off finite estates, yielding, for example: Life Estate Determinable Term of Years on Condition Subsequent Life Estate on Executory Limitation

Defeasible Finite Estates: Example (7H): Thelma "to Louise for 99 years if Louise so long live." Louise: Term of years determinable. Thelma: Possibility of Reverter + Reversion = Reversion (Merger)

(7O): 1st QUESTION “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.” Some: E = Life Estate Determinable A  G = Possibility of Reverter +Reversion = Reversion (Merger) (See Problem 7H)

(7O): 1st QUESTION: RECAP Edith’s Interest – Majority: E has F.S. Determinable – Some: E has Life Estate Determinable Gloria holds future interest through residuary clause

(7O): 2d QUESTION: ARGUMENTS? Is condition restraining second marriage void as against public policy?

(7O): 2d QUESTION: Recap Is condition restraining 2d marriage void as against public policy? Policy Discussion: A’s right to control property v. E’s right to control her life Probably more likely OK if seen as just life estate for support

(7O): 2d QUESTION Is condition restraining 2d marriage void as against public policy? Result: – If not void, nothing changes – If void, pencil out condition

(7O): 2d QUESTION If condition void, pencil out condition – “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.”

(7O): 2d QUESTION If condition void, pencil out condition – “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit.” Majority: E = Fee Simple Absolute Some: E = Life Estate + G = Reversion What Happens when E dies?

(7O): 2d QUESTION If condition void, pencil out condition: “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit.” Majority: E = Fee Simple Absolute  Edith Dies?

(7O): 2d QUESTION If condition void, pencil out condition: “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit.” Majority: E = Fee Simple Absolute Edith Dies?  S= Fee Simple Absolute

(7O): 2d QUESTION If condition void, pencil out condition: “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit.” Some: E = Life Estate + G = Reversion  Edith Dies?

(7O): 2d QUESTION If condition void, pencil out condition: “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit.” Some: E = Life Estate + G = Reversion Edith Dies  G = Fee Simple Absolute

(7O): 3d QUESTION: ARGUMENTS? Is cohabitation a violation of a restraint on marriage? (Only need to resolve if condition is valid).

(7O): 3d QUESTION Is cohabitation a violation of a restraint on marriage? – If yes, Gloria gets fee simple absolute. – If no (Restatement position) nothing changes

(7O): E Dies, Condition Valid, No Violation “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.” – Some: E = Life Estate Determinable – G = Possibility of Reverter +Reversion = Reversion (Merger) – Who Gets?

(7O): E Dies, Condition Valid, No Violation “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.” – Some: E = Life Estate Determinable – G = Possibility of Reverter +Reversion = Reversion (Merger) G = Fee Simple Absolute

(7O): E Dies, Condition Valid, No Violation “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.” – Majority: E = Fee Simple Determinable – G = Possibility of Reverter – Who Gets?

(7O): E Dies, Condition Valid, No Violation “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.” – Majority: E = Fee Simple Determinable – G = Possibility of Reverter – S = Fee Simple Absolute Edith Can’t Remarry After Death Thus Condition Can Never Occur So Condition Effectively Disappears

Qs on 7O?

Review pRoblem 7P: OATS Renee conveys “to Stacy for life, then to my heirs, but should Stacy marry before she turns 35, to Marni.” AMBIGUITIES/QUESTIONS?

Review pRoblem 7P R “to S for life, then to my heirs, but should S marry before she turns 35, to M” Ambiguities: R alive or dead? M’s interest intended to cut off life estate? Condition void? Today or “At Common Law”?

(7P) AMBIGUITIES R alive or dead? M’s interest intended to cut off life estate? Condition void? Today or “At Common Law”?

(7P) Renee conveys “to Stacy for life, then to my heirs, but should Stacy marry before she turns 35, to Marni.” R alive or dead: Why matters?

(7P) Renee conveys “to Stacy for life, then to my heirs, but should Stacy marry before she turns 35, to Marni.” R alive, “to my heirs” = contingent remainder R dead, “To my heirs” = vested remainder subject to divestment.

(7P) AMBIGUITIES R alive or dead? M’s interest intended to cut off life estate? Condition void? Today or “At Common Law”?

(7P) Renee conveys “to Stacy for life, then to my heirs, but should Stacy marry before she turns 35, to Marni.” M’s interest cut off life estate? Arguments ?

(7P) R “to S for life, then to my heirs, but should S marry before she turns 35, to M.” M’s interest cut off life estate? – punishes S for early marriage – discourages fortune hunters – maybe concern w Stacy support for Marni – no “then to Marni” BUT: could have placed right after life estate Could check for other facts (ages of S&M) (!)

(7P) AMBIGUITIES R alive or dead? M’s interest intended to cut off life estate? Condition void? Today or “At Common Law”?

(7P) Renee conveys “to Stacy for life, then to my heirs, but should Stacy marry before she turns 35, to Marni.” Partial Restraint on Marriage: OK to Postpone Marriage Until 35?

(7P) R “to S for life, then to my heirs, but should S marry before she turns 35, to M.” Partial Restraint on Marriage OK? Probably OK if only effects remainder (no harm to S) Check S’s age – Not much effect if S is 33 – Bigger deal if S is 17 or engaged to be married soon If void, pencil out interest to M If void, pencil out interest to M

(7P) AMBIGUITIES R alive or dead? M’s interest intended to cut off life estate? Condition void? Today or “At Common Law”?

(7P) Renee conveys “to Stacy for life, then to my heirs, but should Stacy marry before she turns 35, to Marni.” At Common Law or Today: Why Matters?

(7P) Renee conveys “to Stacy for life, then to my heirs, but should Stacy marry before she turns 35, to Marni.” At Common Law: M’s interest presumed to be in Life Estate Today: M’s interest presumed to be in fee simple absolute

“ At Common Law ” v. “ Today ”

Default Estate “At Common Law” v. “ Today ” Life Estate Must use “and M’s Heirs” to create fee simple. Fee Simple

“to X and the Heirs of his Body” “At Common Law” v. “ Today ” Created a Traditional Fee Tail Traditional Fee Tail eliminated; state statutes provide different results when this language used

Doctrine of Destructability of Contingent Remainders “ At Common Law ” v. “ Today ” Applied everywhere Eliminated in all states except Florida

(7P) Renee conveys “to Stacy for life, then to my heirs, but should Stacy marry before she turns 35, to Marni.” Work Through Decision Tree: One Example

(7P) R “to S for life, then to my heirs, but should S marry before she turns 35, to M.” Example: Condition void, Renee alive, today. – S?

(7P) R “to S for life, then to my heirs, but should S marry before she turns 35, to M.” Example: Condition void, Renee alive, today, DWT inapplicable. – S: Life Estate – R’s Heirs?

(7P) R “to S for life, then to my heirs, but should S marry before she turns 35, to M.” Example: Condition void, Renee alive, today, DWT inapplicable. – S: Life Estate – R’s Heirs: Contingent Remainder in F.S. – R?

(7P) R “to S for life, then to my heirs, but should S marry before she turns 35, to M.” Example: Condition void, Renee alive, today, DWT inapplicable. – S: Life Estate – R’s Heirs: Contingent Remainder – R: Reversion – M?

(7P) R “to S for life, then to my heirs, but should S marry before she turns 35, to M.” Example: Condition void, Renee alive, today – S: Life Estate – R’s Heirs: Contingent Remainder – R: Reversion – M: Nothing

(7Q) (RICE) Xaviera, in her valid will: “I grant Brothelacre to Betsy if it continues to be used as a house of prostitution, but if not, my heirs can take it. I leave the rest of my property to my friend Phil.” Xaviera was survived by no issue or spouse, but by her mother, Yvonne. Betsy later closed the existing brothel and replaced it with an ad agency.

(7Q) : X: “I grant Brothelacre to B if continues to be used as house of prost., but if not, my heirs can take it. I leave the rest of my property to friend P.” X survived by mother, Y. B closed brothel and opened ad agency. AMBIGUITIES?

(7Q) : X, in valid will: “I grant Brothelacre to B if continues to be used as house of prost., but if not, my heirs can take it. I leave the rest of my property to friend P.” X survived by mother, Y. B closed brothel and opened ad agency. AMBIGUITIES? Condition Valid? Heirs take automatically v. must act Ad agency violate grant?

(7Q) : X, in valid will: “I grant Brothelacre to B if continues to be used as house of prost., but if not, my heirs can take it. I leave the rest of my property to friend P.” X survived by mother, Y. B closed brothel and opened ad agency. NOT AMBIGUITIES Common Law v. Today (Ad Agency) Who is X’s “heir”: Y not P

(7Q) : X, in valid will: “I grant Brothelacre to B if continues to be used as house of prost., but if not, my heirs can take it. I leave the rest of my property to friend P.” X survived by mother, Y. B closed brothel and opened ad agency. AMBIGUITIES? Condition Valid? If in Nevada or other jurisdiction where prostitution legal.

(7Q) : X, in valid will: “I grant Brothelacre to B if continues to be used as house of prost., but if not, my heirs can take it. I leave the rest of my property to friend P.” X survived by mother, Y. B closed brothel and opened ad agency. AMBIGUITIES? Heirs take automatically v. must act?

(7Q) : X, in valid will: “I grant Brothelacre to B if continues to be used as house of prost., but if not, my heirs can take it.” Automatically Single Purpose Time Language Must Act Two Clauses “can take it” Presumption

(7R) (RICE) R: “to C for his support and benefit so long as the property is not used for commercial purposes, then to my nephew J and his heirs if J reaches 35.” C on land writes novels & does deals on phone. C dies; J is not 35 VERY HARD (ESPECIALLY IF ESSAY Q)!! Multiple Variations in Old Tests

(7R) R: “to C for his support and benefit so long as the property is not used for commercial purposes, then to my nephew J and his heirs if J reaches 35.” C on land writes novels & does deals on phone. C dies; J is not 35 AMBIGUITIES?

(7R) R: “to C for his support and benefit so long as the property is not used for commercial purposes, then to my nephew J and his heirs if J reaches 35.” C on land writes novels & does deals on phone. C dies; J is not 35 AMBIGUITIES Life Estate or Fee? Condition Violated by Writing/Deal-Making? When Does J’s Interest Take Effect? Destructibility Apply?

Note: No Ambiguity re Today v. Common Law C writes novels & does deals on phone. (Cf. medical school or law school, which go back to medieval Europe)

(7R) R: “to C for his support and benefit so long as the property is not used for commercial purposes, then to my nephew J and his heirs if J reaches 35.” C on land writes novels & does deals on phone. C dies; J is not 35 AMBIGUITIES Life Estate or Fee? – Arguments

(7R) R: “to C for his support and benefit so long as the property is not used for commercial purposes, then to my nephew J and his heirs if J reaches 35.” C on land writes novels & does deals on phone. C dies; J is not 35 Life Estate or Fee? – “support & benefit” v. presumption of fee – “then to J” looks like remainder – Check age of J (more likely fee if J very young) – Is condition just on C (more likely life estate) or on whoever owns the land (more likely fee)? – Check relationship between R & C: any reason to think it’s a support life estate?

PROBLEM 7S (OATS) T (in will): “to the Holy Shrine Church to be used for church purposes, but if not, to my son D if he is still living.” Use of Property: – Parking Lot – Empty for Several Months – Winter Homeless Shelter Run by Parishioner D dies & leaves interest to J

PROBLEM 7S (OATS) T (in will): “to the Holy Shrine Church to be used for church purposes, but if not, to my son D if he is still living.” AMBIGUITIES?

PROBLEM 7S (OATS) T (in will): “to the Holy Shrine Church to be used for church purposes, but if not, to my son D if he is still living.” AMBIGUITIES? Is limit on HSC supposed to survive D? Is Dick’s interest self-executing or did he have to act to retake the property?

PROBLEM 7S (OATS): T (in will): “to the Holy Shrine Church to be used for church purposes, but if not, to my son D if he is still living.” Use of Property Violate Grant?: – Parking Lot – Empty for Several Months – Winter Homeless Shelter Run by Parishioner

FIN