Hatin On Dead-Hand Control

This is the first of a three-part series on Future Interests. This part deals with the application of the Rule Against Perpetuities, a real law school treat.

The Rule Against Perpetuities is a hater. It seeks to ensure that the dead cannot control their property in perpetuity. It does so by imposing a time limit (the "perpetuities period") on any conditions placed in a will or grant which creates a future interest. So, for example, if A has a future interest, that interest must vest or it must terminate within this time limit.

The difficult parts of applying the Rule are (1) figuring out the time period and (2) figuring out whether the condition expires within this time period.

THE RULE:

No future interest is valid unless it can be shown that it will necessarily vest, if at all, no later than 21 years after some life in being at the creation of the interest.

KEEP IN MIND...

"No future interest...": The Rule only applies to future interests. Moreover, it only applies to future interests which are contingent upon some condition.

"...is valid...": if a conveyance violates the Rule, that particular conveyance is void. But it doesn't necessarily mean that the whole grant is void -- only the part that violates the law is invalid.

"...necessarily vests, if at all...": this just means that the interest has to vest or terminate within the perpetuities period. Essentially, the condition, which determines whether the future interest vests, needs to have a time limit – i.e., a point in time where exactly one of the following is true: (1) the condition is met and the interest vests* or (2) the condition is not met and the interest is terminated. And this point in time has to come before the perpetuities period ends.

• If the condition X is “to B, if B graduates law school before 27” and B is 17, we know that in 10 years, we will certainly know whether or not the condition has been met.
  

• If the condition X is “to B, if Starbucks stops selling coffee” -- we don’t really know if this condition will ever be met.

*A future interest vests when it becomes "present possessory," this means that future interest holder takes actual possession of the estate. This occurs when the condition imposed by the conveyance is met.

"...later than 21 years yadda yadda.": this part establishes the perpetuities period. The interest has to vest or terminate within 21 years of the deaths of all the so-called lives in being.

THE [Very Broad] ANALYSIS:

For every conveyance in a grant, in order,** figure out the following:

• what type of future interest has been conveyed?
• does the Rule Against Perpetuities (“RAP”) applies and, if so, has it been violated?

** A single grant may have multiple conveyances. For example, take the grant "O to A for life, then to B if she has children, and if not then to C." You would assess the following conveyances in the order that the property would pass (left to right): (1) the direct conveyance to A, (2) B's future interest and then (3) C's future interest.

THE [slightly less broad] ANALYSIS:

A. Figure Out the Type of Future Interest

KEY: Is the future interest reserved in the grantor or conveyed to a grantee?

• If the future interest is reserved in the grantor…
• Step 1: Is the entire estate conveyed?
• if NO -- the grantor has a reversion. RAP does not apply.

• If YES, Step 2: is fee simple determinable conveyed?
• if YES -- grantor has a possibility of reverter. RAP does not apply.

• If NO, Step 3: Is fee simple subject to condition subsequent conveyed?
• if YES -- grantor has a right of entry. RAP does not apply.

• If the future interest is conveyed to a grantee…
• Step 1: Does the future interest cut short the preceding estate?
• YES -- executory interest. RAP applies.

• If No, Step 2: Is grantee identified?
• NO -- contingent remainder. RAP applies.

• If Yes, Step 3: Is grant conditional on something?
• YES -- contingent remainder. RAP applies.

• If No, Step 4: Is the class of recipients clearly defined?
• YES -- vested remainder. RAP does not apply
• NO -- vested remainder subject to open. RAP applies.

B. Applying The Rule Against Perpetuities

Step 1: Determine “Lives in Being”

• The "lives in being" are all people who satisfy the following two conditions:
• associated with the grant, i.e., those who stand to benefit from the grant
• alive at the time of the grant

Step 2: Determine The End of the Perpetuities Period

• The perpetuities period is the time within which the interest must vest or terminate. If the interest does not vest or terminate within this period, the Rule is violated.
• To determine the end of the perpetuities period:
• First, pretend that all the lives in being are dead.
• Then, add 21 years to when the last one died
• This point is the end of the perpetuities period: the grant has to vest before this point.

Step 3: Is the Interest Certain to Vest?

• Analysis: does a scenario exist (regardless of how improbable) where the interest vests at any point after the end of the perpetuities period (determined in Step 2)?
• if YES -- the Rule is violated and the conveyance is invalid.
• if NO -- the Rule is not violated and the grant cannot be invalidated on RAP grounds.

Step 4: Figure Out the Valid Grant

• If all the conveyances are RAP-friendly, the entire grant is valid.
• Any conveyances that violate the RAP, are invalid.

THE [in-depth] ANALYSIS:

Step 1: Determining Lives in Being

This part is actually fairly easy—the so called lives in being are all the people who are:

• associated with the grant; and
  
• alive at the time of the grant

The people associated with the grant includes EVERY person in the entire grant, not just in a specific conveyance.

• Example: O --> A for life, then B for life, and then to C and his heirs.
• Assuming that they are all alive at the time of the grant: O, A, B, and C are the lives in being.
• Example: O --> A for life, the to the children of B (B has 2 kids)
• Assuming that they are all alive at the time of the grant: O, A, B and B’s two living children are the lives in being. If B has more children, they are not lives in being, but they still stand to gain from the conveyance. This called an open class – a class of grantees that has not been completely defined.

Being alive at the time of the grant is fairly straight forward, but there is a slight twist to this calculation. There is a difference in determining the lives in being when the conveyance is by grant versus by will.

• Grant: lives in being are those alive at the time of the grant.
• Will: lives in being are those alive at the testator’s death.

This is because a conveyance occurs when a grant is made. But, if a testator puts a conveyance in her will, it won’t occur until the testator dies. The rule requires that the lives in being be alive “at the creation of the interest.”

Step 2: Determining the End of the Perpetuities Period

This step is fairly simple, but depends heavily on step 1 being accurate. So make sure you’ve found all the lives in being. Once you do, add 21 years to the death of the last life in being.

Step 3: Is the Interest Certain To Vest?

It might appear that this step doesn’t really guarantee accuracy in applying the Rule. You might think “Just because I couldn’t come up with a scenario, doesn’t mean that one couldn’t exist. Maybe I just couldn’t think up of one.” Well, I would say, “That is true, young 1L, but that is why you have to do this in a methodical manner, thereby ensuring accuracy.” In other words, this whole “coming up with a scenario” step should be done in a systematic way.

You usually don't have to worry about the lives in being violating the rule. Instead, you should figure out all the people who stand to gain from the conveyance (i.e., are associated with the grant), but weren't alive at the time the grant was made. Once you determine all the people associated with the grant, you check if the condition can expire for each of them beyond the perpetuities period.

Example: O --> A for life, then to B’s children. Assume that B has two children. B’s two children are lives in being. But the conveyance is made to all of B’s children, which, until B dies, is an open class (because B can keep having children until he’s dead***). So, if B has children after the grant, they are not lives in being, but they are associated with the conveyance, i.e., they stand to benefit from it.

In this case, the condition is an open class one – the recipients must be the children of B. This class closes as a matter of definition when B dies. Therefore, the condition expires upon B’s death. Since B is a life in being, his death occurs within the perpetuities period. Therefore, regardless of how many kids B has, the condition expires within the perpetuities period.

*** Given the Rules origins lie with a case adjudicated in the 1600s, the Rule does not account for the possibility of cryogenically frozen sperm used to create after-born lives in being...

Given that the rule is one of logical proof, your goal is to see if there is any possibility that the interest will vest after the perpetuities period is over. The point is to be as random as you can be and make arguments which are a complete stretch (e.g., 80 year olds having kids, 80 year olds marrying people that haven’t been born yet, and other fun things with octogenarians)

Practical Sidenote: conditions may not always be explicit – they may be implied by the grant. I would recommend making a short checklist of known conditions that you should look out for with each particular future interest. Or maybe I'll just make one and post it on here.

Here’s an example of how unlikely something can be and still violate the Rule (it’s also an example of the open class condition):

Hypothetical: The Unborn Widow

Grant: O --> A for life, then to A’s widow ("W") for life, then to A’s children who are then living.

Analysis for grant from A’s widow to A’s “children who are then living”

Step 1: Lives in being. A is the life in being. W, A’s widow, was not yet born at the time of the grant so she cannot be a life in being.

Step 2: The end of the perpetuities period is 21 years after the last life in being (A) dies.

Step 3: Is there chance the interest vests after the perpetuities period?

YES. Take the following factual timeline:

1. O makes the grant described above
2. W is born
3. A marries W
4. W has a kid.
5. A dies
6. 25 years pass (note: more than 21 years)
7. W dies

The grant to A’s children cannot vest until A’s widow dies because she has a life estate. The condition is that the children need to be alive when A’s widow dies (“A’s children who are then living”). We can’t tell what children are going to be “then living” until we know when the widow dies. In the above case, the widow doesn’t die till after this period. Therefore, there is a chance that it won’t vest until after the period expired.

Compare with this Grant: O-->A for life, then to A’s widow for life, then to A’s children.

Here, RAP is not violated. Because we don’t have the requirement that the children be alive when the widow dies. This is essentially a gift to the class of “A’s children.” The class has vested by the time A dies, because once he dies he can no longer have children (the Rule assumes cryogenically freezing sperm is not an option).

Step 4: Figure out the Valid Grant

If you’ve determined that a particular conveyance is valid, it doesn’t necessarily void the whole grant. Instead, you just cross out the invalid conveyance until the remaining valid conveyance(s) no longer violate the rule.

Compare the following two grants:

Grant #1

O-->A and his heirs, but if the land is not farmed, then to B and his heirs.

becomes…

O-->A and his heirs, but if the land is not farmed, then to B and his heirs.

Essentially: A gets a fee simple.

Grant #2

O-->A and his heirs as long as the land is farmed, then to B and his heirs.

becomes…

O-->A and his heirs as long as the land is farmed, then to B and his heirs.

Essentially: A has a fee simple determinable.

The Intellectual Property Clinic
by Anne DePree ('06)
[depree@usc.edu]

(1) Description of the Clinic:

The Intellectual Property Clinic has a very broad, potential client base (e.g. from starving artists to non-profit organizations to universities). The binding factor in all of our work is that the projects serve the public interest. The purpose of the IP Clinic is to engage students in the dynamics of the field of intellectual property, to allow students to strategize about how to go about best serving their clients' interests, and to assist students in developing client-related skills.

(2) How to Participate in the Clinic:

There are a few ways to participate in the IP Clinic. First, the clinic runs through the summer and accepts applicaitons each spring. In the summer of 2005, there were three participants in the clinic (two current 3Ls and one current 2L). Second, the IP Clinic runs through the school semesters. Currently, the IP Clinic operates on a per-semester basis (whereas other clinics run on a yearly commitment basis), but Professor Urban has spoken about potentially changing the IP Clinic to run on a year-long commitment basis.

(3) What You Do:

The IP Clinic is different from some of the other clinics because each project is usually different from all of the other projects that came before it. This means that the upstart on a project is highly research intensive and generally presents a high learning curve. You also begin dealing with your clients very early on in your involvement. By establishing a relationship with your client you will be able to make decisions about potential strategies for dealing with the project. In this way you will receive training and experience that you may not otherwise experience until you've been practicing for a few years.

This past summer I was able to travel to hearings held by the Copyright Office in both Washington, DC and Berkeley, CA to support my clients' interests at the proceedings. Not only did we strategize ways of making their statements as effective as possible, but we also compiled information summarizing the proceedings for the clients.

Other projects that I have worked on in the Clinic include drafting a generous patent license (to be released to the public sometime this year), filing an amicus curiae brief in the United States v. Martignon with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and strategizing clients' interests and talking points for Orphan Works hearings. All of the clinics require alot of dedication, but the rewards are well-worth the effort and the quality of work and your ability to deal with clients will undoubtedly improve ten-fold.

summer job opportunity:
PUBLIC COUNSEL

If you're looking for a summer job:

Public Counsel, the nation's largest pro bono law firm, is seeking summer clerks. The position runs from May 30th, after the Write-On, to August 4th. The position is unpaid, unless you're able to get subsidized by an organization such as PILF.

Applications are due by WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 2006.

For more information about Public Counsel, the clerk positions and for an application, click here.

The Post-Conviction Clinic
by Oscar Medellin ('06)
[omedelli@usc.edu]

1. Overview

The clinic provides legal services to prisoners in need of representation in post-conviction matters. What this means is the clinic only represents clients who have had a criminal trial, were convicted, and have exhausted all their available state appeals. Post-conviction legal issues can range from parole hearings to state and federal habeas petition relief. Two Supervising Attorneys oversee the clinic, Professors Carrie Hempel and Mike Brennan.

2. Certification

In order to represent clients, students will undergo a certification process from the California State Bar to work as Certified Student Attorneys. As part of this certification, students will participate in clinic training seminars, which include overviews in Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Trial Advocacy, and Evidence. Students may find it useful during the Fall and Spring semesters of the clinic to enroll in an Evidence or Criminal Procedure class for a better understanding of this area of the law.

3. Supervisor Position

The Supervisor position is a paid summer position with the clinic, which includes a two-semester commitment during the 2L year. Summer supervisors will receive relevant legal training and will be assigned a number of clients for the summer. It is very likely that you will even represent a client in a legal matter during your first summer.

The position provides a lot of opportunities for valuable legal experience in one’s early legal education. Students will meet one on one with clients, conduct interviews, and do intake for prospective clients of the clinic. Students will also have the opportunity to represent a client in a parole hearing and prepare a habeas petition in their first summer. You will also continue to hone your legal research and writing skills in preparing work for clients, and develop crucial client interaction skills as well.

Perhaps the most important thing about the supervisor position is the amount of responsibility that students are charged with. In essence, you are an actual attorney. All the obligations of the attorney-client relationship apply to you, and you will be expected to represent your clients to the best of your ability. Clients depend on you and place a great deal of trust in your representation. I can’t imagine another first-year summer job that gives you this kind of experience.

4. How do you get in?

Interviews begin in the spring semester. Students will undergo a first and second round of interviews. During the first round, the applicant interviews with a panel of current clinic supervisors (i.e., 2Ls). The final round of interviews is with the clinic Supervising Attorneys.

What does the clinic look for in prospective applicants? Most importantly, the clinic looks for students who are genuinely interested in the field of criminal law. The student should be able to manage a great deal of responsibility and be able to work independently when necessary. In addition, the applicant should have good writing and research skills. Good interpersonal skills are just as important since you will be dealing with clients on a frequent basis.

My advice is that if you really want to be a summer supervisor, you have to convey your interests in your interviews. You should be able to point out how your particular skills make you a good fit for the position. If you have career experiences within the field of criminal law, then you should draw on those experiences as well. If you have chosen criminal defense as a career or are contemplating it, then talk about that.

5. What if I can’t get into the summer program?

If you are unable to work as a summer supervisor, but are still interested in the clinic experience, you have the option of signing up for the clinic in the fall semester before your 2L year. The commitment is two semesters. Students who sign up take a seminar class in the fall alongside the clinic supervisors for course credit. In the spring, they receive a grade for their work. Students will undergo the same training as summer supervisors and represent clients as well.

Seats are limited for the fall and spring. Interested students should speak to one of the supervising attorneys prior to registration to find out how they can enroll in the clinic.

Feel free to contact Oscar at omedeilli@usc.edu or Sylvia Hwang ('07) at sylviahw@usc.edu for more information about the clinic.

The USC Immigration Clinic

by Sam Yebri (3L)

[yebri@usc.edu]

(1) Description of the Clinic:

In a city shaped by immigrants, the USC Immigration Clinic offers students an unparalleled opportunity to help members of the community and gain first-hand legal experience. The Immigration Clinic provides representation to clients in a variety of different types of cases, ranging from asylum claims by people who fear persecution if returned to their homes to claims for relief from deportation filed by people held at regional INS detention centers. You also have the opportunity to represent clients seeking relief under the Violence Against Women Act, which enables male and female immigrants to file their own claims for permanent immigration status if they are being abused by a spouse or parent who is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident. Many of the Clinic's clients are victims of torture, including rape, or other forms of severe violence. In some of the cases the client's life or freedom is at stake.

The Clinic has also established a pilot project to provide immigration legal advice to migrant farmworkers in northern San Diego County, where some Clinic students can choose to travel to northern San Diego County once or twice a month on a Saturday or on a Wednesday evening. Client availability, DHS (USCIS, ICE, CBP) and Immigration Court logistics, and, to the extent possible, the individual student's area of interest, will determine the type and number of cases on which a student will work. Students will represent clients before the Immigration Court, U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (formerly the “INS”), and possibly the federal courts. Student representation is provided pursuant to DHS and Justice Department student practice rules under the supervision of Professor Frenzen.

Client referral relationships exist between the Clinic and several other organizations including:

• The Program for Torture Victims
• Public Counsel
• Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles
  

(2) What You Do:

The Immigration Clinic is a full year course, requiring enrollment in both Fall and Spring semesters (keep in mind that this may pose a scheduling conflict with a second semester class or externship).

The Clinic meets in a classroom setting once per week. Students also meet on a weekly basis with Professor Frenzen for case review. Attendance at class and other meetings is mandatory. Additionally, there is a mandatory four-hour Orientation Session that will occur during the first week of the Fall semester that will provide information on office procedures, the case management program, and other introductory material.

The classroom component of the Clinic provides students with an understanding of the relevant substantive law and with the skills necessary to represent a client. In addition to the weekly class, Clinic students will need to commit approximately 20 hours per week to client work, Clinic office duties, and weekly case review meetings with Professor Frenzen.

Enrollment in the Clinic is limited to eight students. Prior or concurrent enrollment in Immigration Law would be helpful, but Immigration Law is not a prerequisite. Students who are not U.S. citizens or Lawful Permanent Residents should discuss their immigration status with Professor Frenzen before enrolling in the Clinic.

The Clinic is four units per semester. The Fall Semester of the Clinic is graded on a CR/D/F basis, while the Spring Semester of the Clinic may be taken for a letter grade or on a CR/D/F basis. There is no final examination either semester. Feel free to contact Professor Frenzen if you have additional questions about the Clinic. He can be reached at nfrenzen@law.usc.edu or 213-740-8933.

Finally, the Immigration Clinic is a truly great way to make a real impact in the lives of immigrants who want to live in the United States by honing the skills you are developing in law school with the help of one of USC’s most patient and gifted professors. And like anything else in life, the Clinic is what you make of it and what you want to do with it. From arguing a case on its merits in Immigration Court to writing a Ninth Circuit appellate brief to interviewing clients, Professor Frenzen will encourage you to challenge yourself and will help you along every step of the way.

HONORS PROGRAMS

The school has four honors programs which 2Ls and 3Ls can participate in:

• Southern California Law Review
• Interdisciplinary Law Journal ("ILJ")
  
• Review of Law and Women's Studies ("RLAWS")
  
• Hale Moot Court

Towards the end of the spring semester, you will be asked to rank the honors programs in the order you would like to participate in them. Based on this ranking and the respective factors considered by each Honors Program (qualifying mock trial round and your brief for Moot Court and the Write-On competition and grades for the journals), you'll be assigned to a particular honors program. You will be assigned to the highest-ranked program for which you are eligible.

Your chances: Each program is open to roughly 35-40 2Ls. So anywhere from 140 to 160 students could potentially participate in an honors program during their second-year. Given that there will be many students who will choose not to participate in any program, virtually any student will have the chance to be in one of the programs regardless of grades. Therefore, I would not let grades dissuade you from trying to join an honors program. Granted, if you don't do so well, you probably won't make Law Review, but there are three other programs that you'll have a good shot at.

MOOT COURT

It is mandatory to participate in the qualifying rounds for the Moot Court Honors Program -- it is a part of the Legal Writing course.

There are two rounds which you must participate in: The first round is a practice round which has no value in determining whether you make the program -- but you do get feedback from the judges from the following round. The second round is the qualifying round in which your performance is evaluated by the judges for admission into the program.

For each round, you need to be ready for about 15 minutes of oral argument. The majority of the round will be spent responding to judges' questions rather than reciting your pre-planned argument. The oral argument and the judges' questions will be based on the brief you have to write this semester for Legal Writing. Also, there is a closed universe of cases for the rounds -- so there's only a particular number of cases you need to know.

The judges are current members of the Moot Court and take great joy in grilling first-years during their qualifying rounds. The quality of your brief (for Legal Writing) is also considered in your evaluation.

If you are interested in doing Moot Court, here are a few tips for the qualifying rounds:

• dress up for the qualifying rounds
• practice: have 2Ls and 3Ls in the program right now "moot" you, i.e., put you through an actual practice round.
  
• know the case law: the better you know the cases the more you'll be able to handle the judge's questions.
• deference: address everyone as "your honor" and direct your answers to ALL the judges, not just the one who asked the question. And always answer whatever questions the judges ask, whether you think it's relevant or not.
• transition smoothly: the judges will interject with questions at will and won't give you any indication that they're done questioning, you'll just find that things get really quiet. At that point, you need to transition back into your prepared argument, but, ideally, do so coherently.
  

Basically, what you want to do is (a) convey a commanding knowledge of the relevant case law, (b) present a convincing argument for your client (try to get across your key points when you're not being questioned and in answering the judges (i.e., have an agenda and get it across one way or another)) and (c) not get trapped by the judges (i.e., allow them to make you contradict an argument you made earlier in the round)

If you make it to the Moot Court honors program, the bulk of the work is done in the Fall. You will be given the case or the fact pattern for the year's competition. The first step is to write a brief for one of the sides.

Units: for Moot Court you get 3 units during the Fall and 0 units during the Spring.

If you would like to be put in touch with a current member of Moot Court, either for more information or to set up a practice "moot" round, you can contact me at: bleiweis@usc.edu

THE JOURNALS

The journals are usually ranked as follows in terms of prestige:

1. Law Review
2. ILJ
3. RLAWS

I would say that, from an employer's perspective, Law Review is most prestigious and the other two are equal.

The Write-On: There is a write-on competition to get on the journals -- unlike moot court, this competition is optional. After your last final (Thursday, May 11, 2006), the Law Review Executive Notes Editor will be waiting for all interested participants with 100-plus page packet which will (a) explain the competition, (b) explain each journal's admission criteria and (c) contain all the sources for the write-on.

Basically, you will be given a fact pattern and be asked to write a 10-page law-journalesque article, with blue-booked endnotes, in response to a particular question based on a closed universe of sources which will include cases, law review articles and popular media pieces. You will be judged on coherence and quality of your argument, your use of the available sources and your bluebooking. You have two weeks to complete the write-on (it'll usually be due on a Friday (you can either turn it in by a certain hour or have it post-marked by this day)-- I'm guessing May 26).

Note: blue-booking for the Write-On, and law journals generally, is substantially different than the blue-booking done for briefs and memos. So, a portion of the two weeks will be dedicated to learning how to bluebook for journals. Closer to the date, I will post up the key differences that you should worry about.

Once you turn in the write-on, it will be reviewed by the relevant editors of all the journals you have ranked on your preference form. In conjunction with the write-on, the editors will look at your grades. The further up you go on the "prestige" rankings, the more grades matter. So, for Law Review, grades matter alot. But it is not the case that someone with excellent grades (e.g., top 10% is guaranteed a spot on Law Review). In other words, you still need to turn in a solid write-on even if you're at the top of the class. But, at the same time, if you're in the middle of the class, it is much much harder to get on Law Review.

If you make it to a journal, during your 2L year you will be part of the general staff. You'll have the following responsibilities:

1. Editing Articles: for each assignment, you will be given a number of footnotes to check (Law Review staff can get up to 50 footnotes an assignment whereas the staff on other journals usually get around 5). You're responsible for
   
• checking the blue-booking of the footnotes,
  
• editing the content or text of the article for grammar, wording, etc.
• you have to check that any proposition cited in a source actually exists in that source as it is cited (this is called cite-checking).
  
• for example: if the author quotes a portion of an opinion, you need to look up the opinion and make sure that the quote was reproduced accurately.
  
2. Collections: in order to facilitate cite-checking, it helps to have all the sources cited by a particular article in the law journal office. For a collection, you'll be given particular sources (cases, articles, books, etc.) to bring back to the office. Sometimes the sources are already in the office, sometimes they're at the law library, sometimes somewhere else on campus and sometimes you'll have to trek out to UCLA or some other place to find the source. In short, collections are alot of fun.
   
3. Article Evaluation: to help the editors pick the best articles to publish, the staff occasionally gets to review articles submitted by authors for publication in the journal. This usually involves reading over the article and filling out an evaluation form.
   

Also, every staff member has to write a Note during the spring semester of their 2L year. A Note is simply a student-written law journal article. You can write about anything you want, as long as you can find a faculty advisor willing to sign off on it (and you'll get to come up with cool titles for your Note, such as Cars and Effect: Affective Forecasting in California Litigation). Your advisor will (theoretically) guide you through the research and writing process and eventually give you a grade on your note.

Units: You get 3 graded units (based on your Note) and 2 ungraded units. On a law journal you get 2 units in the Fall and 3 in the Spring.

SUBSCRIBING TO THE BLOG

Per request, you can now subscribe to the Law School Blog and be notified whenever a new entry is posted.

Click here to subscribe.

GUERILLA TACTICS FOR SPRING OCI

1. BE PREPARED

Make sure to have extra copies of everything. This includes:

• resume
• RAP sheet
  
• writing sample
• references

Most likely, your interviewers will only want your RAP sheet. They will already have your resume. Rarely, do interviewers for firms ask for a writing sample, and it's even more rare for them to ask for references. Ususally, the firm will indicate what they would like you to bring prior to the interview. However, you should always have everything on hand just in cases.

The Writing Sample: Your writing sample should definitely be a sample of your legal writing -- usually, people use a paper they wrote during their first semester of legal writing. If you choose to do so, I recommend going over the paper prior to the interview(s) and making any changes and edits indicated by your instructor.

2. KNOW THY RESUME

If there's something on your resume, you should know everything about it. You should be able to speak intelligently about anything you put on your resume. For example, if you detail a particular work experience you should know when you worked there, specifically what you did (i.e., the details of the projects you worked on), the people you worked with, your supervisors, etc. Think of it as a review sheet for a test: everything on your resume is fair game and may be asked about it more detail than appears on the resume.

The Interest Line: Ideally, you have an interest line. There's a good chance that at least half of your 20 minute interview will be spent talking about your interests. So make sure it's something you actually are interested in and can talk about. Don't put stuff on there that you think will make you look intelligent (e.g., postmodern literature), but that you know nothing about.

Sidenote: it extremely important that your resume be meticulously edited and reviewed. I have heard of a few stories about people who lose jobs because of a misspelled word or bad grammar. I even heard one story about a guy who lost an offer after a successful callback because only some of his sentences ended in a period and others did not.

3. KNOW THE INTERVIEWER

It's good to know who you'll be meeting with. Usually, this will be posted up on the web prior to your interview or you'll see their name up on the door before you go in. Look up the interviewer and learn a few things about them. Where they went to school, what type of law they practice and anything else of interest. This will not only show the interviewer that you took the time to learn, i.e. are interested in the firm, but it will also make it much easier to build rapport with the interviewer.

4. KNOW THE FIRM

Get to know the firm you're interviewing with really well. While many firms appear to be the same, each firm believes it's unique. Before going into the interview, figure out what the firm thinks is unique about itself. The following sites are a good start:

• the Firm's website
• Martindale
  
• Vault
• Greedy Associates
  

Also, understand who you are and what the firm's incentives are. A firm doesn't really want to hire someone merely for a summer -- they want to invest in someone who will stay with them in the long run. And most firms invest a lot of money in summer associates.

So, if you're a 1L, a firm may be hesitant to hire you because they will be investing massive amounts of cash in someone who may not come back the following year. For this reason, firm's are much more likely to hire a 2L than a 1L -- and, in turn, that's why fewer 1Ls get firm jobs. For example, if you did really well your first semester, a small or medium-size firm might hesitate to hire you if they suspect that you're just in it for the cash and will likely find a job with a larger firm the following summer. The same is also true with larger firms, who are equally scared of losing a summer associate to a rival. Therefore, you may need to be more enthusiastic about working for a particular firm during these Spring OCIs, especially the smaller ones.

5. BE READY WITH QUESTIONS

At the end of each interview, the interviewer will smile and ask you something to the effect of: "Sooooo, do you have any questions for me?" The quickest way to deflate the interviewer is to say: "Naw, I'm good. Thanks." Even if it's the seventh interview of your callback and you literally know everything about the firm, throw out a question.

The issue: you never know when the "end" of the interview will be. Some interviewers will ask you questions for about 18 minutes before dropping the request for questions. In that case, you'll probably only have time for 1 or 2 questions. Some interviewers even start off with this expecting to see if you can control the interview. So, I think it's good to have a few questions prepared prior to the interview -- I would recommend having 5 questions or so. The interview will probably inspire a couple of questions and then you'll have your prepared ones to fall back on.

Here are some sample questions:

• What projects are you currently working on? OR What projects have you worked on? (this one is better for younger associates--so they can tell you what type of responsibilities they have earlier on)
  
• What do you value in a working environment and how does [FIRM] accomodate those values?
• What's the partnership track like at your firm?
• What are the relationships like between partners and associates?
  
• What's the deal with Oprah? She's fat, she's thin, she's fat, she's thin. I mean, come on, pick a body and go with it.
  

Sidenote: Partner questions vs. Associate questions -- there are certain questions which might be more appropriate for partners than associates. For example, asking about whether people at the firm hang out outside the firm is more appropriate for an associate than a partner. Asking about the vision of the firm, where the firm is headed/growing, is more appropriate for a partner.

6. HAVE AN AGENDA

If there's something you want the firm to know about you, make sure you have a chance to bring it up during the interview. Have a specific agenda as to what you want to get across prior to the interview and then follow through on that agenda at the interview. For example, if there's a particular work experience that you would like your interviewer to know about, or perhaps a project that you did, that you are not asked about, you should find a way to bring it up. You don't want it to come across as forced or pompous, but it's usually fairly easy to find a good way to transition.

But the main thing that firms look for is what's called "fit." Which is basically an answer to the question: "Would my colleagues and I like to work with this person?" Regardless of what you say or don't say about your experience, you need to prove to the interviewer that the answer to this question is yes.

Fit has nothing to do with whether you can actually do legal work -- that determination is made based on your resume and GPA. Firms usually have a certain cut-off GPA below which they do not hire people, but for the vast majority of firms this is a soft cut-off. In other words, they are willing to look deeper into the class if they think the person would fit well with the firm or has something else the firm is looking for.

Note: There are a few firms that have a hard cut-off (i.e., they won't take anyone below a certain GPA) and there are some firms which really have no cut-off (i.e., they don't rely on GPA as a proxy for being able to do lawyer work).

THE 1L SUMMER

Editor's Note: this entry is mainly aimed at people who are looking to work at a firm during their 2L summer and, most likely, after graduation.

First off, I prefer not to call it a summer job hunt because it really doesn't necessarily have to be that: you don't have to look for a job, per se. I'm sure the CSO has harped on this enough, but as long as you're doing something law-related for a good part of the summer, you should be good to go for Fall OCIs. This includes externships, public interest work, volunteer work, or even studying abroad. In fact, the vast majority of first-year students will not work at a firm during their first summer. For example, the breakdown for the Class of 2007 was as follows:

Judicial Externships -- 27%
Government -- 21%
Public Interest -- 12%
Small Law Firm -- 11%
Academic Position -- 10%
Large Law Firm -- 10%
Business -- 9%

But, that doesn't really tell you all that much. I think what's important to note is that even though a slim minority of first-years do not have a firm job during their first summer, the vast majority of second-year students do get a firm job. Which obviously means that getting a firm job during your second summer does not require that you have one during your first summer.

For example, for the class of 2006, there were 116 people who worked at a firm during their 2L summer. Of these people, only 30 worked at a firm during their 1L summer. Many students externed for a judge (29), did academic research (13) or did public interest work (12). Others worked ih-house, studied abroad or found government positions. And many students combined two positions, such as externing and academic research, or did something else.

The point is this: don't put pressure on yourself to get a firm job this summer on the theory that failing to do so will affect your chances of working at a firm in 2007. If that's your reason, find a better one. This applies across the board regardless of where you want to be at after your second year -- top firm, mediocre firm, big firm, small firm. Someone who externs their first summer does not hurt their chances of working at even the biggest law firm.

Coming Soon: Guerilla Tactics -- Spring OCI Tips

Questions?

If you have any questions about anything related to second semester -- classes, job searching, moot court, law review write-on, etc. (or need some outlines) -- comment on one of the posts or e-mail me at bleiweis@usc.edu

PROPERTY

GENERALLY

Property is often said to be the hardest class during first-year. I think it gets this reputation primarily because the class covers a lot of crap. Usually, professors gloss over many of the concepts but expect you to know them in-depth. And this is why I didn’t find that attending class was that useful.

• Cases are not important to the class because, like Torts and Contracts, they are unique to a particular jurisdiction—they’re merely illustrative, and you should focus on the black-letter law.
• Exception: There are a few Supreme Court cases which matter but those are all at the very end when you study Takings.
• Future Interests and the Rule Against Perpetuities. This is some fun stuff. Unfortunately, most people don’t see it as fun, but rather as horribly excruciating. It will definitely be one of the most annoying things you’ll study. Though it’s not covered too extensively on the test (usually just in the multiple choice section), it does take awhile to understand it.
• Emanuel’s versus Gilbert’s. Everybody gets Gilbert’s. It’s written by Dukeminier, who actually wrote the book that Stone and Altman use, and it’s a solid purchase featuring some sweet flowcharts and good explanations. There’s also an Emanuel’s that’s keyed to the Dukeminier book which some people prefer. Personally, I’d go with Gilbert for use as a quick reference—but I think the Understanding Property book is much better than both in explaining the subject.

KEY STUDY AIDS

• Understanding Property (LexisNexis)—I wouldn’t even read the casebook if I was you. Just look at this book. It’s only worth buying if you buy it early—it’s too long to buy as a last minute study aid.
• There’s also a LexisNexis book called A Student’s Guide to Estates in Land and Future Interests, which explains future interests fairly well. However, it costs about $70—apparently, they haven’t been publishing them too much.
• The Flashcards made by Emanuel’s are also a useful study aids—giving you a series of hypos to help solidify your understanding of each main concept. There’s also flashcards just for Future Interests, but again, I would be hesitant to invest in these because they are so focused on one aspect of a very broad subject area.

PROFESSORS

PROFESSOR STONE

PowerPoint Slides. With sound effects.

• Ideally, you should set up your slides on a document prior to class and edit them as he goes through them in class.

Cases. Occasionally, he gets into cases but you’ll be able to anticipate which ones he’ll get into by the number of slides devoted to the case.

• Initially, he made a big deal of cases and wanted us to brief them and write down who the parties are and what the cause of action is and get really detailed. He ended up only going this much in depth on a one or two cases. There really isn’t that much time in this class to go into all the cases he assigns.

Exam

• Multiple Choice: He will subtract points for wrong answers on the multiple choice section.
• I think about a third of the questions in this section had to do with future interests and the rule against perpetuities.
• Spring 2004:
• Short Answer: Four questions—each one gives you a concept and asks you to define it and explain it to someone not in law school.
• Fact Pattern: Standard fact pattern—spot as many issues as you can.
• Spring 2005:
• Two Fact Patterns.
• Note:
• You need to balance your time between the short answer and the long fact pattern—there’s no break in-between. It will definitely be a time crunch.
• He will ask about concepts rarely discussed in class (e.g., ius tertii). Bring all your study aids to the test, tab them ahead of time so you know where to look. And if you're having trouble finding something, use the index.

Socratic

• He likes to call on people who sit on the sides. The class is in room 101, so I recommend sitting in the back of the rows facing the whiteboard if you don’t want to get called on. I sat in the back row in that section and got called on only once the entire semester (though not going to about half the lectures may have had something to do with it… hmmm… (but also, and actually strengthening this argument, my friend who sat next to me and actually went to class also got called on only once)) People on the sides always got called on. I was given this advice prior to taking the class so apparently it’s something that has been doing for awhile. I'm sure this advice is completely useless to you four weeks into the semester.
• He’s very inconsistent with how many people he calls on each day and whether he even calls on people. But usually he won’t stay on you too long—especially, if you just play dumb and don’t say anything (that’s what my roommate did). He likes people who play along with his jokes—so if you play along, he’ll stay with you longer and probably come back to you.
• No Attendance.

DEAN ALTMAN
sorry, not much of a scoop on this guy, but this is what my friend, Ahmed Sangbana (sangbana@usc.edu), has to say:

• Great Teacher. Class is worth going to because he teaches the material well.
• Straightforward Exams. The exam is straightforward with no surprises.
• Not Socratic.
• No Attendance.

PROFESSOR STOLZENBERG
by Sam Goldberg -- GenGoldy@aol.com

• Know thy policy.
• The test had a short answer portion that had some rather ridiculous hypotheticals that I cannot remember, but recall being rather dicey. O to A then to B and A for life if O isn't human. How can O give to A and B for longer than life and not violate RAP? Seriously, one short answer was something like that. Bottom line--knowing the black letter law was definitely helpful, but being able to be flexible with conceptual ideas would also be good. Obviously that doesn't help, but knowing this ahead of time can help you prepare.
• The essays were like Constitutional Law--property style. I would say it was a writing contest except that I'm sure she looked at some of the ideas in the text as well.
• Most of her class time is spent between rules and standards, and if there is one rule to her test (two years ago), it was that you should have been paying attention. Maybe even ask for an application example from time to time when being confronted with a seemingly vague policy perspective.
• Since it will probably be a closed book test, a thorough understanding of the black letter law is likely not as beneficial as a well polished policy preparation. That being said, of course knowing the black letter law well would be helpful.
• Maybe do a practice test and ask her to review it? Maybe find out what type of music she listens to and play it while going to class? Is Stolzenberg property were a cake: Constitutional Law would be the cake part, LLE the icing, and the sprinkles on top would be property.