Harvard Law School launched its first online course on January 31st, 2013, enabling hundreds of individuals to participate in a Copyright course taught by Law School professor William W. Fisher, II. About 500 students were chosen out of 4,100 that applied and Fisher stated that “We were looking for commitment, people who would be engaged and follow through, and diversity in many dimensions, including profession, age, field and geography. We got it.”

Even if students are practicing a lot, typically they hate to evaluate their own work. Why? Well, because it is kind of a miserable experience! Who likes to beat themselves up about the things they did wrong? Not me (and I am sure not you either).
But it is important. Each time you do practice, you need to be thoughtfully evaluating your work as you go and after you are done.

Why else is this self-evaluation important? Because you won’t have someone there on test day to tell you whether you did it right. You are the only one who can help you. So it is important to think through your work and decide whether it is good or not. Because on test day, you are all you have got to rely on!
What do I mean by self-evaluation?
If you are working on an essay exam . . .
When you are done with a question, ask yourself the following (and also compare your answer with the sample answer).

Originally posted on Courtoons

Kent H.Barnett of Georgia has written To the Victor Goes the Toil--Remedies for Regulated Parties in Separation-of-Powers Litigation, in which he mentions the Big Spring case over the validity of the president's recess appointments, including to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  Here's the abstract:
The U.S. Constitution imposes three key limits on the design of federal agencies. It constrains how agency officers are appointed, the extent of their independence from the President, and the range of issues that they can decide. Scholars have trumpeted the importance of these safeguards with soaring rhetoric. And the Supreme Court has permitted regulated parties to vindicate these safeguards through implied private rights of action under the Constitution. Regulated parties, for their part, have been successfully challenging agency structure with increased frequency.

Oprah Winfrey has about 14.5 million followers. The president - over 21 million. Just Bieber? Over 29 million.

However, Twitter is suing companies claiming that it violated its terms of service agreement by selling followers, among other things.

Followers can be purchased on eBay and other websites for as little as $18 for 1,000 followers, according to the e-security firm Barracuda Labs.

With over 140 million active users, twitters overall scheme is to promote following.

Twitter's lawsuit, claims the defendants violated its terms of service policy, which prohibits "using or promoting third party sites that claim to generate followers"." This includes sites that promote "more followers fast" or any side that offers to automatically add followers to your account.

The subject matter waiver doctrine posits that a client's offer of his or his attorney's testimony as to a specific attorney-client communication waives the attorney-client privilege for all other communications on the same subject matter.  Generally, the doctrine arises in litigation where a party discloses some art of privileged communications yet still wishes to keep privileged some other parts.  Application of the subject matter waiver, however, raises different concerns when the privileged comunications are disclosed in an extrajudicial setting, such as during business or commercial transaction negotiations.  The Illinois Supreme Court held recently in Center Partners, Ltd. v. Growth Head GP, LLC, No. 113107 (November 29, 2012), "that subject matter waiver does not apply to the extrajudicial disclosure of attorney-client communications not thereafter used by the client to gain an adversarial advantage in litigation."  

Let’s talk about how to analyze a sample law school exam question. This fact pattern is super simplified, on purpose.
As we’ll see, the key is asking and exploring the right questions, not arriving at the “right” answers.

The Question

More employees set to benefit from EMI options
Osborne Clarke
Although Budget proposals announced earlier this year indicated there would be an increase in the number of people eligible to claim Entrepreneur’s Relief, the draft proposals released this week have extended the eligibility criteria much further than many believed they would. According to the draft proposals, an employee who disposes of shares obtained under an Enterprise Management Incentive scheme can claim Entrepreneur’s Relief on any benefit they obtain, providing they have held the shares for the twelve month qualifying period.
The draft proposals also state that this extension of eligibility for Entrepreneur’s Relief will apply regardless of whether the shares where obtained at market value or at a discounted rate. Shareholders must normally hold at least 5% of the company’s shares to qualify for Entrepreneur’s Relief so this amendment will result in an increase in the number of people eligible to claim Entrepreneur’s Relief and reduce their tax liability.

One of my favorite law school professors was fond of saying:
There’s good confusion, and there’s bad confusion. Which one is it?
when a student admitted to being confused about something. This reply was met with more than a few blank stares, but ultimately it’s a helpful concept.