Who names these things

Ever since I read about the Uniform Testamentary Additions to Trusts Act, I've been singing "Hakuna UTATA."

Oh well. I won't worry about it--I'll just eat some grubs. Or maybe some TUUNAA.

I need a young priest and an old priest

I never understand how these work. If somebody can figure it out, let me know.

Freaky number guessing website

where the rubber meets the road

One of my favorite things about law school is that you learn a lot about how the world actually works. For example, I used to wonder how exactly corporations do business. Now, after nearly completing Bizzorg, I understand. I have a lot of respect now for transactional lawyers and that special kind of practical creativity they possess. Another example: just last year, I helped my wife resolve a dispute with a seller on eBay who did not want to give a refund after she offered to return a purse that he had described as navy and cream but was actually plain old black and white. We pulled out the UCC, and I explained to him that § 2-711(2)(a) is pretty clear that she gets her money back or we go to court (for the $50 she paid for the purse). He was pretty scared, so we settled out of court for an undisclosed amount.

Well, it has happened again. Recently, my wife's PayPal account got hacked into, and the villain charged up $200 worth of stuff. No biggie . . . except that the bank account tied to the PayPal account did not have $200 in it. So we got charged the $200 plus an NSF fee.* We easily got the money back from PayPal (they actually told us about the hacking in the first place), but the bank was a little tougher to deal with. At first, they said, "You don't get your NSF fee back because it wasn't our fault." My wife's a tough cookie, so she played hardball and we got our money back. Tonight, we were talking about it, and suddenly the mysteries of Article 4 came clear to me. Under § 4-401, we're not liable for the PayPal charges because they weren't authorized. If we're not liable for the PayPal charges, how can we be liable for the resulting NSF fees? It was beautiful.

Did I really just say that?






*Can you imagine that a bank she worked at in college tried to cover the entirety of its overhead from NSF fees? And they were pretty close, too.

See these bags under my eyes?

This is downright amazing. Baylor is ranked number 3 in the nation for most hours spent preparing for class on average. We are highest in Texas, and the only one in the top 25. More interesting, though, perhaps, is a look at the bottom 25, which includes Virginia (147), Harvard (151), UCLA (157), NYU (158), Yale (162), and U of Texas (169!*). But let's look at the real numbers:

• Baylor = 5.68 hours per day spent studying.
• Virginia = 3.77
• Harvard = 3.74
• UCLA = 3.58
• NYU = 3.56
• Yale = 3.50
• U of Texas = 3.23

Wow. I'm really not sure what to think about this.

*Only North Carolina Central is lower, with a paltry 2.52 hours per day.

Fratority of Wet Squishy Shoes

Since when does Waco have monsoons? I left the house this morning dry. By chance, as I walked out the door, I grabbed my umbrella ("it's rather cloudy--rain? Nah--but just in case."). Near the 8th Street exit, it started sprinkling. By the time I was turning right on 5th Street, my windshield wipers were at an ironically ineffective high speed. After pulling into my parking spot, I decided to try to wait out the rain. To my growing dread, the rain started coming down harder and in greater volume and the wind started blowing more violently. If campus had palm trees, it would have felt like Isla Nublar minus the dinosaurs. But resistance is futile; so after a few minutes, I opened my umbrella, slipped on my backpack, and stuck my foot out into Tropical Storm Bizzorg.

As I walked through the parking lot, I held my umbrella perpendicular to my body. Yes. Perpendicular. By the time I reached the building, my head and torso were dry, but my legs below the knees were soppin wet. I've never been in a monsoon before, but apparently the effect on your clothing (if you have an umbrella) is more like wading through knee-deep water than standing in the rain. Putting on dry socks tonight at home was like . . . I don't know. Maybe flying back home in a helicopter after narrowly escaping ingestion by supposed-to-be-extinct reptiles.

Since I don't like to complain without offering a solution, I suggest that BLS convert a room into a giant oven so that the victims of Tropical Storm Bizzorg can dry off, relax, and avoid pneumonia.

Sting'm Jackets

I have been informed that the University of Texas does not claim to have invented football. Rather, the Universities of Oklahoma and Southern California lay this claim. Oklahoma (where the wind comes sweepin' o'er the plain) is one of those unfortunate public schools that got its mascot from some obscure aspect of the state's history. The Sooners? That's right up there with the Hoosiers. Does anybody know if there are more?* As for USC, I've already made my comment. (Incidentally, if HPU could learn the Pythagorean defense and maybe base our offense more on something like Einstein's theory of relativity, we wouldn't have games like this.)

I hope you're still with me. I've been thinking a lot lately about how Texas elects our judges. I used to think it wasn't such a bad idea, but I'm starting to wonder--especially after the episode last week with the Presiding Judge Sharon Keller of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refusing to accept a ten-minute-late petition, with death on the line. I hesitate to align myself with either side of the capital punishment issue, but come on--we're talking about death. There is no appeal from that. Let's at least make sure that we've covered all our bases.




*Note--I do know where the Sooners got their mascot. But what is a "hoosier"?

What a beautiful world

There's a song they're playing on my radio station called "Underdog." The chorus says, "You have no fear of the underdog--that's why you will not survive." This is the weekend of the underdog.

The Yankees are getting smashed by the Indians. UT lost to Oklahoma. USC lost to Stanford (you just can't beat the Pythagorean defense). Call me whatever you like, but I love it when the giants are shaken.

I guess it is a big deal

Listen to this:

Both these [checks] were forged by one Lee, who has been since hanged for forgery.

- Lord Mansfield, Price v. Neal, 3 Burr. 1354, 97 Eng. Rep. 871 (K.B. 1762).

Wow. Sometimes I'm reminded why I'm glad I live in America in 2007 and not in England in 1762. Dang.

Cultural sensitivity

Dadgummit. It's Myanmar and has been since 1989.

Disappointed but not destroyed

Following Poseur's lead, I picked an NL backup team . . . and now I'm lumped with the fans of the Mets, the Tigers, the Brewers, the Dodgers, and the Cardinals--teams that should be in the playoffs but aren't. My backup team was the Padres, and they lost tonight to the Rockies, 9-8 after 13 grueling innings. That means that the once-great Padres, who have everything the Rangers don't*, have stumbled into third place in the NL West and yet another season of what-almost-was. So, please, pity me.

My picks for playoffs (or at least how they should turn out based on relative evilness):

Angels v. Red Sox --> Angels in 6
Yankees v. Indians --> Indians in 6

Phillies v. Rockies --> Phillies in 7
Cubs v. Diamondbacks --> Cubs in 5

Angels v. Indians --> Indians in 6
Phillies v. Cubs --> Phillies in 7

Angels v. Phillies --> Phillies in 4





*Namely, offense and defense, but I prefer pitching so I'll focus on that. Triple-crown winner Jake Peavy, plus two of the (arguably) greatest pitchers alive--Greg Maddux and Trevor Hoffman.

I can see clearly now

A long time ago, I lost that youthful enthusiasm for law school. I think maybe it was September of 1L. But hard work is doing something you don't want to do . . . and keeping on doing it even after it becomes an anti-thrill. In a sense, law school is just that: learning what it means to keep on keeping on.

But I regained a shadow of that former enthusiasm yesterday after Negotiable Instruments. All through 1L, you study cases and learn doctrines that are so abstract and basic that you think either (a) they don't really happen in real life and so are utterly useless or (b) you will never have any grasp on the law as it really is--vast and complex. After a few weeks, 2L has changed those thoughts for me. I'm reading the UCC* and it starts talking about consequential damages, and that means something to me. Or I'm reading the BOC** for Bizzorg*** and LAPP starts bubbling to the surface and I realize that corporate directors are liable only for actual damages and not punitive damages because (1) the rule of implied exclusion and (2) the director relationship is kinda contract-y, and contracts only lead to actual damages, not punitive. Then, the cherry on top of this pedagogical sundae, I have an intelligent discussion by the coffee machine about whether a Marylander can use promissory estoppel to recover damages when we beat him up after promising not to beat him up.****

So I guess the point of this post is twofold. First, if there are any 1Ls who read this, rest assured that it does get better and things will cohere--just not for a long time. Second, to my fellow 2Ls: we're making progress and I can actually start seeing lawyers in each of us. Shame on us.




*If we call the TUPA "toopa," the TRPA "trippa," and the TUUNAA "tuna," then why don't we call the UCC "uck"?

**Most people pronounce this "beeyoSEE," but I propose we change it to "bach."

***Resistance is futile, yo.

****The answer is "Why not just sue for assault and battery and get the punitives p/e blocks?"

From law school dropout . . .

. . . to justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. If you get a chance, read about Stanley Forman Reed, law school transfer who then dropped out but somehow clawed his way to the Supreme Court.

Interesting Thoughts

I've been collecting a few quotes that I wanted to post and comment on, but they stand pretty well on their own. Let me know what you think.

[I]t is much easier for an active mind to acquire the virtues of patience, than for a passive one to assume those of energy.

- John Stuart Mill

El amor no es sólo un sentimiento. Es también un arte.

- Balzac

What is written without effort is in general read without pleasure.

- Samuel Johnson

I'll let you decide whether I read the likes of Mill, Balzac, and Johnson for pleasure.

Go Rangers

Sometimes you just want to hit somebody. Usually you don't.

But sometimes you do.

No stinkin' way

I had to share this. It's a Slate article about a recent study completed that suggests that liberals are more likely to respond to new stimuli in new ways than are conservatives. Anyway--it's an interest read. I don't know how valid his critique of the study is, but I'd be interested if anybody has any comments about it.

Oh--and I'd like to know if you're surprised that liberals are readier to change than conservatives . . .

wOw

Some people say that Texas has one of the most complicated court systems in the world. My limited experience with the Texas judiciary tends to confirm that thesis. I learned something today that doesn't really confirm the superlative-complexity theory, but I think it's pretty amazing: 506 main, trial-level courts of record. And of course, that doesn't include the 254 county courts, the at least 254 JP courts, the numerous county courts-at-law, the occasional county probate court, the occasional county criminal court, the municipal courts, the 14 appellate courts, or the two courts of last resort. So, I guess Texas probably has around 1,000 courts.

wOw

Good laugh

Having had braces and trying to get a job, I thought this was pretty funny:

courtesy of http://indexed.blogspot.com/

Oy vey

My dad is an accountant. Let me just say I'm not surprised. From tax homework:

A taxpayer's attempt to create some black letter law (bathed perhaps in red light) failed when the Tax Court said, in effect: Madame, the wages of sin are not exempt from taxation!

James J. Freeland, et al., Fundamentals of Federal Income Taxation: Cases and Materials, 14th Edition 62 (2006).

How real do you feel, Mrs. Peel?

Over on the Civ Pro Prof Blog, they have an anonymous student blogging about his/her experience as a first-year student in Civil Procedure. Unfortunately, Crash McAvoy (the anonymous 1L) thinks that Civ Pro is about learning to "accept procedural fairness as a substitute for finding the *truth[.]*" (Stars are his/hers.)

As the French say: hélas. Too many people think that procedural fairness and finding the truth are competing values. But the goal of our procedural system is not to be procedurally fair for the sake of procedural fairness. Rather, procedural fairness maximizes the probability of finding the truth. As my hero, John Steed, says so pithily, "Play by the rules or the game is nothing." The game of the legal system is resolving disputes. Finding the truth--and rightly resolving the dispute--when you have two opponents screaming is not an easy task. Civil (and criminal for that matter) procedure attempts to maximize the likelihood that the right party wins and that justice is done.

My (unsolicited) advice: think about civ pro like you think about logic: without it, you might get the right answer, but just because you're lucky.

I can't believe they killed Eko

Wow. First week of classes finished yesterday. Dang. So here's basically how my week went: Get up. Eat breakfast while I read yesterday's Houston Chronicle. (Note--Always tip the delivery guy after he's delivered for awhile.) Go to class. After class. After class. Come home and read. And read. And read. Go to sleep. I thought year 2 was supposed to be easier.

But in e x c e l l e n t news, Madam Registrar sent out a copy of the proposed schedule for this year, and it looks like they're offering Immigration Law in the Winter Quarter, when I can take it. Sometimes you love Baylor Law, sometimes you like it.

That's all I got.

Oh, and today, Poseur's O's were aptly named: their R-H-E line read: "0 0 0." First you lose 30-3. Then you get no-hit by a guy on his second start ever. Ouch.