Non-Comic: Rants and Rambling

If I ever schedule three finals in two days again, someone shoot me in the head. Clearly I'm not using it.

(Disclaimer: Not necessary, I have one semester left and already checked my exam dates multiple times. I'm a dipshit, but I LEARN, thank you.

That is, assuming I pass.)

Anyway, for the curious, the three finals I have are Immigration Law tomorrow at 6:00 pm (studying now, starting to get confident), Bankruptcy on Wednesday at 9:00 am (...less confident) and Future Estates Drafting on Wednesday at 1:30 pm. (Eeek.)

I'm actually best at FE, normally, and the test shouldn't be that bad. But I do have to make sure I brush up on all the special rules like Shelley's and Doctrine of Worthier Title, and fucking Wild's which I NEVER remember.

I'm actually okay with the CONCEPTS, but I have trouble keeping the names straight. Which will be fun considering the drafting portion of the test is all "Draft a conveyance that uses Shelley's rule."

Bankruptcy is my worst subject, and I totally didn't pay enough attention during class, but I spent the most time studying on it. (On advice of a friend, I studied for my worst, latest exam first, then the more recent. Seems to be working.) Also, it's open book and trusty friend/victim Matt also lent me his outline which is so much better than mine that it's pretty fucking sad. And the text book is red. This is meaningless to you, but I've found in my lawschool that the law text books range from brown (terrible, no explanation, drawn out cases), blue (case heavy, but some explanation) and red (awesome and actually tells you why this shit matters).

Immigration Law is somewhere in between. The exam'll be all multiple choice and closed book (blue!). That could be good, but it could also be bad, since I really don't know how he tests. But I've at least got a good memory for concepts. The closed-book thing may be a benefit as the INA (immigration statute) is scattered all to fuck. As an example, marriage fraud gets covered under 237 and 216. For no real reason that I can figure out, except that it seems like whenever Congress passes some new immigration law, they just shove the damn thing wherever in the code. Open book, meaning actually having to find/quote the requisite statute with no margin for error, would be a son of a bitch.

The Professor also actually practices, which seems like a rarity in law school professors. This means he's possibly not as organized a lecturer, but what he talks about is actually relevant.

I possibly know way more about quotas than I ever wanted to, but hey, at least it's interesting.

So yeah. That's what I'm up to. On thursday, I plan to sleep and do NOTHING ELSE. (Except study for my last exam, but that's Monday! Ages away!)