RGANIZING:
Many Methods, One Goal
Reasons to Organize
• To learn course content
– Organizing forces a focus on content that increases
recall of material
– Grouping cases helps
 Deepen understanding of concepts
 Build associational connections to increase memory
• To highlight analysis process
– Drawing attention to legal rules
– Providing context for legal arguments for analysis and
application to new fact patterns
• To prepare for exams
– Emphasizing thoroughness of analysis in exams
– Increasing speed in writing exams
Choosing a Format
• Start with what has worked for you in past courses.
• Experiment with other methods to see if they facilitate
analysis and application.
• ‘To Outline’ is code for ‘To Organize’
–
–
–
–
–
Outlines are one way to organize, but not useful for everyone.
Flow charts emphasize analysis
Decision trees use questions to aid analysis
Diagrams can reveal relationships among and within concepts
Summary and synthesis statements put the big picture into
words
• Use a structure that simplifies understanding,
emphasizes analysis, and aids memory and application.
Preliminary Questions
• What do you want to accomplish?
– Conceptualize material
– Develop an analysis tool for legal problem solving
– Increase speed
• Which organizing structure meets each goal?
– You may use more than one
– The structure should assist recall and analysis skills.
• Is it more efficient to use an outline created by
someone who knows more than I?
– NO! Making it is a huge part of the value
– Do use table of contents, syllabus, or similar materials
to provide an initial framework or to stimulate ideas
Organizing to Conceptualize
• Main Topics
– Identify the main topics in the course:
 Look at table of contents of book or syllabus to identify
these.
 Usually there are no more than 5-9 main topics.
– Look for:
 How the topics are similar and different
 What distinguishes each topic and what types of factual
situations would trigger use of each
– How do the main topics relate to each other
 Can they occur together?
 Are any topics mutually exclusive?
 Is there an order among topics such that one or some
should be analyzed before others?
– It may be helpful to create a diagram or drawing to
examine the relationships of topics to each other
before structuring your organizing tool.
Subtopics
• Make a list of all legal principles, rules, questions,
public policy issues, and terms.
• Group these using each main topic as a category.
• Within each category sort and include case examples
to help remember applications and arguments.
• Put in an order that reflects what you need
to know to analyze a new set of facts.
Creating a Tool to Guide Problem
Solving
• Remember, the goal of any guide for problem
solving is to assist in legal analysis and in
applying rules to facts
• You may want to include:
– Legal tests and rules (don’t over-simplify)
– Questions to ask of facts to test for elements of
legal rules (don’t stop with clear statements,
identify any legal tensions)
– Case examples for arguments and counter
arguments
– Public policy oriented questions and arguments
– Terms, standards, or criteria used by professor
in class discussion
Examples of Different Structures
**CAVEAT – The following material provides general examples.
These are not intended to teach course content. Use only the
material presented or assigned by your professor.
8
Practical Questions for Creating a
Flow Chart or Decision Tree
• What is a flowchart or decision tree?
– These are ways to organize material. A flow chart points out the sequence of
steps in applying course material. A decision tree sets up questions that can
usually be answered with a yes or no. The answers lead a person through
analysis steps.
• Why would I create one?
– Some students like to express steps of legal analysis steps in graphic form.
• Is it a substitute for an outline?
– It can be – but it can also be an enhancement of parts of an outline.
• What if I don’t learn visually?
– You may want to stick with another format.
• What software can I use?
– Word processing programs usually have a format.
– I like a program called Inspiration – you can check it out at Inspiration.com
– Stop by the office and we can talk more!
Creating a Flowchart
Brainstorm
Created by Ruta Stropus,
DePaul Law School
Go with
the analysis
Contracts
Sample - “Brainstorm” Sheet
List rules/key words/phrases
Promissory Estoppel
Offer
Contract
Acceptance
Consideration
Communication - knowledge
of offer
Void
Voidable
Certainty of terms
Commitment/promise
Termination
Created by Ruta Stropus,
DePaul Law School
11
Contracts
Sample organization of rules/key words/phrases
I. Requirements for contract
A. Offer
1.Commitment/promise
2.Certainty of Terms
3.Communication
4.Termination
Organize
B. Consideration
C.
Acceptance
D. Promissory Estoppel
II. Is contract valid?
A. Void
B. Voidable
Created by Ruta Stropus,
DePaul Law School
12
Contracts
Sample organization of rules/key words/phrases
I. Requirements for contract
A. Offer
1.Commitment/promise
2.Certainty of Terms
3.Communication
4.Termination
Organize
B. Consideration
C.
Acceptance
D. Promissory Estoppel
II. Is contract valid?
A. Void
B. Voidable
Created by Ruta Stropus,
DePaul Law School
13
Contracts Sample Flowchart 1
Is there an
offer?
Has the offer
been communicated?
Do we have
certainty in terms?
Is there a
commitment/promise?
Make sure the offer
has not been terminated
Go with
the analysis
Is there
consideration?
Has the offer
been accepted?
Created by
Ruta Stropus,
DePaul Law
School
Yes
Contract
Make sure K
is not
void or voidable
If no - then
Does Promissory
Estoppel Apply?
No
Are there any
other ways to enforce?
Yes
we can enforce
the contract
14
Contracts - Sample Flowchart 2
UCC or Common Law?
Only Goods?
Only service
or land?
Unclear?
Combination?
Yes
Use UCC
Yes
Use Common Law
Created by Ruta Stropus,
DePaul Law School
What is the
predominate
purpose?
Can we
split the
transaction?
Should we
apply the
Gravamen test?
look at
actors
look at
language used
look at
circumstances
Do we have an
Offer?
is there
definiteness
of terms?
Is this an
invitation to
negotiate?
Does the offer
ask for
acceptance?
What is the
intent of
the offeror?
Look to
Price
Who was the
offer
addressed to?
How did the
offeree interpret
the intent of offeror?
Look to
Quantity
Does offeree
know of others
that got the same
or similar offer?
Can the language
be interpreted
as a
valid offer?
Look to
Time
Is this a
commerical
advertisement?
Is the offer
illusory w/out
commitment?
15
Contracts
Sample Analytic Outline
Step 1 - Is there an offer?
Look to see if all of the following elements exist:
1. Commitment/promise
2. Certainty of Terms
3. Communication
* make sure the offer has not been terminated!
Go with
the analysis
Step 2 - Has the offer been accepted?
1. If yes - then we have a contract
2. If no then try to enforce using promissory
estoppel
Step 3 - Is there consideration?
Step 4 - Make sure the contract is valid
Look to see if it is
1. Automatically Void and/or
2. Voidable by one of the parties
Created by Ruta Stropus,
DePaul Law School
16
Mapping Contracts
Formation
Offer
Consideration
(Promise to do or not do
something definite,
communicated to offeree)
(definition)
Acceptance
(definition)
Clearly not
offer
Clear offer
Lucy
Dohrman
Fairmount
Lefkowitz
Craft
Keller
Owen
Moulton
Harvey
Massee
Which organizing method do you prefer?
•
1.
2.
3.
4.
Get into groups of like types.
Outlining
Flow Charting
Decision Trees
Mapping/Flash Cards
Organize, Use, and Revise
• Try out any or all methods to organize your materials
analytically.
• Apply your organizing product or problem-solving tool to a
problem
• Use the following contracts problem to test your work
• If you needed more materials to answer the problem, add
them.
• If you can re-work your organization to make it more analytic
and more useful as a problem-solving tool, make those
changes.
• Apply your revised problem-solving tool to a different
problem and evaluate its usefulness.
• As you organize, use, and revise your problem-solving tool,
you will be learning your course material. You will also be
learning to take law exams.
PROBLEM I -- (60 POINTS)
Sally hated the Tar Heel lottery, telling everyone who would listen that she was philosophically
opposed to it. Sally’s Uncle Urk loved playing the lottery and was always trying to convince Sally that
it was harmless, exciting fun. One Thursday, when the pot had grown to $40 million, payable in
twenty annual $2 million installments, Urk called Sally saying, “Since tomorrow’s drawing coincides
with your birthday, I’m going to buy you $50 worth of lottery tickets, so you’ll see how much fun it is
to play the lottery. I’ll mail you a check today, but you have to spend it on lottery tickets.” Sally
grumbled, but said “O.K.”
That evening, she told her friend Fred , also a lottery enthusiast, about the conversation. Fred
insisted that if she were ever to play the lottery, she should do it immediately, while the pot was so big.
He also said he had developed a system for picking numbers that was “bound to pay off, soon.”
Saying she was afraid to be seen buying lottery tickets, Sally held out $50 to Fred saying, “If you’ll go
fill out the cards and buy the tickets for me, I’ll give you twenty percent.” “Twenty percent?” Fred
said standing up and grinning, If I pick the numbers, I get half!” They both chuckled as he took the
cash and went out the door.
Adding $10 of his own, Fred bought sixty tickets. He took them all back to Sally’s house saying
he would come back the next evening to watch the drawing with her. He said he would pick out his
tickets from the pile just before the drawing. “That’s when my psychic powers are the greatest!”
The next evening, on his way to Sally’s, Fred’s car was rammed in the rear by a pimply-face
eighteen year old driving his mother’s two million pound car. Fred was not badly hurt, but he never
made it to Sally’s. Just before the drawing, seeing that Fred had not arrived, Sally separated the
tickets into two groups – one group of twenty (designating them as the ten that Fred bought for
himself, plus 20% of her fifty tickets), and the other group of forty (designating them as hers).
As luck (meaning the inventor of this tale) would have it, the winning ticket was in the pile of
forty. When Fred called to say he was in the hospital, Sally screamed, “I won, I won! You picked the
winning number, and it was one of mine! I don’t know how I’ll ever thank you.”
Befuddled, Fred said, “I know how you can thank me – by giving me my half of the winnings.”
Saying she owed Fred nothing, Sally hung up, and her friendship with Fred has never been the same.
On Saturday, Sally received a letter from Urk, saying, “I’ve decided not to buy you the lottery
tickets. It would be unfair of me to try to undermine your principles in such a crass way.”
PART A
A(1). Fred sues Sally seeking, in the alternative, fifty percent, twenty percent, or onesixth of her winnings. He puts forth all viable theories in support of each claim, and Sally
defends each to the hilt. What results are reasonably likely? Explain fully.
A(2). Sally sues Urk for $50. What results are reasonably likely? Explain fully.
PART B
Suppose that after Fred’s suit was filed, Sally received her first $2 million
installment. She went to Fred’s house and found him watching the lottery drawing on TV
with a number of their mutual friends. She said to him, “Look, I feel terrible about all of
this, and I miss your friendship. You may have some moral claim to a share of my
winnings, but what you’re asking is ridiculous. Tell you what, if you’ll drop the lawsuit,
I’ll pay you $50,000 a year for the next five years. Here’s the first payment.” She held
out a check for $50,000 made out to Fred. Fred said, “Well, O.K. I’ve missed you, too.”
Fred took the check, and their friends cheered. That evening, they all celebrated; Fred
bought the pizza.
The next week, Sally received her endorsed but undeposited check in the mail
with a note from Fred saying he couldn’t bring himself to sell out so cheaply.
Sally has based a defense to Fred’s suit on these facts, to which numerous
friends willingly testify. Analyze fully.
Points
Part A(1) F sues S
[approx.]
1.
2.
4
Contract? Intent to be legally bound? Friends, laughter, etc
Claim for 20%, or 50%; key is agreement – offer & accept.
a.
b.
10
c.
d.
3.
4
Indefiniteness: Percentage of tickets or proceeds? [Possible mutual
mistake as to basic fact.]
a.
b.
4.
Can breach be determined? Remedy fashioned? If not, no contract.
Seems proper for S to segregate tix in F’s absence – implied reasonable term. Depends
on importance of F’s exercise of psychic power. Does S have knowledge here based on
prior relationship?
F’s claim for 1/6th: Restitution.
a.
8
b.
4
S’s 20% proposal clear offer.
F’s response re 50%: serious rejection & counteroffer or meaningless joke? Facts
important.
If joke, does S’s offer continue? Probably. She lets him take the $ without comment.
By taking the $ and performing, F accepts.
If S has reason to know of serious counter offer, letting gF take the $ is probably an
acceptance. Facts important here re objective manifestation of intent
Two possibilities for benefit conferred:
i.
Supply ten added tickets may have increased S’s odds of winning, but S segregated
them out, so maybe no benefit received.
ii.
Picking the numbers – service rendered.
iii.
Question: value of benefit? 1/6th? Something else?
Assuming benefit, enrichment unjust? Probably. Clearly, no officiousness;
compensation expected.
i.
Number selection clearly not provided as a gift
ii.
Added tix not intended as a gift
Part A(2) S Sues Urk
1. Key: promise to send $50 enforceable?
2
a) Family promise, may not be intended to bind.
2. Two possible bases for enforcement.
2
6
a.
Consideration. Question: use of $ to buy tix sought in
exchange? Turns on motive. Facts important.
b. Promissory estoppel: did Urk have reason to know she
would rely before receiving the $50? Can injustice be
avoided only through enforcement? She may be rich, but
she is $50 poorer. Facts important
Part B. S defends on basis of conversation re $50K per year
2 1.
2.
Clear offer for accord.
Agreement reached?
a.
b.
4
3.
Accord enforceable?
a.
4
b.
4.
F’s forbearance of claim held in good faith is g/e thing. Clearly
sought by S.
Pre-existing duty rule does not invalidate S’s promise if within the
range of dispute. She admits to F’s moral claim. Is this relevant?
Is 1/80th of her winnings below that? Is her offer coercive?
Statute of frauds satisfied?
a.
b.
10
Offer seek a promise or performance? Indifferent?
Did B accept by saying O.K.? (probably) by endorsing?
Contract clearly not performable in one year.
Memo requirement satisfied? Two possibilities: signature on
check on F’s note.
i. Note seems to admit agreement, and check is evidence of
amount.
ii. 5 year term missing, but lots of credible testimony available.
Organizing class notes, briefs, study group notes, illustrative problems, etc.
by themes and by using analytic frameworks helps identify the
relationships among the details of course materials that create a
conceptual big picture.
Organizing before exams helps students spot exam issues. The big picture
then ‘unpacks’ so that application and analysis on each issue have
sufficient depth. An organizing framework, along with the specific order of
questions asked and the chronology of the fact pattern, helps organize
exam answers.