Welcome to LearnLawBetter.
Wondering how to prepare for an issue spotter exam?
Not sure what your professor is looking for?
Stay to the end, as I walk you through what you need to do well on your exam.
Don’t forget to hit the like button if you enjoy the episode and click the subscribe
button and bell if you don’t want to miss any future episodes.
Also, place your comments bellow and I’ll get back to you.
Hi, this is Beau Baez, and today I want to discuss the issue spotter exam.
An issue spotter exam is where you are required to primarily spot issues, with very little
emphasis on analysis.
This is different from a racehorse exam, where there are few issues but little time to fully
analyze those issues.
First, you need to understand what is meant by an issue.
An issue is a fact that can be connected to the law you covered in the course.
Here is an example.
A torts final states that “Tony was walking inside a grocery store when he slipped and
fell on water near a display of apples.”
The fact is slipping on water, and the legal issue is negligence.
But that’s not the only issue, as the facts also state that it occurred in a grocery
store, which is connected to the law concerning the duty of care owed by a land owner to those
who enter the land.
Finally, the water on the ground is connected to proximate cause.
Second, an issue includes not only the facts, but also logical inferences from those facts.
Suppose for example that the facts state that Tony had just gotten out of class at
elementary school, and that he slipped in an area that was roped off to the public.
Do you see that the facts never tell us that he was a child, or that he was trespassing?
But those are logical inferences that we can make.
Sure, it’s possible that Tony was a teacher, but it’s more likely that you are being
tested on the special duty rule that applies to children.
Specifically, because Tony was in a roped off area, the issue is whether the child trespasser
doctrine, also called the attractive nuisance doctrine, applies in this case.
Important and unimportant facts.
You need to learn how to distinguish between facts that are connected to the law you covered
in the course, and facts that are there to provide context or are there to purposely
confuse you.
Going back to our example with Tony, the facts are clear that he fell near a display of apples.
The fact that the display was full of apples is irrelevant and merely provide you with some context
to the story.
The exam could easily have stated that he fell near some pears, cereal, or detergent.
Multiple Issues.
Don’t stop with one issue when multiple issues are in the facts.
Let’s consider a contracts exam, where Frank tells Juan that “I will sell you my computer
for $500, unless I change my mind.”
The next day, Juan shows up and says he accepts the offer to buy the computer for $500.”
Under these facts, most students will spot the rule that there is no offer because the
words “unless I change my mind” makes it an illusory promise.
But there are two other issues you need to spot.
One, that the acceptance appears to be valid when Juan accepts the offer.
And two, that the ability to accept an oral offer, like this one, expires shortly after
it is made, and does not survive into the next day.
The learning point here is to go through all the facts, even when you’ve determined that
legally, an earlier issue is dispositive to the case.
If this was a real client, then you would be correct.
But this is a law school exam, not the real world.
Possible Issues.
You need to spot all issues that can be made in court without getting you in trouble with the court.
In the practice of law, you can take a weak case, but not one that is frivolous.
So if you have facts that support a cause of action, but you don’t believe that you would
win at trial, then you should spot this issue on the exam.
Again, the test for spotting issues isn’t whether you will win, but rather does the
issue have at least a low possibility of success at trial.
Analysis and Time.
In an ideal world, you would fully analyze each issue using the IRAC method.
But with a timed exam, that isn’t possible on an issue spotter exam.
When I was a law school Associate Dean, I reviewed many exams and their grading rubrics.
Many exams had dozens of issues, which necessarily meant that the professors weren’t grading
heavily on analysis.
This means you have to move quickly, using IRAC and Nested IRAC, with just a sentence
or two of analysis.
If you start running out of time, just write down the issue and the rule statement, as
that's going to be better than getting a zero for an issue.
Preparation.
The only way to improve is through outlining and practice.
And I don’t mean one practice exam before the final.
I mean, go find the professor’s old exams and take several of them under timed conditions.
Then you will be prepared for the final exam.
If you enjoyed this material, hit the like button.
Also, to avoid missing any future episodes, hit the subscribe and bell buttons.
For more resources to help you get ahead, including my blog and newsletter, check out
LearnLawBetter.com.
Thanks for watching.