1L - First Year Lesson Topics

This lesson covers the basic Constitutional doctrine of state action. This lesson can be used to prepare for class or as a review of Constitutional doctrine.

This lesson is designed to cover how to distinguish legally relevant facts, contextually relevant facts, and nonrelevant facts; plus, how to use each of those types of facts. It is also designed to cover beginning and organizing a statement of facts, writing facts briefly and readably, stating facts objectively, and stating facts persuasively.

The Statute of Frauds is among the defenses to contract formation. This exercise assists the student in determining whether a transaction is within the statute of frauds, whether the agreement is evidenced by a writing, and whether an exception applies.

This lesson assumes you are familiar with the requirement of consideration and the rule that past consideration is not good consideration. Ordinarily, a promise is legally binding only if that promise is supported by a consideration. As the student may recall, "past consideration" is a misnomer. If a party makes a promise to pay for a benefit previously conferred, there is no consideration for the promise because the benefit was not bargained for in exchange for the promise. This lesson covers one of the exceptions to this general rule.

This lesson introduces the student to the doctrine and processes involved in interpreting state and federal statutes. Statutes are a critical part of every substantive area of the law, so this is important background for every student, legal professional, lawyer and judge.

Strict liability for animals is one of the oldest forms of strict liability in tort law. The topic concerns the problems that arise with both trespassing animals and attacking animals. This lesson discusses and illustrates the rules that apply to that area.

This podcast discusses material that is also covered in Prof. Eades' two CALI lessons Strict Liability and Animals and Strict Liability: Abnormally Dangerous and Ultrahazardous Activities

Strict liability for dangerous activities began with the English case of Rylands v. Fletcher. The First Restatement and the Second Restatement both contained provisions for a similar form of such strict liability and such liability is widely recognized in the United States. This lesson explains and uses examples to explain and then compare and contrast those different theories. In addition, this lesson covers the basic limitations on that form of strict liability.

This lesson gives best practices on whether and how to form a law school study group.

This lesson introduces students to subject specific treatises, a type of secondary resource particularly helpful when conducting legal research in an unfamiliar area of law.

If a contracting party does not complete performance, that party is in breach. But if the party has given most of the promised performance, there may be substantial performance. Another way of saying this is that the breach is not material. This lesson examines the grounds for determining whether a breach is material and explores the consequences if it is. The lesson can be run either as an introduction to substantial performance or as a review after you have completed your study.

This lesson covers the basics of both spousal and child support jurisdiction. It is intended as an introduction to the materials and it can also be used for review.

This exercise is designed as a review for students taking the basic first year course in criminal law. Suspendatur! (Latin for “let him be hanged”, the final entry in medieval plea rolls in capital cases) is patterned after the familiar game of hangman, in which each wrong answer adds a part to a stick figure on the gibbet. The student must answer multiple choice and true-false questions based on hypothetical situations. Each right or wrong answer provides substantive feedback in what aims to be at least a mildly humorous fashion.

This lesson is the third of several addressing the various relationships resulting in the concurrent ownership of property. It is designed to introduce Property students to this tenancy form. The lesson progresses from addressing the traditional elements required to create a tenancy by the entirety, the resulting right of survivorship and the events severing the tenancy. Also, it deals with the status of the tenancy by the entirety under modern statutes.

This lesson is the second of several addressing the various relationships resulting in the concurrent ownership of property. It is designed to introduce Property students to this tenancy form. The interactive tutorial progresses from addressing the traditional requirements to create a tenancy in common, the lack of right of survivorship and the status of the tenancy in common under modern statutes.

This lesson explores the myriad ways in which easements may be terminated. It begins by focusing on express termination, the most effective way to terminate an easement when the holder of the benefit of the easement agrees to terminate it. The bulk of the interactive tutorial deals with the more complicated problem of termination without the express consent of the benefitted party.

This lesson covers secondary resources useful for Texas-specific research including the state legal encyclopedia, state treatises, state practice materials, state form books, and state legal periodicals. Popular resources such as Texas Jurisprudence III and Dorsaneo's will be covered. This lesson also contains information on searching Texas library catalogs and research guides.

This lesson deals with third party beneficiary contracts. The initial questions in this exercise are intended to familiarize students with the various types of contract beneficiaries. Since there is no general agreement on terminology, the questions test the students on both the First Restatement of Contracts types, i.e., creditor, donee, and incidental, and the Second Restatement of Contract types, i.e., intended and incidental. Subsequent questions deal with vesting of contract beneficiaries' rights and with defenses which can be asserted by a promisor against a beneficiary.