I have 6 days left to study and I am done in 9. I've done 5 essays today, only missing a few issues consistently, I'll work on memorizing all of those later on tonight. I'm missing the little bits here and there, but really this is a test on big bits and so I am trying to memorize those. Don't get me wrong there's a LOT of big bits.
Here's a taste of what I have been dealing with these last 11 weeks... Topic: Evidence: Subtopic: Hearsay... (you've all heard of that. "OBJECTION, HEARSAY") Which really means: An out of court statement made to prove the truth of the matter asserted, ya? Well there are 34 exceptions to that rule. Yep - where statements made out of court can in fact be brought in.... So you state IT'S NOT ALLOWED, BUT.... it might fall..... and the spiral begins.
Then in property (today's poison of choice) If you have a restrictive covenant (not allowed to do something with your land) it is supposed to run with the land (meaning when you sell the property, the buyer can't do it either), unless the party did not have notice (which can be obtained expressly in the deed, by word of mouth or by obviousness [no circus tents in your backyard. do you see anyone else with them? SEE it's "obvious" it's not allowed.]) However if you can prove that an equitable servitude exists because of this restricted covenant, specific to you - THEN you can have a circus tent - warranting it is not a private nuisance that disrupts the enjoyment and possession of another's property... or a public nuisance that puts the public's health, safety and well being at risk AND you suffer a unique harm! So, got it? That little paragraph is just a SINGLE rule. That does not include the analysis to the specific facts I would have to go through - nor any of the other 10 issues that are held within one essay question. Rinse and repeat.
Confused yet? The good thing... I'm not.
No comments:
Post a Comment