Quick question about pulling important info out of cases. What else should I be looking for with regard to what the reasoning was behind why the rulings came out the way they did:
-Precedent
-Current statute
-Public policy (including economic advantage)
Are there more major categories I'm missing or am I just fucked for being subject to the whim of my professors' hypotheticals? I pretty much never feel like I've actually considered EVERYTHING, and that feels like a pretty big flaw.
I was sure I had everything accounted for the other day (agreeing with the opinion), only to have the professor invent some ridiculous argument for the other side that almost started making sense because he was better at arguing it than me. At the end of class he eventually gave in and confessed to agreeing with the majority. How the shit do you develop the skill of learning to think about things you don't already think about?
|