Using cases in law exams

The Big Red Button

I'm currently studying for a Business Law exam as part of my accountancy exams.

I've done a couple of very similar exams before in college etc, and I've always had a massive problem with remembering the names for the different cases! There are just way too many of them. I have my own little tricks for trying to remember them, like associating the plaintiffs and defendants with people I know with similar names, but I know well that on the day of the exams there'll be a lot of them that I just won't be able to think of.

What I'm wondering is, what's the best way to deal with this in an exam? If I can remember the facts and judgements of a case, but not the names involved? I assume that it's still worth my while writing down what I remember of the case, or would that just look bad that I obviously don't remember the names? And how should I phrase it - just state the facts but make it seem like a hypothetical case used as an example or something like that?

I'm sure I'm not the only one who's had this problem?! Any advice appreciated!

The_Morrigan

chatterpillar wrote: »

I'm currently studying for a Business Law exam as part of my accountancy exams.

I've done a couple of very similar exams before in college etc, and I've always had a massive problem with remembering the names for the different cases! There are just way too many of them. I have my own little tricks for trying to remember them, like associating the plaintiffs and defendants with people I know with similar names, but I know well that on the day of the exams there'll be a lot of them that I just won't be able to think of.

What I'm wondering is, what's the best way to deal with this in an exam? If I can remember the facts and judgements of a case, but not the names involved? I assume that it's still worth my while writing down what I remember of the case, or would that just look bad that I obviously don't remember the names? And how should I phrase it - just state the facts but make it seem like a hypothetical case used as an example or something like that?

I'm sure I'm not the only one who's had this problem?! Any advice appreciated!

I have the same problem, thankfully my lecturers allow us to give the facts of the case with the outcome, so you can apply it to the problem at hand and show you understand what you're trying to say, rather than just quoting a name and leaving it at that!

I do find that when I'm studying I have to write everything out over and over again, and gradually reduce the notes on each case.

NoQuarter

chatterpillar wrote: »

I assume that it's still worth my while writing down what I remember of the case, or would that just look bad that I obviously don't remember the names? And how should I phrase it - just state the facts but make it seem like a hypothetical case used as an example or something like that?

I'm sure I'm not the only one who's had this problem?! Any advice appreciated!

If you forget a name then you can refer to the case as case "x". Never make it sound like a hypothetical case because with law, any opinion you give should be based on a precedent so you would be much better off showing that you know the facts of a real case and forgetting the name rather than just putting in a hypothetical.

you could phrase it like "there is previous case law which also allows whatever..." or "murder is a crime as was decided in a previous case where x killed y" or something along those lines.

With regard to remembering the cases, I just write them over and over and over. eg:

me v. you
jim v. paul
steve v. mike

and write it over and over and over until its in my brain. Also what you should do is have a word that will trigger what the case is about and your brain will fill in the rest eg:

me v. you - bank robbery
jim v. paul - tripped in work
steve v. mike

you get the idea. Once you know or have read the case and you remember that in jim v. paul jim tripped in work you will remember the rest of what happened in the case!

Failing that there is a way of remembering cases by associating the names with places on a journey. its called the journey method so you might find something on google!

good luck!

Milk & Honey

If you cannot think of the name of a case:-
"in a decided case where the following situation arose ... it was held that ....."
If the case is an old non controversial classic, very few facts need be given. If it is a modern and/or controversial case the year level of court, name of judge and a good description of facts are necessary.

The Big Red Button

Thanks guys, some excellent advice there! Some good suggestions of how to phrase it if I forget names, it might make me a little bit less panicky on the day hopefully!

Milk & Honey wrote: »

If the case is an old non controversial classic, very few facts need be given. If it is a modern and/or controversial case the year level of court, name of judge and a good description of facts are necessary.

Thankfully we don't really need to know much detail - we were told that basically all we need for any of them is the names, the very basic facts, and the judgement - literally only a couple of lines on each case altogether. I have no problem at all with remembering all the details, but just have a bit of a mental block when it comes to the names! Fair play to any of you doing proper law exams with a lot more cases to remember, don't know how you manage it!!