Going by what cases were drilled into my skull during my first year of law school, I’m a little disappointed there’s no Vosburg v. Putney, any of the 500 anti-railroad torts cases, Scott v. Shepherd (this case isn’t really all that important, but I love it because it liberally makes use of the word “squib”), Rylands v. Fletcher, Pennoyer v. Neff, International Shoe v. Washington (no, it has nothing to do with Khurshchev), Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court, Mas v. Perry, Erie (it doesn’t even need more of the actual case name), Chevron, Skidmore, the Benzene case, or any other handle of random procedural or administrative cases that we spent far too many class sessions discussing.

Amazingly, I do know some of the cases. We covered Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly in Civ Pro, I believe in reference to failure to state a claim. We also covered Celotex Corp. v. Catrett in Civ Pro, as a summary judgment issue. And finally, we did Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, again as a summary judgment issue in Civ Pro. Hm. I’m starting to see a trend here.

Though the reason why there were Sippy cups in there to begin with is probably something innocuous, I do like the “maybe people were trying to throw drugs up and over the roof” theory because it made me think of ’80s-era club kids, who probably DID transport drugs in Sippy cups.

Kudos to the ABA Journal, by the way, which ran this story with the fantastic headline, “Sippy Cups Caused Exploding Court Toilets.”

So, imagine my delight when the ABA Journal Twittered that a judge had dismissed a suit against Cap’n Crunch. Apparently, some woman had decided to sue PepsiCo (the owner of whoever makes Cap’n Crunch Crunchberries cereal) on false advertising claims; according to her, the cereal had misled her into believing that crunchberries are fruit and have nutritional value. You can’t make this up. The fact that Judge England, who decided to dismiss the claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (ah, I know ye well), actually wrote a 14-page decision (which you can download at the link) explaining why he dismissed the whole thing makes me, on the one hand, slightly perturbed by the waste of time, but on the other hand, absolutely thrilled that it gave the world such gems as:

“The Crunchberries are pieces of cereal in bright fruit colors, shaped to resemble berries. While close inspection reveals that the Crunchberries on the PDP are not really berries, Plaintiff contends that the colorful Crunchberries, combined with use of the word “berry” in the Product name, convey the message that Cap’n Crunch is not all sugar and starch, but contains redeeming fruit.” 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43127, 2.

“In actuality, the Product contains no berries of any kind.” Id.

“This Court is not aware of, nor has Plaintiff alleged the existence of, any actual fruit referred to as a ‘crunchberry.’” Id. at 8.

“Defendant chose the moniker “Crunchberries” for its brightly colored cereal balls. As far as this Court has been made aware, there is no such fruit growing in the wild or occurring naturally in any part of the world.” Id. at 12.

“The survival of the instant claim would require this Court to ignore all concepts of personal responsibility and common sense. The Court has no intention of allowing that to happen.” Id. at 14.

Here’s the best part: the plaintiff was represented by lawyers who had earlier brought a similar case against Fruit Loops. Would you be surprised if I told you they lost then, too?

First, though, is the question: what is a journal? Basically, pretty much every single (if not actually every single) law school has at least one legal journal. The primary journal is the Law Review. I had originally thought that all the journals were equal, and that Law Review was simply the catch-all of the journals. But, as anyone who you paid attention to President Obama’s campaign biography or has been following along with the vetting of Judge Sotomayor probably knows by now, being an editor on Law Review is quite a prestigious position. Certain slots on the Law Review at my school are specifically for students who “grade on;” basically, it’s those dozen or so students with the best grades of the 1Ls, and this is apparently keeping in line with a long-honored tradition of awarding Law Review membership to the most academically successful students. However, there are also other ways to get onto a journal, most notably by “writing on.” More on that infra.

…oh, yes, I am throwing some random Bluebooking in here.

Depending on the school, there can also be other journals; we have quite a few more, which is actually great because, not only does it mean more students get to work on journals, but since many of these other journals are specialized, more students also get the chance to really focus their journal work in a specialized area. For instance, as someone who is immensely interested in international law, I am hoping, most of all, to get on our international legal journal.

So, then, how does one get onto a journal? Well, I can only speak with specificity about my own experience, but from what I have heard, the concept of “writing on” is absolutely common. Here’s how the process went for me: the same day I finished my last final of the semester (and of the year!), I got access to download the journal competition packet, a 100+-page beast of legal entanglements. Inside, there were several cases, some legislative materials (both domestic and international), and a whole bunch of scholarly articles. The assignment was to read all these materials and write an approximately five-page Comment about the topic in question (the Eighth Amendment and the juvenile criminal justice system, in this case). Amazingly, we needn’t have used all the materials, which was a relief, as most of them were incredibly repetitive.

Anyway, the basic point of this writing exercise is two-fold. First, the journal editors want to make sure you can both write coherently and construct a cohesive, well-supported argument. Since all you can use are the materials provided–this is a closed universe sort of thing–everyone is presumably starting at the same level with the same information in an attempt to equalize the playing field. It was difficult not to do outside research or bring in too much outside knowledge, but at the same time, five pages is not a lot of room to get too many points across. As my packet stated in bold letters, the exercise is not meant to be an “issue spotter” like exams normally are, so, while there had to be an argument, it didn’t need to be an argument about everything. That being said, I just need to recommend taking as much time as you can with the Comment. Take a few days off after exams, maybe work on spiffing up your resume, then start writing, as it will take up a lot more time than you think. And since there are so many materials, and so many subjects about which to write, it’s better to be able to parse out the one you feel most strongly about ahead of time instead of discovering it 3/4 of the way through a different argument that you’ve started.

Second, at least for my school, the journal editors also want to see that the applicants can do proper Bluebooking. I will cover Bluebooking in a later post, so suffice it to say now that it is a method of legal citation/medieval torture. Not only did the Bluebooking in our endnotes (oh, yes, those were part of the Comment as well) have to be correct, but there was a whole separate Bluebooking exercise that was, for the most part, insanely convoluted and full of random exceptions that pretty much only someone who read the Blueboom cover-to-cover, which I had to end up doing, could have caught. So, word to the wise: when you have to learn how to Bluebook, learn the bejesus out if to save yourself a lot of trouble in the long-run.

Additionally, and I have no idea if this applies at all schools, we had to submit a resume and a personal statement. It’s as menial as it seems, but at least you can use both to make yourself stand out a little bit more if you haven’t got confidence in your Comment.

So, then what is this all for? What does one exactly do on a journal? I…don’t really know, actually. I know that rising 2Ls have to write a book review for the fall, and that for the most part, the 2L year is full of proofreading and cite-checking with that accursed Bluebook. Hopefully, I will get on a journal, so I’ll be able to actually say what it is the staff editors do. Until then, all I can say is: it better be worth it, because I was definitely so delusional towards the end of the competition that I actually voluntarily re-watched an old Oprah episode just to re-learn Suze Orman’s tips for cutting down debt.

In a way, it was kind of good. Everyone writes about 1L. The highs, the lows, the stress, the nagging feeling that law school was the worst idea ever and oh my God what did I get myself into all I wanted was to learn the law and become a lawyer what is this consideration bullshit there’s no sense to all of this what the hell…you get the idea. In the thick of it, it’s difficult to realize that any of it makes sense, but a few days removed from my last exam, I can look back and say: yeah, it was all ridiculous, but at least I know there was some abstract point to it.

Overall, I plan on focusing on all the stuff that happens during 2L and 3L (and maybe even beyond), the stuff that isn’t covered as extensively. Honestly, I am going into this kind of blind; I’m the first person in my family to attend law school, and I literally don’t know any lawyers. Besides the parents of the people I’ve met in law school. Hell, most of my non-law school friends are in or are planning on going to med school. So as I learn, you learn (or point and laugh). And as I explore the law in a much more substantive way than just marathoning Law & Order, I’ll share most if not all of it on here.

I’ll still write about 1L; it’s a little difficult not to. And technically, my first year isn’t over, as I’ve still got the journal competition to do and my summer jobs to attend to.  But I did finish my last exam of the year on Wednesday, so it feels like I’m done. So, I’ve chosen today, the day I moved out of my dorm room, as a comprise between the two. to serve as the momentous occasion for starting this blawg .

…and I promise I won’t say “blawg” a lot.