We only got through one case in my contracts class today. People just couldn't stop asking the most repetitive questions, which is frustrating because during orientation we were specifically told multiple times that anything we didn't get through in class would still be on the final, and that we'd just have to read hundreds of pages the week before we took the test if we didn't keep class moving along. Which brings me quite seamlessly (if I hadn't thrown this seem in, of course) to my next grievance: what was the point of orientation if we didn't learn anything useful and even the stupid little tips we did get are going discarded? I got an email recently asking me to fill out a survey about the usefulness of orientation. I really hope I win the random drawing for the gift card after putting "extremely unhelpful" or "no opinion" for every single response. Don't worry, I explained the reason I didn't have an opinion about so many things was because after realizing how useless everything was, I skipped as much of the procedures as possible. The short response section was challenging because I was asked to reflect upon something they did well. All I could think of was free pizza, but even that was sort of greasy. I doubt they're going to take my advice for how to improve it, since scrapping it will deprive the person who's ONLY JOB is to make sure this event is worthwhile and enjoyable.
So nothing interesting happened in contracts, and I have an hour to kill before my torts class. I already did some reading/briefing during my break and don't really feel like being lawyerly at the moment, so I figured I'd write a bit. But I don't have that much to write about. I guess you'll have to bear with me as I take a bit of stream of consciousness approach.
It used to be that I couldn't write very well with music on in the background. I had a couple of classical stations ready at hand for occasions such as this, but I've been listening to this station by featuring a rapper called Childish Gambino for so long at this point tht I don't even find it distracting any more. He has to be the cleverest writer I've come across, even if he's a bit too explicit for me to recommend to strangers. I never know what the rule is on explicitives these days. On the one hand, I hear elementary school kids throwing around the whole gamut of what were considered extreme when I was their age. High schoolers even swear around their parents on occasion, and frisbee tournaments are a whole conflagration of weird situations. On one side of the YCC fields the heckling and profanity rage wildly, while on the other the parents are trying to find tactful compliments that they cross their fingers and hope are relevant. So maybe there aren't inappropriate lyrics anymore, but the thought of adults (I'm obviously still not an adult) appreciating and laughing at lines playing on the concepts of ejaculation, chauvinism, "hood rivalry" and felatio still makes me grimace. But they are so clever! The artist's name is Donald Glover, and he starred on the tv show Community while also writing comedy for at least one other show. He had a brief part on the show Girls, and probably some other stuff if I bothered to look him upon IMDB. He also does live standup! It's weird, because he's a different person in each of these capacities, and yet another person in the interviews he gives.
We are starting to get into the definition of intent as it relates to tort law, and while it's not ll that different than I was expecting, some of the specific cases are a little interesting. The first we looked at was the one that was responsible for changing the definition from intending the harm to intending to commit an action that was "reasonably certain" to result in harm. This is a much broader definition. So if you intend to harm someone you are liable even if you don't succeed, and if you don't intend to harm someone, but you commit an action intentionally that you reasonably know will have that effect, you are equally liable. In case the second definition needs clarification, I found one case particularly illuminating:
A seven year old was playing in a car lot with two friends. One of the friends was on a ledge, and the little girl forced her off, after which she sustained serious injury. The little girl was certainly not thinking at the time "I want to hurt her;" she just wanted to take her turn on the ledge. But she knew that her actions could (or probably would) result in the girl being hurt. So even though we don't hold children responsible for the intent behind their actions (the reason we have an extreme aversion to assigning the death penalty), the girl was liable for the consequence of her action.
I started writing some poetry just now, but it wasn't coming out right, so I switched to classical. Then I gave up temporarily and moved it into my notes section. Then I realized I have many, many unfinished things in my notes section. Then I realized I have a bunch of stuff that reminds me of Rebecca in my notes section. Then I deliberated over what to do with all that stuff before moving it to the back of my notes section because I don't have any idea what I actually want to do with it. Then I compiled all the unfinished stuff into one big document. Then I remembered I might have actually posted some of it, but also that I have some drafts of posts on my blog site still in the editing phase. So my new mission is to put those into the same big document as well, figure out which things I've posted, delete those, and then put the whole thing into production. But for now, due to having wasted half an hour deliberating and collating, I need to go. So no creative fun stuff today, but steps are being taken, never you fear!
Speaking of steps, by the way, I got a reply to an email I sent about getting access to my scholarships from Magic six or eight years ago. One step closer! (included mostly for mother's benefit-one less thing to nag about)
No comments:
Post a Comment