T-Swift can sometimes be slightly annoying, but just like Bieber, she does have some catchy songs.  Like this one: We are Never Ever Getting Back Together.

For the record, I would not be surprised if you are cringing at my song choice right now.  But come one...give me a chance.

Happy studying.

We Know Defamation

You might be thinking this is pretty sad – agreed

But defamation needs a catchy tune – you’ll see

This one will not leave your head…like ever

Defamation – it’s a tricky tort – really

The gist is to protect the reputation – and we

Know there are 2 kinds – libel and slander

OOO –false defamatory statement

OO concerning the plaintiff

OOO publication to another

OO fault and damages

I’m telling you telling you

We are 1Ls 1Ls 1Ls

We know defamation

We know that written oral statements

Lead to litigation

Libel’s worse than slander

Cuz it lasts forever – true

Slander’s easy to prove

Special damages assume

We are 1Ls 1Ls 1Ls

We know defamation

Libel equals damages presumed – easy

Libel per se – on its face defamatory

Libel per quod: we need extra facts

Slander- P must prove specific harm – hard to do!

Slander Per Se means it was so bad -- so presumed

Slander per quod – we aren’t tested on this

OOO –false defamatory statement

OO concerning the plaintiff

OOO publication to another

OO fault and damages

I’m telling you telling you

We are 1Ls 1Ls 1Ls

We know defamation

We know that written oral statements

Lead to litigation

Libel’s worse than slander

Cuz it lasts forever – true

Slander’s easy to prove

Special damages assume

We are 1Ls 1Ls 1Ls

We know defamation

Analyze: first thru common law – then to

Constitution: plaintiff and statement – run through

Fault ground? Malice, reckless, negligence

Last in constitutional breakdown – is this

Figure out the damages and don’t dismiss

Privileges like absolute or conditional

OOO –false defamatory statement

OO concerning the plaintiff

OOO publication to another

OO fault and damages

I’m telling you telling you

We are 1Ls 1Ls 1Ls

We know defamation

We know that written oral statements

Lead to litigation

Libel’s worse than slander

Cuz it lasts forever – true

Slander’s easy to prove

Special damages assume

We are 1Ls 1Ls 1Ls

We know defamation

We are 1L's almost 2L's

We'll know defamation

Hey World.

I'm back...just in time for finals.  This time I want to introduce a couple new additions to Fa La Law...

First, you may have noticed the website is looking a little different.  That is the handiwork of my good friend Tyler Roberts, a fellow 1L classmate of mine at Campbell.  He is way more talented at website design/management than I'll ever be, so when he offered to help me out with Fa La Law I was pretty excited.  He's such a class act.  Everyone should know Tyler.  When he runs for office one day I'm just going to go on the record and say that I'll sing his campaign slogans and be his numero uno fan.  Thanks for being the man, Tyler.

Second, my sister Amber, who plays the piano incredibly well helped me out with this song.  It was way too difficult to do on the guitar...and plus it sounds way better on the piano.  Amber is a pharmacy student at Campbell.  We help each other stay sane.  One day she is going to save the world with her medicinal knowledge.  Everyone should have a pharmacist in their family...if for no other reason than to be aware of all the bizarre diseases and medications that can treat them.  I now know more about salmonela and E.coli (she just informed that E.coli should be italicized since it's a species...see what I mean?) than I ever wanted to.

Without further introduction, this song is about the Possessory Estates in Property.  What better way than to learn it through Journey's "Don't Stop Believin'"?

(Words are at the bottom.)

This is nothing new, but it’s a pain for me and you:

Here’s to hoping Journey will make it less lame

There are 5 PE’s—don’t worry I will cover these

But first remember words of purchase and limit

Words of purchase will identify the grantee

Words of limit describe the nature of estate

When you analyze, there’s 4 things to keep in mind

Language, duration, transfer, and future interest too…

This is not easy, but singing it is helping

We may still be 1L’s but we’re not dead yet

So don’t stop believing—remember it’s just property

We can survive this just ignore the debt

FSA is often where the deed says “O to A and heirs”

It can last forever with no limit

If you give it up: we will infer by will, intestate, or transfer

There’s no future interest but that’s ok

Fee tail—here’s the key: “To A and heirs of his body”

It lasts as long as grantee has a blood relative

It automatically goes to blood line of grantee

In the future it will revert or remain

This is not easy, but singing it is helping

We may still be 1L’s but we’re not dead yet

So don’t stop believing—remember it’s just property

We can survive this just ignore the debt

Life estate you will agree: “To A for life” or “life of B”

If “life of B” it’s called “pur autre vie”

On this you could bet your wife: Transfer only during life

In the future it will revert or remain

Now defeasible estates: There are three, don’t hesitate

FSD, Condition Subsequent, EL

FSD: “so long” “until” “during” while” it’s such a thrill

Possibility to revert in future

This is not easy, but singing it is helping

We may still be 1L’s but we’re not dead yet

So don’t stop believing—remember it’s just property

We can survive this just ignore the debt

Condition Subsequent: look for a comma after A

“But if” “On Condition” “Provided that”

Grantor has the ROE, in EL though to 3^rd party

In EL “to A, event, and then to B”

Just a city school; we learn things like black letter rule

Here at Campbell we can go anywhere

Strangers waiting, just for us to represent them

Lawyers, judges here we come!

This is not easy, but singing it is helping

We may still be 1L’s but we’re not dead yet

So don’t stop believing—remember it’s just property

We can survive this just ignore the debt

This is likely going to be my last song.  Let's face it, I think we're all pretty exhausted and worn out at this point of the marathon we call finals.  My creative juices are about dry.

If you have Professor Sawchak for Civ Pro, you will recognize this checklist of questions to ask for determining if a related claim can be heard in federal court under Supp Jurisdiction.  My powers of memorization are lacking so I thought it would be a good topic for a song.

The melody is from Colby Caillat's "Think Good Thoughts."

Supplemental Jurisdiction

1367 of 28 U.S.C.

Is supplemental juris-diction; it’s a biggie

So I’ll tell you how it works

But we’ll summarize it first

When a court has SMJ

It can have “supp”; there’s a way

When there’s related claims

Like state, tort, or contract claims

The fed court can hear them

Supplement, Supplement

A fed court can hear a claim that’s riding along with

Cases that have made it on their own

Sawchak said in class that it’s just like “one stop shopping”

Why waste time, efficiency? So please stop distressing

Supplement is the way to go

Na na na na na na

Na na na na na na na na na

First thing you should ask:

What’s the claim at issue?

If it’s federal, there’s no need to ask these next few

If you answer no, go to section (a)

Where we know that Congress giveth

Courts power to hear it

First, does the anchor claim fall under SMJ?

Next do the added & anchor claims share a common nucleus of operative fact

You’re halfway there to

Supplement, Supplement

A fed court can hear a claim that’s riding along with

Cases that have made it on their own

Sawchak said in class that it’s just like “one stop shopping”

Why waste time, efficiency? So please stop distressing

Supplement is the way to go

Na na na na na na

Na na na na na na na na na

Next is section (b)

Where Congress takes away

If yes to all three

It’s a really sad day

One: is anchor claim diversity only?

Two: is the added claim one by the plaintiff

(3) What rule joined the D à 14 or 20?

If no to all three then

Supplement, Supplement

A fed court can hear a claim that’s riding along with

Cases that have made it on their own

Sawchak said in class that it’s just like “one stop shopping”

Why waste time, efficiency? So please stop distressing

Supplement is the way to go

Na na na na na na

Na na na na na na na na na

I bet we are all just loving our lives right now.  On the bright side, we are 2/5 of the way done.

Here's a song about homicide.  I don't know if it will help you, but enjoy a study break if anything.  I must say it did feel pretty weird writing and singing a song about murder and manslaughter.  I tried to make it sound as opposite Marilyn Manson as possible.  Guy majorly creeps me out.

Homicide (what a lovely title)

We’re almost halfway thru, I don’t know about you

But I want to go back to bed

And then you realize that would be unwise

So you study crim law instead

Well who needs it?  I guess we shouldn’t say that

These crimes may just save our lives

On the exam

Homicide, it seriously kills me

No pun was intended there

Well then again…

Murder and Manslaughter, they’re the 2 to know

Whether C/L or MPC

In C/L murder malice defines the crime

And in manslaughter it’s lacking

Manslaughter has three types:

One is voluntary, aka intentional

Then two are opposite: untintentional

Just read Dressler for the mouthful

Malice equals any of the 4 kinds

They’re actually mental states, the court has ruled:

Intent to kill, GBI, depraved heart, Felony Murder too

Know through and through

PA is great because they produced a way

To divide murder in degrees

1D has statutory, WPD, and even felony

Murders that are left over but still intentional

They are second degree

We studied cases like Bingham and Carroll

They defined W, P, D

Well who needs it?  I guess we shouldn’t say that

These crimes may just save our lives

On the exam

Homicide, it seriously kills me

No pun was intended there

Well then again…

Last approach is what we call MPC

They just had to do their own thing

Here’s the 411, they have 3 classes

Big M, little m, negligent (homicide)

Here’s where it gets tricky

And I honestly want to tear up all of my notes

They start to sound the same but they’re not

Or maybe they are?

Well who needs it?  I guess we shouldn’t say that

These crimes may just save our lives

On the exam

Homicide, it’s sad we have to know this

Good luck on Saturday

(The chorus melody is from Dave Barne's song"Until You."  Giving credit where credit's due...)