Anyone have any of these Profs in the past?

[xj1998]

Cherie Metcalf, Micheal Pratt, Benjamin Ewing, Mohammed Khimji, Mary Maur. If so what do they look for on exams? 

[colecaufield]

Metcalf is awesome. I loved her in public and conlaw. Her exams are just fact patterns but are super fair. Ewing is like hit or miss, some love and some hate. He's super theoretical and sometimes goes over time but not a bad prof by any stretch of the imagination. His final was a bit of a bitch time-wise but I did well so I'm not gonna start complaining. Maur is hit or miss but like x1000000. I personally loved her for torts but I have had friends/classmates who weren't big fans. The one good thing about Maur is that she seems to be most in touch with what it's like to be a law student so her readings were always manageable. Her final/midterm weren't particularly hard and are also weighed a bit less since she has you do a case brief and a memo. Good luck!

[QueensDenning]

Pratt is also very hit or miss. Likes to get deep into the weeds of things, and is very particular. He's the type of prof that cares more about you getting the right answer than how you got to the answer (which is the opposite of how most profs mark, in my experience). For a Pratt exam, you want to get the answer to the issues and move on, rather than blabbing and citing every case that might be tangentially relevant. 

For the others, what @colecaufield said is consistent with my experiences. 

Edited September 1, 2022 by QueensDenning

[michaelross]

metcalf is the best!!!!!!!

[Scrivener]

On 9/1/2022 at 11:59 AM, QueensDenning said:

Pratt is also very hit or miss. Likes to get deep into the weeds of things, and is very particular. He's the type of prof that cares more about you getting the right answer than how you got to the answer (which is the opposite of how most profs mark, in my experience). For a Pratt exam, you want to get the answer to the issues and move on, rather than blabbing and citing every case that might be tangentially relevant. 

Pratt wants you to be clear about your ultimate answer, and definitely doesn't want the numerous citations, but he still seems interested in how you got the answer. When a student asks a thoughtful question - whether in class, or by email - he appreciates and enjoys it. He taught Remedies in Winter 2023, and talked about a lot of decisions he disagreed with. Philosophical tangents are sort of his thing. While he doesn't require you to cite the case for a precedent so long has you have the precedent right, being able to discuss decisions is a great thing with him... but do be clear about what your final answer is. Don't leave it up in the air for the exam. There are a number of situations where he acknowledges a decision could have gone either way, and while he primarily wants to know which way you would go as @QueensDenning says, he's still interested in your philosophical tangent if you have one.

- Additional note: there was no textbook for Remedies; he puts all the readings into one large PDF, then creates weekly 'Overviews' with case quotes. He does not use slides, and is fond of writing equations using Greek letters on the chalkboard... pi = "plaintiff", delta = "defendant"

 

Ewing can be polarizing because he speaks in the language of a very pretentious theoretical paper - that's just his comfort zone - but he does it with a gentleness and enthusiasm that is quite endearing. He's a very kind, considerate person that is willing to invest a fair bit of time and effort in assisting his students outside of class time if they ask for it. Asking questions in class can be hit-or-miss as he does seem to be on a different wavelength (there were many times that he seemed to give the answer to a different question than what was asked), but emailed questions are met with lengthy, detailed answers that are more on point. I didn't find his exam to be a problem time-wise, or to contain any tricks. 

- Additional note: his slides for Criminal Procedure are clean and thorough. He assigns a fair bit of reading from the text which I couldn't manage at the time due to my own life circumstances, but with attending (most) classes and reading the slides, made it through with a B+.

[Monophobia]

Anyone care to share thoughts on the following professors: Daryl Robinson, Lynne Hanson, David Freedman, Hugo Choquette, and Colin Grey?

Much appreciated! 

[sarcasticlemon]

On 8/9/2023 at 6:27 PM, Monophobia said:

Anyone care to share thoughts on the following professors: Daryl Robinson, Lynne Hanson, David Freedman, Hugo Choquette, and Colin Grey?

Much appreciated! 

Freedman is hilarious but he can be a tough marker. Entertaining lectures tho sometimes it can be hard to know what to focus on when dodging tangents. I’m guessing it’s for property? If so he’ll probably focus on trusts and estates since that’s what he practises in outside of teaching. Also he doesn’t use a textbook and just links the cases which is a great money savings
 

Hugo is great. If you are doing ILS tho, your section leader person is actually the one you’ll probably interact with more. 

Edited August 13, 2023 by sarcasticlemon

[Slothrop]

On 8/9/2023 at 6:27 PM, Monophobia said:

Anyone care to share thoughts on the following professors: Daryl Robinson, Lynne Hanson, David Freedman, Hugo Choquette, and Colin Grey?

Much appreciated! 

Lynne Hanson is fantastic. Incredibly engaging prof that actively cares about her students and their success. She's great to have in 1L. 

I didn't have any of the others besides Hugo Choquette, which as the other poster mentioned you won't really interact with that much unless he is your ILS tutorial leader. 

[Eathwens]

On 8/9/2023 at 6:27 PM, Monophobia said:

Anyone care to share thoughts on the following professors: Daryl Robinson, Lynne Hanson, David Freedman, Hugo Choquette, and Colin Grey?

Much appreciated! 

Grey seems new so its unlikely you will find information. However, I've had Hanson. Very nice, and straightforward. Just do the readings and attend class (her slides are straightforward and clarify everything). I wouldn't really worry about the notes, we didn't really do any of the notes and often skipped over them. If you need to them they will be in the slides. Apart from that just make sure you participate, it can make a difference between a B+ and A-.