1.  I really liked this class and learned a lot. I think Pritchard explains things pretty well -- no ball hiding. He does cold-call but in my class you were only on call one day of the week, e.g. Mondays, etc. The materials say this course is for people with more business background, but frankly I don't really think that's terribly true. He still goes over all the basic stuff like present value and all that, and I thought he was pretty patient if someone didn't understand something. Probably there is more detail on M&A and shareholder litigation vs. in EO. Note that Pritchard doesn't let anyone pass/fail his exams usually. I was annoyed about that at first, but honestly I learned the material pretty well and the exam was really fair. Finally, I think it is nice that this class is usually a lot smaller than EO, it's easier to learn.

2.  I took his Public Corporation last semester. The course is similar to EO, but mainly focuses

on publicly held corporation (corporation with lots of shareholders, such as listed corporation)

rather than close corporation (corporation with just a few shareholders who have large percentage

of shares and actively participate in corporate operations). It also devote considerable time on

agency. Thus, the course covers agency theory, fiduciary duty, shareholders litigation and M&A

(but doesn't cover partnership, LLC, close corporation and piercing corporate veil).


3.  The professor is a strict man. He doesn't allow pass/fail option, and he grades strictly in accordance with the grade curve no matter how small the class is (Thus, at least 10% of the class will get lower grade than C+). He divides the class into three groups and each of the groups may be called on each day of the week (Monday, Group 1; Tuesday, Group 2; ...), and he declares in his syllabus that he will deduct three points from the final exam if you're not prepared on the day you are called. His exam consists of two parts; 35 multiple choices (2 hours) and one essay (1 hour). Multiple choices are the most difficult multiple choice questions I've ever had in my life. It consists of four or five sections, and each section begins with one page fact pattern, then followed by questions, sometimes seasoned with some supplemental fact patterns. Answers given are tricky and hard to spot the right one, going like:

1. Yes, because X did A

2. Yes, because X is a B

3. No, because X did A'

4. No, because X is a B'

But I suppose you don't have to worry so much, because nobody will do it well. When I finished the exam, I thought I would flunk. But, in fact, I got a fair grade though I got only 43 out of 100 points (Class mean was just 40).

Being said all that, I learned a lot in this course. The professor uses Pwerpoint and posts the slide on CTool when he finishes lecturing each chapter. And he is really nice to students when we visit his office in the office hour.


4.  I'm very glad I took this class instead of EO. Pritchard is a great prof and he does a very good job of explaining the material, albeit the exam was VERY HARD (but everyone felt that way, and for the most part the people who were the most prepared did the best so don't let that be a deterrent). He's very socratic, but he divides the class into groups and your group is on call just once a week. As long as you don't think you'll be put off by his dry sense of humor or his bowtie and monogrammed shirts, I would highly recommend this class. Also, I believe they may have added a credit to the class so that it fulfills the ethics requirement, but you should ask Pritchard about that.


5.  Pritchard is a fantastic prof and very funny. The course is excellent and I would recommend it over EO with Khanna (which people like) and EO with Evans (which people hate and you don't learn any of the M&A cass). You don't really need any significant business background to succeed. He is pretty Socratic, but 1/3 of the class is on call each day, so you kind of know when you have to really be ready. The final was fair but hard.


6.  The worst class in law school (I'm graduating this May). The exam was pretty unpleasant (mostly multiple choice, covering very strange areas of the law that we barely covered in class) - I still did well, but it was a nightmare experience. Oh, and Pritchard will not allow you to P/F the class (at least not in the past; I doubt he'd change his mind now).


7.  Avoid it if you can, I think Khanna is a far more effective professor and I'd recommend taking anything in that corp law area with Khanna, not Pritchard.


8.  I really like Pritchard; next year its a 4 credit class, and that might mean they added an ethics component (which is a requirement anyway). He's funny, if not a bit dry, and the class is for ppl who are really going into corporate law. Think of it as advanced EO, focusing only on public corporations, instead of on smaller business forms. The exam was fair; part MC, part essay (2/3 MC, 1/3 essay).


9.  He Is TOUGH


10.  Pritchard is mean and will not let you go to call back interviews without taking a hit on your final grade. SO, I dropped him. He is also wears a bowtie in a nonironic way. Enough said.


10.  Take it. he's tough but you'll learn a lot. EO spends a ton of time on business forms you will never encounter if you work for a medium or large law firm. pritchard is an expert in the field, and Pub Corp was one of the more helpful classes I took while I was here. he's a stickler, but he actually has a heart of gold, and will help outside of class. you'll be challenged, but if you want to do work either in corporate law or in large law firm litigation, you'll want to take pritchard for pubcorp and secreg.


11.  I have Prof. Pritchard now for Civ Pro. I think he's good -- very clear and focused, good at staying on track, and he makes class interesting.


12.  Arguably the best but also the hardest class I've taken. He's a good teacher, incredibly knowledgeable, it's usually around 20 people, and I think you go a little more in-depth with some of the material (especially the DE statutes) than Khanna's EO. But there's a lot of info, it's on a 3.2 curve, you can't pass/fail, and he's kind of a hard ass. Once you get to know him it seems like some of it's for show and he's a bit more funny (dry, sarcastic funny) and good-natured, though the actual substance of the cold calls remains quite tough. You're on call one preset day of the week and you have to be there and prepared only on that day. Depends what you're after: if it's learning corporate law I don't think there's any better, but obviously there are other concerns when picking classes.


13.  Don't take it - pretty bad class. You can learn the same thing with muchless aggravation in EO if you take it with Khanna.


14.  Take Pritchard instead of Khanna unless you are a pussy.  Everyone complaining about Pritchard just has thin skin or is lazy.  He's a genius about the subject matter and the Corporations class is much more useful and relevant than the extra stuff covered in EO.  Also, I wrote the absolute worst exam I have even seen in his class and got an A-.


15.  Just a clarification-- #10 says you get docked if missing for callbacks. I asked about his policy on callbacks, and he said they're considered excused, so no deduction (I'm guessing there's a reasonable limit though). I don't know if that policy has changed since #10 had him, but it shouldn't be the reason you don't take the class.


16. I heard Pritchard was a bad mofo or something in corporate law, so I took the class, but I found him to be not that knowledgeable, or at least not a badass. Also, the exam was incredibly unfair, see above reviews for examples and anecdotes on the exam.  I learned a lot, but just because I studied my ass off for the exam, not because he was a good teacher.


Widget is loading comments...

Make a free website with Yola