1.  Bloodfeuds: Good professor.  No cold calling, just lecturing on ancient Icelandic sagas.  We had 4 quizzes, so you have to do the readings.  No final, just a 10 page paper. He's a pretty entertaining guy.  Some days it was more like watching a stand-up routine than a lecture.  Recommended, especially when you need a break from your typical law class.

2.  hey i took bloodfeuds. workload during the actual school year wasn't bad. don't have to read a ton. the readings are a huge departure from everything else and are really fun. miller loves teaching the class. quizzes aren't too bad if you've read, tho they do focus on small details at points. only thing i would be cautious of is that you have to write a paper for the class. which isn't bad in and of itself, but it is due at the end of finals. or at least it was last year. was tough to juggle it with everything else. however, it may have just been me, b/c i chose to do something not completely based in the readings. may be a simpler route if you do that. still, i recommend it.


3.  Unless you use your priority AND write a super suck-up email to miller, you probably won't get into Faking It as a 1L. However, I heard from a recent graduate that the class is a sure-thing A. Take this advice with a grain of salt though, i rarely find that the "easy A" classes deliver consistently for everyone....


4.  I took Faking It as a 2L (last year). There is a substantial amount of reading for the class (think one moderate-length book per week, or ~200 pages). The class itself is very interesting and I definitely enjoyed it. However, if you feel that reading takes up too much of your time to accommodate the extra load, I would caution against taking it this year. Well, in the grand scheme of things, the reading isn't so bad. It isn't law, so it reads a lot faster. In fact, several of the readings are novels. And you don't have an exam to worry about at the end. One word of warning -many professors will allow you to defer writing your seminar paper until graduation, but Miller gave us a pretty strict deadline. It was a few days after finals wrapped, and the paper was only required to be 10 pages long or so, so it was manageable. I think that most of my advice applies also to Bloodfeuds, with the exception of the nature (and possible length) of the readings.


5.  I would not recommend taking Faking It. I thought that it would be a great break from the typical law school class. I was very disappointed. Miller has a very specific and myopic view. If you are willing to hone everything into a Millerism you ought to do fine, but otherwise it will be hard at times. Miller also does not give very good feedback in the class. You will get some comments on your work but they will be subjective criticisms rather than anything helpful. In addition, Miller has a tendency to say some rather offensive comments in the class, which at times is uncomfortable.


6.  Exam (property) was ridiculous, but class with Miller flew by and was always interesting.


7.  Miller is a funny guy, but we didn't learn much property. Went too slowly in first part of the class and then breezed through the rest, skipping at least a third of the topics in the casebook. Almost never used Socratic method, and spent class telling amusing stories or poking fun at the cases in the casebook. The take-home final exam was basically a few hours of writing an essay of whatever the hell we wanted. Got the best grade of all my classes for superior bullshitting skills, but learned the least.


8.  Class (property) is interesting. Professor Miller brings in a lot of information to help understand the context of the case. To prepare for the exam, definitely get Gilbert's and Flashcards.


9.  I had more fun in this class (bloodfeuds) than in any other course in law school, bar none. Prof. Miller knows the material thoroughly and intrinsically, and it would be difficult to overstate his enthusiasm for the material. The curve, anecdotally, seems as if it may be somewhat capricious; I was well-treated by it (an A), but saw what was judged to be the B paper of a classmate, and really can't see the difference between us.


10.  This is one of those courses that actually changes the way you look at the world. Other law classes claim to do that but Bloodfeuds actually does. I had a strong dislike of Prof. Miller after 1L Property — but in a class that he genuinely enjoys teaching, e.g., Bloodfeuds, he's phenomenal. Screw Evidence, Admin, Crim Pro, and all the other garbage you're "supposed" to take in law school and pick up this class.


11.  Miller is incredible and this course has some of the most interesting reading that I've ever done. No cold-calling or case reading. Grade is based on several short quizzes which ask pretty detailed questions about the sagas (e.g. what color was his cloak?) and a final 10-12 pg. paper.


12.  Had him for property.  Don't think I learned that much, but Miller was hilarious.  


13. Bloodfeuds is awesome and should definitely be taken sometime while you're here. Moderate workload -- a fair amount of reading but once you get used to the Icelandic sagas it goes faster and it's fun and interesting. Non-Socratic, so you don't have that to worry about. Easy paper at the end and no final.

Widget is loading comments...

Make a free website with Yola