Thank You Testmasters

Oh my freeking goodness. I never thought this would happen, but stuff I learned in LSAT prep has actually helped me in law school.

[Stop reading if you don't care about technical legal jargon or other law school nonsense]

I'm reading Burnham v. Superior Court of California for CivPro II, in which the Supreme Court was faced with deciding whether service of process that granted jurisdiction over an individual physically present but lacking minimum contacts with a given jurisdiction was compatible with the Due Process Clause. The Petitioner's argument was that since past Court rulings had established that presence was not necessary in order to satisfy Due Process, presence was also not sufficent to satisfy Due Process. The Court ended up ruling against him, noting that the Petitioner had messed up his logic. While presence was not necessary, it was sufficient.

For those of you who have taken Testmasters- doesn't that sound familiar? Holy S&!*#. After I took the LSAT I threw my books in a corner, convinced that I would never need them again. What do you know... I guess sometimes logic does find its way into the law.

Also, shame on the Petitioner's lawyer for not paying better attention in LSAT prep.