Straight From the Horse's Mouth: Fall 2008
Here is your fall 2008 professor quotes thread. While perhaps not as thorough as last year, I have posted in the comments my collection of this semester's notable moments. If you have contributions, please share them. They tend to make my day.
Labels: Professor Quotes
posted by Patrick Bageant at 2:15 PM
24 Comments:
Income Taxation (Prof. ER):
. . this hypothetical person likes bobbles. She is unabashedly meretricious in her personal preferences, and she likes, she likes bling.
An example is Microsoft. Despite its inferior product, it has been able to make money.
If there is one thing I want you to take away from this class, it is this: a tax deferred is a tax reduced. Now, that’s not always true, but I want to take it away anyway.
The tax code favors *consumers* of insurance, perhaps because that is a less visible than if the government wrote big checks to insurance companies.
Life insurance is like a windfall. It’s like a prize – you dad died, you win a prize!
Life insurance. It’s like saying: “I’m going to bet every single year that I die in the next 12 months. Eventually, I win!”
Professor: Why does the government tax gambling proceeds, but not life insurance proceeds?
Student: Well, the tax code definitely favors one activity over the other.
Professor: They favor dying over gambling? Well, in that case we ought to be subsidizing smoking too . . . The question is why? Some people take their gambling very seriously, and they do not enjoy it. Have you ever walked through a casino, especially in Reno, and looked at the elderly people frittering away their last scraps of savings in the slot machines. They do not look very happy. But maybe they hide their joy well.
[To student] You are thinking the right way: you are thinking, “how can I game the system?”
If you have an annuity and then die early, you lose doubly. One, you’re dead, two, you do not get a return on your investment.
The simple approach is better because a lot of people are simple.
The taxpayer lost. The government said, “Too bad. We do not worry about individuals in this great country.”
Justice Douglass was the only consistent Supreme Court Justice in tax matters. He never, ever voted for the government. Not once. He always sided with the taxpayer. That’s what I call a principled approach to tax law. [But see 370 U.S. 65.]
Embezzlement. For tax purposes, think of it as a self-declared bonus.
The Defendant broke the law, embezzled money, the IRS came after him, and then he made a hurried move to Brazil. To me, the only important question from this case is: Why on earth did he come back?
This is all part of my larger tax-based argument against marrying someone who is like yourself. I’ve prepared some handouts, which are in the packet – we’ll get to it later.
Student: You said two people living together can claim 500k in deductions (250 each). Can it be more than two people? Can three people claim 750k?
Professor: Oh, yes. It can be any number of people. Many lifestyles flourish in California.
[Two days after the stock market collapsed] Cottage Savings is a case about savings and loans. In the 1980’s lenders made, believe it or not dodgy loans to homeowners.
This case was decided in 1931—not among the brighter days of the U.S. Supreme Court. How can you possibly justify this result? Yet this is what they produced. It’s embarrassing, but it’s what they produced.
This is what you do as a tax lawyer: you try to muddy the water. You try to put a decent interval of time -- or whatever else you can find -- between your client’s activity and the relevant event.
[Late October] Okay, now we are going to move on and talk about . . . taxes.
I live in a small, cohesive, affluent community. Actually I don't. I live in Berkeley.
UPS and FedEx, companies from which we all benefit -- richly -- could not carry out their business if they did not park illegally. Think about it. How could they deliver packages throughout a city without parking illegally? They couldn't. And if they tried, we would all suffer. So, instead they incur the tickets. But the municipalities, by characterizing parking tickets as a "fine" and not a "fee" render them non-deductible. That's absurd. UPS and FedEx factor the expense into their cost of doing business, adjust their prices to cover the expense, and the result is that the public has to pay more for packages. It's stupid. It's absurd.
. . . and then Congress goes all moralistic on us and passes legislation like the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Maybe that's overly cynical -- maybe some good has come from that Act. But I'm not sure.
This is how tax law works: Congress passes some sort of moralistic legislation designed to appeal to and pacify the uneducated masses, and sophisticated parties adjust their practices accordingly. That produces a ripple effect, which keeps attorneys employed, keeps the public feeling cozy, and keeps the wealthy people wealthy. Everybody’s happy. Well, everybody except the academics.
Why does the § 1250 recapture rule for real estate have so much less bite than the comparable rules that apply to other groups? That’s easy. The answer is that the real estate lobby is very powerful.
California Constitutional Law (Visiting Adjuncts):
Patrick, to Practitioner-Instructor: "Well, I don't think we should dismiss states' rights out of hand. I mean, the basic rule is that unless the Federal Constitution takes it away, it belongs to the states."
Practitioner-Instructor: "What are you, some kind of pre-Fourteenth Amendment anti-reconstructionist?"
"You'll find your opportunities as an academic multiply the moment you begin to take stupid arguments seriously."
Civil Procedure II (Visiting Prof. TG):
Patrick, to Professor: "Can't someone get around this kind of summons problem with a creative application of the joinder rules?"
Professor: "No. You're completely forgetting Civ Pro I." [zing!]
I have decided to reschedule my office hours for next week. Not that any of you will notice.
Legal Profession (JS):
I have a policy of ‘no drinking while actually in class.’ I realize that may create an incentive to chug at the door, but so be it.
The price of law school, and the cost of passing the bar, can all be seen as all examples of protectionism in the legal profession. You are all being scammed. But do not worry – soon you will be in on it, too.
At graduation this year, which was full of protestors, I noticed that the 3L’s had Berkeley down, pat. “Grandma,” they were saying, “Go stand next to the guy in the orange jumpsuit so I can take a picture!”
The doctor who missed the aneurism was Paul Blank. Remember Doctor Blank? From the Tolgsdad case, the guy who left the clamp on too long and gave the guy brain damage? Yeah – same guy. He has not one, but TWO famous, seminal medical malpractice cases in torts casebooks.
[Asks student a yes-or-no question]
[Student mumbles something long and incomprehensible]
Okay. I’m going to move to strike that as non-responsive. Yes or no?
Corporations (Prof. RB):
"A student phoned me once, from outside of a board meeting, and asked me a question about a technical point of corporate law. But how the hell do I know the answer?! So I have to say, I responded brilliantly – I hung up the phone in mid-sentence, and looked it up quickly in a book. Then I called him back with the answer. But if you do this, you have to remember whom you do it to, because it will only work on each person once – they'll catch on the next time."
Wow, funny. And that's quite a heavy course load you've got there. Good luck with finals!
Con Law (Prof. GL)
GL: Calls [name]
Student: I think that’s me. I have two last names
GL: What’s your other last name
Student: R---
GL: (looks through role) I’ll get to you later
GL: How do you guys get airbears to work in here?
Student: You don’t
GL: No wonder you guys are paying attention
International Humanitarian Law (KJ)
If you fly into another country and start shooting up their airport….you have to have a reason to start doing that
Russia’s not here. She had to go to a wedding.
Property Prof (LV)
Student: What does it mean to die intestate?
Professor, straight faced: It means you die without testicles.
you missed one of my favorite ER tax quotes from the first day:
Tax used to be a required subject. Then “paternalism fell out of favor, restraints were lifted, and basically society went to hell.”
I might be botching this one a bit. I thought I had it written down in my notes, but can't find it. Anyway . . .
Con Law II: Structure (JY)
"Buying someone a ring or flowers or presents is a way to build trust. You're basically saying, 'I like you enough to waste resources on you.'"
Civil Procedure I (DBO)
I hope you guys enjoyed reading The Buffalo Creek Disaster. It's a great story about a terrible tragedy. Boy, that really sums up law school.
Baubles, not bobbles. Unless she likes wobbly headed dolls.
Uh, right. Thanks. She might like dolls too, though!
Torts (Prof. PH):
“I’m surprised that anyone was able to get up enough velocity on the Tappan Zee Bridge at rush hour to get into an accident that caused any injury.”
“People drive through this gauntlet every morning – it’s part of what makes Morning Edition so valuable.”
“It’s sort of like being a little bit pregnant.”
[apologizing for not seeing a raised hand in his peripheral vision] “I’m sorry – if I were a quarterback I’d have been terribly sacked just then.”
[Professor asks the class:] “How many of you are happy all day long?” [3 students raise their hands] “That may be a pharmaceutical issue.”
“All of us have things that upset us. Maybe your significant other has decided you’re not so significant after all.”
Professor: “Why do you say it’s prima facie evidence of an impaired immune system?” Student: “Well, it’s possible I’m using prima facie wrong.”
“Most of these asbestos defendants are just conduits to insurance companies. They don’t care about Joe Schmoe’s machine shop. They want to get to AIG, which used to have a lot of money.”
“Hawaii is even more liberal than California on emotional distress. Things are so placid there – a little emotional distress goes a long way!”
Student: “I’m not gonna go there.” Professor: “You have to go there. That’s where the test is.”
“Of course you don’t know what the facts are – because we just made them up!”
[talking about expert witnesses] “You can always find someone to say what you want, for money. And you can almost always find someone to say what you want, out of conviction. And you can almost always find someone in the social sciences who will say something wacky.”
“Behind my criticism of psychologists is some deep and bitter personal experience.”
[talking about lawyers:] “For us, perfidy is the name of the game – that’s our business.”
[Professor, gleefully] “I’m beginning to browbeat you into submission!”
“Now I’m assuming that Oakland is a civilized place and the bullets only fly occasionally. Even in Oakland, you can usually get to the hospital without getting caught in the crossfire of a gang war.”
“This is the sort of mumbo-jumbo that courts have been trotting out for a long time.”
“He’s the poor guy with the leg. Well, without the leg.”
“I think that if you work that through with symbolic logic, it comes to pretty much the same thing.”
“If you don’t have any money, you don’t have anything to fear from tort law.”
“This is a disgusting hypothetical.”
Prof: “Why is it dangerous to give a 6-year-old a gun?” Student: “Well, cause she’s gonna shoot someone.”
“If you can prove that you have light-seeking rapists in this community, and they like to do it under the light, you might have a case.”
[in response to a student answer:] “You should hold on to that – that would be a great part of a speech to a jury.”
“Judge Posner knew it was brutal to say that, and you can tell that he’s taking a special glee in it.”
“Say you have a tiger. It’s a special tiger – it purrs. Nevertheless it occasionally escapes and eats the neighborhood children. Such cases, Judge Posner thinks, are not adequately dealt with by the negligence system.”
“I don’t want to be cyn-- . . . well, I do want to be cynical. But it’s the adversary system. And expert witnesses can be very inventive in cases like this.”
“All you have to do is listen and read, and you don’t have to think until the next section.”
“In Utah, they’re not liberal, but they are good.”
Corporations (Prof. RB):
“If you go to Delaware, you don’t really find many people. You mostly just find a lot of post office boxes with the names of corporations on them.”
“The real reason Woodrow Wilson became president was because New Jersey wanted to get rid of him! He opposed the New Jersey tradition of chartering all of the companies that did their business in New York. He called it charter-mongering.”
“What would the Supreme Court do if a state said, ‘If you look like a duck, and walk like a duck, and quack like a duck, we’re going to call you a duck, and apply local duck law to you’?”
[to a student who has volunteered an answer] “Start a few words earlier. In fact, I don’t mind if you just read it.” [silence for a few seconds] “I mean, out loud.”
“Anybody with a loud voice can answer this one.”
“You gave the right facts, even if it was by accident.”
“Please allow me a digression. I haven’t taken very many today – this will just be my second one.”
“I don’t worry about the facts.”
“Pirates of Penzance won’t cut it. You need Utopia Limited.” [Prof. proceeds to sing an entire verse from the Gilbert and Sullivan operetta]
“I’m not going to spend any time on this because it’s close to meaningless.”
“You know, it’s just as hard to teach this stuff as it is to read it. But I guess we’re duty-bound.”
“Now it gets even a little more boring, when we get into the case.”
“Read it if you like, if you don’t have anything better to do.”
“I told you it was boring, I’m sorry, but we still have 15 minutes.”
2:26, I can only assume you're a 1L, so good job on taking the initiative and writing down quotes. Don't let the naysayers keep you down.
Con Law (Prof. GL)
Prof asks question
Student: "Well, it's somewhere between the normative and the descriptive"
Prof: "Most things are."
Legal Profession (Prof JS):
[paraphrasing] On the MPRE, when you find the WWJD answer, cross it off. It's wrong. Figure out what a lawyer would do.
Torts (Prof. PH)
In the judicial system we call this "deference to words with multiple syllables"
KB in Admin Law today (paraphrasing):
"I still haven't written your final exam, even though it's due tonight. Writing an admin law exam is much harder than writing a torts exam. When I write a torts fact pattern, I just take a guy an give him a really crappy day. Then you tell me who he can sue."
Berring (Contracts)
Student (Me): 'Well, making you go on a wild goose chase might be consideration, if I was getting something out of it. Maybe I'm a masochist, and just wanted to watch you go to the trouble.'
Berring: 'You mean a sadist. Make sure you don't mix those two up, or else you might find yourself having a very different experience than the one you intended.'
Criminal Law (DS)
"When I say 'interesting' I don't mean, you know, 'repulsive,' or 'awful.'"
DS: But would you find him guilty?
Student: Well, he's.. guilty, isn't he?
DS: That's the point of this course. You could just call this course "Is He Guilty?"
On ECHR: "This is not a fly-by-night organization. It has a big building."
(after student looked a current event up on Google, despite prof.'s requests not to do so)
"You know, in the movies, everyone always cowers at the word of the law professor. I came into this profession too late."
"You might think, 'how is it possible that they didn't think of this? They're prosecutors!' It turns out prosecutors are just like you, only older."
Student: It's X's birthday today!
DS: (long, long pause) . .. okay, that's great.
Contracts (RB)
Prof: Student! [looks up from seating chart] Did you get a haircut?
Student: You can see me??
Prof: Well, sure, it looked more [hand gestures, swooshing]. Very good, tell us the facts.
** the next day **
the same student asks a long question
Prof: That's very good, I have just one question. Did you do something to your head?
Student: It's a beanie.
Prof: [shrugs] I don't know, you sit in the back, your head looks different, you could be a changeling or something.
[reading from review emails]
"... it seems like unconscionability and duress are cousins, could you flesh that out for us"? Well, yes they are cousins. Speaking of cousins, I had an uncle one time who took in the widow of another uncle and her children. It became a scandal when later she became with child. That whole side of the family is a little weird.
This is not from class proper, but from tax prof ER's handouts. It's a classic example of the man's genius.
"Each fall thousands of students wing their way to distant metropoli, where they spend their nights in posh hotels with bonbons on their pillows and rooftop swimming pools. Before retiring for the evening, they routinely devour expensive dinners while evincing a profound desire to learn more about the arcane effects of the new stock-for-debt rules on the restructuring of insolvent corporations. These (mixed) pleasures cost money. Law firms generally supply it. Firms either pay the bills themselves, as when partners pick up restaurant tabs, or reimburse law students for their expenses (within reason, elastically construed). Law students pocket the checks as a matter of course without informing their tax accountants or, if they prepare their own returns, without taking the reimbursements into account in figuring the tax they owe. Why should they have to pay to look for a new job?
This costly courtship raises questions about the collective intelligence of the legal community. It also raises several tax questions."
A not-entirely-exact quote from Criminal Law (DS):
"You know, when I hear 'reasonable person,' I think of Spock. You know, from Star Trek? Do any of you know Spock? . . . --So this makes it difficult to find any time when the reasonable person would be so provoked that he would kill someone, because Spock is always calm. Except, of course, during Amok Time."
I apologize to other people in DS's Crim who may have a more exact transcript!
Corporations (Prof. RB):
“Don’t worry, today is a paralegal day – not a day for lawyers who charge $600/hour.”
Rakowski's paragraph about flybacks is funny, but metropoli is not a word. Metropolis is a Greek word, not latin. Metropoleis or metropolises.
NICE. And you didn't capitalize the language of those plagiarizing Romans...love it.
Post a Comment
<< Home