This assignment hasTWO PARTS. Repeat--two.
Part 1:
Do a casenote—a shorter/moreconcise YET analytically complete version of what you did for your recent CA2. (meaning try not to don't skimp on the ANALYSIS OF THE COURT'S HOLDING, REASONING, WHETHER IT WAS GROUNDBREAKING ETC. of the following case:
Pope v. Illinois. (SCOTUS, you find it)
For Part 1no less than 1 and 1/2 pages SINGLE SPACED, no exaggerated margins etc.times roman 12 pt font not counting footnotes (if you choose footnotes) or in text citations, Works Cited page doesn' t count for length. Use whicheverof the twoformats you are comfortable (see casenote format in instructions to previous assignment, or as prescribed and in the syllabus project description section)
Part 2:
hypo attached
For Part 2 It behooves you to bethorough--I willnot acceptanything less than seven (7) pagesDOUBLE SPACED12 pt Times Roman font pages (excepting Works Cited, etc.) with adequate margins etc. will not be accepted for Part 2 Cite cases properlyin-textper Webliography.
Rubrics for Parts 1 and 2:
Cases (primary sources) and statutes, etc. must be cited prominently and properly; save the works cited page for any outside articles etc you might use.
Use "outside" legal research (authoritative secondary sources outside of what's in Course Content or the Discussions)) asyou see fit, especially for Part 2. If you do, do NOT use kiddie stuff like thedictionaries or some sort of Answer.com; accordingly, limit your use of such "outside" sources (cases, articles, Mass Media Law Prof blog, etc.) to no more than five (5).
Youmayuse bullet points but do sosparinglyand with the most impact. Overusing or non-adept listing will be penalizedseverely.
Paraphrase accurately. Use direct quotes adeptly and with the most impact, yet sparingly. Do not use large block quotes--summarize
No cutting and pasting from sources; avoid quoting me or Course Content, rather, fold me and Module info into your general knowledge.
Week 6 concepts and cases will guide your success! So for Part 2 do not deal with anything outside of Week 6 (like Week 4 intellectual property, Week 3, etc.Butweek 2 concepts might creep in at times)
Use proper casenote format for Part 1; it will just beshorterthan your CA2 but do not skimp on analyzing the holding.
Interweave law and fact for Part 2like CA1. Don't tell meyour opinions, impressions, informal thoughts etc on the "law" is--spot the issues, elements...and analyze the possibilities, dispose of what is likely not going to apply or be controlling whatever Liz's fears might be then move onto next issue
Be sure to incorporate skills/feedback fromCA1in analysis, look at classroom FAQ legal language primer.
Do not list things, do not dwell on conclusions andrecommendations--use analysis, jump right into it, avoid vague declaratory statements--again, go back and forth interweaving law and fact to tell what may or may not happen
Use superior organization, proper grammar and tone, style/sentence/paragraph structure. Avoid "I" or "Me"; you may use "we" or "us" if actively counseling or concluding but any conclusions should bebrief(see above).
No opinion or injecting personal views
No cover page necessary
For Part 2 no need to mimic a fake memo heading (e.g. FROM: , TO: etc.) ...that just takes up space. Just launch right into it.
For Part 1, no long block quotes or regurgitating the courts on own language. Conclude with Pope's significance and continued importance.
Remember, this week's content involves mature issues and I expect everyone to be able to handle these issues as a mature media professional would when given a problem to solve.
|