Getting To Maybe: How to Excel on Law School Exams

Don't let the small size fool you. This little powerhouse is full of essential advice for parsing your professor's exams. I read it before beginning my first year, and found the advice gave me a leg up, both in confidence and in analysis. I've read literally dozens of "law school prep" books, and this is the cream of the crop.

I read this book early in the fall of my 1L year. At the time, I thought that the book was useful and that reading it would give me an edge over my classmates. In retrospect, the book did not give me any edge and reading the book was a waste of time.

The book does give you confidence. It leads you to think that you will be able to take apart a legal exam, reduce it to its essentials, and reason in a manner that your professors will appreciate. I guess it might be worth your reading if you need a shot of self-confidence.

But I do not think that the book will make much of a difference in how anyone does on law school exams. The authors' main point is to look for ambiguities (or "forks"). When you see something on your exam that looks ambiguous, try to explore all the ambiguities. In other words, argue in the alternative--i.e., point out that if X is said to occur, then Y results, whereas if A is said to occur, then B results. Let your professors know that you can see the little things that might produce completely different legal results.

This method is great as a theory. However, it is difficult to apply the method in an actual test setting. I remember that my first exam during my 1L year was in criminal law. I was given a long fact pattern, and I tried to apply the "Getting to Maybe" method. One problem I found was that I was pushed for time. It was not possible to discuss all the ambiguities in the amount of time allowed. The method the book suggested was just not possible in the context of my three-hour bluebook exam. There was no way I could explore all the ambiguities on the exam the way the authors suggest.

Another problem I have with the book is that it is not really giving you any special advice. Reduced to a sentence, the authors are just telling you not to be conclusory with your answers--in other words, show that certain items in the fact pattern could be argued multiple ways. This is hardly novel law school exam advice worth $22.00!

I have read reviews by people who claim that this book helped them make law review or whatever. I also know many people who have read this book and have gotten below average law school grades. I do not think that this book will make a difference in how anyone does in law school. If you are one of those people who has to read everything, because you don't want your classmates to have read something you haven't read, then by all means read this. If, on the other hand, you are concerned about using your time effectively, then you are probably better off working on your outlines or reviewing your lecture notes rather than wasting your time reading this book.

This is an entertaining book with good insights on taking law school exams (I particularly liked Fischl & Paul's hilarious debunking of that stupid old IRAC bromide that professors like to give to all those foolish 1Ls). But some Amazon reviewers seem to think that Getting To Maybe is some sort of magic cure-all. It ain't. Unless you have spent a year or two perfecting your writing and analytical skills through continual practice, merely perusing this book will do nothing for you come exam time. If, however, you are already well versed in basic lawyerly analysis, this book will give you an edge.


Here's what you need to do in order to score well on a law exam:

1. Extricate the key facts from a fact-dense problem. (Watch out for red herrings!)

2. Spot and specify all legal issues that arise from these key facts.

3. Intelligently apply all applicable legal rules to the issues.

4. Interweave key facts into elements of the applicable rules.

5. Insert appropriate policy discussions that support the rules. (Take notes and study up on each prof's particular hobby horse and demonstrate extensive familiarity with it on your essay exams.)

6. Integrate ALL of the above skills with succinct, first-draft legal writing skills within the allotted time (usually about 50 minutes per problem). Think fast, write fast--and do both well.

Getting To Maybe is particularly good at developing point number 5. It is somewhat spotty at most of the others. But what it does, it does very well indeed. And, as far as law-related books go, it's a fun and funny read. So, after you have mastered the basics of black-letter law and learned to think clearly and write well, what this book has to teach you will be yet another arrow in your quiver. Just don't think it's your entire arsenal.

Further recommendations: Pre-law and 1L students should read all the books in the Examples & Explanations series and carefully work through ALL the problems. The single most useful book on exam-taking is John Delaney's How To Do Your Best On Law School Exams, which you can purchase directly from Professor Delaney. And for heaven's sake, don't forget to take Wentworth Miller's LEEWS program early in your first semester.

Lastly--and it's sad to have to say this--learn some friggin' logic and some essay-writing skills before you even think of setting foot on campus. It's amazing and pathetic how few 1Ls can write clear, coherent, grammatical prose. Law school ain't the time to be taking Freshman Comp and Logic 101. Remember, the first year is crucial. Don't blow it.

not all its hyped up to be helped a little go get a gilberts or an emanuels if you want to do well don't waste time on this

This is a fantastic book - can't say enough about it. Now, the authors are going to start giving seminars. The first is November 20 at NYLS. They have a website at www.cap-press.com/GTM/home.html.