Magic Harry Dust

This morning I hiked out to my car in 40 degrees- Forty! Argh!

I walked into Legal Composition this morning and one guy who sits in the row in front of me was partaking of the Harry Potter 4 trailer on his laptop. My interest piqued in spite of the caffeine-deficient haze that still fogged my consciousness, I commented that the movie looked fairly disappointing. He agreed on the grounds of the American trailer and proceeded to show me the British version – me, two other students, and Professor Grant crowded around the laptop watching Harry’s world unfold. Thus ensued an enthusiastic debate of the merits of the movies versus the books, whether the 5th or 6th book proved superior (the general consensus favored the former, with one holdout, but heralded the 4th as the best in the series), and when JK Rowling would finally cough up the 7th volume (after the 6th movie's release). After class we all trudged over to Torts and one guy’s comment that Snape had surprised him by becoming a proverbial bad guy and killing Dumbledore prompted another twenty-minute debate of why Dumbledore had to die, whether he perhaps survived as a Phoenix, if he had perhaps used a Polyjuice potion and not in fact died at all, and all the incidents in the previous volumes that served as foreshadows for his demise. I had no idea so many people my age had read the books – there were only two guys in the class that hadn’t consumed at least one, and six of us had assiduously read and reread multiple volumes a multitude of times. It was really quite an entertaining morning, debating the merits of particular theories and predictions. Our Torts professor even popped in, favoring the 5th volume (in accordance with my assertion).

In terms of Hamster names, I’m pretty much down to Fuzz and Fluff or Pouf and Puff. Guess we’ll see.

I suppose, after my paragraph's indulgence in Potterland, I ought to steer my discussion back to the applicable topic...

In Property we're discussing the different ways to convey real property. We're given cases and have to determine whether land was conveyed via fee simple determinable, fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, or fee simple subject to an executory limitation, based on the language used. Then we have to decide whether the original owner has any "remainder" interest in the property, or if they permanently relinquished the land...

In Torts we're discussing negligence. We're given a case and have to decide whether the defendant was negligent, by analyzing the case and comparing the defendant's behavior to the way in which a "reasonable" person would have or should have acted in an identical condition. Then we have to decide whether they have any special privileges, such as a child's privilege- children are not held to an objective reasonableness standard; their behavior is compared to the manner in which a reasonable child of their age and experience would have acted. I'm really beginning to like Torts, after a shaky start.

Writing was boring today; just learning how to cite precedent cases in our Memos.

Can't wait to go home. One more class!