Thursday, January 23, 2003

I had a rule this semester. I wasn't going to contribute much in Contracts until I was called upon. In Torts, where I didn't hesitate to contribute, it seemed like eight or nine people dominated the ninety-eight person class. Every class Anjan, Larsh, Kevin, tall John, Kristine, SBA John, Conrad, and Big John were constantly piping in. Bill would be called on for any perverted thing, or anything that could be perverted, and Dr Bill was the medical guy. For controversy, we had Tony, who was so outspoken that I told him on the day of the final to think of what he really wanted to say, then say the opposite and he'd get an A. Most people were pretty normal, but Kevin came up with some real gems - like comparing Torts to the bible. We'll be talking about that until the day we die. And the drunk act, too, even though I missed it (I arrived late, and was outside trying to avoid Professor Torts' glare). I didn't see the act, but people walking outside couldn't miss hearing the laughter.

Anyway, this semester, I resolved to be more....reserved. Quiet Greg, if you will. But then Professor Contracts mentioned the parol evidence rule, something I knew of from back in my CPA exam days, and I couldn't resist. My hand shot up right away - the only person in the class to volunteer. I went totally off memory, only forgetting to mention that the rule prevents the introduction of extraneous evidence, but I got the rest. And I noticed a quick smile on Professor Contracts face; I think she liked that I not only knew the name of the rule (the judge only mentioned "bringing evidence in by parol"), but I knew the rule, even to a limited extent. I think I managed to impress her. At least, it kept her from calling on me. I chimed in once more, on why an ad offering a reward for return of a ring published in the newspaper constituted a genuine offer, while most other ads merely constituted an invitation for offers. All in all, a good class, I thought.

In order to not be overly boring, I thought I'd throw some things of interest that I'd come across, and other news...

Would you like fries with that?
Just when you think it was safe to be totally irresponsible, 2nd District court judge Robert Sweet (the almost-perfect name for this case, don't you think?) decides that yes, you DO in fact have to be responsible for what you shove into your pie hole. I love this link. Do the math on that caption: 590 calories for the Big Mac, plus another 540 for the large fries, plus another 200 or so for the Coke to wash it down equals 1,330 calories, and at least 60 grams of fat! Good god, on a 2,000 calorie diet, lunch would set you back for nearly seventy-five percent of your total for the day!!

Sure it tastes good going down. But is the heart attack worth it????

It's always a shame when someone dies. It's worse still when that someone is as young as Nell. Heck, it's downright scary. One can only assume her diabetes contributed somewhat to that.

Other Tidbits
Do religious groups or companies have the right to edit out parts of films and redistribute them? Read this article and decide for yourself. Some interesting arguments.

No comments: