Taking Law School Notes: Five Things That Belong in Your Class Notes

When exam day arrives, your professor will present a brand-new, messy fact pattern and ask you to determine whether the rules you’ve learned throughout the semester will survive or fail under those made-up circumstances. Of course, you must state the rule accurately at the outset; a fundamental understanding of the law is “table stakes” for every exam. But your grade won’t turn on your ability to recite rules and their elements word-for-word. Top grades turn on your ability to identify the strengths and weaknesses in the parties’ cases, given the facts, and then craft arguments both for and against the application of a rule, test, or defense.

Because exams reward the application of knowledge, your note-taking strategy must shift. If you’ve already briefed your cases before class, then the facts, issues, and holdings are captured. Unless you missed something, there’s no need to rehash them while following the classroom discussion. Class time should be about something else: listening for insights that will help you apply the law on exam day.

To do that, your in-class note-taking should focus on five things. Each of the following items belongs in your law school notes and course outlines because they are essential for mastering the kind of legal analysis your exams will demand.

1. Rules as Described by Your Professors

Professors often reframe or clarify the rules you read in your casebook. Sometimes they’ll provide a clean list of elements or restate the rule in a way that’s easier to digest. When that happens, write it down exactly as they say it. Period. Full stop.

Your professor expects you to apply their version of the rule. Including these formulations in your outline ensures that, come exam day, you’re working with a professor-approved rule statement.

To reinforce these rules, study aids like Emanuel Law Outlines can help you see the big picture while ensuring your rule statements are clear, concise, and aligned with common law standards.

2. Rationales Underlying Rules and Elements

It’s not enough to know what the rule says; you need to comprehend its purpose fully and be able to explain why it exists in the first place. Rationales are what allow you to apply the law flexibly and argue both sides of a problem.

For example, in Torts you might learn that some courts define battery using a three-element test: (1) intentional, (2) harmful or offensive, (3) bodily contact. Memorizing those elements is only the starting point. What strengthens your exam answer is showing you understand why each element is there.

Sometimes the rationale applies to the test as a whole. For example, courts recognize the law of battery to deter unwanted invasions of personal autonomy and give victims a way to recover. On an exam, pointing out that broader rationale could help frame your analysis.

Rationales also apply to specific elements. Take the requirement that the contact must be intentional. That reflects the principle that a defendant must knowingly engage in conduct that results in harmful or offensive contact. On an exam, if the facts suggest careless but not purposeful conduct, you can argue both sides: either intent is missing (no liability) or the defendant knew his conduct would likely cause the contact (liability).

By grounding your arguments in rationales, you demonstrate more than memorization; you show mastery of how and why the law operates, which is exactly what exams are designed to test.

3. Professor’s Hypotheticals

Not all hypotheticals are created equal. The “what if” questions your classmates pose are usually distractions, but the hypos your professor inserts into the discussion are exam gold. Professors give in-class hypotheticals to test how rules operate when facts change, and those shifts often mirror exam questions.

Don’t just jot down the bare facts. Notice how your professor manipulates facts to alter the outcome. Ask yourself:

• Which element of the rule is being stressed?
• What fact, if added or removed, changes liability?
• How could the same fact be interpreted differently by each party?

For instance, changing whether a defendant pushed someone “deliberately” or “accidentally” completely changes how you analyze the “intent” element in a battery claim. Observing how professors adjust facts reveals where they perceive weak points in rules and highlights what they might test.

During reading period, reviewing your professor’s in-class hypotheticals is invaluable. They preview your professor’s mindset and exam style. Go further by anticipating your own variations of those hypos, and train yourself for the twists that will likely appear on your exam.

4. Black Letter Gems

Every professor has moments when they go “off-script,” launching into tangents or emphasizing points not in the readings. These moments matter. Call them Black Letter Gems: insights that reveal what your professor finds especially interesting about an area of law.

Spotting and recording these Gems gives you an edge. Everyone will walk into the exam with the same rules and rationales. But weaving in a Gem (directly or by analogy) makes your answer stand out. It also shows you were actively engaged in the classroom discussion.

Even if your professor doesn’t go on many tangents, you can find Gems elsewhere: mainly, in their scholarship. Professors often design exam hypotheticals around issues they’re exploring in their own writing. Reading their articles not only previews topics that might appear on your exam, but also how they expect those issues to be resolved. That’s a pretty handy resource to enhance your law school notes!

You can also spot Black Letter Gems by comparing what’s in your law school notes with a trusted study guide. If your notes and the Emanuel CrunchTime outlines both emphasize a concept, that’s a strong signal that it’s fair game for exam day.

5. Restatement Sections

Finally, pay attention if your professor references a Restatement section. Casebooks often provide only edited excerpts, but the complete text, which is available in the library or on LexisNexis, includes commentary and hypotheticals drafted by the Restatement’s authors.

Why does this matter? Two reasons:

1. Signals importance. If your professor highlights a Restatement section, it’s a clue that it’s central to the subject. Learn it thoroughly.
2. Built-in exam prep. The accompanying hypotheticals are excellent practice tools, and professors sometimes borrow them for exams. If you’ve worked through them, you’ll be ready.

If a Restatement is mentioned, don’t just note the citation; make sure you dig deeper. Study the rationale, review the commentary, and practice with the examples contained in the full text. They may give you the clearest preview of what your exam will look like.

The Bottom Line

Your law school notes are not meant to be a transcript of class discussion. They’re not there to capture every word or answer every lingering question. Instead, they’re a roadmap that points you to the themes, fact patterns, and doctrinal twists most likely to appear on your exam.

While many classmates will use their law school notes as a crutch to patch gaps in their understanding, you should use yours as a springboard to generate more questions. Your notes should push you to test, retest, and challenge the rules you’re learning.

Other Resources