top of page
Writer's pictureTommy Sangchompuphen
Nov 14, 2022

Learning from The Beatles (Part 4 - Songs 31 to 40)

This fourth installment of "Learning from the Beatles" highlights another 10 songs that can be tied back to an important legal rule or tip for the bar exam. This installment contains a few songs the Beatles covered, as well as an original Beatles song covered by Tiffany.


Previous installments:




You know if you break my heart I'll go,

But I'll be back again.

'Cause I told you once before goodbye,

But I came back again.

I love you so oh, I'm the one who wants you,

Yes, I'm the one who wants you, oh ho, oh ho.



Torts: The prima facie case for assault has three components: (i) the defendant acts; (ii) the defendant intends to cause the victim to apprehend imminent harmful or offensive contact by the defendant; and the defendant's act causes the plaintiff to reasonably apprehend such a contact.


Tip: The apprehension component must be of immediate harmful or offensive contact. In other words, threats of future contact—such as “I’ll be back”—are insufficient. Similarly, there is no assault if the defendant is too far away to do any harm—for example, if the plaintiff is in Liverpool, England, and the defendant is in “Kansas City” or “Back in the U.S.S.R.”



Well, she was just seventeen,

You know what I mean,

And the way she looked was way beyond compare,

So how could I dance with another,

Oh when I saw her standing there.



Evidence: A prior statement of identification of a person made after perceiving the person is not hearsay if the witness who made the statement testifies at trial and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement. The rationale for this rule is that the opportunity to cross-examine the witness concerning the statement takes it outside the scope of the hearsay rule.


Tip: For the prior statement of identification to be admissible to prove the truth of the matter asserted under this provision, it is not necessary that the speaker be able to confirm the identification at trial or remember the identity of the person. If the declarant testifies and is subject to cross-examination concerning the identification, the declarant’s lack of memory at trial does not defeat admissibility.



I said I'm sittin' here watchin'

Matchbox hole in my clothes

I said I'm sittin' here watchin'

Matchbox hole in my clothes

I ain't got no matches

But I sure got a long way to go



Criminal Law: While the offense of arson is now defined by statute, common law arson is defined as the malicious burning of another person’s dwelling.


Tip: The required “burning” for arson must be caused by fire. A burning includes even the slightest damage caused by charring. However, mere smoke discoloration is insufficient. Under the NCBE’s Proposed Content Scope Outline detailing the areas to be tested on the NextGen Bar Exam, (which is expected to take effect in 2026), arson will no longer be tested on the bar exam.



The best things in life are free

But you can keep them for the birds and bees

Now give me money, (That's what I want)

That's what I want

(That's what I want)

That's what I want, (That's what I want), yeah

(That's what I want)



Criminal Law: The crimes of larceny by trick and false pretenses are often given as competing options in multiple-choice questions. Both crimes require the taking of personal property from another by an intentional false statement of past or existing fact, with the intent to defraud the other. What differs between the two crimes, however, is what is obtained. If only custody of the property is obtained by the defendant, the offense is larceny by trick. If title is obtained, the offense is false pretenses. What is obtained depends upon what the victim intended to convey to the defendant.


Tip: When the defendant makes a false representation when obtaining money from the victim, the crime will be false pretenses rather than larceny by trick because the victim is passing title (not mere custodyor possession) to the money to the defendant.



Mister Moonlight, come again please

Here I am on my knees begging if you please

And the night you don't come my way

I pray and pray more each day

'Cause we love you, Mister Moonlight



Criminal Law: Common law burglary is the breaking and entering of a dwelling of another at night with an intent to commit a felony therein.


Tip: At common law, burglary could be committed only during the nighttime. On the MBE, look for words like “at night,” “in the evening” and some other facts that suggest natural light might be insufficient break into a home. Under modern statutes, the nighttime requirement is often abandoned.



You're giving me the same old line,

I'm wond'ring why.

You hurt me then,

You're back again;

No, no no, not a second time!



Evidence: Habit describes one’s regular response to a specific set of circumstances. Habit evidence is admissible to prove that a person acted in conformity with that habit.


Tip: Since evidence of habit is more specific and particularized, habit evidence is relevant and can be introduced in circumstances when it is not permissible to introduce evidence of character. However, evidence of habit must be shown to be a regular response to a repeated specific situation.



In Penny Lane there is a barber showing photographs

Of ev'ry head he's had the pleasure to know.

And all the people that come and go

Stop and say hello.



Contracts and Sales: Courts normally will not inquire into the adequacy of consideration.


Tips: Watch for token consideration (something entirely devoid of value) and sham consideration (something not paid and, in fact, never intended to be paid). Courts characterize these as inadequate consideration because they indicate gifts rather than the “bargained-for exchange” element of consideration.



Scarlet were the clothes she wore,

Ev'rybody knows I'm sure.

I would remember all the things we planned,

Understand, it's true

Yes, it is, it's true

Yes, it is.



Evidence: Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, a question is leading and generally objectionable on direct examination when the form of the question suggests the answer. Questions calling for “yes” or “no” answers and questions framed to suggest the answer desired are usually leading.


Tips: There are certain situations under the Federal Rules of Evidence when leading questions are appropriate, such as on cross-examination, when dealing with preliminary matters, when there is difficulty eliciting testimony from a witness, and when a hostile or adverse witness is being questioned.



Here, making each day of the year,

Changing my life with a wave of her hand.

Nobody can deny that there's something there.


There, running my hands through her hair,

Both of us thinking how good it can be.

Someone is speaking, but she doesn't know he's there.


I want her everywhere

And if she's beside me I know I need never care.

But to love her is to need her everywhere.


(Album: Revolver)


Evidence: A court uses judicial notice when it declares a fact as true without a formal presentation of evidence. If a court takes judicial notice of an indisputable fact in a civil case, the fact is considered conclusive.


Tip: Although facts of common knowledge are usually known everywhere, a court can properly take judicial notice of a fact if it is only known in the community where the court is sitting.



I don't want to spoil the party so I'll go,

I would hate my disappointment to show.

There's nothing for me here,

So I will disappear,

if she turns up while I'm gone, please let me know.



Civil Procedure: Permissive intervention is available when the applicant’s claim or defense and the main action have a question of fact or law in common. Because of this, no direct personal or pecuniary interest is required. The claim by a permissive intervenor must invoke either diversity of citizenship or federal question jurisdiction.


Tip: The claim by a permissive intervenor must not destroy complete diversity between opposing parties. In other words, each plaintiff must be of diverse citizenship from each defendant. If the claim in permissive intervention destroys complete diversity, the intervention will be denied.


“The End”


lastest posts

categories

archives

bottom of page