Top Gun Soundtrack

I still haven’t seen Top Gun: Maverick. But it appears most people have.

The Tom Cruise sequel to the 1986 original Top Gun movie grossed $156 million domestically over the Memorial Day weekend, becoming the highest-grossing film ever for the three-day holiday weekend.

While I haven’t seen the movie yet, I’ve been playing the original’s soundtrack on repeat as I’ve been grading. The Top Gun soundtrack, in my opinion, is one of the best movie soundtracks ever, right up there with Flashdance, Footloose, Purple Rain, and Saturday Night Fever.

The Top Gun soundtrack is a pop-culture landmark that epitomizes the 1980s. The soundtrack contains a mix of memorable songs ranging from heart-pounding “Danger Zone” to the slow-dance classic “Take My Breath Away.”

But did you know that each song title on the original soundtrack can be tied back to a legal concept tested on the bar exam?

“Danger Zone” (Kenny Loggins)

Torts: A duty of care is owed only to foreseeable plaintiffs—the class of persons who were foreseeably endangered by the defendant’s negligent conduct. Under the Cardozo holding in Palsgraf, someone who is not within the “zone of danger” from the defendant’s conduct cannot recover. Some courts follow the Andrews dissent in that case, whereby a duty of care is owed to anyone who suffers injuries proximately caused by the defendant’s negligence.

“Mighty Wings” (Cheap Trick)

Criminal Procedure: Incident to a constitutional arrest, the police may search the person and areas into which he might reach to obtain weapons or destroy evidence (his “wingspan”). The arrestee’s wingspan follows him as he moves. Thus, if the arrestee is allowed to enter his home, police may follow and search areas within the arrestee’s wingspan in the home. The police may also make a protective sweep of the area beyond the defendant’s wingspan if they believe accomplices may be present.

“Playing with the Boys” (Kenny Loggins)

Torts: Most courts impose on a landowner the duty to exercise ordinary care to avoid a reasonably foreseeable risk of harm to children caused by dangerous conditions on his property. To establish the doctrine’s applicability, plaintiff must show: (i) a dangerous condition on the land that the owner is or should be aware of, (ii) the owner knows or should know children frequent the vicinity of the condition, (iii) the condition is likely to cause injury (i.e., it is dangerous because of the child’s inability to appreciate the risk), and (iv) the expense of remedying the situation is slight compared with the magnitude of the risk. For liability to attach, the four requirements above must be shown. The child does not have to be attracted onto the land by the dangerous condition, nor is the attraction alone enough for liability.

“Lead Me On” (Teena Marie)

Evidence: Leading questions (i.e., questions that suggest the answer desired) are generally improper on direct examination. However, they are permitted: (i) on cross-examination; (ii) to elicit preliminary or introductory matter; (iii) when the witness needs aid to respond because of loss of memory, immaturity, or physical or mental weakness; or (iv) when the witness is hostile, an adverse party, or affiliated with an adverse party.

“Take My Breath Away” (Berlin)

Criminal Procedure: Contemporaneous with an arrest for intoxicated driving, police officers may administer a warrantless breath test to determine the arrestee’s alcohol levels but may not administer a warrantless blood test. Rationale: A breath test is not very intrusive and leaves no lasting sample with the government, while a blood test requires piercing the skin and leaves the government with a genetic sample. As a corollary, violation of an implied consent law (that is, a law providing that by driving on the roads a driver impliedly consents to a blood test if stopped for intoxicated driving) can be punished civilly (e.g., suspension of license) but not criminally.

“Hot Summer Nights” (The Miami Sound Machine)

Criminal Law: Common law burglary consists of: (i) a breaking (creating or enlarging an opening by at least minimal force, fraud, or intimidation; if defendant had the resident’s consent to enter, the entry is not a breaking); (ii) and entry (placing any portion of the body or any instrument used to commit the crime into the structure); (iii) of a dwelling (a structure used with regularity for sleeping purposes, even if used for other purposes such as conducting a business); (iv) of another (ownership is irrelevant; occupancy by someone other than the defendant is all that is required); (v) at nighttime; (vi) with the intent to commit a felony in the structure (felony need not be carried out to constitute burglary). Modern statutes often eliminate many of the “technicalities” of common law burglary, including the requirements of a breaking, that the structure be a dwelling, that the act occur at nighttime, and that the intent be to commit a felony (i.e., intent to commit misdemeanor theft is often enough).

“Heaven in Your Eyes” (Loverboy)

Evidence: In a homicide prosecution or in any civil action, a statement made by a now-unavailable declarant is admissible if: (i) the declarant believed his death was imminent (he need not actually die); and (ii) the statement concerned the cause or circumstances of what he believed to be his impending death. Note that the statement must be based on the declarant’s perceptions and firsthand knowledge of what happened (e.g., an unsupported opinion or speculation will not qualify).

“Through the Fire” (Larry Greene)

Criminal Law: Arson at common law consists of: (i) the malicious (i.e., intentional or with reckless disregard of an obvious risk); (ii) burning (requiring some damage to the structure caused by fire); (iii) of the dwelling; (iv) of another. Like statutory changes for burglary, modern arson statutes (including the M.P.C.) have modified the common law rules, usually to expand potential criminal liability. Most states have expanded the definition of arson to include damage caused by explosion, and expanded the types of property that may be destroyed to include commercial structures, cars, trains, etc.

“Destination Unknown” (Marietta Waters)

Contracts: The key to forming a contract for the sale of goods is the quantity term. If other terms are missing from the agreement, Article 2 has gap-filler provisions to fill in the missing term(s). For example, if the place of delivery is not specified, the place usually is the seller’s place of business, if he has one; otherwise, it is the seller’s home.

“Memories” (Harold Faltermeyer)

Evidence: Any time you encounter an exam question in which a witness consults a writing, keep in mind the differences between refreshing and recorded recollection. The fact patterns are very similar and could be confusing if you have not thoroughly memorized the distinguishing features. A witness may use any writing or thing for the purpose of refreshing her present recollection. She usually may not read from the writing while she actually testifies because the writing is not authenticated and not in evidence (and thus, there is no hearsay concern). Where a witness states that she has insufficient recollection of an event to enable her to testify fully and accurately, even after she has consulted a memorandum or other record given to her on the stand, the record itself may be read into evidence if a proper foundation is laid.