I just know I am going to get called on first...

I couldn't get that out of my mind all day Monday. I had heard and read plenty about the socratic method that so terrifies law students. Everyone said that it is scary, but not to worry about it. Problem is--I worry. I would like to say that I am an average worrier, but that's probably not true.

So I get to criminal law and head to back right of center from the professor's point of view. I pull out my book and a pen and try to look as inconspicuous as possible. The professor comes in, everyone gets a bit more quiet (which didn't last the week) and she begins the class. After a brief introduction, professor Davidson asked a question--and waited for someone to answer. "The next one will be a cold call," I thought. Nope. Not once did she try to scare us into submission. "The next class," I thought. Not really. I did apparently nod my head which prompted the professor to ask me about Article III of the Constitution. Still, not scary. And it actually wasn't in at all intimidating. Apparently not all professors are intent on striking fear into the heart of their pupils. Who'd a thunk?

Second day of class- how hard could this be? Reading done, checked the E&E, talked about it with classmates. I was feeling pretty good. The only new class on my schedule was Torts. To not break with custom, I take a back seat just to the right of center from the professor's prospective. There are about 80 other students in the auditorium. The professor comes in explains the basics, but with a twist. He explains that he doesn't like to arbitrarily call on people and that he prefers a more democratic method of deciding who gets called on first. So he presents the option of alphabetical order. Not. Cool.

Tangent.

Adams. As a kid, it was cool being at the front of the line. There was one year that Aaker made me second and another that Abbot did the same. The worst moment of my front-lined-ness was when my fourth grade teacher thought that reverse alphabetical order was a good idea; it wasn't. All this popped through my brain. And then one more thought crept in- "Lee, you were the first on the list at orientation."

And before I knew it, "Mr. Adams," booms the professor, "What were the facts of the Prosser v. Keeton hypothetical?" A cold sweat pops up on my forehead and I turn to the case. "Prosser owned a watch, which went miss-"

"Ok, stop looking at your book. Pretend that I am the judge. You will get no respect if you have your head buried in papers when you speak to a judge. We need to start practice today. This is a conversation. Continue, Mr. Adams."

I just smile and continue relating the facts of the case. My answer is apparently been sufficient.

"And what is Judge Allen's reasoning?"

"He focuses on who had rightful title to the watch."

"So what kind of reasoning is he using?"

Panic. I know this. Book. Can't find it. Lee, you are in law school., think. Justice! Of course it's justice- "A sense of justice."

"No. Anyone else?"

Shame. Someone else answers the question. I look down at my book and see that the next judge focused on justice.

"And Mr. Adams, do you agree?"

"I do."

"Thank you Mr. Adams. Ms. Am..."

Phew. I made it. And it wasn't half bad. I think I can do this.