Law School

The Law School of America podcast is designed for listeners who what to expand and enhance their understanding of the American legal system. It provides you with legal principles in small digestible bites to make learning easy. If you're willing to put in the time, The Law School of America podcasts can take you from novice to knowledgeable in a reasonable amount of time.

Law School is a education podcast hosted by The Law School of America, with 1,000 episodes on record and a Required Pod Score of 80. PitchCentric scores this show on Booking Probability, Listen Score, and live audience signals refreshed every 24 hours.

The Law School of America hosts Law School, a education show with 1,000 episodes published.

Our AI reads these to draft pitches. Use them as grounding for a pitch that cites a real guest and a specific topic.

• 

  Law School

  Torts Fall Launch: Strict Liability and Products Liability: Animals, Abnormally Dangerous Activities, Manufacturing Defects, Design Defects, Warning Defects, and Defenses

  Aug 22, 202656 min

  FREE COMPANION STUDY GUIDE CLICK HERE TO OPEN YOUR FREE STUDY GUIDE Turn this episode into an exam-ready study plan. EPISODE SUMMARY A wedding day turns into a 15-year prison sentence when Jeff Coffin wakes up stowed away on a deep-space ship bound for Centaurus. What starts as a simple prank becomes a desperate fight against kidnapping, mutiny, and the brutal logic of space law - and the only thing standing between Jeff and survival is a crewman who knows how the ship really works. Dwight6 brings "Shanghaied" to life as a tense, fast-moving sci-fi tale where one wrong night out at the bar changes everything. Jeff believes he can talk his way back to Earth, but once he learns the ship’s destination, the stakes spike fast: if he doesn’t escape before launch, he vanishes for fifteen years, and by the time he returns, his life is gone. You’ll hear: How Jeff is tricked onto the RS Michael Raffitt and why the joke turns vicious The harsh reality of long-haul space travel, including hull watch, airlocks, and punishment under space code The escalating mutiny as the crew realizes the captain will sacrifice anyone to keep control The moment a crucial crewman becomes the key to getting through the ship’s locked bulkhead Why a patrol ship at the end turns the whole crisis inside out This episode works because it takes a simple premise - a man trying not to miss his own wedding - and pushes it into a claustrophobic survival story where every decision has a cost. The ship becomes a trap, the crew becomes a threat, and the law of the future feels colder than the vacuum outside. If you like classic science fiction with pressure-cooker suspense, sharp twists, and a story that keeps tightening the screws until the final minute, this one belongs on your list. Perfect for listeners who want old-school radio drama with real momentum and a genuinely high-stakes premise. ℹ️ INFORMATION, PRIVACY POLICY & TERMS OF USE ℹ️ The Podcast and Website Purpose The Law School Podcast and 1L Study Aide webpage supplements law-school and Bar Exam study with strategies, condensed rules, quizzes, and flashcards. Educational Disclaimer Content is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not legal advice, creates no attorney-client relationship, and does not guarantee law-school or Bar Exam success. Privacy Policy No account or login is required. This webpage uses no forms or analytics to collect personal information. Quiz and flashcard activity stays in your browser and may clear when local site data is removed. Terms of Use By using this webpage, you agree to use its content only for lawful, personal, noncommercial educational purposes. It supplements—not replaces—courses, textbooks, official materials, or qualified instruction.

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Law School

  Torts Fall Launch: Negligence Defenses, Multiple Defendants, Vicarious Liability, and Allocation of Responsibility

  Aug 21, 20261h 8m

  Place text here.

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Law School

  Torts Fall Launch: Negligence Part Two: Actual Cause, Proximate Cause, Intervening Forces, Emotional Harm, and Damages

  Aug 20, 20261 hour

  FREE COMPANION STUDY GUIDE CLICK HERE TO OPEN YOUR FREE STUDY GUIDE Turn this episode into an exam-ready study plan. EPISODE SUMMARY Negligence requires more than careless conduct. The plaintiff must establish actual causation, proximate causation, and actual damages. Actual causation ordinarily uses the but-for test: but for the defendant’s breach, would the injury have occurred? If the answer is no, factual causation is established. Multiple sufficient causes require special treatment when several independent acts were each sufficient to cause the same harm. Alternative liability may shift the causal burden when multiple defendants acted negligently but uncertainty prevents identification of the actual wrongdoer. Loss-of-chance doctrine may address medical negligence that reduces a patient’s probability of survival or recovery. Proximate cause limits liability to injuries within the scope of the risks that made the defendant’s conduct negligent. The exact mechanism and extent of harm need not always be foreseeable, but the general type of injury ordinarily must fall within the relevant risk. An intervening event does not automatically cut off liability. Ordinary medical negligence, reasonable rescue, reactions to danger, normal natural forces, and foreseeable negligent conduct often remain within the scope of responsibility. A superseding cause is sufficiently extraordinary or outside the original risk to cut off liability. Intentional and criminal acts are not automatically superseding when the defendant’s negligence increased the risk that those acts would occur. The rescue doctrine recognizes that danger invites rescue and generally treats reasonable rescue attempts as foreseeable. The eggshell-plaintiff rule requires the defendant to take the plaintiff as found. Once the defendant is responsible for the relevant type of physical harm, the unforeseeable severity caused by the plaintiff’s vulnerability generally does not reduce liability. Negligent infliction of emotional distress varies among jurisdictions. Major approaches include zone-of-danger recovery, bystander recovery, and special-relationship situations in which emotional well-being is central to the undertaking. Negligence requires actual compensable injury. Damages may include medical expenses, lost wages, lost earning capacity, property damage, pain and suffering, emotional distress, disability, disfigurement, loss of enjoyment, and reasonably certain future losses. The traditional collateral-source rule generally prevents a tortfeasor from reducing liability because the plaintiff received compensation from an independent source, although statutory modifications vary. Wrongful-death actions compensate designated survivors for losses resulting from death. Survival actions preserve claims the decedent could have asserted had death not occurred. The key lesson for Thursday is that causation is a two-stage inquiry: did the defendant actually contribute to the harm, and is the resulting harm within the scope of the defendant’s legal responsibility? ℹ️ INFORMATION, PRIVACY POLICY & TERMS OF USE ℹ️ The Podcast and Website Purpose The Law School Podcast and 1L Study Aide webpage supplements law-school and Bar Exam study with strategies, condensed rules, quizzes, and flashcards. Educational Disclaimer Content is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not legal advice, creates no attorney-client relationship, and does not guarantee law-school or Bar Exam success. Privacy Policy No account or login is required. This webpage uses no forms or analytics to collect personal information. Quiz and flashcard activity stays in your browser and may clear when local site data is removed. Terms of Use By using this webpage, you agree to use its content only for lawful, personal, noncommercial educational purposes. It supplements—not replaces—courses, textbooks, official materials, or qualified instruction.

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Law School

  Torts Fall Launch: Negligence Part One: Duty, Standard of Care, Breach, Negligence Per Se, Res Ipsa, Affirmative Duties, and Landowners

  Aug 19, 20261h 7m

  FREE COMPANION STUDY GUIDE CLICK HERE TO OPEN YOUR FREE STUDY GUIDE Turn this episode into an exam-ready study plan. EPISODE SUMMARY Negligence requires more than careless conduct. The plaintiff must establish actual causation, proximate causation, and actual damages. Actual causation ordinarily uses the but-for test: but for the defendant’s breach, would the injury have occurred? If the answer is no, factual causation is established. Multiple sufficient causes require special treatment when several independent acts were each sufficient to cause the same harm. Alternative liability may shift the causal burden when multiple defendants acted negligently but uncertainty prevents identification of the actual wrongdoer. Loss-of-chance doctrine may address medical negligence that reduces a patient’s probability of survival or recovery. Proximate cause limits liability to injuries within the scope of the risks that made the defendant’s conduct negligent. The exact mechanism and extent of harm need not always be foreseeable, but the general type of injury ordinarily must fall within the relevant risk. An intervening event does not automatically cut off liability. Ordinary medical negligence, reasonable rescue, reactions to danger, normal natural forces, and foreseeable negligent conduct often remain within the scope of responsibility. A superseding cause is sufficiently extraordinary or outside the original risk to cut off liability. Intentional and criminal acts are not automatically superseding when the defendant’s negligence increased the risk that those acts would occur. The rescue doctrine recognizes that danger invites rescue and generally treats reasonable rescue attempts as foreseeable. The eggshell-plaintiff rule requires the defendant to take the plaintiff as found. Once the defendant is responsible for the relevant type of physical harm, the unforeseeable severity caused by the plaintiff’s vulnerability generally does not reduce liability. Negligent infliction of emotional distress varies among jurisdictions. Major approaches include zone-of-danger recovery, bystander recovery, and special-relationship situations in which emotional well-being is central to the undertaking. Negligence requires actual compensable injury. Damages may include medical expenses, lost wages, lost earning capacity, property damage, pain and suffering, emotional distress, disability, disfigurement, loss of enjoyment, and reasonably certain future losses. The traditional collateral-source rule generally prevents a tortfeasor from reducing liability because the plaintiff received compensation from an independent source, although statutory modifications vary. Wrongful-death actions compensate designated survivors for losses resulting from death. Survival actions preserve claims the decedent could have asserted had death not occurred. The key lesson for Thursday is that causation is a two-stage inquiry: did the defendant actually contribute to the harm, and is the resulting harm within the scope of the defendant’s legal responsibility? ℹ️ INFORMATION, PRIVACY POLICY & TERMS OF USE ℹ️ The Podcast and Website Purpose The Law School Podcast and 1L Study Aide webpage supplements law-school and Bar Exam study with strategies, condensed rules, quizzes, and flashcards. Educational Disclaimer Content is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not legal advice, creates no attorney-client relationship, and does not guarantee law-school or Bar Exam success. Privacy Policy No account or login is required. This webpage uses no forms or analytics to collect personal information. Quiz and flashcard activity stays in your browser and may clear when local site data is removed. Terms of Use By using this webpage, you agree to use its content only for lawful, personal, noncommercial educational purposes. It supplements—not replaces—courses, textbooks, official materials, or qualified instruction.

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Law School

  Torts Fall Launch: Intentional Property Torts and Privileges: Trespass, Conversion, Consent, Self-Defense, Defense of Others, Property Protection, and Necessity

  Aug 18, 20261h 2m

  FREE COMPANION STUDY GUIDE CLICK HERE TO OPEN YOUR FREE STUDY GUIDE Turn this episode into an exam-ready study plan. EPISODE SUMMARY Trespass to land protects the possessor’s right to exclusive possession of real property. Liability generally requires intentional entry, causing a person or object to enter, remaining after permission expires, or failing to remove an object when required. The defendant need only intend the physical intrusion. Mistake about ownership ordinarily is not a defense. Traditional trespass generally requires physical invasion. Actual damages are not ordinarily necessary, and nominal damages may vindicate the possessory right. Trespass to chattels protects personal property against dispossession, use, or interference. Unlike technical trespass to land, the tort generally requires dispossession or measurable harm. Conversion involves interference with personal property so serious that the defendant may be required to pay the item’s full value. Theft, destruction, unauthorized sale, prolonged possession, and refusal to return may constitute conversion. Minor interference generally points toward trespass to chattels. Consent may be express, implied from conduct, or implied by law. It may be invalid because of fraud concerning an essential matter, duress, incapacity, or certain known mistakes. The defendant must remain within the scope of consent. Self-defense permits reasonable and proportionate force when the defendant reasonably believes such force is necessary to prevent imminent harmful or offensive contact. Reasonable mistake may be protected. Retaliation is not. Deadly force generally requires threatened death or serious bodily harm. Defense of others similarly permits reasonable intervention to protect another. Modern doctrine generally protects reasonable mistakes, while older alter-ego approaches may depend on the defended person’s actual rights. Defense of property generally allows reasonable nondeadly force but not deadly force solely to protect property. Mechanical devices cannot ordinarily use greater force than the owner could use personally. Recapture of chattels permits limited, prompt, reasonable force following wrongful dispossession. Voluntary transfers ordinarily must be challenged through legal process. The shopkeeper’s privilege permits reasonable detention based on reasonable suspicion when the detention is conducted in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable time. Necessity permits interference with property to prevent greater harm. Public necessity ordinarily provides a complete privilege when action protects the public from widespread disaster. Private necessity ordinarily provides an incomplete privilege: the entry is lawful, but the defendant remains responsible for actual damage caused. The key lesson for Tuesday is that proving the elements of an intentional tort is only the first half of the analysis. The student must next ask whether the defendant possessed a privilege and, if so, whether the defendant stayed within the privilege’s boundaries. ℹ️ INFORMATION, PRIVACY POLICY & TERMS OF USE ℹ️ The Podcast and Website Purpose The Law School Podcast and 1L Study Aide webpage supplements law-school and Bar Exam study with strategies, condensed rules, quizzes, and flashcards. Educational Disclaimer Content is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not legal advice, creates no attorney-client relationship, and does not guarantee law-school or Bar Exam success. Privacy Policy No account or login is required. This webpage uses no forms or analytics to collect personal information. Quiz and flashcard activity stays in your browser and may clear when local site data is removed. Terms of Use By using this webpage, you agree to use its content only for lawful, personal, noncommercial educational purposes. It supplements—not replaces—courses, textbooks, official materials, or qualified instruction.

  ListenShow Notes

Based on semantic analysis of episode topics and host coverage, this show is a strong guest fit for executives in:

Industry fit is computed by PitchCentric using vector embeddings of the show's episode catalog.