ziggyandleo - Tumblr blog

[ziggyandleo]

I use ChatGPT to give me law school exam prompts and thought this might be helpful.

I've been obsessed with Supernatural lately, so I'm using it to stay concentrated on practicing for my contracts final. I'm going to go to more recommended practice tests maybe tomorrow, but having ChatGPT throw me some softballs is helpful to see if I get basic legal concepts and I have them down in my outline.

This technique is not limited to law students. You can ethically use AI to give you practice as long as you do your own work practicing.

You can also use AI to score your response, but I highly recommend reading through it and scoring yourself as well.

DO NOT feed ChatGPT any material from class that might be your professor/teacher's intellectual property unless they give you express permission. That could get you into some copyright trouble.

ChatGPT is only using Supernatural information that is readily available to it. This isn't necessarily new content, but it's fun to read and legally analyze.

I've included both ChatGPTs prompt and my own written response.

Without further ado:

ChatGPT's prompt:

Dean Winchester, a skilled hunter, makes a pact with Crowley, the King of Hell, seeking assistance in resurrecting his brother, Sam Winchester. The terms of the agreement involve Crowley providing a soul for Sam's resurrection in exchange for Dean's "favor" to be named at Crowley's discretion at a future date.

Crowley materializes the contract on parchment, inscribing it with mystical symbols, and Dean signs it in his own blood, indicating his acceptance. The contract explicitly states that the favor must be fulfilled when Crowley demands it, without any negotiation or refusal.

However, as the agreed-upon resurrection ritual nears completion, Sam expresses strong opposition to the terms of the agreement. He argues that the contract is unconscionable and against public policy, given the open-ended nature of the favor and the potential harm it could cause.

Dean, torn between his commitment to save his brother and the looming uncertainty of the favor, seeks legal counsel to challenge the contract's enforceability.

My response (the below is written by me and is not AI writing for me):

Here, there’s no question that a contract exists. There was mutual assent and consideration on both sides. It should be noted that with consideration, there doesn’t necessarily need to be a totally equally exchange as long as both parties bargained for what they got, and got what they bargained for. There was an active negotiation when signing the contract. This particular contract would be governed by common law and not the UCC because there are no movable goods involved.

The problem is the defense of unconscionability only provides a narrow escape. The contract has to be so one-sided that it can’t possibly be enforced. We’re going to go through different arguments aside from unconscionability as well.

Dean might argue that he was under duress when signing the initial contract. He was trying to get his brother back. What brings more duress than that? Crowley will doubtlessly scoff and say that duress requires threats or no reasonable alternative. He didn’t threaten Dean to sign the contract and there was a reasonable alternative—he could have let what was dead be dead. He didn’t have to bring his brother back but he wanted to. Dean will probably lose here.

Moving to unconscionability, Dean will have to prove both procedural and substantive unconscionability. Dean might try to argue the contract suffers from procedural unconscionability under Restatement. § 208—a contract is procedurally unconscionable if it (1) has a significant inequality in bargaining power (preventing a party from having meaningful choice or real alternative in setting the terms of the agreement), or (2), the contract involves some aspect of unfair surprise. I.e., there’s a term that’s purposely hidden.

Dean might say that there was a significant inequality in his bargaining power. Crowley is a demon with a lot of power and he’s just a human. He might bring up Walker-Thomas Furniture where the plaintiffs didn’t have financial sophistication but the furniture store duped them into putting themselves in more debt. The defendants in that case also didn’t really explain the terms to the plaintiffs. Dean will say that he had no way of knowing what giving his soul truly meant and he couldn’t fully understand the terms of the contract. Crowley will immediately point out that Dean has spent his life killing monsters and demons. He knows full well what giving his soul up means and that he’s hardly an innocent, unknowing party who can be taken advantage of and duped into contracts. Plus, he might add, he fully explained the terms himself to Dean.

Dean will come back saying of course he didn’t have meaningful choice or a real alternative, and Crowley will point right back to saying he could have just let his brother stay dead. As for unfair surprise, Crowley might add, Dean knew that there would be no ifs, ands, or buts when he comes to collect on the contract BEFORE he signed the initial contract. Dean might next bring up Lhotka v. Geographic Expeditions. The plaintiffs in this case didn’t have to purchase the tickets to hike on Mount Kilimanjaro. However, GeoEx didn’t give the late plaintiff any meaningful choice or ability to negotiate. They wanted the agreement to be signed without any modification and told Lhotka that all other travel companies did it the same. Lhotka, thinking he had no choice to shop the market, signed the liability waiver. Dean will say that he had no chance to modify the contract and might claim that Crowley said all crossroads demons do the same thing. Crowley might say this is ridiculous. Again. Dean didn’t have to make the bargain with him, and he did have a chance to challenge the terms. It would help if we knew exactly how the contract was bargained in deciding whether Dean wins or loses here.

Moving to potential Substantive Unconscionability, according to Restatement 2 of Contracts § 208, a contract is substantively unconscionable if the terms are overly harsh or one-sided against a party. This definition is a bit vague, so Dean will have to underline some caselaw to show what this means.

He might, again, bring up Lhotka v. Geographic Expeditions, which found there was substantive unconscionability because Geographic Expeditions unreasonably limited liability for people wanting to go on their expeditions to only being able to access any compensation by going through arbitration in GeoEx’s country (which they themselves probably don’t live in). Dean will claim that the contract itself says he can’t further negotiate. He has no way of challenging the contract if anything goes wrong—like if Sam dies again or starts killing people like a zombie. It might help to know if Crowley promised that Sam would come back the same.

Crowley’s response will probably depend on the exact terms of the contract. It could be as simple as a life for a life. But it could also indicate that Sam would come back exactly the same as he was. Either way, Sam seems to have come back as he was (in this prompt only. Not in the show), so Dean did get what he bargained for. There’s no point arguing about what-ifs. But still, a court might be persuaded by this argument from Dean, but they also might find for Crowley as well.

(ChatGPT scored this response a 20.5/25)

[ziggyandleo]

Zionism is NOT Judaism. Opposing the crimes of Zionists does NOT make you antisemetic - it makes you an individual with morals who doesn’t stand for colonialism, genocide and ethnic cleansing.

If you can understand that a group like ISIS is not Islam, you can understand that Zionism is not Judaism.

Zionists want you to believe that this is all a sort of ‘religious’ battle. No. Palestinians are comprised of Muslims, Christians and Jews. But didn’t you know? Even Palestinian Jews aren’t the right race or language or color, apparently. Guess you gotta be a white European-descent settler to count.

No matter the race or ethnicity or religion of the foreign settler, the real problem here is the occupation. Stealing people’s lands, driving them from their homes, killing their families, stealing their resources, trapping them in an open air concentration camp (Gaza), terrorizing them, etc. That’s the real issue, and Zionists are utilizing everything in their propaganda media warfare to not show you.

[ziggyandleo]

Kent State University

[ziggyandleo]

“Marah Bakir, who was been imprisoned for eight years since she was 15 years old, embraces freedom at these moments after being held in solitary confirment for over 40 days. Marah is the representative of the women prisoners' movement.

She is one of 11 prisoners from Al-Quds who were released moments ago.”

24 Nov 23 via RNN

[ziggyandleo]

Remember, kids, every time you try to choose "sides" between Crowley and Aziraphale, the Metatron wins!

[ziggyandleo]

i've been hyper-focused on the beach kisses for two weeks, but decided to revisit the pre-intimacy kiss and fully lost myself in it again. because like...

the way they move as one and hold onto each other so tightly. the way they share so many different thoughts and words simply through their gazes alone. the way stede doesn't proceed without explicit consent from ed, and the way ed gives him a legitimate little nod to signal his ok. the way they both ease towards each other at the same time, and meet each other right in the middle.

the way ed immediately reaches his hand around stede's neck and tugs him impossibly close, effectively making their bodies just melt into one another's. the way stede's hands drop from ed's collar when their kiss begins, and the way ed's hand follows one of his down—intertwined. the way ed reaches his other hand around stede's back, fully embracing him and holding him in a way he's probably always wanted to, holding him in a way where nothing bad could ever possibly reach stede again. the way stede threads his fingers through ed's hair, cradles the back of his head so tenderly.

the way such touch, intimacy, and love comes so naturally to them. the way they've both been so deprived of it, yet with each other, it's like coming home. the way it just clicks, it just makes sense, it just happens so beautifully...

and the way it chases away the bad—turns poison into positivity.

[ziggyandleo]

[ziggyandleo]

“stop congratulating cis allies for doing the bare minimum” NO!!! i want to encourage speaking out and being on trans people’s side!!! stop being assholes to people just trying to support you and give them room to grow!!!

[ziggyandleo]

[ziggyandleo]

Le Chansonnier Cordiforme, c. 1470, music manuscript ― facsimile by Vicent García Editores of Valencia, Spain

[ziggyandleo]

You should stop following Jackson Hinkle because on top of being a white supremacist, he misrepresented a lot of information. He keeps sharing photos of destroyed Syrian cities as Gaza

[ziggyandleo]

No one:

Cats when they love someone:

[ziggyandleo]

Of course, the burkini ban is messed up on grounds of religious freedom and racial discrimination. But also

Under any other circumstances, people would be HORRIFIED at a government mandate that women have to show a certain amount of skin. Like. That’s fucking dystopian, and the absolute opposite of feminism. If a government tried to pass a law that all women had to wear tube tops and miniskirts to go outside, people would rightfully be up in arms demanding blood

But because it’s targeting a marginalized religious group, many folks are lauding the blatant forced sexualization of women. Appalling

(apparently the ban also outlaws things like sun – protecting bathing suits if they cover too much skin. Which like. Yes, let’s give everyone skin cancer just so we can spite a religion we’ve decided to hate. Sounds like a good plan </s>)

[ziggyandleo]

mutual 1: I want to turn that man's prostate into silly putty

mutual 2: here's smth i doodled during science class lol

mutual 3: pls remember that you personally can drink milk and still be a lactose intolerance ally!! anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't know their history :]

mutual 4: fucking a robot girl in the ass call that backend programming

mutual 5: holy shit I need him so fucking bad holy shit holyyy shit oh my god

mutual 6: anyone get kind of horny putting the ignition key in the car....it's so intimate....turning him on....

mutual 7: so lets talk about where scrimblo's arc is realistically going- I know a lot of people are trying to argue that he's being manipulated but this ignores the fact that there is clearly unresolved conflict between him and bleebus about their moralities

mutual 8: happy propeller penis thursday

mutual 9: "scrimblo and bleebus need to discuss their morality" god forbid a pathetic boywife does some torture 🙄🙄

mutual 10: WHO IS HYPED FOR THE NEW ALBUM LETS FUCKING GO

mutual 11: guys we're not getting a new album

mutual 12: please stop sending me death threats

mutual 13: why is my whole dash talking about this band I don't even listen to.....

mutual 14: hey boy nice knife wound can i put my tongue in it

mutual 15: i'm going to fall into lake michigan

[ziggyandleo]

[ziggyandleo]

I think this is a good opportunity to educate people on the history of Palestine, the Nakba, and how it happened to show why what's happening today has been happening for the last century. Here's a documentary series that uses archival footage, official documentation, Israeli and Arab historian accounts, and personal accounts from Palestinian refugees to tell the story of the colonization of Palestine. Remember to click the Read More in the link to look at the episodes.

Even if you don't plan on watching it, I would still appreciate if you could share this so access to this knowledge is more widespread.

[ziggyandleo]

No one ever tell me anything bad about the person who runs this account.