Most students can recite the rule for adverse possession, consideration, or hearsay. Far fewer can take that rule apart on an exam and show a professor how it moves against a messy set of facts. That gap — between knowing a concept and analyzing with it — is what this coaching is built to close.
Law School Is a Skill, Not a Mystery
Plenty of students work hard at the wrong things. They reread casebooks, recopy outlines, and highlight until the page glows, then sit down for the final and produce a summary of the law instead of an argument about it. Grades in law school come out of method, not raw knowledge. Once the method is clear, the same effort starts paying off.
Curtis Lewis teaches that method concept by concept. Rather than handing you a general formula and wishing you luck, the work goes doctrine by doctrine: what the concept actually tests, where the fight usually is, which facts trigger it, and what a full analysis of it looks like on the page.
Building Analysis One Concept at a Time
Every legal concept has its own shape. Negligence per se asks different questions than promissory estoppel. A Fourth Amendment standing issue rewards a different kind of paragraph than a Rule Against Perpetuities problem. Treating them all the same is why answers come out thin. Here is the work we do on each one:
- Break the rule into elements you can actually argue. Not a one-line statement, but the pieces a professor is looking to see addressed separately.
- Find the contested element. Most elements are easy on a given fact pattern. Learning to spot the one that carries the points is half the exam.
- Attach facts to elements. Every useful fact in a hypothetical was put there on purpose. We practice pairing them until it becomes automatic.
- Argue both directions. Strong analysis states the other side honestly, then explains why it loses. Weak analysis pretends the other side doesn't exist.
- Write the paragraph. IRAC is not decoration — it is the structure that makes your reasoning readable under time pressure.
- Test it against a real case. Case briefing stops being busywork when you use the case to see how a court handled the same contested element.
Do this across a semester's worth of concepts and something changes. You stop staring at a fact pattern hoping for recognition and start working through it with a process you trust.
You don't need to know more law. You need to know what to do with the law you already know.
How the Coaching Works
Sessions run by phone and video, so it doesn't matter where you're enrolled. You bring what you're working on — a practice exam, a hypo, a set of notes from a class that isn't landing, a memo draft — and we work on it live. You write, Curtis reads it closely, and you find out exactly where the analysis went thin and how to thicken it. Availability is Monday through Sunday, 9:00am to 7:00pmwhich means sessions can be scheduled around class, work, and the week before finals when you need them most.
Some students come in during the first weeks of 1L to set up good habits. Others arrive mid-semester after a disappointing midterm, or in the spring to prepare for finals in a single heavy subject. Legal writing tutoring for memos and briefs works the same way — the concept gets broken down, the analysis gets built, and you leave with a draft that is measurably better than the one you brought.
There is no fixed package you have to buy into. Some people want a standing weekly session. Some want three meetings before an exam. What matters is that the work is personalized to the concepts you're actually struggling with, in the classes you're actually taking.
Start With a Conversation
The simplest way to begin is to talk through where things stand — which class, which concepts, what the last exam looked like. Call Curtis Lewis at (903) 651-6999 or email curtislewis420@gmail.comand we'll figure out whether this coaching is the right fit before you commit to anything.