Praise God.

-Male, 19, college sophomore, as quoted in Motives and Conduct, Herbert Blumer, University of Chicago, 1933, on the impact of motion pictures on his individual life and understanding of society

Here’s another reason (as if you needed one).

Below are three sample questions from the multiple choice section of the Bar Exam.  There are 200.  These are three.

Questions 3 – 5 are based on the following fact situation.

Exec and Associate were both white collar workers who were employed by firms located in downtown Centerville. Both Exec and Associate were late for work on Tuesday morning. As such, they each were traveling at an excessive rate of speed toward their respective places of business. Exec was traveling down Second Street, only seven blocks from his office, at a speed of forty-five miles per hour. The posted speed was thirty miles per hour. As Exec approached the intersection of Second Street and Gilbert Avenue, Associate also approached the same intersection. Associate was traveling north on Gilbert Avenue to get to work that morning. Associate was also speeding and witnesses estimated his speed to be somewhere between forty and fifty miles per hour. The posted speed on Gilbert Avenue was thirty miles per hour. The two cars collided at the intersection of Second and Gilbert. Associate’s Buick Skylark hit Exec’s Ford Escort causing Exec to swerve out of control into Jose’s produce cart parked at the side of the road. Both Jose and his merchandise suffered extensive injuries. The jury found that the accident was caused due to the inattentiveness of both drivers with Exec 40% negligent and Associate 60% negligent.

3. If the jurisdiction follows the doctrine of “pure” comparative negligence, and Associate suffered $10,000 in damages, what will Associate recover in a suit against Exec?

(A) $10,000 (B) $6,000 (C) $4,000 (D) Nothing

4. If this jurisdiction follows the doctrine of “modified” comparative negligence, and Associate suffered $10,000 in damages, what will Associate recover in a suit against Exec?

(A) $10,000 (B) $6,000 (C) $4,000 (D) Nothing

5. Assume for the purposes of this question that Jose has a claim for damages against both Exec and Associate and that he obtains a judgment for the full amount of his damages from Associate. Which theory will now allow Associate to pursue Exec in order to have Exec pay for part of the damages?

(A) Subrogation (B) Collateral sources rule (C) Contribution (D) Indemnity

Three short (or long, depending on how you look at it) years ago my husband and I were itching and waiting and wondering where we’d be living and what we’d be doing with our lives.  He had applied to law school and was waiting to hear back from several schools.  I had resigned from my teaching job because we were positively sure that in just a few short months we’d be packing up our little house and moving to South Bend, Indiana.  I’d even picked out our apartment.

In the course of four weeks, we went from moving to Notre Dame to not moving at all to going to South Asia for a year and raising support to work with orphans and packing up our entire house, only to learn that we’d be staying right where we were for the next three years.  It was a whirlwind, to say the least.  I packed up  my entire life and then unpacked it in the very same place, in the very same cupboards.

Law school began a few short weeks later and I, jobless and lonely, attacked our backyard with a vengeance.  I put in a vegetable garden.  I read Mark Helprin’s classic work, Soldier of a Great War.  I made tiny grocery trips each day because I needed something to do while my husband was at school.

In addition to his new “mistresses” (huge law school books), I loved to hate this thing called West Law.  Lexis Nexis for law students, it seemed that he spent every waking moment either reading the mistress-novels (I was sure they called out to him wooingly in the night, just like the Sirens in The Odyssey) or consulting the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-wise computer program who apparently had all the answers, or at least the answers worth knowing.  Me or the seductive-sirens of looming tomes, West Law, and a horrible law school building with florescent lighting.  Yes, I admit, at times I can be dramatic.

Ahem.

Fast forward to last month. 

“Hey babe,” my J.D.-and-soon-to-be-Esquire-husband said.

“Yes?”

“What should I do with these West Law points?”

“What do you mean,” I asked.  “You mean they actually GAVE you something for using their system instead of taking more money?”

“Yes, they do,” he responded with a grin.

“Well, let’s look.”  So we did.  I must admit I didn’t have high hopes.  Normally you get an electric razor or a cheesey wine cork set or something like that.  But then, as he scrolled through the list, I saw it.  A cherry-red, 7.25 quart dutch oven from Le Creuset.

I’ve wanted one of these ever since I was in culinary school.  Stove to oven to refrigerator and back again.  In what else can you cook Julia Child’s boeuf bourguignon?  Nothing.  And there it was.  We had enough points.  And so my sweet husband, always the giver, said:

“Well, these points are yours.  You suffered enough for them too.  Let’s do it.”

My beautiful (and free… well, sort of) dutch oven arrived this week.  The picture doesn’t do it justice.  It is sleek and shiny and calling to be used.  When I unwrapped the box, I just stood and stared for a moment.  That seemingly-unattainable mark of culinary excellence was now sitting in my kitchen, the result of a website I used to hate and a hard-working husband.

Good things come to those who wait.  Even the most unexpected things.

Take this weekend.  We slept in.  Stayed in our pajamas until past noon.  Drank several cups of coffee.  Read the paper — together (whereas before I clipped coupons and he read Commercial Paper or Torts or something equally awful-sounding).  Went to a baseball game with friends that went into the twelfth inning and, according to my lawyer-husband, “It was AWESOME!” and there was no stress whatsoever over what he wasn’t doing or reading or writing.

And although he has eight weeks of bar prep left and I have eight weeks of work left, we’re both as happy as can be.  We have time to run around the lake, watch movies, go on dates, read books outloud to each other, sit on our deck, swim, have dinner with friends or just by ourselves.

I’m falling deeper in love every day… and I think my face *still* hurts from smiling.

Joy-filled.

 Colorful.

Chalkboard-themed.

Warm.

Summery & On the Deck.

Salads atop law books (yes, he really read all of those).

Food-filled.

Just perfect.

My face still hurts from smiling.  More to come.

Thank you for humoring me and for not sending me “I am an annoyed reader now… get over it” emails.  I’m sure you’ve been tempted.

This morning we walked out the door at 5:30 so JPJD could have one last morning of caffeinated study.  “Saturday is going to be the second-happiest day of my life,” I said.  “Why not today,” he asked.  “Because Saturday means  you are DONE and GRADUATED and NEVER GOING BACK THERE AGAIN.”

Truth be told, I’ve not been a big fan of law school, especially the first year.  As it turns out, I’m a selfish person and a selfish wife who would like the world to revolve around me.  Somehow those big, heavy law books made me feel threatened.

But here’s the best part — God, in His mercy, has made these past three years the best three years of my life and of our marriage.  Hard?  Yes.  But worth it?  Totally.  Recently I’ve been learning that God is always doing a thousand different things through one circumstance (or a few) in our lives.  He doesn’t waste anything.  Not only has He not wasted law school — He’s used it in the most beautiful of ways.

We have this photo hanging up in our entry way… a memory of the happiest day of my life, a day of anticipation and of dreams fulfilled.  Saturday will be like that.  Three tears of waiting and praying and longing… and then, completion.  God is good.