Rauterberg is great! He is very interested in the material he teaches and this comes across in the way he teaches. He’s also very invested in making sure his students are actually following along and learning the subject. Definitely worth getting to know outside of class and getting lunch/drinks with!
His exams are very fair and generally a combination of multiple choice/issue spotter.
Rauterberg is an okay teacher but does not temper his libertarian political views and will teach some of his opinions as though they are facts. I left the class having learned the core concepts of corporate law but I could have done without his suggestions that low income people don’t own companies because it’s more efficient and better for the “common good” for rich people to own them.
Professor Rauterberg has been my favorite professor in three years here (Contracts & Corporate Lawyer). His enthusiasm for what he teaches is contagious, and his lectures are engaging. Even if corporate law is not your cup of tea, Rauterberg does a fantastic job of making financial concepts accessible to those without a background in finance/economics (although some of my classmates may disagree). Outside of normal lectures, Rauterberg typically includes a handful of classes per semester which deep-dive into a real world example of something relevant to the subject material. I found these to be as helpful and interesting as his lectures focused on the case book.
Best of all, however, Rauterberg is the same person you see in the classroom as he is outside. He genuinely cares about his students and will go out of his way to say “Hi” in the hallway if you’ve had a class with him before. Take advantage of his office hours and offers to grab drinks because its always an enjoyable experience.
He is one of my favorite professors here, in terms of both teaching style and personality. He is so clear, does not hide the ball, and his PowerPoints (in Corporate Lawyer) are so helpful. I also find him incredibly funny. I often find myself chuckling in his class. I do get this vague vibe that he’s not very approachable after class though.
Rauterberg is a nice man and obviously has a lot of passion for what he teaches. With that said, Capital Markets (Fall ’23) was the worst class I’ve ever taken in law school.
First, the class has relatively little law and is more economic theory based. A lot of time is spent on discussing why the stock market functions the way it does (increased access to liquidity, spreading out risk, etc) but in a way that was too much and way far into the weeds for a law school class.
Second, Prof. Rauterberg loves the cold call method. He will cold call up to 10 people a class with no rhyme or reason, and the questions border on ridiculous. He isn’t a mean cold caller, but his cold calls are not often about reading of that day but more about general theoretical topics that come up. It’s hard to explain but it is reason enough not to take the class, imo.
Third, the final was restricted meaning no access to desktop notes or the book if you bought it for class. He allows outlines and notes to be used in the exam but you have to print them out. It’s not that big of a deal, but it’s annoying and totally unnecessary.
Disagree about point #2. Since we didn’t really read cases in the class, we didn’t get cold called on typical law school things like facts or arguments. We did get asked questions about parts of a statute that we read, or questions that required you to think critically about the current regulation. But I found the cold calls to be very easy if you’ve done the reading, and Rauterberg is very nice about it, and never grills his students.
Cap Markets was the worst course I have taken at the law school. The readings are dense and do not connect to each other. The lectures do not do anything to explain the material. The cold calls ask policy questions when the majority of the class does not even understand the underlying substance the question is based on. Cold calls way too often — think of the class as a seminar but the professor is calling on you for your opinion but you don’t even have a basis to have an opinion because you don’t know what’s going on. His book is awful and the readings are at least annoying if not sometimes very difficult to understand. Not totally sure why we had to print out our outline, nor were we told about this until the midpoint of the semester. He started to get visibly frustrated that most of the class was not reading, but I don’t blame anyone; the readings started to become pointless, too long, too dense and simply not worth anyone’s time.
Took Rauterberg for Cap Markets Regulation, Fall 2023. I had a blast. Rauterberg’s enthusiasm for the material and for teaching makes lectures engaging. He doesn’t really cold call that much, and the answers to his cold calls are usually straight forward and obvious if you’ve done the readings. The readings were a bit dense, but I found them enjoyable and interesting, if you’re interested in economics, trading markets and practices, and financial regulation. The exam was extremely fair and tested on a very representative set of material that was reflective of the entire semester. As long as you keep up with the readings, the class will be manageable.
Took Cap Markets Fall ’23. I would not take this course again. This is more of a survey-level course designed for policy wonks. Rauterberg spends about equal time discussing economic incentives of participants in different trading markets (stocks, bonds, etc.) as he does on the legal regimes regulating those markets/participants. He also spends a lot of time on history. It does not go into nearly as much depth on statutes as Sec Reg. The course became more of a seminar after learning the main regulation (Reg NMS), by discussing other topics at a surface level every class or so (antitrust, insider trading, etc.).
I don’t think this course is generally useful for corporate/transactional students going into big law; the subject matter would be a niche practice at few NYC firms. This class would be much more interesting to someone with a economics background, and/or someone focused on being a government-side regulatory lawyer or policymaker (SEC, CFTC, CFPB).
Rauterberg is a good professor but I don’t think this course is designed well. Readings can be long and very dry. Exam is perfectly reasonable.
MLaw Prof Reviews
Rauterberg is great! He is very interested in the material he teaches and this comes across in the way he teaches. He’s also very invested in making sure his students are actually following along and learning the subject. Definitely worth getting to know outside of class and getting lunch/drinks with!
His exams are very fair and generally a combination of multiple choice/issue spotter.
Rauterberg is an okay teacher but does not temper his libertarian political views and will teach some of his opinions as though they are facts. I left the class having learned the core concepts of corporate law but I could have done without his suggestions that low income people don’t own companies because it’s more efficient and better for the “common good” for rich people to own them.
Professor Rauterberg has been my favorite professor in three years here (Contracts & Corporate Lawyer). His enthusiasm for what he teaches is contagious, and his lectures are engaging. Even if corporate law is not your cup of tea, Rauterberg does a fantastic job of making financial concepts accessible to those without a background in finance/economics (although some of my classmates may disagree). Outside of normal lectures, Rauterberg typically includes a handful of classes per semester which deep-dive into a real world example of something relevant to the subject material. I found these to be as helpful and interesting as his lectures focused on the case book.
Best of all, however, Rauterberg is the same person you see in the classroom as he is outside. He genuinely cares about his students and will go out of his way to say “Hi” in the hallway if you’ve had a class with him before. Take advantage of his office hours and offers to grab drinks because its always an enjoyable experience.
He is one of my favorite professors here, in terms of both teaching style and personality. He is so clear, does not hide the ball, and his PowerPoints (in Corporate Lawyer) are so helpful. I also find him incredibly funny. I often find myself chuckling in his class. I do get this vague vibe that he’s not very approachable after class though.
This prof is kind & enthusiastic.
highly recommend you take CapMarkets with him. It might seem scary and dense but he’s a great lecturer and his exam was very fair. I learned a TON
Rauterberg is a nice man and obviously has a lot of passion for what he teaches. With that said, Capital Markets (Fall ’23) was the worst class I’ve ever taken in law school.
First, the class has relatively little law and is more economic theory based. A lot of time is spent on discussing why the stock market functions the way it does (increased access to liquidity, spreading out risk, etc) but in a way that was too much and way far into the weeds for a law school class.
Second, Prof. Rauterberg loves the cold call method. He will cold call up to 10 people a class with no rhyme or reason, and the questions border on ridiculous. He isn’t a mean cold caller, but his cold calls are not often about reading of that day but more about general theoretical topics that come up. It’s hard to explain but it is reason enough not to take the class, imo.
Third, the final was restricted meaning no access to desktop notes or the book if you bought it for class. He allows outlines and notes to be used in the exam but you have to print them out. It’s not that big of a deal, but it’s annoying and totally unnecessary.
Disagree about point #2. Since we didn’t really read cases in the class, we didn’t get cold called on typical law school things like facts or arguments. We did get asked questions about parts of a statute that we read, or questions that required you to think critically about the current regulation. But I found the cold calls to be very easy if you’ve done the reading, and Rauterberg is very nice about it, and never grills his students.
Cap Markets was the worst course I have taken at the law school. The readings are dense and do not connect to each other. The lectures do not do anything to explain the material. The cold calls ask policy questions when the majority of the class does not even understand the underlying substance the question is based on. Cold calls way too often — think of the class as a seminar but the professor is calling on you for your opinion but you don’t even have a basis to have an opinion because you don’t know what’s going on. His book is awful and the readings are at least annoying if not sometimes very difficult to understand. Not totally sure why we had to print out our outline, nor were we told about this until the midpoint of the semester. He started to get visibly frustrated that most of the class was not reading, but I don’t blame anyone; the readings started to become pointless, too long, too dense and simply not worth anyone’s time.
Took Rauterberg for Cap Markets Regulation, Fall 2023. I had a blast. Rauterberg’s enthusiasm for the material and for teaching makes lectures engaging. He doesn’t really cold call that much, and the answers to his cold calls are usually straight forward and obvious if you’ve done the readings. The readings were a bit dense, but I found them enjoyable and interesting, if you’re interested in economics, trading markets and practices, and financial regulation. The exam was extremely fair and tested on a very representative set of material that was reflective of the entire semester. As long as you keep up with the readings, the class will be manageable.
Took Cap Markets Fall ’23. I would not take this course again. This is more of a survey-level course designed for policy wonks. Rauterberg spends about equal time discussing economic incentives of participants in different trading markets (stocks, bonds, etc.) as he does on the legal regimes regulating those markets/participants. He also spends a lot of time on history. It does not go into nearly as much depth on statutes as Sec Reg. The course became more of a seminar after learning the main regulation (Reg NMS), by discussing other topics at a surface level every class or so (antitrust, insider trading, etc.).
I don’t think this course is generally useful for corporate/transactional students going into big law; the subject matter would be a niche practice at few NYC firms. This class would be much more interesting to someone with a economics background, and/or someone focused on being a government-side regulatory lawyer or policymaker (SEC, CFTC, CFPB).
Rauterberg is a good professor but I don’t think this course is designed well. Readings can be long and very dry. Exam is perfectly reasonable.