This was his first time teaching it and I left knowing almost nothing. He is a really nice guy and sometimes can be pretty funny, and clearly has a very impressive resume (he clerked for RBG), but he is seriously way too philosophical in his approach without teaching the underlying black letter law. The exam was a closed book and notes (seriously?!), and only at the last minute did he allow us to bring our textbooks.
He barely gave us an idea of what the exam would be like and there were no past exams of his for us to go off of. He did end up giving us exams from other professors he thought might have been helpful but then refused to go over them with students in office hours, etc. Everyone thought the exam was easy and so the curve was very tight. Exam was a giant two-part issue spotter with a word count.
Overall most of our class agreed we were not enthused about Hershovitz. I would not recommend unless you really enjoy philosophy and/or want to hear him casually name drop how he went to Yale for law school.
I also had Hershovitz for Crim and had the exact opposite impression. He is a really interesting and engaging lecturer, asking students for their own opinions and not simply to spout off what’s in the textbook, which was a refreshing change of pace from much of my 1L experience. He does lean toward the philosophical – he likes to highlight the ways the law is unclear, vague, unfair, or poorly mapped on to the problems it purports to address – which could be frustrating but isn’t a bad way to teach the law (imo), given the fact that those various grey areas often come up on exams. He’s always happy to meet in office hours or by appointment to spin out any questions you have and he actually likes his students, appreciates you coming, and wants to get to know you. I think he’s great and he’s one of my favorite professors at MLaw for it.
His exam was pretty easy – he gave more than enough time needed so that you had time to edit, plan, etc- I even searched in my casebook for 10 minutes for a particular notes-case I needed.
Hershovitz is a really smart guy and is especially knowledgable about torts. That said, he is a “love him or hate him” professor. I personally found his attitude and teaching style condescending and way too philosophical for my tastes. His cold call style was also more “pick on a few students repeatedly for a few classes, and then move on to others.” His exams are typically closed book (and both Criminal law and Torts are similar – two really large issue-spotters with a few questions for each prompt), but generally students find them fair and the curve is probably tight.
Had Hershovitz for crim. It was his first time teaching it, which maybe explained why he didn’t really seem to understand the material very well. I and my friends basically taught ourselves crim using Dressler. That being said, he was very nice, and charismatic, and clearly cared about students. I thought he handled the rape unit well. It was BS how he made the exam closed-note, so we had to write our notes in our textbooks or not have any notes at all. Otherwise, it was fair. People say Hersh is polarizing, but I and most people I know were just fine with him.
Based on my experience with him in torts and the crim reviews from above, class discussion are more philosophy / public policy oriented and less about black letter law (though he does teach that and it’s what he exam is based on). I found class very engaging, but I find him personally to be somewhat of an asshole? He doesn’t seem to care about students individually. Definitely recommend for the teaching, but don’t expect to have a relationship with him.
He turned every class into a Law and Philosophy class, which I didn’t ask for. I did not learn enough law in his class. I regret studying the textbook and class notes instead of outside supplements for the final.
Also one of the unlucky ones who had Hershovitz for crim. When I told him in office hours that I didn’t love law school, he repeatedly told me that I was the only student he had ever heard say that and encouraged me to drop out. He made inappropriate comments about rape and sexual assault and is incredibly arrogant.
Had Herschovitz for my 1L elective – Philosophy of Law. I’m currently in my 4th semester at Michigan Law and that class is still my favorite. He is brilliant and assigns thought-provoking articles that offer a nice change of pace from other law classes. If you are able to take a seminar with him, do it!
MLaw Prof Reviews
Had Hershovitz for Criminal Law
This was his first time teaching it and I left knowing almost nothing. He is a really nice guy and sometimes can be pretty funny, and clearly has a very impressive resume (he clerked for RBG), but he is seriously way too philosophical in his approach without teaching the underlying black letter law. The exam was a closed book and notes (seriously?!), and only at the last minute did he allow us to bring our textbooks.
He barely gave us an idea of what the exam would be like and there were no past exams of his for us to go off of. He did end up giving us exams from other professors he thought might have been helpful but then refused to go over them with students in office hours, etc. Everyone thought the exam was easy and so the curve was very tight. Exam was a giant two-part issue spotter with a word count.
Overall most of our class agreed we were not enthused about Hershovitz. I would not recommend unless you really enjoy philosophy and/or want to hear him casually name drop how he went to Yale for law school.
I also had Hershovitz for Crim and had the exact opposite impression. He is a really interesting and engaging lecturer, asking students for their own opinions and not simply to spout off what’s in the textbook, which was a refreshing change of pace from much of my 1L experience. He does lean toward the philosophical – he likes to highlight the ways the law is unclear, vague, unfair, or poorly mapped on to the problems it purports to address – which could be frustrating but isn’t a bad way to teach the law (imo), given the fact that those various grey areas often come up on exams. He’s always happy to meet in office hours or by appointment to spin out any questions you have and he actually likes his students, appreciates you coming, and wants to get to know you. I think he’s great and he’s one of my favorite professors at MLaw for it.
His exam was pretty easy – he gave more than enough time needed so that you had time to edit, plan, etc- I even searched in my casebook for 10 minutes for a particular notes-case I needed.
Hershovitz is a really smart guy and is especially knowledgable about torts. That said, he is a “love him or hate him” professor. I personally found his attitude and teaching style condescending and way too philosophical for my tastes. His cold call style was also more “pick on a few students repeatedly for a few classes, and then move on to others.” His exams are typically closed book (and both Criminal law and Torts are similar – two really large issue-spotters with a few questions for each prompt), but generally students find them fair and the curve is probably tight.
Had Hershovitz for torts. Liked him well enough. He’s quite philosophically oriented.
Had Hershovitz for crim. It was his first time teaching it, which maybe explained why he didn’t really seem to understand the material very well. I and my friends basically taught ourselves crim using Dressler. That being said, he was very nice, and charismatic, and clearly cared about students. I thought he handled the rape unit well. It was BS how he made the exam closed-note, so we had to write our notes in our textbooks or not have any notes at all. Otherwise, it was fair. People say Hersh is polarizing, but I and most people I know were just fine with him.
Based on my experience with him in torts and the crim reviews from above, class discussion are more philosophy / public policy oriented and less about black letter law (though he does teach that and it’s what he exam is based on). I found class very engaging, but I find him personally to be somewhat of an asshole? He doesn’t seem to care about students individually. Definitely recommend for the teaching, but don’t expect to have a relationship with him.
He turned every class into a Law and Philosophy class, which I didn’t ask for. I did not learn enough law in his class. I regret studying the textbook and class notes instead of outside supplements for the final.
Also one of the unlucky ones who had Hershovitz for crim. When I told him in office hours that I didn’t love law school, he repeatedly told me that I was the only student he had ever heard say that and encouraged me to drop out. He made inappropriate comments about rape and sexual assault and is incredibly arrogant.
Had Herschovitz for my 1L elective – Philosophy of Law. I’m currently in my 4th semester at Michigan Law and that class is still my favorite. He is brilliant and assigns thought-provoking articles that offer a nice change of pace from other law classes. If you are able to take a seminar with him, do it!
Read his book and you will do well on the exam. Not even kidding.