This course is a must-take for students with their eyes set on law school, but make sure you plan your quarter around its' workload. We read/covered dozens of cases, each of which required reading and parsing through many pages of dense legal writing. The midterm and final are very tough, as he asks you to apply lengthy rules/precedents set in each case to analyze three provided fact patterns, each in their own blue book. The midterm and final take up the entire class period (nearly three hours) and I filled all three of my books both times. Even though it was a lot, it was all worth it in the end. It's a lot of work, but the course is so interesting and enriching. This class was one of the few times I felt like I really accomplished something at the end of a quarter. If you can handle the workload, don't be deterred from taking this one-of-a-kind comm class at UCLA!

If you go to all of his lectures, you will get an A.
Selling course reader
Text **********

Great professor and great class!
Currently selling the course reader for $30 text me at ********** if interested!

I have the textbook in the class. Just finished the quarter for this class and would only take this class if you want to go to law school or have any interest in this topic.

Have the textbook for this class and will sell this for less than the original pricing!!

Text me if you want the textbook **********

Kassabian's 101 class is interesting. It is pretty challenging and all the rules and facts of the cases take a while to understand. If you read, ATTEND lecture and discussion, and memorize all the rules and how they could be applied to hypothetical situations, you can definitely get an A. There is an midterm and a final- thats it.

SELLING COURSE READER FOR
$40.00/
It's $80 at the store.

Text me ASAP if you are interested:
**********

Like the last review stated, avoid this guy at all cost! He does not belong at UCLA. For Raffi it is just a game to get an extra good point on his resume. As you can see from grade distribution, he is super stingy! He tells students that he once failed at University level and had to go through some shady law school in Downtown LA and then transfer to UCLA. < this apparently his justification for screwing with people's grades.TA's are also incompetent and he is not available!

Kassabian does not know how to teach, confuses himself and the class, and is a stingy grader. On top of that he is completely unavailable, as he is a practicing full time attorney. TO ALL NEWLY ADMITTED COMM MAJORS; THERE IS NO NEED TO TAKE CS 101 ANYMORE. I would advise you to avoid this class like the plague. The class was hell from start to end. Received worst grade at UCLA ever.

Professor Kassabian is very nice and knows what he is talking about, and he was approachable after every class meeting. He mentioned several times that he can stay talking to students as long as they need!

Suggestions to the Professor, if he is going to read it:
***I think extra office hours would not hurt! I felt like knowing everything during the class, but the discussions helped to raise diffferent questions!

***Also, Prof. Kassabian needs to make extra evening for the midterm and final reviews, specifically going over the practice hypos or just ANSWERING QUESTIONS because e-mail system does not inform everyone who has similar questions which could be adressed over the meeting! (although he tried to put all questions in one file and posted them on class website for the midterm, he forgot to do this for the final)

***Another problem with this class of 150 ppl is that Kassabian is not a loud person, people in the back could not hear him at ALL! We have been complaining about it all the time, but Kassabian used mike only once or twice - please, take an example from Professor SUMAN, he always uses mike!!!

***In addition, I've noticed that he was using the notes which outlined every single case with the rules, and TAs had them as well, but he did not want to share them with the class! So many students suffered not because they did not read the cases but because they did not know specifically what is important and what is not for the exam. (*suggestion to students - bring a voice recorder, it helps a lot, I had to listen over the lectures and transcribe important things).
The notes, by the way, many people got through their friends who took 101 with Professor Hobbs, but the other part of the class did not have them, and I think this was unfair!

***Another thing: PLEASE bring several hypos to the example when disscussing the case! It is essential way to learn because you know how to apply rules to different relevant facts by practicing them!!! But we only got practice hypos to practice on our own, which is NOT a good learning experience!

TO THE STUDENTS:
This class was hard, but law-related classes are always like that because you need to read cases written many years ago and with a specific language, about which everybody complains even today. Plus, not only you have to memorise the rules used almost in every case you read and several "thinkings" the justices provide, you have to memorise every single relevant fact from the cases (although this facts can help you on the exam to raise more issues and guide your analysis, this is Kassabian's style of "helping us out").

Well, midterm and final are also hard because you have to write for three hours NON_STOP, otherwise your analysis will not be complete. My hands weve numb for about 20 minutes after this extensive writing!

There are 3 hypos (1 -for each blue book) which takes at least an hour to write (suggets you wear a wrist watch to time yourself out, this helped me a lot!) and I suggest that before the exam you practice writing everything by timing yourself. I did that too, because it helps you to organize writing in your head + and allows you to cut less relevant info, bc you have to leave some extra time for the disscussion of specific facts mentioned in the case!

This was Kassabian first time teaching this particular class, and I hope that he can find ways to improve, so I will leave the judgement to you!

I felt compelled to write a review, as Kassabian's class was entertaining, informative, as well as useful. I'm glad I came along, as this professor has not been given an adequate shake by the below posters.

1) As a new 1L in law school, I can say this class gave me an excellent undergad foundation in reviewing and analyzing case law. Many sources now advocate expanding law school exam analysis beyond IRAC; however, having been exposed to the method and numerous cases, I believe I gained an edge having taken CS101 with Kassabian.

2) Kassabian is busy, as he is a full-time practicing attorney. However, he was never unavailable and always hung around as long as necessary after class to answer specific questions. I cannot attest to his availability during office hours or by email, as I always clarified any necessary points in person either before or after class, or during break.

3) I know nothing of Kassabian's undergrad career, but I do know he started law school at a well known and long standing Southern California law school--one that has produced a plethora of local practicing attorneys. Having said that, I also know he made a drastic and uncharacteristic jump in transferring to UCLA School of Law. This should be a testament to his ability, not his inadequacy (I believe he was #1 in his class prior to transferring; that's an accomplishment at any ABA law school).

4) In addition to useful practical skills for someone interested in law case-study, this class was very informative and entertaining in its subject matter. The rights afforded by the first amendment are not well understood. This class explains the beauty of freedom of speech, as well as the (few) ways in which it is justly and necessarily limited. This understanding is delivered in an entertaining historical context.

In conclusion, I think most of the reviews below do not do this course or the professor justice. This class is more than adequate in explaining the material it purports to cover in an appropriate contextual basis (i.e. the ways in which the amendment has been tested in the forum designated to do so). Moreover, the appropriate analysis used to do well in this class is useful for those entertaining law school.

Classes involving case-study analysis necessitate more engagement than strictly reading text and memorizing historical facts; this class requires active thinking and application of the rules contained in the cases. It is easy to do well in this class if one is willing to engage the material. Read the cases, show up, engage in the discussion, note the rules applied by the court in the various cases, and follow the exam instructions and format recommended by Kassabian. If you do this it is virtually impossible to not do well, to not learn something useful about the first amendment, and to not enjoy the class.

The class is like an easy version of a pre-law class. You read Supreme Court cases regarding the first amendment and you must learn the rules given by the court regarding such a situation and you must later apply them to hypothetical situations for the midterm and the final. It is a straightforward class with no busy work. He is not available much except the days of lecture, but i did not email him at all so he might be more available if help is needed. The only down side is writing for 3 hours for both the exam and the final and the lectures are 3 hours. Most times it ends early. With competent writing skills this class is not difficult at all.