Straight to the point, I do not know jackshit about writing in lawschool exams. I understand concepts, i read them but i do not know how to write them in the answer sheets that will fetch me marks, and I also don't know how to ratto-fi everything in the syllabus. Any help would be appreciated. Please!

There is no need to ratto- fi everything. I am assuming you may be from science or commerce background. But anyways most people face a little bit difficulty in writing long ass answer which usually requires in law some tips from my side although I am not any pro.

Most people might not agree but no. of pages filled matter( depends on the teacher also)

If you understand the concept just write in your own words with few technical jargons

to increase the length use as much example as you can

Start your answer with introduction and end it with conclusion

there is no need to remember case laws for everything and also try to identify some common case laws which can be used in different sections

you can also asks your teacher for help by writing few sample answers and tell them to grade it gradually your skillset will increase.

Hope you do well in your exams.

For so-called problem questions (where you are given a scenario and you have to apply the law to it):

1. Read the question carefully. Think a lot about what it is asking you to do. Many questions might say 'advise Party X'. This is not 'argue for Party X', it is 'advise'. Therefore, you should take a judge's birds-eye view of this sort of thing. You should advise impartially, applying the law to the facts, justifying whatever conclusion comes.

2. You would obviously gain marks if you not just applied the law, but also tried to do things like distinguishing. E.g., if a fact-pattern in a particular case comes to mind, think of how the fact-pattern in your exam is different to the fact pattern in that case; if you do spot a difference, explain to the examiner why the obvious case A might not be most applicable, or why case A's approach would have to be different in the circumstances of the facts you are given.

3. As this is, after all, an academic piece of writing and not a true advice letter to a client, the examiner is not only interested to know whether you know what the law is and how it applies to this situation, but she may very well also be interested in your ideas of what the law should be. Therefore, you may want to delv into your list of 'further' or 'recommended' readings in preparation for your exam and think about how you may want to encorporate some ideas from those. Maybe a small paragraph saying something like 'If the law worked the way Author E in Article XYZ says it should work/proposes how it should work, the outcome in this case would be different because...' and then maybe 'it should/shouldn't be different because...' [advance justification].

4. You may find ambiguities in the wording of problem questions. Always assume these to be deliberate. Write down in your response at the relevant point what you would infer from the ambiguity - if there is information missing, what you think it would have been, if it had been given. NB: If there are two or more possibilities, don't bother exploring all of them in detail; only get into a possibility of what an ambiguity might mean if it changes the legal advice (i.e., if your conclusion on that specific point of the scenario or your conclusion overall would change depending upon the possibility).

5. In terms of structure and how to deal with approaching individual elements (sub-parts almost) of the question, divide your response into clearly-marked sections, using headings and subheadings. You will always be looked upon favourably for this. A heading would be a specific aspect of the problem (e.g., whether there is consideration if thinking about a contract formation), while any subheadings would deal with things under the broader section. Depending on how much moving-room you have in terms of word-count, include an introduction and conclusion. In the introduction, explain clearly what you will argue, and signpost the reader to how you will argue it and where in the body of your answer you will argue something. In your conclusion, recap your argument, tie it back together, showing how the threads of your argument connect together. NB: Be pragmatic on this! If you have a lot of ground to cover but very few words to do it in, there isn't any reason, in my view, why you shouldn't be able to dispense with the introduction and conclusion.

6. Keep the language simple. No need to be flowery. Nobody's checking here if you are the world's next Shakespeare. At the same time, your writing should be as accurate and correct as you can possibly make it.