ELEMENTS B15: GROUP WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT #1

Sub-Assignment 1C2: Student Submissions & Prof’s Comments

(2) Formulate an argument that the application of the policy of rewarding useful labor to the hypothetical supports concluding that, at the time Niles took them from the traps, the weasels were not Frazier’s property.

In presentation below:

  • Student submissions in Arial font roughly ordered from best to worst.
  • I inserted letters and numbers as markers to reference in my comments.
  • Suggested edits indicated by strikethroughs on text to be omittedand [brackets around text to be added.]
  • Red text = Accuracy Problems. Double strikethroughs indicate significant inaccuracy.
  • Blue text = Clarity/presentation problems
  • My Comments in Times New Roman Font on bottom of same page or on page following each submission.
  • Overall Comment for top two submissions adjusted upward on 11/5 to sync with later-graded questions.

(A) Frazier’s lack of useful labor began with the faulty construction of his traps.

(B) (1) According to Shaw, a private enclosure must meet several criteria to be considered an effective meansof trapping an animal:

i) it must bring the wild animal under its control;

ii) it must maintain control over the wild animal in a manner that clearly shows there is no intent to abandon the animal; and

iii) it must make escape highly improbable.

(2) The fact t[T]hat the weasels were able to escape after a two-day period coupled with the fact [and] that Frazier was only able to check the trap every four to five days shows that Frazier failed to meet the effective trapping criteria laid out in Shaw.

(C) (1) Conversely, by snatching a few weasels from Frazier’s traps, Niles is actually providing a positive social output.

(2) The state issued a bounty of ten dollars per weasel because the weasels were affecting the livestock in the local area.

(3) Niles is helping to reduce the weasel population by ensuring that more than half of the weasels that fall into Frazier’s traps do not escape.

(4) The state is not as concerned with whom it pays so much as how many weasels it can incentivize its citizens to kill.

(D) (1) Some might say [F might argue] that Niles ought to dig his own holes and kill only the weasels that are trapped therein. However, this plan does not align as well with the state’s goal.

(2) If there were no holes currently in the ground, it could easily be argued that [perhaps] each man ought to dig his own holes. But there are holes ; and they are trapping weasels.

(3) Unfortunately, half of these weasels are getting away and continuing to wreak havoc on farmers’ chicken coops,and their respective eggs.

(4) As it stands, Frazier dug too many holesto properly supervise by himself.

(E) There is a stark contrast between labor and useful labor. Somebody needs to kill these weasels before they escape so that society as a whole can benefit and Niles, fortunately, has been providing this useful labor.

OVERALL: Generally Solid Work. # of concerns, but lot of useful ideas. Probably Best 2015 1C2.

Focus on Topic: Pretty Good Overall.

  • Introduction & Conclusion properly reference labor but should more explicitly tie labor policy to F not having property rights.
  • (B) is structured as an application of the test you state in (B1) and is not connected to labor policy at all. Also, why use what is essentially the subject of Sub-Assignment 1A as the heart of your argument?
  • (C) & (D) clearly concerned with relative value of F’s labor v. N’s, but would be helpful to reference useful labor & policy more explicitly.

Labor Policy: Helpful to provide a brief clear explanation/description of the policy.

Application of Policy: Generally Solid.

Social Importance: Good noting significance of weasels escaping and that state has put weight behind killing. Might explain/defend (C4) a bit more.

Shouldn’t Reward F: Pretty Uneven. Could be much clearer about why F’s labor should not be rewarded, including defending that 50% capture rate is insufficient.

  • Could be clearer about what he did wrong (I’m not sure assertions in (A) and (D4) are correct; see below). E.g., could be clearer in (B) which prong you think F doesn’t meet and why (and tie back to labor).
  • Helpful to articulate what he could have done in addition/instead.

Should Reward N: Quite Solid. Good idea noting benefits of N’s actions and you generally give a solid sense of what these are. Very nice at (C1) and (C3) not overstating N’s contributions; he takes a few extra weasels out of circulation, but problem doesn’t tell us how many. Good addressing argument in (D) that N ought to do his own work. Might be a little clearer about why F’s labor isn’t useful anyway b/c N relies on it.

Accuracy: Number of concerns, especially point in bold font below.

  • (A) Not clear anything wrong with traps. Checking traps every two days sufficient to get 100% of weasels
  • (B1) Shaw does not address what is “effective means of trapping.” Test is to determine whether net creates property rights for net-owner.
  • (B1-iii). Language of case does not make this a requirement
  • (D3) As written, looks like the eggs either were laid by the farmers or by the coops. 
  • (D4) Not clear this is the problem. If he only has time to check every four or five days, same issue recurs no matter how many holes he’s checking.
  • (E) Red phrase looks like empty rhetoric and I think it’s fairer to say “There’s a fine line between labor and useful labor.” Instead, explain why F’s labor is not useful or not as useful as N’s.

Writing/Presentation:

  • Some wordiness/unneeded passive voice throughout. I made some suggested edits above; room for more.
  • Through (C) + (D) + (E), you interweave references to importance of killing weasels, to what N is doing right, and to what F is not doing. Might try to reorganize to address each of these concerns one at a time and separately.

(A) Considerations of efficient labor as interpreted by the Shaw courtwould most likely lead to the notion that Frazier did not have property rights in the weasels at the time that Niles took them out of the traps.

(B) (1) Although theShawcourt used these same considerationsin determining that the fishermen did have possessory rightsin the fish when they were taken from the nets, the present case bears [contains] crucial distinctions.

(2) Only a small amount of fish were able to escape from the net; despite not being perfect, it was sufficient in that [most of (?)] the fish could be taken out by the fishermen at will.

(3) Thus in Shaw, the fishermen’s labor was efficient because [most of] the school of fish [they caught] could be retrieved from the net, despite the potential for a few to escape.

(C) (1) In the present case, however, Frazier’s traps and labor are too ineffective to engender [create] property rights.

(2) About half of the weasels escape after being trapped. Furthermore, Frazier only checks the traps every four to five days despite the fact that the weasels can dig out of the traps in two days.

(3) Granting Frazier property rights over these weasels without either improving the traps or having someone check them more frequently, would be rewarding ineffective labor. Half of the captured weasels would continue escaping back to the wild as a nuisance to the surrounding area.

OVERALL: Pretty Solid. Probably 2d Best 2015 1C2.

Focus on Topic: Generally Solid. Good keeping focus on labor. Helpful to work explicitly with phrase I gave you: “rewarding useful labor.” Not clear that “effective” and especially “efficient” mean the same thing. Helpful to provide a separate concluding sentence, reiterating that policy suggests no property rights.

Labor Policy: Helpful to provide a brief clear explanation/description of the policy.

Application of Policy: Pretty Good.

Social Importance: Good idea in (C3) to note harm from escaping weasels. Might do this in a bit more detail and more toward beginning to drive home significance of F’s weaknesses.

Shouldn’t Reward F: Some good ideas; needs more defense

  • Need to defend that 50% capture rate is insufficient and that F’s labor was “ineffective” despite catching many weasels.
  • Good idea to compare to labor of fishermen in Shaw.
  • Good idea to note problem with checking schedule and to suggest better labor and to suggest that F doesn’t have to check himself. Might be more explicit about what’s wrong with traps or how to improve them.

Accuracy: A few concerns:

  • (A) & (B1): Need to be clear that Shaw never explicitly mentions rewarding labor. I would leave this idea out of intro sentence and rewrite (B) to clarify that this understanding of labor is implicit in what Shaw does.
  • (B1) Don’t use “possessory rights” as a synonym for “property rights.”
  • (B1) I only see one “distinction”: % of animals caught. If you see more than one, make that clearer. (Note we have no info on how often net-owners checked nets).

Writing/Presentation: A few concerns, including some unneeded passive voice. I made some specific edits on text above, but room for even more editing.

(A) (1) The policy of rewarding useful labor supports the idea that at the time Niles took the weasels from the traps they were not Frazier’s property.

(2) The method Frazier used in making his traps took a significant amount of time and effort.

(3) However, his rate of capture was not substantial enough for him to establish exclusive control. Some of the weasels would escape from the traps and were never permanently deprived of their life or liberty; in fact, about half of the trapped weasels were able to escape.

(4) Furthermore, Frazier’s limited time constraints restricted and reduced his effective management of the traps. Only being able to check the traps every four to five days reveals Frazier’s lack of exclusive control over the weasels; because such a significant time gap proportionally increased escape probability.

(5) In order for Frazier to reap the reward of possession from his useful labor, he would have needed to do more to establish exclusive control of the weasels. For example, Frazier should have built deeper traps that would render escape practically impossible and[or] perform dailytrap checks [every two days] to establish his intent not to abandon the weasels. Frazier’s inefficiency resulted in labor that was not very useful.

(B)(1) Conversely, under the policy of [rewarding] useful labor, Niles’[s] labor was sufficient to qualify for a reward.

(2) Through daily collections of the weasels, Niles solicited [achieved] a better overall benefit to society.

(3) Niles mitigated the issue that farmers in Ohio were losing chickens and eggs to weasels through an increased capture turnover of weasels.

(4) Therefore, Niles’[s] useful labor rather than Frazier’scontributed to a greater societal benefit.

(C) The court’s should reward the useful labor of Niles by granting him possessionof the ferae naturae; and, furthermore, allowing him to continue pursuit of the weasels for compensation of $10.

OVERALL: A Little Uneven.

Focus on Topic: Pretty Good Overall. Intro + (B) good; you wander off some in key parts of (A)

Conclusion: (C)Solid focus on labor, but should come back to F’s property rights. E.g., “Because N’s labor was more useful, a court should find that Fdid not have property rights in the weasels at the time N removed them from the traps.”

Problems: Discussion in (A3-4) & part of (A5) not primarily focused on whether F’s labor was useful. Instead, you address whether F met tests like “exclusive control,” “intent not to abandon,” and “deprivation of liberty,” without any explanation of how these tests relate to labor policy.

Labor Policy: Helpful to provide a brief clear explanation/description of the policy.

Application of Policy: A Little Uneven.

Social Importance: Good explaining why all this matters in (B3); might do this more toward beginning to drive home significance of F’s weaknesses.

Shouldn’t Reward F: Some useful points; needs more defense.

  • (A2) Good acknowledging F’s time/effort.
  • Need to defend that 50% capture rate is insufficient and that F’s labor “was not very useful” despite catching many weasels
  • (A5) Good idea to suggest better labor, but
  • Checking traps every two days sufficient to get 100% of weasels
  • Don’t need to both improve traps and increase checking rate

Should Reward N: Reasonable to discuss this here. Needs more defense of key claims like “better overall benefit” and “greater societal benefit.” N almost certainly caught some weasels that would have escaped, but we don’t know how many (or how many he took that F would have gotten anyway). Might anticipate that F will argue that N’s labor impossible without F’s, so F’s labor was more useful.

Accuracy: A few concerns; (B2) is a big misstatement.

  • (A5) “and” + “daily” (see above)
  • (B2): Nothing in problem says N collected weasels “daily.” Could have been once every three weeks. Don’t make up facts.
  • (B4): Use of “rather than” in phrase in red suggests that F created little or no social benefit. Needs much more defense. F caught weasels & created traps that allowed N to catch weasels.
  • (C) Don’t use “possession” as a synonym for “property rights.”

Writing/Presentation: Unnecessarily wordy in places and some odd word choices. I made some specific edits on text above, but room for even more editing. Some specific concerns:

  • Phrase in blue in (A4) hard to understand.
  • (C) ferae naturae means “of a wild nature,” so you can’t use it by itself as a noun.

(A) The a[A]pplication of the rewarding useful labor policy, in this case, would mean that when Niles took the weasels from the traps, the weasels were not Frazier’s property.

(B) (1) In general, society has found labor and hard work to be beneficial. Furthermore, when individuals are productive, they not only better themselves, but better everyone in the community as well. Therefore, it would be wise for society to reward the individuals who work hard. In this way, individuals are motivated to continue working hard and thus further better society.

(2) Additionally, rewarding labor brings a sense of justice to the community because [most people believe (?)] it is right and fair for those who work to reap the benefits.

(3) Conversely, if society were to reward those who do not work the hardest, society would not be as productive as it could be. When working hard does not guarantee benefits, individuals may lose their motivation for working, which can lead to negative consequences.

(4) Therefore, the policy of rewarding useful labor is highly beneficial to society.

(C) (1) If rewarding labor is highly beneficial to society, it follows that Niles should receive property rights of the weasels.

(2) The issue is not that Frazier did not work at all. Frazier did productive work when he dug the weasel holes in the first place.

(3) However, Niles worked harder by doing what Frazier did not do. By checking the weasel holes and retrieving the weasels, Niles displayed a greater source of labor and thus should be rewarded with property rights of [to] the weasels.

OVERALL: Pretty Uneven. Even with good focus & strong description of labor policy, have to actually make the arguments applying policy to these facts much more thoroughly and clearly.

Focus on Topic: Generally Good. Tight focus on labor throughout. Helpful in conclusion at (C3) to bring result back to F not having property rights.

Labor Policy: Solid. Generally strong statement of policy & significance, although probably could edit a bit. Focus in (C3) off a bit; person who works “hardest” isn’t necessarily doing the most useful labor. Can work very hard at non-productive tasks.

Application of Policy: Pretty Thin.

Social Importance: Helpful to briefly explain why killing weasels is useful labor.

Should Reward N/Shouldn’t Reward F: This is pretty quick & conclusory and not completely accurate (see below). Good acknowledging that F did some useful work. Need better explanation of why F’s labor shouldn’t be rewarded even if N worked harder and more defense that N’s labor is worth rewarding. Might suggest with more specificity what F could have done instead. Might anticipate that F will argue that N’s labor impossible without F’s, so F’s labor was more useful.

Accuracy: Couple of problems in (C3):

  • Problem gives us no idea how hard N worked. Might have been picking up weasels every three weeks.
  • In context, “doing what F did not do” is misleading. F did check weasel holes and retrieve weasels. Need to make point much more clearly.

Writing/Presentation: A little wordy. I made a few suggested edits above, but more tightening would be useful. I don’t understand blue phrase in (C3).

(A) Based on the policy of rewarding useful labor, Frazier did not have property rights in the weasels.

(B) (1) Frazier took four to five days to retrieve the weasels from the traps that he set, knowing that the weasels could escape in that time.

(2) Half of the weasels were able to escape from the trap because he did not put significant time into retrieving them.