Empire College. in California Law Schools
đź“š Empire College School of Law
1. Nature of the School
Empire College School of Law was a long-established evening-only law school in Northern California. It is California-accredited, meaning graduates are eligible to sit for the California Bar Exam, but it is not ABA-accredited, which affects practice rights outside California.
It was built around serving working professionals—classes in the evenings, with most faculty drawn from the local bench and bar (judges, practicing lawyers, and legal scholars).
2. Curriculum and Case Law Anchors
Like other California-accredited schools, Empire taught a bar-focused curriculum with emphasis on California doctrine. Here’s how major areas were covered, illustrated with case law (instead of statutes):
A. Contracts
Hadley v. Baxendale (1854, Eng.) – Students learned how foreseeability limits damages in breach of contract.
Grupe v. Glick (Cal.) – Applied California’s approach to anticipatory repudiation, showing how courts enforce obligations before actual breach.
Why important at Empire: Evening students often had business backgrounds, so commercial and contract disputes were especially emphasized.
B. Torts
Rowland v. Christian (Cal. 1968) – Landmark California case expanding landowner liability by adopting general duty of care.
Tarasoff v. Regents of the Univ. of California (Cal. 1976) – Introduced the duty to warn third parties of foreseeable harm, an essential California tort principle.
Greenman v. Yuba Power Products (Cal. 1963) – Established strict products liability in California.
Classroom takeaway: Empire faculty emphasized that California tort law often sets national trends.
C. Criminal Law
People v. Anderson (Cal. 1968) – Defined “premeditation and deliberation” in murder, clarifying first-degree murder standards.
People v. Beeman (Cal. 1984) – Explained aiding and abetting liability, focusing on intent requirements.
Why taught: Many Empire graduates became prosecutors or defense attorneys in local courts, so California criminal precedents were crucial.
D. Property Law
Spinks v. Equity Residential (Cal. 2009) – Addressed constructive eviction and tenant protections.
Hannah v. Dusch (Va.) – Taught as contrast with California’s pro-tenant doctrines.
Focus: California’s strong housing and landlord-tenant jurisprudence was emphasized due to regional relevance in the Bay Area.
E. Constitutional Law
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins (Cal. 1979; aff’d U.S. Supreme Court 1980) – Expanded free-speech rights in privately owned shopping centers under the California Constitution.
People v. Brisendine (Cal. 1975) – California Supreme Court gave broader search-and-seizure protections than the federal Fourth Amendment.
Lesson: Empire stressed California’s independent constitutional tradition, often granting greater rights than federal law.
F. Evidence
People v. Wheeler (Cal. 1978) – California’s version of Batson v. Kentucky, prohibiting race-based jury strikes.
People v. Sanchez (Cal. 2016) – Landmark ruling restricting expert witnesses from repeating hearsay case-specific facts.
G. Community Property & Family Law
In re Marriage of Pereira (Cal. 1909) and In re Marriage of Van Camp (Cal. 1921) – Developed two distinct methods for dividing business profits between community and separate property.
Dastane v. Dastane (Indian SC, 1975) sometimes compared in family law courses for standards of cruelty and burden of proof, showing comparative legal reasoning.
H. Professional Responsibility
Lucas v. Hamm (Cal. 1961) – Held that attorneys can be liable for negligent will drafting, underscoring the standard of care in legal practice.
Local tie: Many Empire adjunct faculty shared practical malpractice experiences, grounding the Lucas case in real-world lessons.
3. Distinguishing Educational Features
Evening-only JD – Allowed working adults to pursue law.
Practitioner faculty – Judges and practicing lawyers linked theory with daily courtroom practice.
Local impact – Many alumni became Sonoma County judges, public defenders, and prosecutors.
Moot Court success – Empire students often won advocacy awards in statewide competitions.
4. Case Law-Centric Learning Philosophy
Empire students were trained through case method:
Reading appellate opinions (like Rowland or Tarasoff)
Extracting ratio decidendi (the legal principle)
Applying rules to hypotheticals, often grounded in California fact patterns
This mirrored the California Bar Exam, which itself emphasizes state-specific precedent and reasoning.
âś… In short:
Empire College School of Law was a California-accredited, evening-focused law school that prepared students to practice in California courts through a case law-driven curriculum. Core California cases like Rowland, Tarasoff, Greenman, Pruneyard, and Lucas were central teaching tools, ensuring students could argue, brief, and analyze like practicing California lawyers.
RELATED Blog
0 comments