|
|
| Monday, March 26, 2007 |
| Freaky Friday |
My entire Securities Regulation class is still in a funk and bitter over the whole "professor doesn't show up for class" issue. He really tries to engage us, but he can't. Tonight he started to explain something that left many people perplexed --- and it wasn't even complicated, he just wasn't making sense. I asked a question, then others followed up with more, and before we knew it, we had our first truly engaging discussion wherein I think we all learned things. Amazing, I know.
However, just as the ice was starting to get a little wet with the warmer air moving in, he started to diagram the issue on the board. He was discussing the concept of a "purchase representative" in the case of a Regulation D Non-Public offering of restricted shares.
The problem was that he wrote "Non-PUBIC Offering" on the board.
I was sitting with a friend who is not known as a giggly-girl. She's just not. She's the type who would often glare at someone who tried to talk to her during class. She takes class very seriously.
Yet, I leaned over and whispered, "look, it's a non-pubic offering."
Well, my poor friend cracked up. She couldn't stop laughing. I'm sure it was because of the tension in the room which was just starting to thaw. Her cracking up made me sort of choke, and other people were noticing, and then starting to laugh. I don't know if they noticed the mis-print on the board, or if the tension leaking away was tickling all of our funny bones.
I am sure, really, that at some point during this day, one of my daughters started to involuntarily spew odd information about reliance, intent, and perhaps even public offerings.Labels: kids, law school |
posted by Zuska @ 8:51 PM   |
|
|
|
|
|
