A Roman Holiday During a Working Retreat

Written by Robin Houghton

One part of LEAP’s mission is to expand cultural horizons, and this includes exposing students to classic films. Thus it was on the Sunday of our retreat in Houston, we attended a showing of “Roman Holiday” at the historic River Oaks Theatre.

Directed by William Wyler, “Roman Holiday” tells the story of Princess Anne (Audrey Hepburn), who, overwhelmed by the tedium and responsibilities of her title, escapes the embassy for a night in Rome. She stumbles across reporter Joe Bradley (Gregory Peck), who, upon learning her identity, realizes he has a chance at a scoop of a lifetime.

Of the seven students attending, five of us had never seen the film, and it was a treat to find it witty, charming, and romantic, with Audrey Hepburn stealing the show.

Her on-screen chemistry with Gregory Peck was palpable, and it was a surprise to learn this was her first starring role!

Roman Holiday both subverted and helped shape the modern romcom genre. It includes the classic “meet-cute,” montages of Anne and Bradley falling for each other, and many comical and romantic touches throughout.

It does not (spoiler alert), however, include the happy ending that some viewers expect (talking to you Michelle Cardenas) from their films. Princess Anne chooses to resume her duties as a princess; Joe foregoes the story he could have sold. Both do their duty and both willingly take on the personal cost of doing so, making the ending even more romantic.

As a side-note, this was one of the first American films to shoot on location overseas. The entire film was shot in Rome, displaying iconic landmarks (including the “mouth of truth,” one of our favorite scenes) and the charm of post-war Italy.

After the film’s release, Rome transformed into a top tourist destination, in part due to the unique filmmaking choice made by William Wyler.

The ending was, in many ways, the perfect end to our retreat–a flavorful and light scoop of gelato, following a weekend of substantive progress and hearty fare. It was the treat of the retreat.

Contracts, Promissory Estoppel, & Chess: Simulated Law Class with Professor Val Ricks

Last week, LEAP students had the opportunity to experience what it’s like to be in a law class led by Professor Val Ricks at South Texas College of Law Houston! From cold calls that made us lean in with anticipation…

…to deep dives into Promissory Estoppel, Professor Ricks left us all with new knowledge and a new way of viewing words.

The mock class started with defining what law is, specifically:

Law: a set of words that, independent of anyone involved in litigation, describes or establishes a standard of conduct which against the actions of those involved in litigation — including the judge — may be measured. 

Why do humans form law? Would law exist if humans didn’t? The simple answer is: Law is just a standard of conduct humans use to govern themselves. Even though we write them down, without us here to interpret those words, they would have no value.

Professor Ricks related law to a game of Chess, each piece on the board is affected by a rule, that, in turn, influences the sequence of the game.

Then it was time for the case: G.D. Holdings, INC. v. H.D.H. Land & Timber, L.P., a civil case revolving the transaction of 300,000 dollars in exchange for nine acres of land IF the land were to be surveyed, cleared, and level. Professor Ricks provided us with the facts of the case and turned it over to us, cold calling on students…

…to give the other aspects of their case briefs.

Learning from each other, we began to apply the rule of Promissory Estoppel, re-defining its three requisites.

As a class we came to understand that Promissory Estoppel is when a promise is made and the person making the promise can reasonably predict that the person agreeing to the promise will rely on that promise in a detrimental way.

In the example case, the promise was the purchase of land by G.D. Holdings from H.D.H. once the land got cleared.

We also learned that even though both parties signed a contract, because one party crossed out a clause in the contract before signing, the law considers that to be two different contracts meaning there wasn’t ever a valid contract.

After we dissected the case and the language used in it, we got to practice our application with a few examples and found that Professor Ricks (to no one’s surprise) did an excellent job at teaching us the concepts so we all properly applied the learned rules to other cases.

We also got the chance to ask Professor Ricks about law school admissions, grading, as well as what to expect in similar law school classes. Of course, we had to get our signature selfie to finish the class, but the learning didn’t stop there as even afterwards, all of us were beaming with a new passion for contract law and hopes for what future knowledge lies ahead.