This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - BoscoBreaux
Pages:  2 3 4 5 6 ... 79
« on: July 03, 2006, 04:39:30 PM »
So during our first year of law school, I'm sure we'll all have that "oh crap" moment when we realize we will have to start doing oral arguments for professors and judges soon (at my school, you have to do an oral argument before a panel of judges as part of legal writing).
I never minded (too much) the formal prepared speaking opportunities (mock trial, oral arguments, etc.) I hated the daily socratic grind in classes 10 times more! At least the former allows you to prepare. In class, no one is fully prepared, and it goes on for an hour at a time, day after day after day. And of course, you will always be called on to talk about the one case you barely read, and failed to prepare.
« on: July 03, 2006, 04:34:40 PM »
1.Casebook – My main text. Read all the cases and outline them. Along with the lecture, should be my main source of info.
2.Commercial Outlines – Brands like Emanuel’s and Gilbert’s. Should be used as a supplement, like Cliff’s Notes. Should I buy them, or grab them from the library?
3.Reporters – No clue what they are or how to use them (or even if they are necessary)
4.Hornbook – An in-depth look at cases?
5.Nutshell / Examples & Explanations – Are these similar? And what are they used for?
First, forget Hornbooks. Any book that is thicker than your casebook should be avoided. In fact, even some specialists consider the Hornbooks a bit "overboard" in the depth with which the info is convered.
Second, the issue really isn't what would be helpful so much as what you should get given that you will have next to no time to do anything other than just keep up with your assignments in classes.
I bought Gilberts, and they were useful as a crutch when preparing outlines. I didn't really have time to even look at the E&Es, and when I did, it was for a point or two, nothing heavy. I could have accomplished this in the library.
« on: July 03, 2006, 04:29:12 PM »
Everyone knows that the SAT and the GRE are total scams that don't have any correlation with college/grad school success... but how indicative are LSAT scores of first year performance?
In short, for an individual, whether you get a great LSAT or a mediocre one will bear little on your grades.
LSATs are indicative in the same way that SATs, or an intelligence test, or even a timed New York Times crossword puzzle would be–each tries to test one’s ability to think under pressure. What they cannot do is test drive, interest, commitment, and the variety of other intangible things that bear 5 times as much relevance to performance on law school exams than does intelligence (albeit a special type of intelligence).
Over thousands of persons, the thousands who get 160s will do better than the group that gets 155, but that is because since the intangibles are evenly distributed among the masses, and the only true tangible element left to consider is the LSAT score.
The truth is whether you like your professors or not, whether you fall in love or out of love, or whether you think your school has bad food will have more impact on your grades as to whether you snuck in a few lucky guesses on the LSAT. Love, bad food, and sadistic professors are not any more of less likely to afflict 160s than 150s, so hence the remnant LSAT differential.
In my experience, there were plenty of 168s who were at the bottom of the class, and plenty of 152s who were stars. All worked reasonably hard, studied, and took the work seriously. But, I am sure if the entire school was considered, over 1,000 students you'd see a coorelation. But over a dozen or so, none.
« on: July 03, 2006, 04:14:36 PM »
I agree in legal skills when a paper is due you have to put in some time, but I gotta wonder what you were doing for 10 hours a week when nothing was due-usually I had like a 2-3 hours of reading for week for my legal skills (a lot of times I would skim it too, especially if it was technical and they didn't expect us to memorize it)-I can't imagine another school bumping that to ten hours.
The 10 hours was the average, taking into consideration both the slow and busy weeks. In fact, a couple of weeks, I didn't spent more than an hour.
« on: July 02, 2006, 11:19:02 PM »
This week I am paying a visit to three of the schools that I am applying to, all in DC. American, GW and GULC. I was wondering if anyone on here could offer me any helpfull advice, things that you wish that you had asked but forgot? or things that you checked out on your visits that really made a diffrence? anything of this nature would be nice.
Take a look at the students. If they look frantic, worn down, tired, or worse--too chatty and "fraternity-ish," run away like the wind! While one can tolerate a few worn chairs in the library, law students are probably the worst group of persons you could possibly spend three years of your life with!
« on: July 02, 2006, 11:16:28 PM »
I love the concept of living in New York and going to Law school. Was just wondering if someone out there who was in contention for these two schools could give me a run-down of the pros and cons of each. Some things to consider would be:
1. The safety and personality of each school's location
2. The rigor and reputation of the two schools relative to one another
3. The reputation each school has among native NYers in the area
4. The cost of attendance in each area/living expenses
5. The student body- helpful or snooty?
just a note about NYU--at times going there feels like you are at a real estate development company, instead of a university. In many respects, it doesn't feel like you are a part of anything at all when you go there. In some respects, you are made to feel like you are but an irrelevant speck annoying anyone affiliated with the school who are awaiting the next big building purchase or major renovation. When I called to get a transcript, I literally had someone tell me they weren't going to bother to fix an error on it, and if i didn't like it, "tough".
I don't know if such things go on at Columbia, but I doubt it.
« on: July 02, 2006, 11:12:44 PM »
Has anybody considered not going to a school because the school has a crappy web site?
I'm not talking anything severe like blinking neon pink marquees or dancing Lady Justices or anything. I mean little things like bad links and outdated info. It gives me a bad vibe- if they can't get it together enough to hire a webmaster or can't be bothered to update their pages, what else are they letting slip through the cracks?
Remember, up until the 1990s, Mercedes Benz didn't advertise on television or radio. Often times, the splashier the ads, the more competition the school perceives is out there.
« on: July 02, 2006, 11:11:10 PM »
Anybody have any feedback on this topic? I'm currently considering all of the T14s except for Cornell and Michigan (Don't want to live in Ithaca and I grew up in Columbus, thus I am morally unable to attend Michigan). I'll appreciate anything you guys have to share, thanks.
Speaking as a married student, I would say whichever school offers one's spouse a life outside of the home, generally a big city. Thus, NYU, UCLA, etc. As they say, if you don't get divorced during law school, one of you should have your heads examined! lol
« on: July 02, 2006, 11:08:47 PM »
When my law professors who went to Yale and Harvard ended up being mindless twits, and my torts professor who went to a third tier retired from her job as partner in a torts firm with a $10million bonus at age 36. I think the Yale professor is making $80k a year though. Big Deal!
« on: July 02, 2006, 10:57:34 PM »
I'm starting at Temple in Fall of '06 (it was also my ugrad school) and am deff looking forward to my return to North Broad.
But I was wondering which classes required the most investment in both reading and prep (for instance is Torts more time consuming then Contracts)? If so is there anything I can do for the last few months of summer to get a leg up on the more time consuming L1 classes?
First, enjoy your summer. Don't read anything, or only enough to fight off boredom. That is exactly what I'd recommend doing the summer before OneL. Soon, you won't even have time to eat much less relax!
Second, One L classes. Each one is different, and all too often which professor you get will determine how much time you will spend. I had a real pill for Civil Procedure. We met twice a week, for a total of three hours, but the depth with which he went into the material, coupled with the volumes of pages he assigned, and "special presentations," which were almost like mini mock trials, demanded probably 16 hours of prep time for each week. So, we're talking 19 hours per week for Civ Pro.
For torts and contracts, it was about 12 hours per week each.
Property was good in that the professor didn't assign much reading, but the cases went on forever and he demanded the most irrelevant facts to be memorized, so it was 13 hours per week for me.
Legal writing was my "blow off" class. I spent probably an average of 10 hours a week, but of course there were weeks where I had to put in 40 just for this class alone which big papers were due.
Total : 66 hours per week average, not including study time for exams.
Note, this doesn't include time for outlining, which is in many ways more important than the above 66 hours. I didn't outline as much as I should have, but 5 hours per week would be a pretty good minimum for me.
Pages:  2 3 4 5 6 ... 79