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 - MorningStar
Pages:  2 3 4 5 6 ... 22
« on: May 19, 2011, 01:40:45 AM »
This might be the worst idea I've ever heard, like literally ever. ever ever.
First, you're presumably doing this as a "fast track." However, it will take you approximately:
1 year - Paralegal school
4 months - Paralegal exam
Years to build a "small claims court business"
You know what.. actually, it's not even worth it to go through the timeline. Trust me, it will take you a lot longer than the 4 years it would take to get an LLB in the UK (4 years) + do Canadian equivalency exams (roughly 1 year). In addition, weird ass paralegal school followed by a distance learning law degree will get you absolutely nowhere in terms of being hired by a Canadian law firm. In sum, do not do any part of your plan. Instead, get a law degree at the best school you can get into in Canada (if you want to practice here) or he UK (if you want to practice there).
« on: October 16, 2010, 06:43:23 PM »
I agree with Bike. US law schools will certainly permit Canadian students to attend. Generally, you're on the same ground as Americans. However, I've heard from some adcoms, especially at higher ranked schools, that they occasionally feel more inclined to yield protect Canadian students because they are more likely to apply without having the finances in place to be able to attend (US fed loans are inapplicable and Canadian gov doesnt provide nearly enough $ to foot the bill). Giving them a call to demonstrate genuine interest and explain your situation can't hurt.
« on: May 29, 2010, 12:23:03 PM »
You do. Probably not UofT. Splitters are hard to predict in Canada, I would send as many apps as possible, include safeties like Windsor, and, if possible, write an addendum to explain your subpar GPA.
« on: April 11, 2010, 04:15:28 AM »
Your GPA won't be considered at 4.0 if you have 80 credits at 3.2.
Will Pace screw you? Absolutely not. UG name isnt a huge deal in law school admissions. Generally speaking, numbers are god and UG school name usually won't hurt you, but may provide a minor boost if you're coming from a really elite college.
Around a 165 and you should be good for Fordham.
« on: April 10, 2010, 04:31:12 AM »
Lawrookie doesnt know what he's talking about. If your numbers seem out of range and you're still getting a fee waiver their intentions are likely something like 90% decrease acceptance ratio / 10% get a look at some interesting students who may not otherwise apply (every once in awhile tremendous softs and fit can prevail over underwhelming numbers).
« on: April 09, 2010, 01:31:44 AM »
Consensus seems to be that scheduling the online release so far in advance of the print release is designed to eliminate leaks. The issue may not go to the presses (where leaks start) before the online unveiling.
« on: April 08, 2010, 10:04:14 PM »
Okay, from the outset, you have to recognize that the combination of those numbers with being a non-traditional applicant your chances at Vandy/UT range of schools are almost literally zero. Even with URM status it'd be a waste of money to apply. Given that fact and that your family is located in Nashville, you remain unsure about your desire to practice law, and assumedly want to spend as little money as possible on this proposition, it seems like an evening program at NSL may be a reasonable avenue towards boosting your resume in certain cirles and opening some possibility of future legal practice in TN. (ick, ugly sentence)
« on: April 08, 2010, 07:19:50 PM »
Are you 100% you want to stay in TN? Moreover, if you did decide to pursue law do you see yourself in Biglaw or a smaller firm, gov, etc.? Finally, what's your UG Gpa / LSAT sitting at? A full ride at Vandy/UT makes it a very different situation than if you'd be applying on a wing and a prayer.
« on: April 07, 2010, 05:02:28 PM »
Sure, literally, his question is whether his GPA is sufficient to gain admission to top law schools given that he will "kill the LSAT." However, I think it's a pretty reasonable to give some guidance on what "[killing] the LSAT" will need to entail, especially given that his original question shows a demonstrated lack of knowledge on law school admission criteria.
I wasn't implying that your statement claimed a 180 is required. I was merely reinforcing that despite the 180 comment, don't worry about it, 168-169 range and you're likely good at every law school in Canada. "No 180 required" was an independent statement.
« on: April 07, 2010, 02:30:28 PM »
169+ get's your into every law school in Canada except McGill that would also require some french fluency. No 180 required.
Pages:  2 3 4 5 6 ... 22