Law School Discussion

Show Posts

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 - thirteen13

Pages: [1] 2
Current Law Students / Re: Character and Fitness Concern - Petit Larceny
« on: January 30, 2008, 04:12:23 AM »
I think you'll be fine.  The only issue is the larceny, because a 7 year old trespass doesnt get anywhere near what it would take, even in conjunction with the other one.  By far, the three biggest kinds of things that will get you jammed up are (i) any felony, (ii) any crime involving moral issues or breach of trust (fraud, embezzelment, larceny by trick, securities law violations, forgery, etc.) and (iii) a huge number of little things (e.g., there is a strory about a girl who got bounced from CA for having a hundred or so parking tickets).

You're definitely not the only one applying to a bar with a an old larceny charge for something stupid, I would bet your fine. 

Job Search / Re: What do you call a judge during an interview
« on: January 26, 2008, 08:42:36 AM »

Job Search / Re: Include class rank and % in resume?
« on: January 26, 2008, 08:41:48 AM »
As an initial matter, the others are right and you should check before you include something that the school didnt give to you.  At most schools at least a couple students will drop out in disgust or leave for other reasons after 1st semester.  If and when that happens, you'll be 34 in a class of 132 or 133 and 26% wont be accurate anymore. 

That being said, I'd put a percentage in if I could, and only for the stupidest reason - somehow I think 1/3 instictively comes to mind you look at 34/133 quickly and dont take a second to do the math in your head. 

Regardless, "Top 26%" screams retarded.  I think "26th Percentile" is maybe a better way of expressing it.

I suppose it depends on what you're giving up and your prospects where you are if you stay.  I transferred from a 50-ish to CLS.  In doing so I gave up 40k in scholarships and incurred 80k or so that I would not have borrowed had I not left, so a swing of 120k. For me, my situation and where I wanted to ultimately practice, it was worth every penny and I would rather pay an extra 600 a month for ever than not owe it every month but not have a job where I wanted to live. 

I'd put it this way. All things being equal, the grades that will get you into a T10 will put you at the top of your class where you are, where, presumably, you are well positioned to get a job, even if there arent enough to go around.  To give up a scholarship and incur debt on top of it, the school you're transferring into should be a school with true national and perhaps even international reach, one that will give you the ability to pick where you want to go and who you want to work for, now and for the rest of your career.  While all the T10's are great schools, there's definitely an argument that Duke, UVA and Berkeley are more regional (East Coast and south for the first two, the first two states inland along the west coast for Boalt). 

In my opinion, there are 2 questions you should ask about any school you are considering giving up a scholarship to transfer to:

1.  Is the class ranked/does the school calculate a GPA for you?
2.  Is the schools OCI one where the employers pre-screen students and select the ones they want to interview, or is it a blind lottery where the employers have no say in who they interview and see your resume for the first when you walk into room?

I suppose 1 or 2 is fine, but in reality they tend to go hand in hand, i.e., the only way a school can get away without ranking their class or giving them a GPA is if there are basically more jobs to be had than students to take them and the only people who dont get a job either didnt want one or tied their own noose somehow.  Likewise, firms hate not being able to select candidates to interview - and a school can only get away with it if ... etc. 

Current Law Students / Re: Restricted Gifts
« on: January 25, 2008, 03:36:08 AM »
I'm sure there are plenty, but I would say that one of the central themes is a comparative analysis between restricted gifts to entities and contingent remainders/testamentary gifts to people. 

If I remember correctly, the law is much more accepting of restrictions placed on how the money will be used when it's given to an non-profit, endowment, etc. than it is of "dead hand control" on testamentary gifts and divises to heirs and beneficiaries.

Transferring / Re: Transferring to NYU/CLS
« on: January 25, 2008, 03:26:45 AM »
I was top 1% with a single digit rank at a school in the upper 40's.  I got in to CLS, NYU and Penn and got dinged at HLS, Chicago Boalt and Stamford.  I would say that generally speaking, most of the transfer class came from schools ranked equal or better than my own, and there were at least a couple from Cornell and Penn.  I have no idea what anyone else had for a rank or GPA 1L year.

Candidly, I also have no idea what you're real chances are, but if I had to guess I would say you're probably on the bubble.  While, I would be willing to bet that top 6-8% would not have gotten me in from my school, it only makes sense that the amount of leeway you'll see will increase proportionately as the school you're coming from gets better.  That being said, top 6-8% presumably means a numerical rank in the high teens or twenties.  That's a great neighborhood to be in, but I would think a crowded one on the desk of an admissions officer.

Transferring / Re: Transferring to NYU/CLS
« on: January 24, 2008, 01:37:56 AM »
I transferred into CLS from a 50-ish school with a 3.82 at a school with a B curve.  You're rank is probably more determinative then your GPA though. 

Transferring / Re: For the 100th time: my chances?
« on: January 16, 2008, 10:13:29 PM »
You'll have to do it again this spring, but top 1-3% almost anywhere for a full 1L year will get you into all but a few T14 schools.  I transferred into CLS from a barely T1, but out of the 60 or so in my transfer class, more than a couple were from T3-ish schools. 

If you're looking for good news, your UG GPA and LSAT score are an insignificant factor in the decision process, if they are factored in at all.  The emphasis on UG GPA and LSAT in the regular decision process is driven by rankings and the substantial weight assigned to these two factors.  On the other hand, as a transfer, your UG GPA and LSAT score will never see the light of day for the purposes of any ranking calculation or admission statistic.  Like everyone else in my transfer class, CLS wasn't competing against NYU or Harvard for my LSAT score or even my 1L grades, they were competing for the $80,000 in tuition I represented.  $80,000 that they can take in without any consideration as to whether someone with your LSAT belongs there or how it will figure into some calculation that will oneday determine their position in a ranking table or the FAQ section of an admissions website.  The same $80,000 that a peer school might take off your hands if they don't give you the chance to send it their way.  Put another way, an admissions officer sitting at CLS or Stamford knows that nearly every applicant applied to the other one, along with Harvard, Chicago, NW, Penn, etc.  So if you're the admissions officer at Stamford looking at a transfer application, the question boils down to this ... are the other ones going to let him in and take the $80,000 if we don't?  If you're top 1% almost anywhere short of a dreadful school, the answer is most likely yes.

As for the other two things - recommendations from law professors and your personal statement - I would argue they factor in, but very little compared to your rank.

As for the recommendation, I never raised my hand in any class or stayed after to ask questions my entire 1L year and the first time I spoke directly with either of the profs who wrote me recommendations was when I sat in their offices at the end of April and asked them to do it for me.  They both readily agreed to do so, but quite appropriately, neither was especially enthusiastic or insightful.  Of the two, I only saw the one from my torts professor.  It was two sentences long, the second of which pointed out the fact that he didnt really know me and couldn't recall me volunteering in class discussions, but judging by my grade on his exam, he was confident I would have made a valuable contribution if I had. 

In my opinion, they're required for two reasons, neither of which have anything to do with what they actually say: (i) to prove you're serious enough about transferring to take 15 minutes out of your day and ask for it and (ii) to provide a minimum level of assurance that you're not an all around terrible human being to the point that
even after beating nearly everyone on 8-10 exams, you're still unable to muster 2 strangers to write a two sentence letter confirming that they don't really know enough about you to offer an opinion one way or the other.

Provided the question is limited to AM 100 firms - there will be less offers given out during OCI and summer classes will be smaller, but a rising 3L summer associate has the same chance of getting an offer that they would have had 3 years ago.  Without exception, if you find yourself a summer associate at a national law firm, the offer is yours to lose on Day 1.  The screening and interview process results in a presumption of intelligence and capability before you get there, so as long as you don't (a) defeat that presumption or (b) fail the lunch test with a power that be - there will be a spot for you.

"lunch test" = would I rather kill myself than go to lunch with this person?

Current Law Students / Re: Why is outlining necessary?
« on: November 06, 2007, 10:12:08 PM »
I agree.  I took evidence as a 3L and our exam was multiple choice. I remember it being hard, but also not really caring because it was almost over.  You'll run into it again on the bar exam because its part of the MBE and along with property, are statistically the hardest sections. 

Pages: [1] 2