Law School Discussion

Nine Years of 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 - gershonw

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 14
1
seriously..if the cost is the same you have nothing to loose.  heck..since when you transfer usually your grades from the old school dont factor in..you might take off in the coming years giving you another chance to excel

2
General Board / Re: I HATE MY SITUATION!!!
« on: June 15, 2009, 04:19:29 PM »
Uh you can't transfer after your first year.  He could go be a visiting student though I guess.

 ???

I know someone who transferred for just her third year. Definitely transferred. She isn't going to be a visiting student.

Hmmm...not possible?  Every school that I've ever head of requires at least 2 years worth of credits in order to issue a diploma.  It's pretty standard. Was she doing a joint degree program? 

so jacy- how many academic requirmeent rule books have you been through besides your own school's and maybe one or two others?

i think your genreally you are right.  but diffrent schools have diffrent rules about counting summers and counting 5 sems plus summers and waivers etc... Further, you could, as pointed out, take your first year, tranfer to a 2d school, then tranfer back to your first school...which would give you 2 years at the first school.

you tend to make judgements about "what youve heard of" a lot..such as my jurisdiction having rules for early determination of character and fitness (which although they aknowledge exist..have told me not to invoke becuase they would rather not follow their own rules).  I recall you telling me that "youd never heard of that" before either.  despite the fact that 

3
General Board / Re: Awful 1L year
« on: June 09, 2009, 12:34:27 AM »
the reality is somewhere in between tgifirdays and ~90% doing fine.

on one hand...i think the standard and oft repeated argument i see on the internet that the ~90% level stats from most schools include those working at min wage jobs is a little misplaced. (and is the argument that the stats include only those who report)  if you look closer at those stats...you find very high level reporting rates at most schools.  also us news assumes 25% of those who don't report are unemployed (which is almost certainly high and encourages many schools to go after the graduates to complete the nalp surveys)  you will also see that the nalp surveys include a question about what type of employment it is.  students answer whether their job is a jd preferred job or a bar admission required job or a job that is neither non legal or competently unskilled.  most of the time you will find that of the 90% or so that are employed...only 8% or so are in "non jd preferred or non bar admission required" jobs. 

on the other hand though..you got contract attorney jobs that are "jd perfereed" but are no benefits 20 dollars an hour barely pay rent and your in default on your loans jobs.

so lets say USN reports 90% employed 9 months after.  that's still 10% without anything ...plus at least another 5% or so (of the 90%...i.e. ~4% of totalof the total) who are doing minimum wage stuff.  its still a little masked..becuase you dont think about these things together and just see ~90% employed and most of those in bar positions...and sometimes dont put together that that means a total of at least 15% fu&%&ked...plus more in government jobs baerly covering rent and loan payments.

i wish they woeld report the type of jobs as a percentage of the total not the percentage of the employed...(and then put a catagory for unemployed...that would look mroe accuarate even if you can add this up yourself)

additionally the employment numbers from previous years will be vastly different from this year or next year.

4
General Board / Re: Thoughts as I enter my third year....
« on: August 07, 2008, 06:44:31 PM »
All of you are right...just keep doing what you've been doing, it seems to be working very well.  I try to offer advice, and it was rebuffed quite harshly.

Let me know how that whole "not sending letters" strategy works out



you didn't just offer advice. you said that "As far as employment goes, it is only your own fault if you do not have a job"

in other words ALL people that didn't have jobs were complaining and it was 100% their fault.  nobody said you cant send letters its your attitude we don't like. 

5
General Board / Re: Civ Pro Question
« on: July 20, 2008, 08:34:34 PM »

And apparently federal civil procedures is the ONLY thing I'm ready to be tested for on the bar exam.

i gotta wonder why bar administrations see it necessary to test federal procedure? i dont really care so much becuase i happen to like it. but it still seems weird.

6
General Board / Re: Are law school grading curves reasonable?
« on: July 06, 2008, 12:58:40 PM »
curves=good.
curves based on 1 test=bad.

Curves are good becuase they
a) allow the best students (and probably best work producrers) to the employers who are willing to offer the most (in money or future prestige for them).  (protect employers and the economy)
b) they protect students from randomness in  grading. (protect students)

curves based on 1 test are bad becuase they
a) don't offer a good enough gauge of the the best students, so that the highest ranks are not reliably enought the best students and hence will not reliably enough have the best work product.  The more tests and assignments that contribute to the grade, the less likely a grade is a 'fluke' of one day (the flu, a break up, etc.. etc..).  True, there is more than one grade, but a week of the flu could be 1/6 of your gpa down the drain. (the 1  test system does little to protect employers looking to make sure they have the best)
b) don't protect students from randomness in grading. True, there is more than one grade, but a week of the flu could be 1/6 of your gpa down the drain. (the 1  test system does little to protect employers looking to make sure they have the best) (don't protect students).

so the current system is good and bad for the exact same reasons.  I'm not sure why we insist on the one test system.  the only thing I can think of is that professors don't want to grade more and that this has always been the way its done.  Back when all students from law school were almost guaranteed jobs becuase there weren't too many lawyers for the market-it didnt really matter so much.  Now its a big deal what your grades are-you might not even be able to get a legal job after law school-yet law schools don't want to change the 1 test system.

(Some might argue that 1 test is a good way to prepare for the practice, where you don't get a second chance. this argument is bad becuase, a) your next chance is your next case-assuming your mistake didn't amount to malpractice b) we let people take the bar or LSAT, the most important tests-pretty much as many time as they like c) most students don't go directly into practice alone at first.)

of course-anyone making the above argument is sometimes (not always) lumped in with those who don't like curves-so this argument isn't heard as often.

oh and i agree with jacy85 that schools who make a curve so that X% must mathematically be below the level needed not to stay in are pretty much vulchers.  Schools should not accept vastly more people than they intend to graduate and then kick them out after taking their (borrowed on future earnings from law school education) money.

7
General Board / Re: Should I drop out?
« on: June 24, 2008, 06:03:36 PM »
I'm not sure they should consider his 'reliance' interest in determining that the original poster should keep his scholarship money for summer classes. His 'reliance' would have been the expectation that at least his 1st semester, 1L would have been paid for. It was. Following this he did not meet the condition that he maintain a 2.0 term GPA--so the scholarship money is gone. If the original poster was actually going to sue over this and proceed on some sort of contract theory--he would lose. It seems to me that his school's OFFER of a scholarship renews each semester. Since the poster can only ACCEPT the terms by performance (maintenance of a 2.0 or higher) then Restatement (2nd) Contracts 45 would control. Here the school is the offeror, and they are released from their duty to perform (pay his tuition) because the poster (offeree) did not complete performance within the terms of the schools offer. Restatement 90 won't work for him. It seems difficult that his reliance on scholarship money for summer classes would be 'justifiable' considering that he was aware of the need to maintain the 2.0.

it doesn't matter if its whithin the contact-if the policy of the school is to be nicer than they have to be under the contract-then thats the policy of the school.

8
if it could be determined that a certain personalty type was more ripe for the law or performance in law school-youd probably see more schools requiring admissions interviews.

look at successful lawyers.  they are not all similar. some are gerks. some are nice. some are really really bright-others just have specific strengths they take advantage of.  some are hard workers-some are lazy.  some are really obsessive about detail-some are better at making sure the whole package looks good.  some are really interested in the law-some do it becuase its the only thing they can succeed at.

9
General Board / Re: In Need of Resources for Writing Sample
« on: June 23, 2008, 10:18:25 PM »
if it could be determined that a certain personalty type was more ripe for the law or performance in law school-youd probably see more schools requiring admissions interviews.

look at successful lawyers.  they are not all similar. some a gerks. some are nice. some are really really bright-others just have specific strengths they take advantage of.  some are hard workers-some are lazy.  some are really obsessive about detail-some are better at making sure the whole package looks good.  some are really interested in the law-some do it becuase its the only thing they can succeed at.

10
General Board / Re: Should I drop out?
« on: June 23, 2008, 08:01:28 PM »
lets see below average undergrad gpa lsat way way way above average.that probably means your smart and don't work.


this suggests to me the reason your not doing well in law school as well.  a 167 at a t3 is unheard of.  your probably smarter than everyone there.  work harder.

if you drop out and find out your working fcor 35-30k a year with 30k+ in loans to pay off-your going to find out what hard work means.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 14