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 - Lindbergh

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 425
11
Most people don't visit, so it's not really a negative.

On the other hand, it can help if you do visit.  It shows the school you're serious about attending, and it gives them a chance to get to know you beyond your numbers.  For this reason, I would compare it to your personal statement, which is obviously important, if not as important as numbers.  I would definitely at least visit your top choices, especially if you're on the fence there.

Susan Estrich of USC Law highly recommends campus visits (and other aspects of an admission "campaign") in her book "How to Get into Law School" (worth reading).  She's just one person, but she does play a role in admissions at a top 20 program, so it's presumably a worthwhile perspective.


12
Studying for the LSAT / Re: did anyone lie about their race on the lsat?
« on: October 10, 2008, 06:03:12 PM »
this is just ridiculous.  although I know plenty of white people check "other" to make it SEEM like they are some kind of minority without actually having to choose one of the minority statuses.

They probably just don't want to be discriminated against.  It's not so much that they want to be seen as a minority, they just don't want to be labeled as a "privileged" white person.

This is probably more of a problem for asians, however, who experience the most discrimination in admissions, and are therefore probably most likely to check the "other" box.

13
Studying for the LSAT / Re: did anyone lie about their race on the lsat?
« on: October 10, 2008, 05:59:14 PM »
OP -- plz tell us you were kidding.  if not, though...i have never met a white person who thought white privilege wasn't enough and wanted to snatch whatever benefits minorities get from the admissions process.  (ps, there's only one scale, and it happens to be colorblind.)  you, my friend, are pathetic. 

My poor/working-class white friends would take issue with the idea they're privileged at all as a result of their race, especially since many minorities are far more privileged. 

That said, you're correct that they generally don't want special benefits -- they simply want to be judged fairly and consistently.

14
Studying for the LSAT / Re: did anyone lie about their race on the lsat?
« on: October 10, 2008, 05:54:46 PM »
I have been batteling with the question of race my whole life..... My parents have a plethora of ethnicities in their blood, they both look white, but somehow I ended up looking pure Mexican. I have identified as white my whole life until about four years ago, when I realized racist people were rearing me as they would any other minority.....

Were they raising you, or sodomizing you?   ???

15
Studying for the LSAT / Re: A couple Logical Reasoning questions.....
« on: October 10, 2008, 11:21:40 AM »
Some things have been changed for copyrighted purposes.

1)  It's apparent that 1 ought to have a will stating how 1 wishes 1's estate to be distributed. This can easily be seen from the fact that, according to current laws, in the absence of a legal will distant realtives whom 1 has never even met have a greater legal right to 1's estate than 1's beloved friends do.

Which 1 of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(D) People are generally not indifferent about how their estates are distributed.
(This is the correct answer & I do understand it!)

(E) One's beloved friends have a greater legal right to one's estate than one's distant relative's do.
(I chose this & it's also the most tempting answer according to 2 test prep co. Kaplan's explanation of this totally sucked!)

Why isn't (E) right? Maybe I didn't properly negate it. I really like (E)! :-\

I really struggled w/the following one...

2)  R: To become an attorney, a person should be required to have a diversity of experience. The more diverse one's experience, the more one will understand the need for compromise.

S: To be worthy of public trust, it's not enough, as you recommend, that one simply have varied experience. Such a person would not necessarily be worthy of public trust.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the reasoning in S's response to R's statements?

(C) The response attributes to Ruth a view that's more vulnerable to criticism (btw, vulnerable to criticism means weaken, right?) than any she actually expresses.

(D) The response fails to make a needed distinction between personal experience & relevant professional experience.

The correct answer is (C) and I chose (D).

First of all, I'm not even sure I understand what S is saying. Maybe that's why I got this wrong.  Public trust so the people will compromise w/him??

Thank you!


Just to (hopefully) clarify a little for the first question: If something is a stated premise, then you have to accept it as true.  It's not an assumption, it's a stated fact.  So any answer choice that calls into question a stated premise, or describes it as an assumption, will generally be incorrect. 

Here, it's clearly stated in the argument that distant relatives have a greater legal right to your estate than beloved friends do.  Choice E, as written, contradicts this premise (stated fact), so it can't be right as an assumption.  Moreover, the negation of Choice E would not destroy the argument, it would simply restate the premise.

If Choice E said the opposite (that distant relatives have a greater legal right than close friends), then it would simply be a restatement of the premise, and would fail on those grounds.  In that case, though, the negation would in fact hurt the argument, as you'd be removing the key premise from the argument.

16
LSAC and LSDAS / Re: How Important Are My LSAT Scores?
« on: October 10, 2008, 11:00:04 AM »
by presenting my accomplishments aside from a potentially poor LSAT score for the purpose of promoting my perceived superiority.

That's alliteration. 

17
LSAC and LSDAS / Re: How Important Are My LSAT Scores?
« on: October 10, 2008, 10:54:59 AM »
To the OP:

1.  You're clearly very bright and accomplished.     
2.  The LSAT probably constitutes most of your law school application, for good or ill.  LSAT + UG GPA constitutes the majority of your application, and the LSAT is worth significantly more than GPA.
3.  Yes, your Masters will help somewhat, just like many other soft factors will.  However, it's not weighed as heavily as LSAT or UG GPA. 
4.  Are you sure you want to go to law school?  Seems like you have marketable skills in other areas.
5.  The LSAT is learnable.  Study hard for it, and consider seeking accomodations if necessary.

18
Where should I go next fall? / Re: Another Tier 3/4 question
« on: October 01, 2008, 08:14:52 PM »
For the record, I do not know a single person at my law school (or at any other "T14", for that matter) who got his or her law firm job through personal connections that existed prior to law school.  And yes, I know a large number of people at my school.

And in case anybody wonders why I put "T14" in quotation marks, it's because I think the category is stupid.

C'mon, you can't tell me that there are not sizeable numbers in each class who go to those schools only because their daddy went there. Please!

Legacy admissions are almost nonexistent in law school.  Aside from AA, law school admissions are incredibly meritocratic/numbers-driven, if only by necessity.


If you pay $43k per year to attend an elite law school, that's on you. If mommy and daddy pay for it, great! Yet, if you incur that debt all on your own and gamble with your future, you are either far braver than I. Why let your debt load dictate your job options?

Here's the problem:

1.  Most law schools cost about the same amount. 
2.  At an elite school, you're pretty much guaranteed a high-paying job.
3.  At a non-elite school, you're clearly not.
4.  The non-elite school is therefore much more of a gamble, generally speaking.
5.  Even if you get a full-ride, you're investing 3 years of your life, lost earning opportunities, etc.  There's no guarantee you'll make law review.  So there's no guarantee you'll get a respectable job.

Either way, it's a gamble.  Even if you go T14, you may hate the work, and quit after a year.  But that's generally a more secure gamble than attending a lower-ranked school, which could handicap your entire career, depending on what you want to do.

Put another way:  Why let your pedigree/short-sightedness dictate/limit your job options?

19
Where should I go next fall? / Re: Another Tier 3/4 question
« on: October 01, 2008, 08:07:30 PM »
For the record, I do not know a single person at my law school (or at any other "T14", for that matter) who got his or her law firm job through personal connections that existed prior to law school.  And yes, I know a large number of people at my school.

And in case anybody wonders why I put "T14" in quotation marks, it's because I think the category is stupid.

I agree with this, if you have connections there is no reason to to go to a T14 in the first place. Go to your local school live at home, party your ass off and have you parents pay for it. The t14 (which I also agree is stupid) is a magnet for social climbing poor people desperately trying to become socially important. But, thank god, we know who you are and can spot you from your new rich Acura/Lexis/Infinity and know to keep our daughters away from you so you donít taint our blueblood with your commoners. Nobody from a good family goes to anything less than Yale or Harvard, or they go local. We donít want our children mixing with the townies at Cornell for god sakes. Sure we will pay you a lot of money to work for the firm our name is on, but we know we never have worry about you moving in next to us in the Hamptons, we give you just enough to taste it but never enough to really be one of us, we invented SoHo for you to feel like you made it so we don't have to mingle with you at the yacht club.

You really as rich as you're pretending to be here, Mattheis? 

That said, remember that H and Y are also part of the T14.  And the truly rich people don't go to law school at all.  (Is your Audi exempt from your Acura/Lexis/Infinity analysis?   ;)

20
Where should I go next fall? / Re: Another Tier 3/4 question
« on: October 01, 2008, 08:04:58 PM »
For the record, I do not know a single person at my law school (or at any other "T14", for that matter) who got his or her law firm job through personal connections that existed prior to law school.  And yes, I know a large number of people at my school.

Agreed.

And in case anybody wonders why I put "T14" in quotation marks, it's because I think the category is stupid.

Why?  You don't think the T14 places significantly better than other schools?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 425