« on: April 16, 2014, 06:54:46 PM »
If you are already working in the legal field, I'd just ignore Concord and move on to another DL Law School.
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 - jonlevy
« on: April 14, 2014, 09:34:23 PM »
Since Concord unlike any other DL law School is actually a regionally accredited school same as any university through its affiliation with Kaplan, the EJD is similar to a MLS (Masters in Legal Studies). The 2 year MLS which Kaplan offers is actually a more versatile degree and is useful in government and for advancement as a paralegal. Neither one will qualify you to be a lawyer though. It is possible Concord filled its quota (though hard to believe) and had spaces in the EJD. More likely your writing and academic skills were not up to snuff according to Concord and thus they thought you a poor candidate to get past the FYLSE.
« on: April 13, 2014, 08:57:52 AM »
IMO I also think EJD is a waste of time and money. If you think you have the right stuff, try another online law school like Taft. Although, getting rejected by Concord might give one pause for thought about the entire affair.
« on: February 06, 2014, 09:08:44 AM »
Law Dean - thanks for the stats. Note that DC has it right - more admissions by motion than anyone else by far. Most states including California are violating the Commerce Clause by engaging in restraint of interstate trade by erecting barriers to practice and free movement. Surely, one can expect a competent attorney with 5-10 years continuous experience to be able to seamlessly move between jurisdictions. The differences in law between DC and California for example are minimal - at least DC thinks so and permits all California attorneys including non ABA to motion in after 5 years practice. Even going to another commmon law country is not difficult for a seasoned lawyer who can read the rules and statutes.
Apparently the "public" needs protection from lawyers who cannot read or comprehend statutes but then again what bar did they pass I wonder?
Then there is the crazy quilt of federal district court jurisidictions - I can be a member of federal court bar for example in North Dakota but not Nevada - why? Bar protectionism and restraint of trade.
« on: February 02, 2014, 07:55:14 PM »
Among big bars, DC and California have the hardest bars, Illinois one of the easiest. If someone passes the FYLSE exam they should get a ticket to the bar. Low pass rates by DL applicants may have to do with:
1. Poor performance on the essay questions.
2. lack of preparation time due to employment and other responsibilites.
If DL students were allowed to take some of the easier bars like South Dakota with a consistent 90% pass rate - we would see those pass rates at least double or tiple.
« on: January 28, 2014, 06:59:45 PM »
Concord's rates were fairly dismal given the Washington Post Corp. is the parent company. Anyone contemplating DL should realize the odds are at least 5 -1 against and in the case of some schools off the charts. However, I submit the problem is not necessarily schools but the students just not of the requisitie calibre. Low pass rates for foreign educated applicants also indicates that an offshore law school is bad option.
« on: January 28, 2014, 08:40:04 AM »
So there you go - about a less than one in 5 chance no matter which alternative route route you take -
Versus 22% for NON ABA California Accredited
My alma mater Taft however had overall a nore than 20% pass rate