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 - Thane Messinger
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5  7 8 9 10 11 ... 52
« on: September 14, 2011, 10:23:19 PM »
What would I do if I were you? Anything for a year or so. Work in a bank. Be a park ranger. Heck, I'd join a band and spend the next year surviving on doritos and pepsi. You're young. Experience life. The grind of a real job is something you'll deal with for decades. If you have any wild oats, now is the time to sow them.
Tucker aside, Falcon is exactly right. Read and re-read his response. (Good for all. = : )
« on: September 14, 2011, 10:19:14 PM »
Does anyone have any knowledge, opinion, information, or insight they wouldnt mind sparing me? I came here because people who know this business frequent this board. I have no one else I can talk to about this, you guys are my only source of law admission experience.
The other comments are quite right. As to the admissions picture, take a look at Law School Undercover, by Professor X. He gives a few tricks of the trade in terms of what admissions officers and deans are really thinking.
« on: August 20, 2011, 04:00:24 PM »
Good point. I stand duly chastized.
The great thing about law is that we all get chastized, each of us every day, and then we come back for more.
= : )
« on: August 19, 2011, 06:24:55 PM »
I like the OP's rationale for obtaining a J.D. According to the World Bank Development Indicator (2009), the mean US life expectancy is now 79 years. Can we seriously expect, that in today's political and financial climate, a government pension is a "sure thing"? I don't count on it and neither should the OP. He is making an investment in himself and he is a proven performer. In this case, I don't think that making a bet on himself is a gamble.
Quite right. It's hard to look a decade ahead, but it's a lot easier to look a decade back and sigh.
Part of our mission in life is to predict what it is we'll regret looking back, and do what we can to avoid that. Since there are too many things we can do at any given point, perhaps the greater point is to decide in which area we will excel. = : )
« on: August 19, 2011, 06:03:55 PM »
Regardless of the kumbaya stuff that a lot of these admissions folks try to spout, the vast bulk of their decision is numbers, alone. They simply have too many files to process. They use numbers and nothing more to make their "first cut".
* * *
However, a person who is competitive for a spot at Yale and misses out due to lack of extracurriculars is almost certain to get in at a top 8 school. Unless they want to be a Supreme Court justice, their career isn't particularly harmed.
True, but not true. For a reach school . . . which is what the applicant really wants (and the school that will likely give the biggest vocational boost) . . . the soft factors become dispositive for exactly this reason--everyone in that final decision pool has good numbers (or stellar numbers, depending upon the school). At that point, the admissions committee pretty much tosses out the numbers [!] and digs deep into transcripts, extracurriculars, and Ouija boards.
It's quite right that the LSAT is important, if not crucially so; but that doesn't diminish the importance of soft factors, especially where it counts most . . . which is where most applicants want it to count most.
The deeper point combines the two: better to focus on a leadership position in a single endeavor rather than a mishmash of semi-endeavors. The former can take less time, and certainly is less distracting to efforts in, say, an LSAT exam.
And it *does* matter where one goes, if career is the goalpost. Yale *will* open doors that School #8 will not. And School #8 will open doors that School #118 will not. (This is not to argue that it's the only thing that matters, or indeed the only goalpost, but it does no good to dismiss reality.)
« on: August 17, 2011, 11:13:18 PM »
how important are extracurricular activities when applying to law schools?
im hoping to have a peer-reviewed journal article published in a scientific policy journal, and have done internships for two consecutive summers at a government institute. however, i am not involved in any extracurricular activities during the school year.
i'll be a rising junior and i'm hoping to apply during my senior year. would participating in an extracurricular activity in september not make much of an impact on my application next year?
thanks so much!
This is covered extensively in a new book, Law School Undercover, by a Professor X.
In short, choose one thing, and be a leader.
« on: August 17, 2011, 05:54:01 PM »
I don't object at all to making people aware of:
1. the financial realities of this path. Old rule of thumb on small biz is that you don't start breaking even for 2 years and may not turn a net profit on the venture for 5. You might very well end up sorting packages for UPS on the night shift to make rent for a while until your practice is started.
2. The difficulty of this path in terms of the type of personality required.
3. The dangers involved.
People should go into this with eyes wide-open. Where I quibble is with the assertion that it can't be done or that trying to do this is a sure path to ruin. The warnings have a good basis, but to be frank, we all know attorneys who hung out a shingle at graduation and did just fine.
Given the alternative prospects for many graduates of today's schools, I don't think a solo practice is an unreasonable aspiration.
No argument from my side as well. My points were aimed in a somewhat different direction, as I see sub-par lawyering far too often. (Including from some "top" lawyers who darned well ought to know better.) If the motivation is there, and large heaps of it, anything is possible. If the motivation is not there, get it or get out.
And, as to jobs, I would encourage any graduate to widen the net massively. I know this sounds a bit too easy, but I too dealt with this, many years ago. It can be done. Find a small office, law or non-law, and learn. Central to this is the genuine desire of the individual. Not just loan repayments (although that's clearly front-and-center too), but the real person. For anyone with a burning desire to practice, that's the person who should be contacting every DA in every town (note, not just city) in the surrounding 12 counties. For others, there might be corporate, government, or other opportunities with some connection to law (contracting, real estate management, regulation, etc.) that might be a decent or even better fit.
Good luck to all,
« on: August 16, 2011, 04:57:40 PM »
What? Entry level jobs day one after passing the bar down from $160K.....MADNESS!!!!!!
Quick, everyone dropout and go to B-school where we can learn to make coffee and fake paperjams for extra cigarette breaks!!!!!
Actually, business school is a lot of fun. And, truth be told, more appropriate for many who attend law school.
« on: August 16, 2011, 04:56:00 PM »
I guess I can see that idea. Maybe that's why so many retired vets end up as cops(and not good ones either)
I'm a vet in lawschool too, I just only did the 1 tour plus guard option.
Although you probably already know this, I would advise staying in the guard and getting that retirmement. 62 seems like a long ways off right now, but when you hit it, you'll be glad to be collecting that pension. It's pretty substantial. I wish I'd stuck out 16 years in the guard after my 4 years active. Ah well. I was young. 62 is a long ways off when you're 22.
Absolutely right. Think very, very, very, very carefully about your plans whether you stay, go, or just don't know which way to turn. (And especially the last.) A few good decisions provide a rock-solid foundation and open options. Bad decisions do the opposite.
« on: August 16, 2011, 04:52:50 PM »
I have a friend who went solo after 6 months at a firm. Honestly, I question his competence. I'd bet those people slaving away at those big firms and corp. in-house counsel offices are learning more than you'd think. Those "slaves" have the luxury of someone to continue teaching them after law school. They're being groomed to move up in the organization, and its a process that takes time. Theoretically, if all goes well, they'll end up in the position of the partner teaching them the practice. There are attorneys, and then there are good attorneys.
Incompetence aside, my friend makes ends meet by taking public defender cases on contract. That jurisdiction doesn't have an established P.D. office. His practice is slowly growing, but its been tough for him. The hours are pretty good most of the time, and he is his own boss. That counts for alot. Other solo attorneys I know got their start in the prosecutor's office. They did that for a couple of years and then went solo. They made alot of connections that way.
This is a post worth re-reading for all, whether or not you're contemplating starting a firm. Among other reasons, for those in a law office of any kind, there is and should be a greater awe in the value being GIVEN to you by being in that office and learning from experienced practitioners. Why is this form used and not that one? Do I confirm this or not worry about it? Why shouldn't we notify x about y? Oh, we need to worry about z?
It is stressful, thankless work? Well, often, yes it is. That is the nature of most professional service providers, and it's simply part of the reality of law practice. Keep in mind too that someone is paying you for all this. (This is something a solo practitioner becomes acutely aware of.)
Duplicating this early training in a solo practice is tenuous and difficult. It can be done, but it often isn't . . . much to the harm of clients and bank account alike.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5  7 8 9 10 11 ... 52