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 - Hamilton

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 33
Current Law Students / Re: Why Law School is Still Worth It...
« on: October 14, 2011, 11:39:31 AM »
Right, but why is competition keen (what a bull$h*t word) in law? as BLS states "...because of the large number of students graduating from law school each year."

As far as the KEEN competition all the jobs I listed except for nursing say job prospects will be competitive.

Current Law Students / Re: Why Law School is Still Worth It...
« on: October 14, 2011, 09:42:33 AM »
Spot on here except the last part.  For many it is also a horrible long-term investment.  A bad short-term investment can evolve into a bad long-term investment when one cannot make the loan payments and interest keeps accruing - the cute little kitten grows to be a ravenous lion.  Thats what the scamblggers are railing against, the fact that many are putting themselves in a financial hole that they cannot recover from, and the law school/higher ed machine are enabling and encouraging it (and this guys article is part of that encouragment).

I am behind you 100% I don't think you should go to law school for the money. I don't think you should undertake any type of educational undertaking for the money, because no job can guarantee you a lot of money. Law school is also likely one of the worst short term investments, but a great long term investment.

Interesting quote from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics on the legal profession - note the artful use of the word "keen."

"Job prospects. Competition for job openings should continue to be keen because of the large number of students graduating from law school each year. Graduates with superior academic records from highly regarded law schools will have the best job opportunities. Perhaps as a result of competition for attorney positions, lawyers are increasingly finding work in less traditional areas for which legal training is an asset, but not normally a requirement—for example, administrative, managerial, and business positions in banks, insurance firms, real estate companies, government agencies, and other organizations. Employment opportunities are expected to continue to arise in these organizations at a growing rate.

As in the past, some graduates may have to accept positions outside of their field of interest or for which they feel overqualified. Some recent law school graduates who have been unable to find permanent positions are turning to the growing number of temporary staffing firms that place attorneys in short-term jobs. This service allows companies to hire lawyers on an “as-needed” basis and permits beginning lawyers to develop practical skills."

Current Law Students / Re: Why Law School is Still Worth It...
« on: October 13, 2011, 08:25:17 AM »
Nando seems to disagree with this gentleman...

A lot of these articles do seem to come from T3/T4 faculty and professors since they will suffer from a law school backlash.

Law School Admissions / Re: Non traditional student looking for advice
« on: October 09, 2011, 07:48:43 PM »
Isn't there a teaching/research gig you can move into within your current field?  Seems a terrible waste to throw that skill set away for something like law.  You are looking at moving from the position of well paid, well respected professional to being just another law student - nobody will give a rusty armadillo fart what you did before... you are JUST a lowly law student.  Once you graduate and if by some miracle you get a job, you will be at the bottom of the ladder competing with people 15 years younger.  I think you really need to find a way to redirect within your current field.  My humble 2 cents.

Current Law Students / Re: 1Ls: How are you doing after the first month+?
« on: October 07, 2011, 10:37:27 AM »
There is a difference between being totally unprepared to discuss a case and not knowing some fine details when asked by the prof.  EVERYONE at some point does not know the answer to a specific detail asked about, but so long as you are capable of discussing the basic facts of the case and rule of law it does not matter.  Profs will only waste time going after you if you are habitually totally unprepared and have not done any work to prepare for class.

If you say so guys. Plenty of Profs have been "I don't care who fails" and let you check facebook all day. Most of mine though actually have asked specific details of each case and made students stand up in front of the class while doing it. They claim they learned it in some archaic movie called the "paper chase" (which I hear had hippies crying or some BS in it)

Socratic method. What do you THINK it means?

Current Law Students / Re: 1Ls: How are you doing after the first month+?
« on: October 06, 2011, 06:09:44 AM »
I would bet dollars to donuts that has never happened.

that all works untill the prof ask you specific details on the case, you don't know them, look like an idiot, it happens a few more times in a row, get sent to the dean, get kicked out..........stuff like that.

You can pass your tests and do your work at the same time too. It's crazy I know.

Current Law Students / Re: 1Ls: How are you doing after the first month+?
« on: October 03, 2011, 01:29:29 PM »
IMO Jack is right.  You can get everything you need by spending quality time with a canned brief, study guide, and perhaps scanning the case - will save 30% to 50% time reading and "learning."  Spend the time you saved taking practice tests and applying the concepts.  Do you really need to read an 8 page case to effectively learn and understand the concept of "open and obvious" in premises liability?  The "black letter" series were excellent briefs for getting to the heart of things.

Law School Admissions / Re: frustration
« on: September 30, 2011, 06:39:08 AM »
1.  Speeding and parking tickets, largely irrelevent.  Expunged?  If you were a minor and it's expunged, again, may be irrelevent b/c is may be as though it never happened.  Disclose what they ask, do not disclose more than what is being asked.  If there is a question in your mind, call the school and ask how you should answer the question.
2.  "in trouble" will matter if there was official action taken by university and it's on your record.  What you mean by "in trouble" is relevent.

GPA, trend does not matter, final number on GPA and LSAT are what counts.

I've said it a hundred times - I think anyone who is marginal about law school should SERIOUSLY rethink the decision to attend anyway.  Especially if they are paying full price at a low T2 or a T3/4.

If you have not dreamed of being a lawyer, or know in your heart that you truly want to be a lawyer, rethink the decision to even go to law school.

So how bad is this really going to look to law schools?

1. I have an expunged charge for shoplifting 5 years ago, 3 speeding tickets, and numerous parking tickets
2. My freshman year I got in trouble for a student turning in a participation assignment I wasn't actually present for

My gpa isnt the greatest but it has an upward trend. My LSAT is only average, but I'm being realistic about what schools I actually have a chance of getting into.  I felt confident about getting into the schools I'm applying to, but now with having to disclose everything..

What do you guys think?

Transferring / Re: T4 to T4
« on: September 28, 2011, 08:50:38 PM »
Ranking ALWAYS matters when it comes to landing a job, unless you are not going to be a practicing attorney - which then raises the question as to why waste the time and money on law school.  UDM is certainly viewed better than Cooley, so the switch is worth it.  I would be careful trying to transfer with Cs.

Like I said, I am transferring as a matter of location rather than ranking. For what I am doing as far as a career, ranking does not matter.

Current Law Students / Re: Briefs
« on: September 28, 2011, 03:05:42 PM »
Yea, that's crap.  I used canned briefs, book briefed, and never really put together outlines in the traditional sense.  Key for me was studying off professors old exams and knowing what he looked for.  Finished cum laude and passed bar 1st time (with 4 weeks prep time working full time except for 1 week vacation).  So yes, don't buy-in to the whole idea that canned briefs are bad voodoo.

My process was to read and understand the brief, then quickly read/skim the case knowing what to look for.  Highlight the key points identified in the brief, highlight/add talking points to the canned brief I would use in class if called upon.  I ever asked (never was) by prof 'did you read the case?' could always answer in the affirmative.  This really sped up the process and cut through the crap so I could understand the material.

I try not to be a conspiracy theorist, but I heard all kinds of this crap from law professors:

"Don't use commercial outlines"
"don't use old outlines from previous years"
"Don't use commercial briefs"

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 33