so i've looked around a little bit and found some people talking about WestLaw and saying that it costs so much to use.  I guess it doesnt matter to me now but I was wondering if people knew how schools and law firms use this and how they pay for it.  Do schools get some type of discount using the service?  also how do firms control the cost of their employees searches.

i'm just used to getting familar with computer systems by trial and error and simply using them for a good while until i understand the ins and outs of them.  however, now that ive heard that westlaw searches can cost hundred(s) of dollars for a single search i doubt that i will be permitted to simply spend some time getting familar with the system.


how exactly does it work?

i support the notion of not allowing online ABA approved law schools to open up.  i dont think there should be online law schools for a few reasons.

first of all i dont think it would flood the market with lawyers because i dont think that anyone (or barely anyone) who went to an online law school would pass the bar.  more importantly though, i dont want traditional law schools to see online learning as a way to cash in (in the same way they have in undergrad and some grad school levels).  ive unfortunately been forced to take some online classes and they have been utterly worthless.  i could not imagine taking them for law school and expect to perform as well. 

i also dont think that online law schools are a good idea because i think that being an attorney is a profession that is not suited for everyone.  there is a reason that law school is competitive for entry and a reason that classes at schools are small.  if online law schools open up the overall value of a JD would go down and the time honored profession would be devalued. 


that being said, i support technological integration into classrooms but i do not think that technology can replace the classroom. 

law school is not a weeknight get training in medical assistant school.  it is hard work with competitive entry and students, this is a negative aspect of law school, this is why the country is essentially run by lawyers.  its the best of the best and thats how it should stay.

this thread has become pointless because of the gross over exageration that is going on.  first of all, the difference between #1 and #2 is not going to be so spread apart that it is going to matter that greatly.  obvioulsy #1 looks better on a resume than #2 but most law firms arent going to hire someone based simply on rank alone.  if #1 and #2 show up for the same job its probably going to come down to the interview, not their GPA. 

obviously #1 at harvard counts for more than #1 at cooley or most other schools, simply due to the reputation of the school. 

the arguement that i am giving is that with the way that law school works and how selective it has become in recent years, most schools are going to find themselves with a group of students that will before equally, and some that will excell and some that will fall behind.  this is why a curve shouldnt be neccessary.  it should happen naturally.  students can still be ranked against one another, but why should it be neccessary for someone to receive a C or D if they are performing at a B level?  simply because of the curve?  that doesnt make sense. 

grade students and give them the grade they deserve, the class ranking will show where students stand in their class, GPA doesnt show that anyway.  GPA should be used to show at what level your performing, class rank should be to show how you are performing in comparison to everyone else.  why there are curves simply doesnt make sense. 

it only functions to hurt the job prospects of students at schools with difficult curves, and that is a school purposely putting its students at a disadvantage.

Quote from: RootBrewskies on March 02, 2006, 09:30:33 AM

Quote from: condy on March 02, 2006, 03:21:12 AM

Quote from: RootBrewskies on March 01, 2006, 05:19:23 PM

give the money to the stripper. its a funnier ending.

true, but america doesn't usually go with funnier endings, unless it's in its funny moments ..

anna nicole in the supreme court?  thats not a funny moment?  better believe i get a chuckle out of it when i hear legitimate reporters and analyists talking about it.

true, if you see it that way, but don't you think it's not that funny to see big shots full of *&^% (oops, sorry, I meant money) being milked by whores that they were supposed to treat 'em up to the end like whores, and not like ladies?

i think its better that the old man got what he wanted, the whore got what she wanted.  and the family isnt getting anything.  odds are the family is a bunch of crapfaces, if the old man hated them enough to give all his money to a ho. 

or they could just declere the trial ridiculous and give the money to a charity.

i cant say from personal experience.  i dont go to RWU.  i visited it as a prospective student and my friend goes there for undergrad.  the setting is beautiful, the law school building itself is nice, but nothing to brag about.  the students i talked to seemed to like it.  they say that since they are the only school in RI job prospects are good for RI, but in reality you have to think that your competing against Boston schools as well.  The odds of getting a Boston job are probably slim but not impossible.  providence or the surrounding small RI towns is more likely.  its a nice area, if you like that new england feel.  bristol is small but nice. 

personally i thought the school was a good setting for undergrad, and i would consider it for that, but for law school, it wasnt for me.  i really didnt see myself settling down in a small RI town.  Providence is nice and i could definately be there, but the school just wasnt a great fit for me. 

it does have some unique programs like maritime law.  all in all i would give it a positive review but a law school has to match your personality and where u see yourself in the future.  RWU didnt for me, but maybe it will for you.


good luck.