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 - loki13

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 60
Law School Admissions / Re: Any good ideas for my undergrad?
« on: November 01, 2016, 09:47:31 AM »
Your undergraduate degree (given these choices, and your stated desires) doesn't matter. Honestly.

Choose the one that you have the most interest in. Do really well (your GPA matters a lot). Then take the LSAT. But law schools don't care, at all, what your major is in undergrad- especially when it's a standard "liberal arts" major. So choose what you like, and do well.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Low Diagnostic Score & Study Timeline
« on: September 19, 2016, 08:19:55 AM »
Please forgive me, I'm sure this is a regurgitation of someone else's post, but I just took a diagnostic test and am unhappy with my score: 134. In my own defense, I was not concentrating (at all), skimming through the passages, and did not time myself (i.e., not working "under pressure").
I am set to take the LSAT in December, and have signed up (cringes) for an online Kaplan prep course, coupled with a few study guides (LSAT for Dummies and Barron's). Assuming I really "hit the books", is there a realistic chance I can score in the 150s-160s range?
I am not aiming to go to a top 10 school, my desire to attend law school is to come back to my small town and help in the education sector in helping low-income families navigate the system as well as revising policies (I am a teacher right now and am finishing up my Masters, if that's of any benefit).
Any feedback would be much appreciated. Thank you much.

So, let's start with the basics.

First, that is a really, really low score. There's no way around it. And time pressure should make it worse, not better. It would be easier to analyze if you had taken it more seriously.

What does it mean? Well, the LSAT does not correlate perfectly to professional success, but it does have some predictive power in "thinking like an attorney." If, after real preparation, your score does not significantly improve (to, say, 150 minimum) I would seriously reconsider going to law school.

So two points-

First, the two primary areas that you can see improvement on are general test taking strategies, and logic games (or whatever they are called now). Some people just aren't good at understanding how to approach standardized tests- this is something that you can work on. Logic games are something that can be improved through specific strategies that you may not have. Remember that- and work hard on learning how to do them.

Second, the benefit of a high LSAT score given your desires is to get a scholarship at a lower-ranked school. Scholarships will be based on your uGPA (undergrad GPA) and LSAT score. You want to minimize your cost of attendance- look at state schools as well.

Finally, there are websites (such as lawschoolnumbers) that will provide snapshots of how other applicants are doing, and websites (lawschooltransparency) that provide good metrics on the lawschool based on publicly available information. Do you research, and don't rely on the schools' brochures.

Good luck.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: September 08, 2016, 10:12:12 AM »
To those hundreds of folks who check into this thread

I think Julie needs a wellness check.

I think, like, five people read this thread. Julie, and four people to make fun of her.

too long and pointless, didn't read............reality remains reality.

If anus hurts too bad to absorb the majors part, focus on the clinics part.

Awwww... what was your law school major? Was it learning how to find a process server?


Not true, MANY have majors as options, and without question concentrations on the rest, and different quality of clinics for options (if any at all in those specific areas)


Many law schools have "majors" as options? Really?

So, when I'm on the hiring committee, and someone tells me that they received a JD with a major in corporate law* ... do you think I'm going to laugh, or just toss the applicant's file?

So, moving on from that foolishness (you get a Doctorate in Jurisprudence, not a Bachelor of Science/Arts with a major), let's address your other incorrect points.

Do schools offer concentrations / certificates / gold stars? Of course they do! After all, they need things to put in brochures for impressionable 0Ls. You know, the kind that think, "I wanna be an international lawyer!" Allow me to rank the value of these concentrations / certificates / gold stars in the real world (assuming you haven't been practicing for a while, in which case, who cares what you did in school?)-
1. Class Rank/School.
2. Law review/ Moot court.
3. Trial Team
4. Jobs / Positions taken during 1L and 2L summers
5. RA to Professor, other academic work.
6. Secondary journal.
7. Cool facts about the person, like their middle name.
38. Concentration.

I kid, but only slightly. Because these "certificates" and "concentrations" have no more validity than what the school says they have. They are just another thing to on your resume - nothing more, nothing less. And they are almost all a big joke.

Do some schools have better clinics? Sure. Can I think of a school that doesn't offer clinics in criminal law? No. Is this something that someone will easily find out, as opposed to every single school saying they offer "amazing clinics, with hand-on ability to work with actual clients and practitioners!" Nope. Isn't it true that only a small percentage of the student body will usually take advantage of the amazing opportunities, while the vast majority won't- yep (and can you blame some of them- if you're going into transaction work, why the heck do you need a litigation clinic)?

Finally, let's look at the request. Even assuming you weren't wrong (which is difficult, but we're analyzing a hypothetical here), the specific question was directed toward criminal law and child advocacy law. Now, I respect people that can practice in those fields. And while "child advocacy law" is somewhat ill-defined for purposes of the question, family law and criminal law as fields are the two easiest areas to break into, if that's what someone would like to do. I'm not saying that all areas of each are equally easy to get into- the difference between federal prosecution and state public defense is ... not small.

Anyway, to sum up- please don't believe the crud law schools are shoveling at you.

*Except someone with that lack of knowledge wouldn't say corporate law, they'd say M&A, because of course they would.

Hello I need help! I want to go into either child advocacy law or criminal law and I want to know if anyone knows of any good schools with great programs for either of these majors? :o

1. There are no "majors" in law school. Just a JD.

2. Any school will teach you enough to go into child advocacy law or criminal law.

3. Do not believe the self-rankings of schools regarding their programs; with a very few exceptions (such as tax law, which you need an LLM for anyway) it doesn't matter at all. Certainly not for those areas.

4. Go to the school the you like, that is the least expensive, in the geographic area that you believe you will practice.

Finally, good luck. Those are two fields that I could never practice in. It's not the law - it's the facts, if you know what I mean.

Not enough information in this post.

As a usual rule, you have to disclose crimes and academic discipline. You will likely have to disclose this event to the law schools you apply to, and to any Bar that you take. You will need to be more candid than, "Put a little crudely, we got very loud[.]" Were you having loud consensual intercourse? Were you having a loud argument?

Assuming there are no other issues, so long as you are candid, this shouldn't be a bar for admission to a school, or admission to a bar.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: August 08, 2016, 10:09:38 AM »
Oh ... Julie Fern.


Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: August 08, 2016, 10:06:48 AM »
Julie.........please stop pretending you know grammar or wtf strawman is..........

It is Julie!

Julie, you shouldn't have reverted back to your old syntax patterns. Too easy.

Story time?

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: August 05, 2016, 01:33:48 PM »
I lose cases

The only true thing you've said today.

You're kidding, right? Spicy Troll isn't an attorney!

After all, anyone who combines the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year old with the internet acumen of your crazy grandfather isn't an attorney. Spicy Troll probably assumes this is the local newspaper ... sorry ... periodical commenting section.

That said, I did appreciate the unintentional comedy in someone who continually references the perfidy of Nixon, and then, without irony, employs the "silent majority" phrasing to back up their contentions. Good times!

Lol. Silent majority different than southern strategy. I knew trip you up.  You not good at this.

Is it actually possible for you to be less intelligent? I think not.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 60