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 8 9 ... 58
31
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: June 14, 2016, 07:54:09 AM »
which has jack to do with Hillary.................tell the truth, you are a 1L who is dead center in class rankings ain't ya there boy??

You're kidding, right? Cinnamon Troll is some old guy who has probably been banned from numerous newspaper comment sections, and is too dumb to be allowed to comment on youtube and espn. 

Source- a periodical.

32
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: June 09, 2016, 12:35:30 PM »
..like the Valerie plame case--but this time-- we know the culpable parties already.😉😊

Breaking news! Dumb troll still unable to see the obvious; doesn't realize that people are laughing at, not with, him.

Source- A periodical.

33
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: June 08, 2016, 09:37:12 AM »
After a year of trolling, and being wrong, I take comfort in knowing that CS will continue to troll and be wrong.

Seriously- look at his posting history. He's never been right, and every single time, he doubles down on being wrong. Please, go to a website where everyone doesn't already know what a pathetic loser you are.



34
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: May 10, 2016, 07:44:25 AM »
As usual, you don't let pesky facts get in the way of your wishful thinking.

1) Polls indicate that Clinton will obliterate Trump in November. One poll, ONE, by Rasmussen shows Trump ahead by 2 points. Every other poll ever conducted shows Clinton ahead by as much as 13 points.

No matter how unpopular HRC is, Trump is doomed with women and minorities. He can't win without them, thus he can't win. You cannot provide data to refute that fact, can you?

2) Abedin has not even been questioned.
3) No date has been set for HRC to be questioned. You're making stuff up again.

Dude, he's always making stuff up. The only thing you know for sure is that if he says it, it will be wrong.

Source- a periodical.

Stop feeding the troll.

35
Studying for the LSAT / Re: LSAT Score Improvement
« on: May 02, 2016, 08:34:24 AM »
Hello,

I just wanted to pose a question (which I'm sure has been asked a million times) as to how much you all were able to improve your LSAT scores from your first practice test to the real deal.

I finally made, and solidified the decision to attend law school, and decided it was time to begin prepping.
Tonight, I took my first "cold" test, without any preparation. I scored a 149. I realize this is not a score that will get me into Law School.

My question to you all, is what was your first score, and how much did you improve over the months between that test and the true LSAT? I'm shooting for no less than a 170 on my final LSAT Exam.

Let me start with the short, simple, easy-to-understand answer to your question. If you scored a 149 on your first practice test, then you will not score a 170 on your final LSAT exam. I would bet significant amounts of money on that. Now, allow me to provide the longer answer.

Is it possible? Sure, anything is *possible*. It is possible that you will win the powerball lottery tomorrow. But this type of thinking is a common fallacy with 0Ls (people before they go to Law School)- it's the old, "95% of incoming students think they will finish in the top 10% of the class."

A 170, percentile ranked, is over the 97th percentile. Which means that to score that, you are doing better than over 97% of all people taking the LSAT. Now, remember that this isn't the population at large- it's the test takers. The majority of people taking the LSAT are type-As, driven, did well in UG, and believe that getting an "A" in a class is their right as a human being.

The LSAT is, theoretically, an aptitude test. Does that mean that preparation doesn't matter? No. You can learn basic skills (how to take tests, how to manage your time, how the LSAT is scored). Certain sections (the analytical reasoning/logic games section) can see improvement by learning some techniques in dealing with a class of problems. But there are limits - because it's not like one of those AP tests, where you can just study the information and regurgitate it.

Circling back, you can improve. You will. But if 149 was your actual score on your first exam, then it would be unrealistic to believe that you will score a 170 with practice. But it's not impossible- just unlikely. And your improvement will also depend on what you are weakest at- reading comprehension tends to be hard to improve at, logic games can improve with practice.

It could also be that your first diagnostic wasn't representative of your ability.

36
I'm very sorry to say that-- at least in the case of the University of Florida Levin College of Law-- passaroa25 is correct: UF won't even consider the application of a formerly academically disqualified applicant. This remains the case EVEN THOUGH the ABA has completely waived any required waiting period before reapplication and simply requires the would-be second round law student to make "an affirmative showing" that they possess the requisite intellectual and academic skills to complete law school and contribute to the diversity, prestige, and talent pool of the class. Seems incredibly narrow-minded to me, but here's the rule. We don't have to like or even respect it (I'm glad to hear that Michigan is more open-minded toward second chances): "INELIGIBILITY FOR ADMISSION
........
Applicants who have attended another law school and are ineligible to return as a continuing student or are not in good standing (including, but not limited to, having been academically dismissed), are not eligible to apply to the Levin College of Law."

https://www.law.ufl.edu/admissions/apply/standards-for-admission

Holy thread necromancy!

Well, since this was brought up, individual law schools can, of course, have admissions requirements that are more restrictive than the ABA minimum. So the lesson, as always, is check with the school you will be applying at. It shouldn't be hard.

Regarding UF, it makes more explicit what is implicit at some other schools (cf. FSU - "Applicants must be in good standing at all institutions attended to be eligible for consideration."). The reason why the Florida schools, as opposed to some other schools, might have a more ... selective approach here is because Florida has one of the most demanding character and fitness (if not the most) applications in the nation. Seriously. I've gotten my bar license in multiple jursidictions, and while some jurisdictions are a rubber stamp, Florida is more like a proctological exam.

37
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: April 21, 2016, 03:55:32 PM »
...and he is poised to take California...

Evidence? Otherwise, you're just making stuff up.

Of course he's making stuff up.

Stop feeding the troll. Did you think it would be different this time? ;)

38
That said, for whatever reason, it does have a pretty good rep from those in the know, and it places very well outside of MO. It's kind of like Emory in that way - I never really think about it, but it's a very good law school that places well.

WUSL definitely has a good rep, and it's perennial place on USNWR's list probably imparts at least some degree of name recognition even if it's just "Oh yeah, I've heard of Wash U."

I guess what I mean (and admittedly my opinion is based on ambiguous stuff) is that Wash U isn't exactly what I'd call a nationally prestigious school. Good? Yes. Prestigious? Meh.

I'm sure that Wash U has a great rep in the Midwest, but outside of that region are doors being opened by a strong alumni network or by the school's inherent reputation? I really don't know. I suppose a CA equivalent would be UCLA/USC. Great local reps, but probably not going to land you a gig on Wall St. 

Other schools that are fairly close in rank (Cornell, Georgetown) have a certain panache that the Wash Us, Emorys, and Bostons of the world do not. Such is the ephemeral nature of rankings and prestige.

I think we are on the same page.

I might quibble, a little, regarding GULC. GULC is an example of a school whose name in USNWR and with laypeople is > than in actuality, but maybe that's just me (I cut it off at Cornell).

But yeah, WUSL is definitely with the Emor(ies) and UCLAs and BUs of the world. In terms of reputation. A solid, good school, but not (strictly speaking) a "national" one.

39
I've always thought of WUSL as an outlier. It's USNWR ranking seems to outpace it's national reputation.

That's not to say it isn't a well respected school, it is definitely respected. But compared to other similarly situated law schools, it just doesn't seem to have the same immediately recognizable "name".

I'm not sure if I'm in agreement, or disagreement, with your conclusion, but I agree with your premise!

There is a mismatch between WUSL's USNWR ranking and their "general name value." Then again, I rank it from Cornell up (roughly T14, now T13) as being the only real "name" schools.

That said, for whatever reason, it does have a pretty good rep from those in the know, and it places very well outside of MO. It's kind of like Emory in that way - I never really think about it, but it's a very good law school that places well.

40
Are you going for a JD or a Master's? Assuming you meant JD, I think the decision comes down to money and location. Both are good schools, both will offer almost identical educations (as will most law schools), and both will provide post-grad job opportunities that are mostly within their respective regions.

In other words, if you want to live in DC go for GW, and if you want to live in St. Louis go for Washington U. I don't know about the job prospects in St. Louis, but Wash U is the big dog in town so that's going to help. DC is a very competitive market, but the job market is much larger. Keep in mind that outside of their regions, each school will be viewed very similarly.

Has either school offered any money? That's a huge factor.

I agree with almost everything written here. Cost is the biggest factor.

That said, WUSL is a bit of an anomaly in terms of jobs- yes, it places great in St. Louis/MO. But (this is a little weird), it also places decently in NY, Illinois, and DC. GW is more regional (from NY to VA, but really DC!). I wouldn't call WUSL a "national" school, but it does have some diverse connections.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 58