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 - Cereal_Killer
« on: August 18, 2011, 12:57:56 AM »
Age has no bearing on law school admissions. It's really all about your LSAT and GPA. On the other hand, your age might actually help you get into the school of your choice (assuming your hard factors are competitive) because law schools work very hard to create diversity within the classroom.
« on: August 14, 2011, 08:48:31 PM »
I respectfully disagree. I think the perceived prestige of one's undergraduate institution and major is just as important in scholarship decisions, if not more, than UGPA. If you don't think so, just ask yourself which of these two law school applicants you'd rather be: (1) a M.I.T. graduate who holds a degree in chemical engineering with a 3.75 GPA or (2) an University of Phoenix graduate who holds a degree in Early European Literature with a 3.95 GPA? I think the answer is obvious. Now, of course, one's academic background doesn't perfectly predict law school success, but it's naive to think it's not weighted heavily into the decision-making process as it relates to scholarship awards.
Moreover, I suspect admission councils have a great deal of latitude with respect to who gets awarded a scholarship and who doesn't. Consequently their decisions are likely not bound by blind adherence to some sort of LSAT/UGPA index. Just take a glance at Lawschoolnumbers.com to confirm this. You'll see people who have identical LSAT/GPA numbers and get nothing while others get generous scholarship awards.
« on: July 23, 2011, 03:13:32 PM »
My decision has come after careful consideration and conversation with others.
Since it appears you made up your mind prior to the original post (or shortly thereafter), why even bother asking for advice? Just curious. It seems a considerable waste of time for everyone involved.
« on: July 05, 2011, 08:08:37 AM »
I wouldn't be so quick to laugh.
While the skill sets are not identical, a good paralegal will have a lot of the same skills as an attorney. For instance, a paralegal knows how to research, read, and brief cases, draft memoranda, and so forth. Also, a paralegal will know the black letter in a number of legal specialities, for example, he'll know the elements and affirmative defenses for all intentional torts, negligence, statutory torts, and strict liability. Now, of course, if you ask a PI paralegal a question about securities law you'll likely get a "deer in the headlights" look in response.
Naturally, an attorney will know more law than a paralegal, ceteris paribus, and will have a better understanding of the reasoning behind the law. But a paralegal who has worked in one area of law for a number of years will easily holds his own with most attorneys---especially a newly-minted attorney. A ten-year paralegal at V20 firm will run circles around most new, HYS attorneys.
In addition to the skills a paralegal shares with an attorney, he will surpass an unexperienced attorney in many other categories. For example, most attorneys haven't the faintest clue how to go about ordering core medical records, e-filing pleadings, or inputing raw data into litigation software, such as Summation.
A solid paralegal is a smart attorney's best friend. I wouldn't be so quick to discount the comparison of skill sets.
« on: July 04, 2011, 11:37:14 AM »
I, myself, feel like an idiot for aiming for a paralegal career. However, I know that paralegals are more employable than attorneys, simply because they make less money while having the same set of skills.
There's nothing wrong with the paralegal profession. With some experience and expertise in a particular area of law, you could easily make 50K or more per year. A lot of attorneys don't even make 40K. I worked as a paralegal for a number of years. When I left, I was making 80K. I'm not bragging. I just want to you know there are some paralegal jobs that pay exceptionally well---in particular, corporate and intellectual property law are two well-paid specialities.
« on: July 03, 2011, 09:33:20 PM »
Are those your best choices?? OMG Retake the LSAT man. Those schools are some of the worst in the nation. Dont wait till you graduate from law school to realize how important school ranking is.
This from a guy whose screen name is AspiringBlackLawyer. Are you really a non-black who aspires to be a black lawyer? I think you mean BlackAspiringLawyer, don't you? Before you insult someone unnecessarily, I think you should make sure your own house is in order, pal.
« on: July 01, 2011, 10:51:36 AM »
I appreciate your confidence. And I'm sure you're a bright and diligent student. But you've likely never been in an academic environment where you're surrounded by people who are as equally intelligent and determined as you. In fact, some of these people are intellectual mutants---scary smart.
Granted finishing in the upper third of your class sounds quite easy. You, like most of your fellow students, have probably achieved a great deal of academic success in the past so top third sounds like a cakewalk. But from a purely statistical standpoint, you're almost twice as likely to end up in the bottom 65% than in the upper 35%.
Anyway, I wish you all the success in the world. Good luck!
« on: June 30, 2011, 06:13:39 PM »
Because you're attending part time, I assume you're holding down a full time job. And if you're working full time while attending law school, there's just not enough hours in a day to do everything. Unless, of course, you plan to skip sleeping altogether.
If you're working part time or less, however, you should have plenty of time to take on Moot Court or Law Review.
« on: June 29, 2011, 05:48:11 PM »
Maintaining a 3.2 GPA will be much harder than you think. Law school isn't college. The odds are stacked heavily against you maintaining the scholarship throughout 3 years of law school. So if tuition is your main concern, you'd probably be better off asking yourself which of the two schools you'd be happy paying sticker price to attend.
« on: June 28, 2011, 11:11:09 AM »
I understand that the girl is mad, and probably scared too. Who wouldn't be scared while staring at 150k in debt with no viable means to pay it down? But she has to take a long, hard look in mirror, and buck up.
Every student who attends a T4 school must comes to terms with the fact that it's going to be a struggle to find employment and his degree alone isn't going to open any doors. Consequently, finding a job out of a T4 school is more about networking and gaining real-world experience through clinics and externships, then how well one does in school. Sure grades matter, but not all honors graduates are created equal. Selection of elective courses can play a significant role in how you're viewed by a perspective employer.
I don't know if this is case with this girl, but imagine if she was able to achieve her "honors" status by racking up electives in classes universally known as "bunny courses," e.g., Law and Literature. If she competed for a job against a fellow TJSL who had a slightly lower gpa (and graduated without honors) but who focused her elective courses on, say, contract drafting and other practical skill courses, she would likely lose nine times out of ten.
Also, she complains that she sent out 150 resumes to no avail. This, too, needs to be qualified. If these were just template, unsolicited resumes, then 150 is nothing. However, if she sent a resume for each law firm along with a tailored cover letter (for example, she could've researched a recent case the firm worked on and discussed what she could have brought to the table, and so on), then 150 is significant. But if she just sent out 150 template resumes/cover letters, then she should have sent out hundreds (if not thousands) more. There are over 2700 attorneys and law firms listed on Martindale Hubbell in San Diego alone.
I think part of the problem is that most people fail to realize when they're unemployed searching for a job should be approached as a full-time job in itself. From the scant details that I've read about this case, I'm not sure she understood this.