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 - Felsen
Pages: 1 2 3  5 6 7 8 9 ... 56
« on: April 21, 2007, 12:40:20 AM »
Here's the priority ranking as I have heard it:
2. Law Review
3. Moot Court
4. Mock Trial
After this comes the other journals, clinics, etc.
Moot court is considered important as it requires research and writing skills to do well at it, and not just the verbal skills like mock trial.
« on: April 19, 2007, 12:50:22 PM »
it is a non issue. to ban guns would take a repeal of 2nd amendment. This could never happen. Think of all the states that would never vote for it (I think 2/3 are needed to repeal an amendment or maybe 3/4) TX, FL, all the southern states, all the western states, VT, AK, etc etc.
Darn it. Where's that copy of the Constitution when you really need it? Even my Con Law professor said we wouldn't need to read the thing again after we were done with his class.
On the serious side. The 2nd Amendment has not been incorporated into the 14th Amendment, so it only applies to the federal government and not the States. It isn't even held inviolate at the federal level.
« on: April 13, 2007, 12:20:36 AM »
I'd go with the small firm job.
First, you can typically only do a firm job over the summer, but (at least at my school) you can work for a judge during the school year. This presumes that the judge works in the same city as you are going to school. You do miss out on the experience of working at it like a full-time job, though.
Second, if you plan on doing a judicial clerkship after school, you'll get a year's worth of the experience at that time. You'd get more use out of the judicial clerkship if you've also had a bit of experience over the summer at a firm. That gives you a broader look at the full process when you are ready to get a job after your clerkship.
Third, small firm job is most likely more money. Nothing like earning some actual money to lower the costs of law school.
« on: April 11, 2007, 09:43:01 PM »
Thank you, Felson, do you think tax is a necessary course for every law student? How about bankruptcy?
Personally, I plan on taking tax and not taking bankruptcy.
The resolution of most lawsuits will involve taxes. Your clients have to know if they need to pay taxes on the settlement or verdict and how to structure it to minimize the taxes. I want to be somewhat knowledgeable in this area when my clients ask me questions, rather than referring them to the tax guy.
I expect far fewer situations when the lawsuit will end in a bankruptcy, so I'm fine with having to ask the bankruptcy group all sorts of questions when it happens.
Other classes I plan on taking: Evidence (I'll be a litigator), Business Associations (commercial litigator), Wills & Estates (for my own benefit). I think all of those are considered Bar courses as well.
« on: April 09, 2007, 11:07:41 PM »
My understanding is that 99% of firms will care about what GPA you got over what classes you took to get it. They know you'll come out of law school knowing the basics, and expect you'll have to be taught the rest.
Take Torts for example. You learn the basics of tort law in law school. You discover the elements of negligence, learn about causation, and get some idea of comparative and contributive negligence. That is all nice background information. When you get to New York and you get assigned to an employment case of wrongful discharge, your tort class will probably not have really prepared you for it. Even if you get a negligence case, you still need to research New York's variety of negligence. You'll have to find a New York case listing the elements; you can't just write them down from memory or quote that California case from your textbook. You then have to find out what type of comparative or contributive negligence system New York uses. Oh, and start all over again next month when they hand you a tort case in New Jersey.
I expect classes to be like having read and studied a really good secondary source. They'll make you knowledgeable in an area, but you still have all the real work ahead of you.
So game the system for a higher grade if you have to. A law firm might get suspicious if you take all Pass/Fail classes your last year of law school, though.
« on: April 09, 2007, 10:54:01 PM »
I can only speak for the journals here at UT. At UT there have been three journals that I know of that have already chosen people to be on the journal next year, or at least over the summer (with an automatic next year offer unless you don't do the summer work). All of the journals say up-front that they understand that people will be trying to get onto Law Review, and they fully expect someone to choose Law Review over their journal.
My feeling is that the other journals pick ahead of time as they expect that the gung-ho folks who will just barely miss out on Law Review will be looking for any type of journal experience early. By selecting early, they get to choose from the most enthusiastic and possibly best before the other journals grab them.
« on: April 07, 2007, 03:12:40 AM »
I meant the georgraphic location of my future job. But I am also concerned with choosing a correct course in my third year. Many factors pop up for me to balance, but without sufficient knowledge and experience, I have no idea to make a decision.
1) I would like to choose courses with less reading assignments
2) I don't know whether international law will be worthy to concentrate on because I have limited credits left for third year, and some people told me they found out that there is no such international law practice after graduation
3) Some areas of law are locally oriented, such as oil and gas, mainly litigated in the center of the country
4) Don't know whether I should choose course only for the purpose of bar exam.
Thank you for your input and any advice.
1. Depends entirely on the teacher and how they teach a particular class.
2. Most "International Law" is just a corporation doing business in a foreign country (say Germany). The American firm hired to handle it will probably just hire a local firm in Germany and act as a go-between. Or the corporation will go directly to the German firm. Or it will be the reverse and an American will be doing law work for a German firm.
3. Oil and Gas practice is not necessarily too limiting. I believe mineral practice is also included in this, so it can stretch across most of the U.S. Certainly places like Texas and Oklahoma will be bigger for Oil and Gas. There are other states known for their mining operations.
4. There are typically too many "Bar" courses in Law School to take them all. If you try, you miss out on areas of more interest to you. Pick the ones that you are interested in the most. There will be BarBri or other courses to cram in the courses you miss. Likewise, you don't want to skip all the Bar courses and have to cram in everything during BarBri.
« on: April 05, 2007, 09:54:36 PM »
Will this course confine my future practice area to oil and gas area, such as the central of the states? Thanks!
Are you actually asking if taking a course will confine you to a specific area, or did you mean to ask if specializing in Oil & Gas will limit your job possibilities by location?
I certainly hope it is the latter. I'd hate to think that the required Criminal Law 1L course will prevent me from being a civil lawyer. Shoot, and they tricked me into doing Torts last year, which prevents me from being a criminal lawyer.
On the serious side, you can switch "specialties" as often as you want in law practice. The state bar is general purpose. That's why lawyers are able to do pro bono. Even though I'll be doing patent law, some day some really poor person may have me trying to keep them from the electric chair. I don't know whom to pity more, the defendant or the judge who has to constantly remind me that it is beyond a reasonable doubt, not a preponderance of the evidence.
« on: March 05, 2007, 03:56:59 AM »
We check it. The reality of school has answered all of our questions and musings, though. So there isn't much need to post anymore.
« on: February 24, 2007, 01:30:00 AM »
If B were dead, there wouldn't be a perpetutities problem, as there is only a preceding life estate of someone who is currently living. The living person for the life estate counts as a measuring lifetime.
Pages: 1 2 3  5 6 7 8 9 ... 56