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 - Felsen

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 56
Current Law Students / Re: Do people study over break?
« on: January 12, 2007, 10:28:36 PM »
It will partly depend on your school.  At my school (UTexas), booklists for classes weren't posted till last week on Wednesday.  The campus bookstores said they wouldn't have all the books in till about Tuesday of this week.  School starts up again on this coming Tuesday.

So even those who really wanted to study ahead couldn't have more than a week of prep time.  As it is, most of my classes have just posted the very first day of reading, and don't have a full reading schedule up yet.  It isn't a problem if you know the class will just read through the entire book or at least start at the beginning.  I had a class that started in the middle and jumped around a lot this past semester, so I'll probably always wait on a reading schedule.

Current Law Students / Re: Attrition Rates
« on: December 24, 2006, 09:42:05 PM »
Go to

The site has their Official Guide.  Under ABA Law School data for each individual school they list attrition rates for the last year.

We'll take UTexas, since it was mentioned.

1L - 3.0%
2L - 2.0%
3L - 0.4%
All of those were listed as Other attrition instead of Academic.

Current Law Students / Re: Playing job offers against one another
« on: December 24, 2006, 09:36:41 PM »
OK, you answered my first question, you're a 2L.  This makes a difference.  Note, I've not gone through the process yet, but this is what I've gathered.

There is a deadline required by the NALP for when job offers can first expire.  It is December 1 (that's what the Skadden folks said at a Q&A session I attended).  Since it is already past that point, there probably aren't additional requirements.  The firms are trying to finalize who will actually be coming over the summer so they can plan on how many 1L positions they'll have, and possibly grab any remaining 2Ls.

It is perfectly acceptable to call a firm who hasn't given you an answer yet and tell them you have a job offer and need to make a decision soon.  I am presuming of course that you have already interviewed with the firm and are just waiting on a decision.  You can call them (one of the interviewers probably gave you their card).  Start by asking them what the status of their decision is.  If they are still deciding, let them know you have an offer on the table, but need to act on it.  Give them the date you need to know by.

If they want you, they'll speed things up.  You can tell them that you'd really like to work at their company, but you need an offer or else you'll have to take the existing offer.  If they don't want you, they won't do anything, so you'll want to more seriously consider the existing job offer.

Definitely do this through a phone call, not an e-mail.  Do not leave the information in a voice message, you want to talk with someone directly to make sure someone is going to act on it.  Make sure you talk with a decision-maker.  You want to talk with someone who is involved in the process and can actually speed up a decision, rather than the person who was just sitting in on the interview to learn how to do a recruiting job.

I know, this is too late to help you by now, but maybe someone else will have a similar question.

Current Law Students / Re: Torts Hypo - input appreciated
« on: December 24, 2006, 09:21:13 PM »
It is a wonderful exam question.  Sounds like a 1 hour one.  Here's my short version.

No Battery:  Patient consented to a transplant.  The nature of the source of the organ does not void the consent, as the nature of the transplant is still the same.

IIED:  Unlikely.  The act of taking body parts from the dead is certainly reckless.  Person A, however, probably cannot claim IIED, though, as organ transplant donors are typically dead people.

Negligence:  No chance without actual damages.  Fear of getting a disease is only rarely held as damages (typically when there is a 50% or greater chance of developing the disease).

D's Estate
No Battery:  He's already dead.

IIED:  Dead people can rarely show severe emotional distress to have occurred after they are dead.  D's relatives may be able to prove this.

Negligence:  Not really.  D hasn't suffered any damages, neither has his estate.

Stuff not asked for
I'd mention that there is obviously a criminal statute under which the person was convicted.  The statute may create a specific cause of action.

Current Law Students / Re: Torts Question
« on: December 24, 2006, 09:05:03 PM »
It is an interesting question, but mostly because I can't see exactly what the question was.

The pillow was recalled, so there is probably some sort of strict liability.  Of course, there still must be some sort of connection between why the pillow was recalled and why the baby died.  You don't mention it in this question, and it does matter what the defect was and how the suffocation happened.

It is not recommended that pillows or any similar soft objects be placed with a baby while they sleep, as the baby can roll over onto it and suffocate.  If that's what happened and it would have happened with any pillow, there isn't really a case for strict liability.

An example:
The pillow was recalled because it will catch fire too easily.  The defect has absolutely nothing to do with the baby's suffocation.  No liability should be imposed.

Current Law Students / Re: adverse possession exam question
« on: December 24, 2006, 08:58:14 PM »
If I'm reading your statements correctly, Lot 2 was conveyed to X in a (presumably) deed.  Whether it was accidental or not, it was conveyed. 

There is no adverse possession in what you have described.  If someone else was occupying Lot 2, then you start getting into an adverse possession issue.  X does not have to occupy Lot 2 if it was conveyed to him.

So X has a claim over Lot 1 and Lot 2, unless someone else establishes an adverse possession claim or Bona Fide Purchaser claim (if you want to worry about recording acts).

Of course, our property class didn't ever go over anything called "Color of Title."

U of Texas - Austin / Re: I love my professors
« on: December 14, 2006, 11:29:23 PM »
I personally wonder if they stack the first year classes and we can expect everything to be downhill from here.  ;)

Current Law Students / Re: Nuisance ?
« on: December 08, 2006, 06:12:08 PM »
No nuisance probably.  See Amphitheatre, Inc. v. Portland Meadows, which dealt with a drive-in theater and a race track.  In that case, the race-track did take steps to prevent the light pollution to the theater's property, though.

Light can be a nuisance, but it does need to be excessive and/or in the wrong place.  For example, the Winn Dixie lights that are too bright in a residential area and can interfere with people trying to sleep.

Current Law Students / Re: I don't know if I want to be a lawyer anymore!
« on: November 24, 2006, 09:56:19 AM »
If you want to transfer to your first choice school, you need to focus on getting good grades.  There are people that transfer between schools every year.  You still need to get good grades, even though you were accepted to your first choice this last admissions cycle.

I am pretty sure that you cannot just drop out and apply to law schools again in another year or two.  Remember that you need to list all law schools that you have attended when applying.  Since you already started at a school, you'll have to list that on future applications, even if you drop out before grades are given.  At any of the higher tiered schools, they are concerned about their attrition rate.  They want to bring in people who will actually finish at their school.  Dropping out will look bad, and would need to be addressed in your applications.  Now, I have a friend who is a 2L right now who dropped out after a year, and a few years later got into a top 20 school, so it certainly doesn't kill you.

If you really feel like you need a year off, then you have to talk with your school.  They're the only ones who can help you with that.  Don't fret about talking to them.  They won't kick you out just because you're having second thoughts.  If they cannot accomodate such a request, they'll tell you.

Current Law Students / Re: BigLaw Suit Requirement?
« on: November 20, 2006, 08:00:29 PM »
The grey and brown suits might work if they are a dark color.  For grey, the recommended suit color for lawyers is charcoal grey.  For brown, you just have to be careful.  You don't want to become known as the guy in the poop suit.  Depending on the people who see you in it, that might be an unavoidable title no matter what color of brown your suit is.  :(

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 56