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 - Maintain FL 350

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 97
11
People, who are looking for an attorney will presume T14 lawyers are better. Employers know this. So to ensure that people come to their firm over anyone else, they higher the highest T14ers they can. They probably know, the quality of their education is little better than tier four. But they don't care about that. They care about what will get clients in the door.

That's the case at larger firms. They have more prestige-conscious clients, and they want to be able to say "My lawyer went to Harvard." Although even at big firms that not always the case.

The vast majority of the time, however, your client has no idea where you went to law school nor do they care. The fact that you have a law degree means that you possess some mystical knowledge that they don't. Most clients have heard of Harvard, Yale, etc, but have no idea what the difference is between Harvard and Loyola.

Quick example: the other day I contacted a lawyer (Ivy grad) for a recommendation for a good local attorney to handle a particular type of case. He referred me to a guy who graduated from a non-ABA school. Clearly, the Ivy League guy didn't care about pedigree because he knew the guy was a good lawyer. 

12
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Process Of Service
« on: July 02, 2016, 08:41:12 AM »
Just check your state rules, should be easy.

I've never heard of an attorney serving their own papers, though. I went to small claims court once, and even then I had to have a third party serve. Seems like there are way too many potential problems with an attorney serving. I mean, the last thing on the world you want is some sort of confrontation between you and the defendant.

13
I agree with what Loki has already said, and with your numbers you will get into most schools.

One thing to consider:

Don't get too caught up in the T14 thing. What I mean is, not all T14 schools are magical just because they are T14. Some, like HYS, are truly elite institutions and you will probably get a job based on pedigree alone.

But, depending on where you want to live and what you want to do, any T14 is not necessarily better than any non-T14, especially of there is a big price tag attached.

Let's say you want to live in LA and your dream is to be a prosecutor. Would T14 Virginia be a better bet than UCLA/USC at a steep discount? In my opinion, no.

The T14 are all great schools, don't get me wrong. My point is that you should at least consider other well respected schools, especially if there is money on the table.

14
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: June 24, 2016, 09:15:37 PM »
He's voting for his opponent. Who cares whether he's suspended his already dead campaign. This is a great example of why the left never really gets anywhere.

There is no revolution. Never was. Just total capitulation.

15
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Charlotte School of Law vs. CUNY
« on: June 24, 2016, 03:50:53 PM »
You need to think about where you want to live post grad. These are both local schools with local reputations, and you will almost certainly end up working in the immediate area.

Personally, I'd go with the cheapest option. NYC is a very competitive legal market with a very high COL. You will have lots of debt and be stuck competing for the lower end of the legal pay scale.

I don't know the NC market at all, but the COL is definitely cheaper.

Frankly, neither school is a powerhouse and you will be seriously hustling to find work. Thus, limiting cost should be a major goal.

As far as CUNY being #1 in public interest, nobody cares. I don't mean that to sound like a jerk, but seriously nobody cares. CUNY could be #1 and NYU could be #200, and the NYU grad will still get the interview. These kinds of subcategory rankings are (with a few exceptions) practically meaningless. For example, St. Louis University is ranked high in Health Care Law. Go to any big firm that represents hospitals and insurers and see if they hire St. Louis grads over Harvard and Yale grads as a result.


16
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: June 24, 2016, 10:52:05 AM »
Here you go, Cinnamon.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/bernie-sanders-says-he-will-vote-hillary-clinton-n598251

Sanders says he will vote for Clinton. Think about that for a minute. The guy you will write-in will not vote for himself, because he has the intellectual maturity to understand that defeating Trump is more important. What does that say about you?

I think it says that either you picked the wrong guy in the first place because he's a sellout (unlikely), or that your diehard position is sort of childish (likely). 

18
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: June 21, 2016, 03:51:50 PM »
Yeah, I held my nose and voted for HRC. I'm not a big fan, but she has a better grasp of the issues and isn't a "gimmick" candidate like Sanders.

Sanders is a good guy, but would have accomplished very little. Congress is not going to vote for new taxes, which he needs to fund his cradle-to-grave welfare state. Tax the rich? Not enough. Tax corporations? Still not enough. Cut spending? Nope, sooner or later middle class taxes would have to be raised and that would be the end of Sanders. As my colleague says, "Americans love free stuff until they find out how much it costs." 

Estimates are that his programs would have added 15-18 trillion to the debt. No thanks.

Sanders is a big picture guy, but I'm not convinced that he would have been able to handle the day to day managerial tasks which are the less sexy side of the Presidency.

Finally, let's assume that you're right and HRC gets indicted. That's still no guarantee that Sanders gets the nomination. Delegates could just as easily go for whoever else throws their hat in the ring.

19
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: June 20, 2016, 06:46:26 PM »
Secondly, not only Republicans party is being  blown up....but Democrats party is now being berned to the ground.

Bernie is there to pick us up after Hillary has her interrogation and then gets indicted.

I'm actually not a big fan of HRC, which is why, unlike, Cinnamon, I can be at least somewhat objective about her candidacy. You're so obsessed with Sanders as a panacea for all that ails the nation, that you've seriously departed from reality.

The fracture in the Democratic party is not even close to the absolute implosion of the Republicans this year.

The Dems have moved to the left as a party over the last couple of decades anyway, and have picked up on the concerns and lingo of Sanders supporters and have incorporated them into the party platform. Stuff like "inequality" will figure big at the convention, and Sanders will play a role. But at the end of the day, HRC is the nominee and Bernie will go home to Vermont.

The vast majority of people who voted for Sanders will vote for HRC. A few diehards (like you) won't, but it won't make much difference. She'll win with or without you.

As far as your wish for an indictment, good luck. Did you see Loretta Lynch on MTP this weekend? She made it clear that DOJ won't lift a finger. Cronyism at it's best. 

Trump will lose, Clinton will win, the Republicans will freak, and Sanders will have a new career as a disheveled late night guest. The new center-left administration will chug predictably along, and you will no doubt update us on every new fake scandal.

20
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: June 16, 2016, 05:32:35 PM »
...and I would add that it's, well, amusing that someone keeps finding the same topic "popcorn worthy" in this election (remember- he had the popcorn ready for the Benghazi hearing), while ignoring a pretty amazing election that includes, inter alia-

1. A party's prior nominee in open warfare against their current nominee. Seriously, how amazing is the Romney/Trump split (putting Utah ... UTAH!!!! in play).

2. A sitting GOP senator saying that the GOP nominee is too bigoted and racist to be President (??? that's from Kirk, today).

3. The first-ever female presidential nominee from one of the big-two parties.

4. Having both candidates have unfavorable ratings that have never been recorded (seriously- Clinton would have serious difficulties, but for Trump).

5. The continuing and open question as to whether the GOP will revolt prior to, or during, Cleveland.

6. The open question as to whether events (the economy-Brexit, a terror attack, etc.) could substantially upset the race and ... we could actually have a President Trump.

All of the above, and more. Yes, I agree completely.

It is an incredible election, and has exposed so many fractures within the system.

This is probably a somewhat predictable response, but this Trump phenomenon demonstrates how wrong the pundits and party leaders have been at reading the tea leaves. There has been a seething anger building for a long, long time, and I think it's too simplistic to just chalk it up to racism. That certainly is the animating force for some Trump voters, but there's something else going on. There's a strong desire to burn the SOB down, start over.

So here's my question:

Let's assume that HRC wins. If she beats Trump, who is anathema to so many voters, by only say, five points, does that mean that a less Trump-y type of anti-establishment candidate would have smoked her? I mean, when you look at Trump it's hard to believe that she's not ahead by 25 (which could happen, maybe).

Further, and more importantly, does that mean that the Democrats now have to find a way to deal with the fact that nearly half the electorate is willing to go for something radically different? I think it legitimately calls into question the assumption of a permanent Democratic majority based on future demographics.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 97