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  8 9 10 11 12 ... 81
« on: May 18, 2015, 07:58:57 PM »
I can understand that.
So, if I understand correctly, you would have to be readmitted to your old law school then you can apply to do your last year as a visiting student somewhere else.
If that's the case, I wonder if you could let them know right off the bat that you're planning on finishing somewhere else. That might make the admin a little less skittish. Maybe that was the idea your parents were going to talk to them about?
On the other hand, the admin may be concerned that if they readmit you and you don't get into another school, then they'll have to take you back. I wonder if you could somehow negotiate a conditional admission, solely for the purposes of trying to get visiting student status at another school?
Also, (I'm not trying to be negative here, but this is a major issue) are you sure that you can actually get into another school as a visiting student with the disciplinary action on your record? You might want to look into that before starting the whole readmission process.
« on: May 18, 2015, 12:11:44 PM »
The admin may not even be able to discuss your situation with your parents due to privacy requirements. (A waiver may be required). There may also be privacy issues involving the other students. Just remember that not everything the school does is to "punish" you, so to speak. They are also concerned with protecting other students who may feel threatened. These kinds of issues are taken VERY seriously nowadays.
You seem to harbor significant animosity for the admin. Maybe it's totally justified, I don't know. Do you feel that you're ready to return to law school?
« on: May 16, 2015, 02:40:11 PM »
Yes, my mistake.
As far as readmission/ADA "reasonable accommodations", I don't know. The school will be balancing your rights against their obligation to provide safety for other students. Perhaps finishing at another school renders the point moot?
I strongly believe that the key is to get healthy FIRST. Not only will you be in a better position to demonstrate changed circumstances, but you will probably do better on a personal level, too. I wish all the luck in the world with your continued recovery. People with such issues DO finish law school, pass the bar, and get admitted. Take care of your most immediate needs first, and everything else will follow (even if it takes a little longer than anticipated).
One last point: if I were an administrator at your law school, I would be wary of speaking to your parents without you being present. I would want to see that you were at least capable of handling a conference on your own before I'd consider readmission. I would expect that from any adult. This may be something to discuss with your lawyer.
« on: May 15, 2015, 07:13:35 PM »
Nice to have the site up and running again.
Hi Opal. Loki has done a very good job of addressing the major issues, but I just wanted to mention a few things.
First, I'm not familiar with PA's C&F process, but I imagine it's not too different from CA (my home state). The key to C&F issues is full, unequivocal disclosure. The Bar is often quite forgiving of many issues, but NOT of a lack of candor. I was always told that if in doubt, fully disclose.
Your situation IS going to attract the attention of the bar. You will have to disclose the disciplinary actions, and they will likely investigate. Admission to the bar will likely rest on two major factors: 1) your honesty, candor, and willingness to cooperate, and 2) your ability to demonstrate recovery. At least here in CA, it is up to the applicant to demonstrate that they presently possess good moral character. In other words, the burden is on you.
Part of the Bar's job is to protect the public. Thus, they are probably going to want to see that this problem is behind you rather than ongoing. You're going to have to establish that, probably by showing a clean track record for a decent period of time accompanied by affidavits from doctors attesting to your progress. BTW, don't take my word as anything more than my non-professional opinion. This is just based on what I remember from law school.
I would think that at this point any talk of an ADA lawsuit is premature, to say the least. Even if the Bar did turn you down, I'm not sure how successful that route would be as opposed to waiting a couple years, showing continued progress, and reapplying. Typically, people who are denied the C&F are not permanently denied. They can reapply and show changed circumstances. Again, just my opinion, but I wouldn't want to get into an adversarial relationship with the Bar if I could avoid it. It often doesn't turn out well.
As far as getting into another school to finish out your JD, I don't know. I mean, honestly, having a disciplinary action on your record is not a small issue. My guess is that most schools would want to see changed circumstances before admitting you.
Loki gave great advice regarding retaining an attorney. If you decide to go this route, pay attention to the "chemistry". It really does help when you have a natural, positive relationship with someone who you're going to have to spill your guts to.
« on: May 11, 2015, 12:04:49 PM »
Please? Can we do something about the spam?
« on: April 22, 2015, 11:48:59 PM »
I more or less agree with you, Citylaw.
I don't doubt that SCU is as good as any other ABA school. The 13 point drop in one year, however, struck me as unusual. I know that bar pass rates do fluctuate, but that's a big drop.
Like I said, one year's drop in the rate is NOT necessarily indicative of a problem. But, if I were considering spending 100k+ on a law degree I'd want to know why the drop occurred, and whether they were taking measures to remedy the issue.
I guess part of my concern comes from personal experience. When I was in law school (my second year of a four year part time program) my school experienced a significant drop in the pass rate. The administration pretty much brushed off the issue, "Oh, don't worry we'll be back again next year." The next year, the rate was again pretty low. Suddenly, the admin was freaking out because the low pass rate was hurting the school's ability to attract students (money).
They established a whole new bar prep program, hired great instructors, and slowly pushed the numbers up. Now, they're fine but it took a while and hurt their reputation in the meantime.
« on: April 22, 2015, 07:01:02 PM »
July 2014 60%
July 2013 73%
July 2012 73%
July 2011 76%
July 2010 70%
That's a significant drop in one year. I'd ask why.
« on: April 22, 2015, 06:50:46 PM »
Phantom, if you're still here I noticed something today that you may find interesting.
Just out of curiosity, I went on Calbar to look up my alma mater's performance on last July's bar exam. I noticed that Santa Clara only had a 60% first time pass rate.
Although that is not super low in the absolute sense, it does seem quite low for a long established school with relatively decent admissions numbers. I mean, other schools were lower but they were places like Whittier and Thomas Jefferson which have had problems with bar passage rates for years. Other schools like McGeorge were also lower, but so are their admissions numbers so it isn't too surprising.
I seem t remember that when I was in law school a couple of years ago SCU had very respectable pass rates. If the rate has fallen, I'd wonder why? It doesn't necessarily mean anything bad, might just e luck of the draw. One year of low pass rates is not a trend.
BUT, if I were a consumer (and yes, law students are consumers) considering writing a very large check to ANY law school and I noticed this issue, I would ask:
1) what happened?
2) what are you doing about it?
« on: April 21, 2015, 02:39:43 PM »
I am being offered the following positions:
~Dept. of Justice, U.S. Office of Trustee Legal Intern (for the summer)
~GAP Legal Intern (for the summer and into the next school year)
~[A tech company but not a huge global one] (for the summer w/possibility to extend to the fall term)
These are pretty different positions. I think it has to do with what you hope to accomplish via the internship. If you are simply looking for any legal experience, DOJ would be a good choice.
You mentioned that you might want to work in Biglaw. In that case, a Biglaw internship/summer associate position would be best, as many people actually get hired based on their summer experience.
Out of the options you listed, I'm tempted to say that DOJ offers the best experience, although the Trustee's office is fairly unique. I'm not sure that what you learn there will be viewed as widely applicable to most civil litigation/transactional firms, the way that some other DOJ positions may be. Bankruptcy and receivership (I think they handle receiverships?) are their own animals, with their own courts. Unless you were considering this as a career, I'm not sure that the DOJ imprimatur alone will make much difference.
I would also look at the whether any of these internships hold out the possibility of a job offer after graduation. For the feds that will depend on budgets. For the private firms, you could discretely inquire.
« on: April 17, 2015, 01:35:58 PM »
I will be moving to SD to attend law school these two choices will constitute my decision just not sure if I should go for TJ even with a full ride since Ive heard that its reputation is not so remarkable even in SD.
Here's the thing, I'm not trying to be rude but neither school's reputation is remarkable, even in SD. Outside of SD, many employers will have no clue about either school, period.
There are a few things to consider. Cost
Personally, and this is just my opinion based upon my own priorities, I'd take the full ride in a heartbeat. Your post grad employment opportunities are probably going to be very similar graduating from either school. Firms that care about pedigree won't be interested unless you graduate top of the class, and firms that don't care so much about pedigree will focus more on your personal skills and experience anyway.
For example, if you apply to the Public Defender's office they're going to want to see that you have some relevant experience (internship, volunteer attorney, etc). A TJSL grad with relevant experience would probably stand a better shot at getting hired at the PD's than a CW grad with no experience. In that case, it would be better to be the TJSL grad with no debt.
You mentioned that you're moving to SD for law school. Are you prepared to live in SD after law school? If you attend one of these schools you will almost certainly end up in the immediate area for work.
Pay very close attention to these. It is very easy to lose most law school scholarships. If the CW scholarship offer has more reasonable stipulations, it may be a better deal even though it's only 50%. What are the stips?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6  8 9 10 11 12 ... 81