I've heard great things about McKenzie and Baker
I agree with the above posters. There isn't much difference in the quality of education you will get with ANY of the Canadian schools. If you aren't sure where you want to practice (Canada or the US) you should attend school in Canada. The process to take the bar in Canada with a U.S. JD can be tedious. You may have to take additional courses, sit for more tests and you'll still have to article once you transfer back. You're much better off staying here.
Good luck with your decision.
What's the point of that? Then you could do your business without the LLM anyway if foreign language skills weren't a big deal.
You could still do business internationally without the LLM, but not necessarily legal business. Generally, what makes the Duke LLM in International and Comparative Law useful is the fact that it provides the students with knowledge of international legal systems. The foreign language part of it just enables you to use this knowledge more effectively in a given international market.
If I could please try to negate JGCESQ's terribly poor advice.
I could easily humiliate you here, but I won't. Call it a philanthropic gesture and an acknowledgment that your comments may owe more to stupidity than malice.QuoteOh, so in 2 years you attained guru level knowledge on the legal profession.
No, but I feel more qualified to comment than, say, people who have spent no time in the profession.QuoteThis is ridiculously flawed logic and dangerously bad advice. Your post is offensive.
Saliently, you offer conclusory statements but no argument in support of your contention.Quote
First of all, people who go to Harvard and Stanford aren't blessed. It wasn't luck. They are intellectually superior.
Yes, as evidenced by George W. Bush (Yale undergrad, Harvard Business), Pat Robertson (Yale Law School), Ted Kaczynsnki (Harvard undergrad) and many others. I do not deny that the Ivy League is home to some extraordinarily bright people who are intellectually superior, but those who actually are intellectually superior are the exceptions, not the rule.
Schools like Harvard and Yale are home to a relatively small core of extraordinarily, indeed unimaginably, bright people. That is, the John-Roberts types. Unfortunately, in addition to this core, a considerable portion of the student body at these schools owes its presence there to the advantages attendant with affluent birth, familial relation, and environmental circumstance. One need look only to George W. Bush (Yale, Harvard); John Kerry (Yale); Bill Bradley (Princeton); male private part Cheney (who managed to fail out of Yale not once but twice despite the notorious grade inflation at those schools); Paul Giamatti (admitted to Yale when his father was acting President of the school); Jordana Brewster (Yale, grandfather was a former President of Yale) and many, many, many others to see that, although the Ivy League is home to GREAT schools, enrollment at an Ivy League school is hardly proof of superior intellectual capacity.
I have occasion to deal with a great many people who went to Harvard and Yale. Some of them are brilliant; others are shockingly mediocre. Attempting to assess intelligence based on where--or whether--someone went to school is a very, very perilous enterprise that will doubtless redound to your detriment. I have worked with a kid from Cooley who had a far better handle on litigating matters than I did, and I have met kids from Harvard who were utterly clueless. As a matter of fact, I recently had a summary judgment motion wherein opposing counsel was a recent Harvard Law graduate. His brief was average, and he lost. Later, he called me and asked for my suggestions on writing better briefs.
On the whole, the Ivy kids that I have met are gracious, humble people, and I imagine that is so for a number of reasons. First, the ones who actually ARE smarter (and they certainly exist) feel no need to advertise their intelligence. Second, they know, by virtue of having been at these schools, that many of their classmates were mediocre and are undeserving of the credit appended to them solely on account of having a degree from Harvard.QuoteThey work harder, are smarter etc. It's not luck, it's skill and ability. Skill and ability which will be used on the job.
I have to say that you're an unlikely spokesman for all things academic and intellectual. Before you discuss skill and ability, I'd counsel you to learn the difference between the restrictive "that" and the non-restrictive "which." If you're going to hold yourself out as intellectually superior, it might be advisable to master the rudiments of English grammar lest you become one of the clueless Harvard kids to whom I adverted above.Quote
Personal appeal can get you very far in life. People with personal appeal from Stanford/Yale/Harvard become the President of the United States.
Well, I think Richard Nixon (Whittier), Ronald Reagan (Eureka College), and Jimmy Carter (U.S. Naval Academy) may beg to differ. Moreover, that Yarvard/Hale students continue to be the leading candidates for such offices is more rightly attributable to blue-blood privilege than to ability or intelligence. For every Bill Clinton who gets in there legitimately, there is a George W. Bush. Does anyone honestly believe that John Kerry and George Bush were the two smartest people in the country? No, they're both patrician types, so they got the nod, but make no mistake: designer-label academia is starting to fade. The percentage of Ivy-League CEOs in the Fortune 500 companies has been in decline for a decade.
Further still, it should be noted that of the five self-made men who rank in the top 10 on Forbes Magazine's list of the richest Americans, only one (Warren Buffet) has a college degree of ANY kind. Gates did drop out of Harvard, but Larry Ellison (CEO of Oracle) dropped out of the University of Illinois; Michael Dell (Dell Computers) dropped out of the University of Texas; and Paul Allen (Microsoft) dropped out of Washington State University.
You may wonder why there are only five self-made people on the list of the ten richest Americans. It's because the other five people on the list are the heirs of Sam Walton, who, incidentally, never went to college.QuotePeople with personal appeal from the bumblef*ck lawschool your friend went to brag about making $200k after two years in some ambulance chasing firm. $200k after two years is not that impressive. Sure it's unheard of and amazing for 4TT, but is common for top school graduates. Sounds like your friend busts his *ss for that money. I suspect he's the front man in an ambulance chasing firm. He's the one literally chasing the ambulance. Then he uses his charm to get the welfare-check receiving trash to sign the retainer.
I won't comment on the substance of this twaddle because, frankly, there is no substance. But on an unrelated note, I get the sense that you're a TOEFL student. Before going to law school, whether it's at Yale or somewhere else, you really want to do something about your English. It's very, very poor.
Are you fluent in any different languages? If not getting an LLM as an American student won't really help you in that field I would assume, unless you wanted to become a professor.
Since English is the international language of business, I would think the LLM would still be useful even if you're not fluent in a foreign language.