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 - Connelly

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
Current Law Students / Re: book totin' question
« on: July 22, 2008, 07:04:44 AM »
Here's a good lifting program if you're interested.

It works. I'm deadlifting 300+ lbs. at 160 (ectomorph build).

I will second this.  This is vastly better than what most people in gyms do.

Also, the ectomorph build is the best for deadlifting.

Job Search / Re: Real deal on law firm life
« on: July 18, 2008, 11:09:55 AM »
Just make sure you know the real deal on how the rest of the world works as well.  There are very few jobs where you can come in, work 40 hours a week, and then completely mentally and physically check out at the end of the day and still get paid extremely well.  I am not saying that being a lawyer is a walk in the park or that the rest of the world is 60+ hour drudgery, but we need to be sure we're making accurate comparisons.  If your goal is to work your 40 hours, pick up your paycheck, and go home, then that will eventually become evident to those around you no matter your career. 

The other side of this is that I see people who have no idea of what even a 40 hour work week feels like making the decision to go work 70+ hour weeks at large firms.  Not very curious why there is a lot of burnout.

Job Search / Re: Do big firms hire from their support staff??
« on: July 18, 2008, 06:35:05 AM »
My apologies for the bump.

I work in the IT department of a 400+ attorney firm, and I will be attending law school part-time in the evenings starting next month.  My assumption is (from talking to many around here) that if I have grades in the normal range that they would hire from, that they might be pulling for me if I apply here.  I have no problem with this, because I don't know if I'd want to work at a law firm that hired out of guilt.  I also know that if I have the grades to get a job here on my own merits, that I'll be pulling for them if I get offers from other places. :)


My sense is that women in their 30s are at a disadvantage at OCI.  My sample was quite small, so take that with lots of salt.

I have heard this. I've heard people recommend that you 'forget' to wear your ring (if there's a ring) on the day of your interviews. Sad but true.

I am about to start law school part-time in August, but I have worked at a 400+ attorney law firm for the past 5 years.  While gender, age, and attractiveness affect any job application process (and differently at law firms), it's hard to guarantee a general trend, or one that is very different from other lines of work.  A hot 25 year old blonde woman is going to have an easier time in life in general that a chubby 33 year old guy.  Such is life. 

Yes, it does seem that attractive women are hired to be associates due to their looks* and the fact that it is fairly certain the young lady will be married off, breeding, and easier to push out of the partner track in 5-7 years.  But that doesn't mean that that is the only factor or even always a positive factor in employment decisions.  Talk to the female attorneys in their 40s and 50s...they often have a very different view on hiring young, perky, definitely-going-to-be-moms-first female associates.  Many of these older ladies feel they had to fight harder than their male counterparts to get where they are now, and seeing young women today not realize whose shoulders they are standing on causes friction.  Besides this, most businesses, including law firms, honestly do want to make money, and while some will get hired based on their looks/availability, for the most part you will get hired on who you know or what you can do MUCH before your looks. 

With the wedding band thing...I think that is appropriate for about any job interview.  They cannot ask you whether you are married or not, and wearing a ring is a near certain answer to that question.  I have taken my ring off (I'm a dude) for interviews when I thought it would matter at all.  It's none of their business at that point. 

*What's the best thing about 24 year old female associates?  The fact that they're always 24.  Sorry, couldn't resist. 

Current Law Students / Re: NBA FINALS
« on: June 03, 2008, 08:19:00 AM »
I'm with you but how do you explain the Celtics' dominance v. the West head-to-head this year in the regular season?

I picked the Lakers in 5 too, but the 2-3-2 will make it more difficult for the Lakers...

I think the Lakers have too much depth and firepower when all is said and done but I wouldn't be surprised if it went 6 games...

The days off between games (which doesn't always happen during the regular season) will help the aging Celtics...

You think the Lakers are too deep? The biggest critique of their team is that they have such a terribly weak bench. They developed an 8-man rotation like almost every other team does in the playoffs, so now it's also pretty short. The Celtics, on the other hand, have refused to do so and regularly played 10 or 11 guys. It seems like you're talking out of your...lack of sports knowledge.

"Too much" could be referring to quality and not quantity.  3 players could be "deeper" than 5 scrubs.

Current Law Students / Re: NBA FINALS
« on: June 03, 2008, 08:16:42 AM »
The Hawks didn't even break 0.500 and still the Celtics were blown out by them in several games.

In the playoffs, I'm not sure if 97-92, 103-100, and 102-93 performances qualify as "blowouts".  

Also, the 2004 season was ages ago and the Lakers are a whole new team, especially after shedding the NBA's biggest dead weight...Shaq...he was holding Kobe down.

Exactly.  It was great to see the Lakers immediately start winning consecutive championships as soon as they were able to unload Shaq.  

Current Law Students / Re: NBA FINALS
« on: June 03, 2008, 08:12:06 AM »
Can't win every year, but I'll take 4-5 banners this decade when all is said and done...


Yes, they seem to win the years they can dodge the tougher teams.  A very good 2nd or 3rd best team in the NBA for years at a time. 

Job Search / Re: Criteria for making partner
« on: May 21, 2008, 06:18:13 AM »
If you owned your own business, at what point would you let someone working for you become a partner and share in your profits?  The decisions of partners to let associates move up to their ranks seems kind when coming at it from their perspective. 

Choosing the Right Law School / Re: JD or PhD in Biology
« on: May 20, 2008, 06:49:41 AM »
And what about lawyers who get out of law? What do they do? Go into industry? Yeah: companies like Best Buy, Wal-Mart. Not as counsel. As retail clerks. LUCRATIVE! Good luck paying off your $150k debt on $10/hr.

If all one can do is become stuck in a $10/hr job, then that is not a harsh reality of law school; that is a harsh reality of them lacking a work ethic and a modicum of intelligence.  Even if the person leaves the legal field and has to start over with zero credentials and experience, income well beyond $10/hr can be generated relatively quickly through hard work. 

I have less of an issue with that an more of an issue with people who could go full-time yet elect to go part-time.  These students will then be in class with us and not working full-time. 

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6