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 - SEC_2L

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: southern or lsu
« on: June 04, 2009, 08:53:12 PM »
Your most recent question didn't encompass the issue of whether it is a "poor decision" to attend Southern. You simply asked why they did not pursue their JD at LSU, Tulane or Loyola instead of Southern. In response, I provided some reasons why they may have...which are not at all unique from any other law school applicant.

Even those that go to Virginia or Duke probably would have gone to Harvard if they could have or if the money were the same. Therefore, whatever argument you are trying to implicitly make through the question seems dumb to me...

But wouldn't they forgo law school all together, or retake the LSAT, etc. to ellude the "poor decision"?

Choosing the Right Law School / Re: southern or lsu
« on: June 04, 2009, 08:31:19 PM »
...because they didn't get into those schools or Southern offered them more $$?? I don't know, seems reasonable to me...

You seem to be implying that a great number of LSU grads have come to the decision that Southern is the superior school in comparison. Yet there are many other factors that lead to where you get your JD. I would have gone to Michigan or Texas...but they didn't accept me.  :(

Answer the paradox while you laugh.

What paradox? That some schools are poor decisions for 90% of their students?

...that more than a battery of individuals holding LSU undergraduate diplomas, also hold SULC J.D.s. Why didn't they also pursue J.D.s LSU, or Tulane, or Loyola?

Current Law Students / Re: Less is More?
« on: June 02, 2009, 08:53:30 PM »
I seriously almost mirror your exact scenario...Top 30% 1st semester after busting ass and probably being too neurotic about exams and then...all As or A-s (on a B- curve) this semester after a more laid back but probably more efficient approach...

It seems crazy but I'll take it!

Last semester I did pretty well (somewhere in the top 1/3) but I studied excessively, maybe 70+ hours a week, every week.  I felt burned out by the time finals were around and then afterward I felt cheated that 90% of what I knew wasn't even on the exams.  I then decided on a new strategy--just keep my mind completely fresh.  I didn't read cases the entire way through, just got what I needed from listening to class, and looked over old outlines so I knew where we were at.  About three weeks before exams I did my own outlines and it made me sort of nervous because it felt like I was teaching myself all of the material for the first time.  The result was that I felt really brimming with intellectual energy right when exams rolled around and not burned out at all.

I got my grades back the other day and aced every single class.  Furthermore, I got the top grade in 3 of 4 classes.  Less really is more--I deserved these grades last semester when I busted my ass but got them this semester when I probably averaged 5 hours a week of study until the last few weeks. 

I know a few other people on this board were taking this approach.  How did it turn out for you?

Current Law Students / Re: Products Liability Question
« on: May 24, 2009, 12:41:10 PM »
Just out of the hell do you know that, being a 0L? Serious question because I know that I definitely did not...

If the product is 'defective' then there are some jurisdictions that will say, 'proper' warning is not an issue because one is not expected to warnt against unknowable defects, therefore the plaintiff may want to seek a defective product suit (UNDER A NEGLIGENCE THEORY)

Sorry, I was unclear, the defective product suit for unknowable dangers (to the manufacturer) are usually negligence suits. This is because of the obvious, we assume they (manufacturer) might have not had the proper procedure or standards in place to recognize the products defects, therefore they did not act as the prudent person would in this similar situation.

I've only gotten the one...last semester it was like this too. I got one grade and waited 2.5 weeks to get the next one. It's a brutal period of time.

^same.  Given how long it took last semester I'd be happy to have them by mid June.

I finally understand what everyone told me about coming into my 1L year about, "the worse you feel about the exam the better you probably did."

I would have bet my student loans that i did no better than ride the curve (on the sunny side of things) in Torts this last semester. It was the most ridiculous, convoluted fact pattern I could have ever expected and the multiple choice literally made me question my career prospects. I log-on this afternoon and somehow he gave me a High A. I have absolutely no idea how it happened...all I can do is be thankful.

Anyone else?

Just for depth...I personally know someone #1 at my TTT (actually low end TT in new rankings) who is starting at full market salary in Dallas (my school is not in TX)...not to mention a slew of others who will be making a lot of money at good firms for being in the top 20-30% of the class...

I'm sure you guys considered this... but I'll tell you a story.  I had a full ride to a T4 and acceptances from a T1 and some T2s.  I had savings, no debt, and loved the idea of not borrowing.  I have since transferred and am paying full tuition at a T2.

1.  Having experienced OCI, networking, career services, and local job markets at 2 law schools.  I can tell you a few things... It is true the average lawyer could care less (outside of the T-10) where you graduated from.  The problem is the average lawyer isn't out recruiting or hiring in their market.  Also, hiring partners often have resumes screened, it is not unusual for lower ranked schools resumes to never make it to his/her desk after they are picked through.  Finally, initial job prospects, employers that recruit on campus...overall opportunity is far lower at the lower ranked schools, the experience is vastly different.

2.  People lose scholarships at these lower ranked schools all the time.  My school's were randomly pegged at 2.9 or 3.0 gpa.  The school awarded scholarships to half the entering class and then artificially deflated the curve by sections.  Essentially the curve was kept at a 2.7 and all of the students with at least half scholarships are put in an "honors" section.... competing against each other.  End result 60% of those scholarship recipients were full paying tuition students for their final 2 years.  My gpa was 2.96, guess what my scholarship was pegged to?  ***I know what the obvious rebuttal is..".won't happen to me, I have never gotten grades lower than B's etc.  Stuff happens though, like getting a 95% in Legal Writing and finding out after grades are given that a last minute change to the section curve makes it a B+.  Instead of a 3.03, you have a 2.96.

 I'm no math geek, but you'll see most T3/T4 scholarships have statistical odds stacked against them.  Schools just can't hand out that free money to that many people. 

Best of luck in your decisions.

I think you're spot on. Although many lawyers will say that it doesn't matter where you get your JD, the fact is that for those that actually do the hiring, it does. A quick glance at NALP will confirm this.

I personally know of one student, very likeable, who finished number 1 at a ttt and could not find employment. And I stress that there was nothing socially awkward about him that would have prevented him from getting hired. 

AR-Faye is up to 94 these days Ninja! Get with the times... ;D

I go to UA-Fayetteville and yeah, you have virtually NO chance of going to NY out of law school here or UALR. You certainly don't have to practice in Arkansas though.

As long as you are even relatively competitive (Top 1/2) you could probably choose to practice in Tulsa, OKC, KC, or Springfield. If you make Top 1/3 grades you have a good shot to make it to Dallas, St. Louis, NO, etc. I mean I know of one 3L going to work for a firm in DC but other than that unless you are at the VERY top of your class with some connection you won't start in a coastal big city market. I think there a lot of advantages to that too but it is all relative to what you want out of life and your career.

Again though all of my knowledge is based on UA-Fayetteville and not UALR...

Studying for the LSAT / Re: Need some advice
« on: March 30, 2009, 06:24:56 PM »
The "minority"....maybe overall yes, but again if you research the area and choose a good one it won't necessarily be the minority (in the average understanding of the term). I honestly feel positive that 35-40% of my class will end up with very good jobs.

BIGLAW in NYC/CHI/LA/DC?? Hell no! But many/most of us in the south wouldn't want that anyways. Let me make 60-80% what you will (admittedly only as Top 25% in my class)in those towns and I'll buy a 5,000 square foot house on an acre for the price of your uptown loft...

...oh, and I will have paid probably less than a 3rd than most in tuition...

I'm with this guy. Saying that TTT and TTTT grads will not find a job as a blanket statement is just ridiculous. SO much depends on where you live or are willing to go to school.

I go to a TTT in a state where there are only two schools and mine is the slightly higher regarded of the two. We have one pretty big market with a handful of firms that pay well into the 6 figures for starting associates. We also have several decent sized markets that you can make good money in with a great quality of life and the states immediately bordering mine hire a lot of people from my schools during 2L summer.

If you are hell bent on being on a coast...maybe I would agree to an extent with the original argument. But those of us that aren't interested in that can do very well coming out of a state school with good grades. Even right now in this poo economy because our firms aren't the ones laying off hundreds of attys...

If you can do well enough on the LSAT to get into a TT I would encourage it. But if all you can muster is a TTT or TTTT, please think carefully before doing it. (You won't.)

BULLCRAP.  Any graduate from any school can get a job in law.  This LSAT is complete crap, and not every school relies on it so heavily.

I work at a law firm that hires interns out of Harvard and Yale and guess what?  All of them have sucked.  They all came to us with a sense of entitlement and they all cheated their way through their internships (by claiming graded credit when they didn't fulfill their obligations to the law firm).  I've witnessed a couple of them (from Yale) flunk the Massachusetts bar.

So scoring high on an LSAT and getting into a top tiered school doesn't mean the student's not an a-hole.  It just means the student's an a-hole with a sense of entitlement.

TTom, I highly encourage you to GO FOR IT.  Study up and take the test a third time in two years.  You seem like a thoughtful person who's discouraged, and don't let the negative blowhards on this site discourage you by saying you're not cut out for it.

If you want it badly enough, then you're cut out for it.  GO FOR IT.  All you really need to practice law is admission to a state bar.  Period.  Build your contacts now, do great in whatever school you attend (on whatever tier you can get into) and GO FOR IT.

I wish you all the best.  And to the blowhards who are negative, I wish all the worst.


My comment wasn't intended as a blanket statement. I know that many students who go to ttt and tttt schools will become very good lawyers and will have very good jobs. Those that end up with good jobs, however, are in the minority.

If anyone has to be a lawyer, then yes, go to any school you can get into. But please be fully aware of the economics involved. That's all I'm saying.

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