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 - Citylaw

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 64
Online Law Schools / Re: NOVUS LAW SCHOOL?
« on: October 15, 2015, 10:04:53 PM »
Thanks for that link it answered all my questions.

 I reviewed the initial Complaint filed by Touro and was shocked that they filed it.  After reading the Complaint my understanding is that Touro accepted a NOVUS grad into their LLM program, under the impression he was a foreign law studnet. It appears Touro  did no background check on this applicant at all, because they later dismissed him for attending NOVUS.

The dismissed student sued Touro for accepting him and then deciding his "foreign law" school was not enough.

As a result of that lawsuit Touro then filed a Class Action Lawsuit in state court under a Federal Statute. (No Joke f;ing weird though)

With such a bizarre Complaint I really nerded out and looked up the full case in detail from the New York Supreme Court website, which actually maintains PDF's of all filings in the case, which is pretty cool.

NOVUS killed them in their motion to dismiss.

So the facts are that Touro let a NOVUS grad into their LLM program and they believed Touro was a foreign law school. They then tried to dismiss the NOVUS grad they accepted, but he sued them.  Somehow Touro blames NOVUS for their inability to check on an applicant's background. All Touro had to do was google NOVUS and they could have learned what it was.

Touro then files a class action claim in state court under a Federal Statute 20 U.S.C. 1003, which actually contains the words" Diploma Mill" but it is unclear what the remedy under the statute is. I don't know what Touro even sought to accomplish from my reading it of the filed documents Touro wanted a New York State Court to Declare Novus a school in the Marshall Islands a diploma mill under a Federal Statute. What a declaration of a Diploma Mill would even do is unclear, which is why the court dismissed the case for the lack of any justifiable controversy.

The court needed no more than one page to say there is no controversy and dismissed the case.

I have to ask what the hell was Touro thinking? They screwed up by admitting a NOVUS grad and apparently conducting no background check whatsoever on their LLM applicants. It seems like you would sweep your inability to use diligence under the rug, but instead they sued NOVUS for no apparent reason.

Just bizarre really the only relief they sought from the State Court was to declare NOVUS a Diploma Mill under a Federal Statute. WTF? Why would a class action be necessary for that either?

Good for NOVUS and as to Touro if you make a mistake take accountability for it . Don't attack some obscure unaccredited law school, because your taking money from applicants without doing due diligence of your own.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Evidence Why 0L's shoudl not use Rankings
« on: October 15, 2015, 11:22:46 AM »
I have no big issue with the rankings at the end of the day they developed a  good for them. I wish I would have thought of it, but I believe students should not consider when choosing what school to attend.

I suppose as LOKI suggests if you want to use it as a guide for schools to apply to then it could be beneficial, but  I think most 0L's give it far more importance than that, which is no fault of U.S. News. They are just giving their opinion and getting paid well to give it.

As a sidenote to LOKI's response I applied to about 30 schools, because I attended an LSAC forum and got more fee waivers than I knew what to do with.  I highly recommend any OL attend an LSAC forums if it is convenient, because they hand out fee waivers if you just stop by their booth.

In summary, if 0L's are using it to determine what schools then there is nothing wrong with that or even if 0L's use it as a tiebreaker, but when OL's make the mistake I did of making the rankings a primary factor in their life altering decision is where issues arise.

As evidenced by my own experience the rankings also change drastically and two of the schools have no completely changed entirely Franklin Pierce Law School is now University of New Hampshire and Texas Wesleyan is now Texas A & M.
Other schools ranks changed by 50 plus spots and the actual ranking system changed entirely as well. It used to only go to 100 now it goes to 150. The ranking system in 2008 when I was applying consisted of Tier 1; Tier 2; Tier 3; and Tier 4 schools. That has no completely changed U.S. News now ranks 150 schools out of 200 and leaves the remaining 50 with a rankings not published distinction.

That all in seven years. I graduated in 2011 and am coming up on only my fourth year as a lawyer and the ranking of my school has changed drastically, as has the system so to any 0L please don't let it be a major factor in your decision.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Evidence Why 0L's shoudl not use Rankings
« on: October 15, 2015, 10:10:43 AM »
Solid post and I guess my point is that if a 0L doesn't know that Northwestern is better than Appalachian they probably shouldn't be going to law school.

Northwestern is a well regarded school and any 0L at an ABA school went to undergrad and for example I went to a California State University. I knew that Northwestern, Stanford, UCLA, USC etc were "better" undergrads.

The issue you cite is where I think the problem lies and was even my situation, I was using the rankings to decide between the following schools Penn State, Michigan State Tulsa, Franklin Pierce (now University of New Hampshire), Florida International, Texas Wesleyan (Now Texas A&M), University of San Francisco, Golden Gate, Chapman, and Santa Clara.

I was living in China when making my decision, which is why my schools were all over the map and I was not being realistic about location at all.

The rankings have no utility for any of these schools. If I wanted to live in Michigan-Michigan State would have been the best choice.  New Hampshire-New Hampshire, then as to the Bay Area Schools at the time USF was "better" than Santa Clara now USF is barely ranked and Golden Gate was "tier 4", but now it is the same as USF. None of those three bay area schools are really much different when Boalt & Stanford are right here not to mention the array of Harvard, Yale, NYU etc grads that move to the Bay Area.

Many of my friends went to Boalt & Harvard and have no idea that there is even a difference between USF, Santa Clara and Golden Gate. It is essentially the distinction I made earlier about two students fighting over the 55th and 72nd class rank who would know or care?

As I have said you can use the rankings as a tie-breaker and to someone out there it might make a difference, you never know. However, if you wear a blue suit to an interview instead of a gray one that could make a difference as well. 

I may even be even stupider than most 0L's when making my decision by using the rankings as a guide, but using the rankings to make a life altering decision is not a good idea. At least in my anonymous internet poster opinion, which is worth according to Michale Scott the most reliable source of information ever :)

Online Law Schools / Re: NOVUS LAW SCHOOL?
« on: October 15, 2015, 09:22:47 AM »
I wonder if that is why the case was dismissed? If NOVUS won a motion to dismiss I assume standing was the issue.

If Touro has standing to sue NOVUS what stops Harvard from suing Touro etc.  If you thought schools fighitng for rankings was bad, why not just let them litigate with each other and the winner gets ranked #1. At least that would be an objective ranking opposed to scantrons they use.

The whole lawsuit seems stupid, why Touro a school with a less than stellar reputation itself would use its resources to attack Novus? Unless they let Touro Grads participate in the lawsuit to get experience, I don't see why Touro would pick a fight with an obscure unaccredited law school.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Evidence Why 0L's shoudl not use Rankings
« on: October 14, 2015, 03:13:36 PM »
I think law school grades can be analgous to U.S. News. If you are in the top 10% of your class you did well and there is merit to that distinction. However, is there a much difference between someone in the top 8% v. top 10% not really. Is there a difference between someone in the top 10% and the bottom 75%? Yes.

However, even if you go lower is the student in ranked 55 out of 100 that much better or worse than someone ranked 72 out of 100? I don't think it matters much at that point. Both are mediocre law school performers sure it is better to be 55 than 72, but no employer will say wow you were 55th amazing.

U.S. News is the same situation if you are in the top 10% of schools then there is a real distinction and maybe even in the top 25% of schools that is a factor to consider, but when you get to 78th v 112th what does it matter?

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Evidence Why 0L's shoudl not use Rankings
« on: October 14, 2015, 01:17:37 PM »
I assume most law students would know that University of Texas & UCLA are solid schools. I think that goes to my point in that UCLA is a university people know all over the United States as is University of Texas. The campuses are beautiful, they have massive alumni networks etc.

I think it is fair to say that most people would know that UCLA is a "better" school than Southwestern or Loyola Marymont. I also assume most people would know that University of Texas is "better" than South Texas College of Law or St. Mary's College of Law.

I have no issue with U.S. News offering the rankings it is a money maker and if people want to pay to listen to their opinion let them. If people Tony Robbins wants to give life coach lectures more power to him. However, I wouldn't recommend that anyone take either that seriously.

As I am sure you remember as a OL everyone is insecure about their decision, most incoming 0L's are very dilligent researchers who wants to be sure they are making the "right" choice. U.S. News exploits that fear for profit by making an arbitrary ranking of schools.

There is no ranking for every single undergraduate institution, but when I was a high school student I knew UCLA was a "better" school than Cal. State L.A. or Cal. State Northridge. Not that there is anything wrong with Cal State L.A. or CSUN, but UCLA is a better school. I knew that without a magazine telling me.

I knew UCLA was a better school than Southwestern, but as a OL when I saw a school ranked 70 instead of 94th I actually thought it meant something, but it doesn't.

Like most things involving law school if you use common sense a lot of issues can be resolved, but U.S. News makes a profit on 0L's by releasing this ranking to confuse people during a confusing part of their life. However, they are more than entitled to make a profit for their opinion, but incoming 0L's don't have to listen to it and they shouldn't listen to it either.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Evidence Why 0L's shoudl not use Rankings
« on: October 14, 2015, 09:20:20 AM »
Agreed yea I will extend that to T14 and really even any school with a National Name. I don't know what BYU is ranked I am sure I could google to find out, but that is probably the best school you could possibly attend if you want to live in Utah.

There are schools everybody knows or the vast majority as "great" schools. Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Georgetown, Berkeley, NYU, Michigan, Notre Dame, UCLA, USC, Duke, Vanderbilt, Cornell, etc  I could go on, but there are certain schools known nationwide and those are worth attending.

In my situation attending Tulsa over University of San Francisco based on rankings, would have been based a bad decision. Tulsa is not a school with a nationwide rep nor is University of San Francisco they are both fine schools, but nobody is going to be impressed by either one.

Right now Notre Dame is "ranked" almost equally with UC Davis. . However, Notre Dame has a far stronger alumni network and national name than Davis does.

So you don't even need the rankings really before they were published Harvard was a good school as were the others I listed and everybody knew it. It is essentially amounts to a magazine telling us Shaq is big, I knew that already and didn't need a magazine to tell me.

Online Law Schools / Re: NOVUS LAW SCHOOL?
« on: October 14, 2015, 08:59:41 AM »
Its interesting that Touro would even be involved in the lawsuit. They are ABA approved, but not exactly a model of success and they might want to worry more about themselves and let Harvard, Yale Stanford, Georgetown etc litigate against sham schools.

As to the New York Supreme Court that is the lowest court in New York so it is just a trial decision. The New York Court of Appeals is actually New York's Supreme Court.

So NOVUS was sued by a law school that is scrapping by as is and the lawsuit was dismissed, because there was no purpose to it. NOVUS is an unaccredited law school that provides J.D.'s to students that want to enroll. NOVUS makes no secret that it is not accredited. I assume NOVUS allows you to take the California Bar, since it is the most liberal about who it allows to sit for the exam, but I don't even know if that is true. Therefore, if someone wants to get an unaccreddited J.D. from NOVUS they can. Whether the unaccredited degree has any value is up to the consumer. 

If I was a Touro student I would be upset that the tuition dollars I paid were used on this lawsuit.

Law schools suing law schools is not really helping law students succeed. I honestly, think Touro is more to blame than NOVUS, because NOVUS is saying what it is an unaccredited law school.  I would not enroll in it nor would I advise anyone I know to enroll in NOVUS, but I am just a guy on the internet. Leave NOVUS alone and I wish the best for their current students and alumni.

Current Law Students / United States Supreme Court Admission?
« on: October 12, 2015, 08:58:48 AM »
I was just seeing if anyone has either gone through the process or know someone that has gone through the process of being admitted to the U.S. Supreme Court. . It looks like you need to find two sponsors, but I was not sure where to look. Anyone have any experience or know anyone that has gone through the process of admission?

I finished my PS years ago, but can take a quick look if you want.

Also, just so you are aware the PS doesn't mean that much your GPA/LSAT make up about 90-95% of application decisions. I remember spending probably 50-100 hours on my personal statement and frankly it was pretty good, but at the end of the day I got into the schools my numbers were in range for and rejected by the ones that weren't.

If you have a 3.4 159 LSAT you can get into a number of ABA schools, but not the top 20. With that said I am happy to take a look if you PM me, but as with most things involving law school don't overthink it.

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 64