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 ... 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 ... 64
Yep the card does not matter and I have actually never had a client ask to see it, but I keep it in my wallet, because it makes me feel good about myself : ) , but other than that as Loki says it is a piece of plastic and I have been asked to show it to a client, or Judge. I guess in Federal Court you can go into the attorney line and skip the security check at least in the Eastern District of California and I am sure there are other counties and or districts that have the same privilege for someone with a bar card.

I have read it and he doesn't make bad points, but the reality is if you were an Oregon attorney that wanted to get licensed in California you do not need to even take the full California Bar Exam you need to only take the Attorney Exam. This exam does not require you to do the MBE and you only have two days of essay so it is significantly easier.

Also, many states have reciprocity etc. Plenty of states do the Uniform Bar Exam, which is fine, but I think California having a slightly harder exam considering it is the most marketable state to be licensed in makes sense.

As for the 50% statistic cited in the article I believe California is one of the most if not the most liberal about allowing people to take the exam. We allow unaccredited law school graduates to take the exam and if they can pass the bar more power to them. New York does not allow non-aba grads to sit and you have to go through the rigors and expense of an ABA program and if that requirement is there then fine minimize the bar exam standards, but we allow people to get a J.D. and sit for the bar far more freely than other states, but our exam is very difficult. If these grads that did not go the traditional route, but can pass a more exhaustive bar exam then great let them practice.

At the end of the day this proposal is very self-serving to Chemerinsky who is a BarBri instructor and a California Law School Dean. Of course he wants the exam to suddenly get easier so he looks great when the percentages all skyrocket, but he would never include that part in his article.

Don't get me wrong I love Chemerinsky and more power to him for advocating for his students, but I don't think it is a good idea to change the exam.

Law School Admissions / Re: Upcoming Undergrad-- Law???
« on: June 01, 2015, 02:44:10 PM »
Well the question is also who is a good person.

An attorney (Lincoln) Supporting the abolition of slavery 150 years ago was looked upon by many as so evil that thousands of people died.

The definition of "good" people changes all the time and part of being a lawyer is advocating for a side.

At this moment in time defending the Police is controversial, because there is a lot of media saying otherwise, but the months after 9/11 if you represetend the cops you were a good idea.

It is a valid point once you have the license why make it is easier for more competition, but I am not that big of an a-hole and I think if I was able to pass the current exam then it is certainly possible.  I am not Einstein and there are a number of people less competent than me out there that  passed the bar exam so it can be done, but it is hard and it is supposed to be.

I would also argue it is far easier than it was people before 2000 who did not have internet access to get quick answers and had to handwritte, etc.

I don't think the exam structure is wrong. One change I would advocate for is not making law students wait four months to get bar results.

You know why the employment rate for grads 9 months after graduation is so low? Because  you cannot possibly be a licensed attorney until 7 months after graduation and the results come out Thanksgiving and from Thanksgiving to Christmas is not exactly a hiring frenzy in the legal market and so you can't even really look for a licensed attorney job until 9 months after graduation.

I have heard reasonable arguments that students could take the bar exam after 2L and the 3rd year could be a much more practical experience for those that pass and those that do not pass the first time around could use the third year to go into a law school bar-exam program.

That aspect could certainly be changed, but the difficulty of the exam is fair in my anonymous internet poster opinion. 

Law School Admissions / Re: Upcoming Undergrad-- Law???
« on: June 01, 2015, 11:16:41 AM »
There are definitely jobs such as City Attorney work where you deal with Constitutional Law all the time.  There are very few private practice attorneys that do Free Speech Work, etc, but if you are government attorney particularly a City Attorney or County Counsel there are significant constitutional issues.

However, as everyone said most people don't practice in that area, but the law is very broad. I think what every poster can agree with is that you should go to undergrad and pursue a degree you are interested in and do as well as you can. A lot will change during your college years, I specifically remember saying I would "never" go to law school in college, but it happened. I knew plenty of other pre-law majors etc that were completely focused on going to law school, but never ended up going.

Since your major does not matter for law school, but your grades do pursue a field of study you are interested in and do well academically.

Good luck!

Chemerinsky always makes good points, but I don't think it needs to be any easier or any change is necessary. California is a very desirable place to live and there is no shortage of lawyers in California.

If the pass rates were 10% maybe something needed to change, but according to the July 2014 Bar Exam Results 3,818 out of 6,220 people passed.

 This is a pass rate of 61.4% of all non-aba, aba, repeaters, etc. 61% passed.

3,818 were able to do it so it can be done. Does UC Irvine having a 60% bar passage rate have more to do with him being upset probably? However, even if you look at the numbers for Irvine it is one of those messed up thing 3 out of 5 UCI students passed so 60% passage. B.S., but I am sure that 60% did not impress his bosses at UCI so he is taking it out in the article.

Is the bar extremely difficult, yes. However, as my professor told me it is supposed to hard.

I wanted to be in the NBA, but I didn't make it. I don't think they should make it easier to get in. Anything worth doing is not easy and if the percentage was 5% and there were not enough lawyers in California then make it easier, but people do pass and there are certainly more than enough lawyers in California as it is.

I think one of the main reasons California is routinely lower is you can take the examination by attending a non-aba school.

Additionally, these are three simple theories that may or may not be true, but may have an impact.

1) California allows foreign law school grads that complete an LLM to take the California Bar. Do those test takers count as ABA law school grad/first time takers? If so I imagine the percentage of those grads passing on the first try is substantially lower. Not even because of intelligence, but simply if English is not your first language noticing the minor nuances on a MBE question would be difficult as would adjusting to life in a new country etc .

2) I believe California has the most out-of-state ABA law school grads taking the exam.  For any student taking an exam in the state they did not attend law school makes a difference. Although, there is a lot of similarities there are differences in state law.

3) I believe many attorneys that graduated law school long-ago and passed a separate bar years ago attempt to take the California Bar, while working etc. I knew a Stanford undergrad and law school grad that was very intelligent and worked for one of the most prestigious law firms in New York, which is the exam they took out of law school.  10 years later this person attempted to take the California Bar and  did not pass. They were having to bill 200 hours while simultaneously studying for the California Bar and then had to fly into California etc. The person is a first-time taker ABA grad, but not the typical type you think of.

I would be interested to know what the percentage of California ABA Law School Grads who are taking their first bar exam three months after graduating from law school is.

On top of that lets be honest whether you pass the bar or not has a lot more to do with the individaul. I had a friend in law school that just did not take it seriously the first time. She was fully capable of passing and did, but she was burned out from law school and admits she put in a half-ass effort and did not pass. Is that the law school or California Bar's fault? No.  Another friend of mine in law school had one of his parents die two weeks before the exam and another was diagnosed with cancer a month before. These people did not pass on their first time either and all three went on to pass on their second try, but those instances make it understandable how they did not pass on their first try.

People are people and I guess I really dislike these blanket statistics that cannot possibly take into consideration each individuals personal circumstances.

The California Bar Exam is difficult, but thousands of people pass it each year so it is not impossible.

I also think the number of applicants has gone down significantly so there are less competitive students.  When the economy collapsed in 2008-2009 law school applications were significantly higher in 2011-2012.

76% in 20122
68.3% in 2012

Then everyone said there were no jobs etc and then law school applications are now down significantly. Therefore, a less competitive pool and lower passage rates.

Let's also not forget that exam soft collapsed during the 2014 California Bar Exam, which likely did not help anyone.

Law School Admissions / Re: Upcoming Undergrad-- Law???
« on: May 27, 2015, 05:35:10 PM »
There are no prerequisites for admission to law school other than a bachelor's degree and an LSAT score.

The better your GPA and the better your LSAT score the more opportunity you will have.

Basically, pursue something your interested in for undergraduate if your into biology then get a B.S in biology and get a 4.0. If you want to get a B.A. in music then get a B.A in music and get a 4.0.

You essentially want to get a B.A or B.S. while getting the highest GPA possible. So keep it simple and study something you enjoy and don't make any life altering decisions based on wanting to go to law school at this point.

A lot will change in your mind during college and maybe you will go onto law school, but maybe you will fall in love with chemistry and get a degree in that. Whatever, you study take it seriously in undergrad and it will keep as many graduate school doors open as possible.

I know Med School has substantial pre-req requirements, but law school does not.

Good luck.

Online Law Schools / Re: Graduation
« on: May 27, 2015, 04:16:15 PM »
All I  asked for was an actual case where someone went to jail. There is probably a statute out there that says you can go to jail for using expletives on the internet so hypothetically you could go to jail for that. You made a claim of Novus Grads possibly going to jail for attending Novus. I am seriously interested in hearing about that or anyone every going to jail under the law you mentioned.  Not trying to be a smart-ass or anything, but there are numerous unconstitutional laws on the books and what you cited seems unconstitutional, but I have been wrong before.

Again, I am genuinely interested in hearing about any Novus Grad or a graduate of any of the schools mentioned in the link you posted actually going to jail.

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 ... 64