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 - veganvenus

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
Online Law Schools / Re: Stop Hiding behind your ABA school...
« on: April 25, 2007, 02:22:00 PM »
$200k+ x 30 years - 33k x 3 years.
$40k+ x 30 years - 9k x 3 years.

If only we had a CPA to let us know what is the better choice!

In all seriousness, trashing the loan debt of ABA law school graduates doesn't make much sense.  It is a wise investment in lifetime earning power.

Current Law Students / Re: curves? i dont get it.
« on: April 25, 2007, 01:57:14 PM »
1. Yes, it is nearly impossible to fail out of Harvard. Indeed, it is quite easy to get a B-.

2. Furthermore, most have BigLaw offers by October of their 2L year.

3. This does not mean that all, or even most HLS students then spend all their time drinking, and have no engaging class discussion.  Having the option to do so does not necessitate one take it.

People have a way of adjusting their expectations according to their circumstances. Whereas the same students, were they at Brooklyn, wold be quite happy getting an offer from a top 50 firm, the culture at HLS convinces you that this is not success.  Only an offer from Cravath, which you turn down for an Appellate clerkship, will suffice.  Ergo, many, not all, continue to work hard and remain the same anal-retentive nerds that got them there in the first place.

Yes, absolutely, some spend weekends drinking at the Hong Kong.  But that may well be because those people are more visible.... a vocal plurality?  Perhaps less visible are the hoards that make it difficult to find an open carrel anywhere in the library. 

HLS's curve is favorable, but that does not mean that it is really 'grade inflation'.  It is populated by people who got As all their lives.  If anything, the B/B+ average seems below what many deserve.

There is inflation at the lower end of the curve, for those who don't want a clerkship, have stopped caring, and have discovered the wonders of a scorpion bowl.  Being able to turn in the bare minimum and get a C, to turn in a half-assed effort and get a B- is not quite fair to those who struggle endlessly to get those grades elsewhere. 

However, that should not reflect poorly on the rest of the student body who still slave away just like the rest of you.

Current Law Students / Re: Smoking Ban
« on: November 10, 2006, 08:47:12 PM »
Galt is right - it is an employee issue.  It is no less constitutional than other workplace safety regulations.

As for takings, def. no - if you look @ Penn Central have to look at what has been taken vs. overall property rights - right to smoke doesn't make up a significant enough part of overall property rights.

Current Law Students / Re: Law Schools To Avoid At All Costs!
« on: August 08, 2006, 02:54:32 PM »
I think both sides have good points - it's just hard to make the (valid) argument that you're better off at a higher-ranked school without seeming to 'look down' on those who do. 

I simply don't get those people who were bragging about not studying for the LSAT, especially the poster who said he had better things to do at his job.  I took a low-paying 9-5 job and spent a year really preparing.  The effort landed me in a higher-ranked school than I would otherwise have gotten into - which in the long run will more than compensate me for the money I could have earned that year in a more demanding job.  I don't know how people studied for the LSAT while a college student, and I give you credit. 

And while I would have still had a chance to eventually make six figures, I'd much rather just make that my first year out (instead of working my way up), and not have to go through the trials of a T4, period. My friend who attends one has to deal with a much more stressful atmosphere, fear of failing out, closed-book exams(!), killer curves, and a competitive student body. These factors alone justify the extra year I took on my apps and LSAT.

But the long-run economics are still the most compelling factor.  Barring those with a set career path where rank doesn't matter, it's just penny-wise and pound-foolish to go to a school with lesser job prospects just because it's cheaper.

Current Law Students / Re: To law students 29+
« on: August 08, 2006, 02:12:09 PM »
I don't understand why people have the impression that marriage is a detriment to being a law student.  A spouse is an asset, kids are a liability.  Assuming you have the right spouse, that is.

My spouse understands how important these three years are.   When my classmates are carrying cafeteria food into their dorm room and schlepping their underwear to the laundry room, I come home to a home-made meal, and a bag of clean clothes from the local fluff-and-fold (working spouse is key!).

Granted, a spouse with a very demanding job might not be able to do these things, but they would very likely be able to pay for some of the services your classmates have to do for themselves. 

And if a spouse is taking care of a child, they will not have time to take care of you as well - not to mention the child-care duties that you will still have to deal with while a student.  My friends who have kids just can't have school as their top priority - that spot is reserved for their children.  Obviously, that's the way it should be.  Can they still succeed?  Of course.  But I would say that it is quite a bit harder.

That being said, I know squat about part-time; my school does not offer such programs, and I wouldn't consider them if they did.  I function best being able to focus nearly entirely on school, and let my needed downtime and spouse-time coincide organically around it.

Law School Admissions / Re: Appealing Decision?
« on: May 09, 2007, 12:35:40 PM »
Maybe they'll let you in so they can use you as evidence they really do give "individualized consideration" to each person based on soft factors :)  OK, not really, but what the hell.

Law School Admissions / Re: Harvard Law School Class of 2011?
« on: April 28, 2007, 04:38:34 PM »
Where will you be living in Korea?  If you're in Seoul, north of the river, Dimatteo will be your new favorite place to eat.  The pizza and pasta are good even by US standards.

Better then you'll find in Cambridge, that's for sure.  Sigh . . .

Visits, Admit Days, and Open Houses / Re: Southwestern vs. Whittier
« on: April 25, 2007, 12:50:56 PM »
I wouldn't overplay the Bar Passage Rate (BPR). Bar passage rates are almost invariably a function of average LSAT scores. That is, with some insignificant exceptions, the ranking of BPRs for schools from first to last is the same as their rankings if based only on average LSAT scores of their students. So, if someone gets a 168 and then goes to Golden Gate, he or she has a reasonably good chance of passing the bar. If someone with a 150 goes to Stanford (setting aside the reality this person wouldnt be admitted to begin with), he or she might have some trouble with the Bar Exam. Law school classes are pretty much identical no matter which school you go to--they are all taught by people who went to the same type of schools, and use virtually the same materials. The only difference: quality of students.

I would agree. If you look at schools with very high (90%+) bar passage rates, those are the schools that do no bar prep at all.  Either it is a function of student quality, or spending hours on hypotheticals while ignoring black letter law is great for preparing students for the bar.  If that were true, then all the schools with bar prep are doing it wrong. Doubtful.

Perhaps if someone found numbers for a school which showed passage rates way out of proportion to their incoming LSATs, that would be evidence they prepare you well for th bar.  But until you have that data, passage rates alone mean little.  Especially without comparing the overall passage rate for the jurisdiction.

The again, if you did well on the LSAT, that may well mean that you can do well just by working hard at BarBri like those at top schools do.  In that case, do you really want to spend three years doing bar prep instead of law school?  That doesn't sound fun.

Moo cow-- Thanks! Texas is my top choice at the moment. It's amazingly inexpensive. NYU is tempting, but I just can't justify paying that much more for an NYU education, particularly when I see myself wanting to work more in Texas than New York. UCLA is also a player; I visit this weekend. Duke is still technically in the running, but pretty much out; it combines the expense of NYU with the lower ranking of Texas, and it's not clear what it gives back to make up for those.  The odds are good that unless I get good news from Yale or Stanford that I'll end up at Texas. I know there's a lot of anti-Texas people out there, but I can live with their drawbacks....

Are you certain that you know what kind of law you want to practice?  100% sure that you want to practice in Texas?  Opting out of the top 5 closes doors at some firms and clerkship/government positions . . . or at least makes them less likely, from what I hear.  And all the schools keep reiterating how much law students change their minds over the three years.

Jab - I was in a similar situation.  I spent two years as a Physics major... my numbers are not that drastically different than yours (if you look @ my LSDAS GPA), and my index @ Columbia is the same.

Check my link below, and have hope.  However, note that I am six years out, so the power of my GPA is diminished.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6