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 - hollywoodude

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
31
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Chapman v. Whittier
« on: April 08, 2004, 01:52:16 PM »
thechoson is one of those natural gurus. He dont need no expereinces to teach him common sense.

32
Law School Admissions / Re: Tom Cruise's "The Firm"
« on: April 06, 2004, 11:46:47 PM »
Nonetheless it is still the best Grisham adaptation

33
What happens if he fails to deliver?

..well, i guess that would give him time to go to his own funeral.

34
i know of a marine who got into SC with 157 and 3.1

35
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Pepperdine v. Chapman with $$$$
« on: April 02, 2004, 03:22:45 PM »
What does HB stand for --Hermosa Beach???

36
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Pepperdine v. Chapman with $$$$
« on: April 02, 2004, 03:20:41 PM »
Pep is probably worth giving up Chapman's money for. it has high starting salaries and is definetley way above Chapman as far as rep goes.

37
someone who would tries to come off soooo hungry that he would want to put work before mandatory human duties.

Excuse my typo: I know kids are getting real judgemental these days. Figured i'd do it before somebody else relished in pointing my mistake. 

38
Its cute and everything but its too long. Uniqueness still needs to be filtered through conciseness.

Stuff about mother's funeral and the wedding; thats a real amateurish way to put the point across. I'd be weary of someone who would tries to come off soooo hungry that he would want to put work before mandatory human duties.

39
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Texas, UCLA, or USC
« on: April 01, 2004, 02:28:45 PM »
SC is gonna overtake UCLA and all the others!!!

sorry, irrational, overzealous Trojan here.

40
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: Pres. BUSH
« on: April 01, 2004, 01:47:49 PM »
It would depend on the construction of the statute. If the courts rule that a mother is within the scope of liability on a Law that was specifically designed to cover terrosist attacks etc then she may be at fault. On the other hand if the courts say that it was not the intention of the lawmakers to include mothers within the reach of the this Law it will be held otherwise.

I havent read the Law so I cannot give an opinion as to what I think but like all controversial issues various political forces determine the outcome.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5