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 - oscarsonthepond
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7  9 10 11 12 13 ... 16
« on: April 25, 2007, 12:58:49 AM »
At least in our class we hardly even talked about that prong - the focus was definitely on activities substantially affecting interstate commerce. For instrumentalities, though, it's just like everything else in law school - you can make arguments on both sides. I'm guessing the decision hasn't been hashed out enough to say conclusively what constitutes an instrumentality and what doesn't. So on the one side you'd argue that the whole point of Lopez was to limit the ridiculous extent that the Wickard v. Filburn test was taken too and thus instrumentalities should be construed narrowly. On the other hand, in Gonzalez you see the court going back to expanding the commerce power and thus could argue that in its current state the court would construe the prong broadly. In any event, I'm guessing that Congress could definitely not regulate any activity of anyone who has ever crossed a state line. I'm also guessing they certainly could regulate truck drivers who transport goods across state lines (the other example given). In between those two there's a lot of gray area.
« on: March 25, 2007, 11:18:46 AM »
I would e-mail firm A and say thank you so much for the offer....you're really really excited about it. You loved firm A and you're really excited about it and if you go there you'll be dedicated 100% but you just found out that you have an interview at another firm and you'd like to at least give them the same opportunity you gave firm A.
Whatever you do do not turn down firm A before you have an official offer from firm B.
« on: March 20, 2007, 06:09:03 PM »
I would first see a psychologist or some type of stress expert or something like that. You certainly don't have to be in the top 25% to be a successful attorney. If you're capable of being in the top 25% then you could probably be middle-of the class w/out trying too hard. I would recommend just taking it easy and not worrying so much. If you are unable to do that, then perhaps I'd suggest dropping out.
« on: March 20, 2007, 05:59:29 PM »
In my experience they send lots and lots and lots of unsolicited e-mails.
« on: March 14, 2007, 11:30:18 PM »
My advice....take my advice from above
« on: March 14, 2007, 11:25:29 PM »
Like others said, if it's a federal judge or state supreme court take that. Also if it's a state appellate court and it's the state you want to stay in, I'd probably take that too. Otherwise, I'd take the fortune 500.
« on: March 14, 2007, 11:20:48 PM »
If you can get it, DEFINITELY take the 9th circuit - no matter where you're going. That would be better than any job save for:
1) Something with the Supreme Court
2) A job at a firm you might actually want to work for
« on: March 13, 2007, 03:09:44 AM »
I know somebody who went to Western State and charged $275/hr in a small town as an attorney back in the early 90s and has now been a judge for ten years. So it is definitely possible to come out of a school like that and do well. Having said that, that is the exception, not the rule. Personally, I would not recommend waiting a year and retaking. If you took it three times and your highest was 152, you will not be getting much higher. If you do decide to retake, I would only do so if you're going to invest a substantial sum into a review course like Testmasters or Kaplan.
Personally, I'd recommend thinking/praying very long and hard about whether you want to be an attorney or not. Understand that deciding to become an attorney could mean taking on well over $100k in debt and struggling for years after you get out to pay that off while being stuck in a job that you don't necessarily like. On the other hand, it could be the greatest experience of your life. Once you've made up your mind one way or the other, go full steam ahead and work your butt off.
« on: March 13, 2007, 02:56:24 AM »
I know of two people who've done such a thing. The first worked as a paralegal-type in-house at a large on-line retailer. He did it for a year inbetween his bachelor's and law school. The other worked for a small patent law firm writing patents before starting law school. If you have a technical undergrad degree, then you can likely find a small patent firm that might be looking to pay you on a per-patent basis. Otherwise, you can likely find a job in-house at a corporation or perhaps at a law firm if you approach it as a "paralegal" rather than as a "0L clerk"
Also, as far as how much it will help you, my guess is that it could help you some to get a job your 1L summer if you're lower down in your class. However, by far by far by far the most important factor in getting a job is your 1L grades. Personally, if you want to do it because it sounds fun then I'd say go for it. If there is another job that sounds more fun/pays more/etc. then go for that, because it really won't help you that much. As far as helping you in school, I'm sorry but I can not imagine it helping you at all. Perhaps for the other person who commented it was useful, but in reality the experience you will have will not make that much of an impact. It takes two seconds to look up what a motion for summary judgment is, and I can't imagine a civ pro test that actually asks you that. Civ Pro is about Erie Problems, jurisdictional issues, res judicata, etc. - all things that you would have absolutely no exposure to working at a law firm as a 0L. Perhaps it would help you with some of the basic vocabulary, but once everybody else learns that after the first week then you'd be on the same playing field as them.
« on: December 24, 2006, 02:39:10 AM »
At risk of being unfunny...let me say recount this one moment.
In torts, we were discussing what physical symptoms may be recoverable for NIED. Most states don't allow recover for purely emotional symptoms BUT one of the the physical symptoms they allow recovery for is loss of bladder control. The professor said this very quickly and moved on. I looked around the class and nobody got it.
Any jokes about, well, this subject seem funny to me. I can't believe I'm the only one who got it....
The original post on this threat did not result in loss of bladder control...hence, not funny.
Maybe I'm slow, but I don't get it.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7  9 10 11 12 13 ... 16