My prediction: Online law schools will EVENTUALLY be recognized

[LegalLatin78]

At what point did I say I anticipated having to interview? You all may be correct with regards to a "traditional" path, but that's most assuredly not the path I've chosen. Were I to do so, I would move my family, or commute the 250 miles RT to my local ABA school. I will not be interviewing. I will not be working as an associate, praying to make partner. I have a partnership waiting for me with a close friend's firm. Why would they offer me, a lowly "DL" grad, a partnership? Because I bring 20 years of hard-core business experience to the table, which all you lofty T1 grads will spend the next two decades developing for yourself. Because I have run successful and unsuccessful businesses. I have had to meet payroll. I have hired and fired. I have litigated and been litigated against. I have written and signed more contracts than most of you will ever write, and know what works and what doesn't. My POS "DL" degree, and California license, will only serve to ratify the knowledge and skills which I already possess.

For a bunch of aspiring attorneys, this group, in general, does a very poor job of reading the facts as I lay them out, without interjecting your own bias into the argument.

See you in court. 

Your insecurities are so glaring; I can see them from every post you make. You are very hung up on what these 'kids' think, it's hilarious.

[johns259]

To go DL and pass the CA bar, you must be good.

Kathleen Sullivan, the editor of my con law book and former dean of Stanford Law, failed the CA bar.

[lawafter40]

...All of your posts are the same, confrontational and self indulging. 

Also, calling me a child is quite stupid.  You are a few years older than I am, but you hardly act it.  I am quite sure I have seen much more of this world then you could ever dream of...

Actually, I took on the tone of the board. The BM students here act like a pack of deranged rabid dogs towards the DL students (see duckasourus, et al)

And, you infer a lot about me from a small number of posts. It's the ultimate in hubris and self-indulgence to assume you've seen "more of this world..." at such a young age. But, then again, at your age I felt the same way. Legallatin, of all the BM posters here, you appear to have more common sense than the rest.

To the rest: I didn't mean to knock the chip off your shoulder, just to challenge some of your assumptions. In general, this group needs to assume less and be more open to recognizing the difference between what things are, and what you want things to be.

Why is this argument so important to you traditional students that you'll take time away from your studies to visit a board not designed for you, and to beat up on a delusional "bitter old man?" Is this persona I chose really that threatening to you? Or are you acting out your hostility towards your professors here? How do you know I'm not really a professor in DL drag, trolling to see what happens?

You don't. You don't know anything except what I've allowed you to know.

Folks, in practice you will meet adversaries of all stripes. Don't make the mistake of believing that, because you graduated Yale, made Law Review, and are a general over-achiever, that it makes you the best. Granted, you may have raw skill, but, in spite of all your posturing here on this board, you are not seasoned. 20-year litigators will chew you up like a tasty little Scooby snack if you're not careful.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that, because your adversary has a 5th-rate degree, you'll be able to pound him or her into the sand. They passed the bar, same as you. There are so many other intangible skills that go into making a litigator, that for you to base your conclusion on only one item could prove fatal in practice.

Don't let your hubris get in front of your common sense.

[LegalLatin78]

To go DL and pass the CA bar, you must be good.

Kathleen Sullivan, the editor of my con law book and former dean of Stanford Law, failed the CA bar.

Agreed.

Lawafter40, I agree with you on many of your points.  Success is not measured on where you went to school, but on the results you can deliver in the real world.  I would never look down on anyone because of where they went to school.  If DL fits their needs, then I think it's a great option.  Also, a fancy law school and strong study habits does not guarantee you will pass the bar exam.  We had 3 associates who graduated in the top 20% of their Ivy League class fail the CA bar this year.  Penn, GTown, Harvard.  Go figure.

[lawafter40]

Lawafter40, I agree with you on many of your points.  Success is not measured on where you went to school, but on the results you can deliver in the real world.  I would never look down on anyone because of where they went to school.  If DL fits their needs, then I think it's a great option.  Also, a fancy law school and strong study habits does not guarantee you will pass the bar exam.  We had 3 associates who graduated in the top 20% of their Ivy League class fail the CA bar this year.  Penn, GTown, Harvard.  Go figure.

Exactly. What gets my dander up here is the broad overgeneralization that DL is uniformly for losers and cranks, and that B&M schools are the be-all and end-all of lawyerin'. Do DL schools attract a fair share of those who shouldn't be in the profession? Absolutely. Is it all the students? Not by a long shot.

Do traditional schools attract bright students? Hell yes. But there are a large number of extremely bright people practicing law, who graduated from high-end schools, who still can't lawyer their way out of a gunnysack. Law attracts more than it's fair share of overconfident power-tripping chowderheads.

DL has a high bar failure rate. But a fair number of DL students do manage to pass, every year. And a fair number of ABA students do manage to fail, every year. The great equalizer is that the ones who do pass, all passed the same exam, regardless of which school they attended.

[ladyofthelaw]

There are soo many new lawyers for firms to choose from, why on Earth would a firm choose a non-aba graduate.  Granted most never pass the bar so there are few to chose from but still why would anyone hire a non-aba student.  (Insert here how the aba is bad yet your law school keeps trying to get approved).

If you pass the bar, there will be plenty of job available.  I know that class rank, school, etc matter if you want to go corporate, but most people that go DL have different goals...
[/quote]

[LegalLatin78]

There are soo many new lawyers for firms to choose from, why on Earth would a firm choose a non-aba graduate.  Granted most never pass the bar so there are few to chose from but still why would anyone hire a non-aba student.  (Insert here how the aba is bad yet your law school keeps trying to get approved).

If you pass the bar, there will be plenty of job available.  I know that class rank, school, etc matter if you want to go corporate, but most people that go DL have different goals...

I will respond on the condition that you promise to learn how to use the quotes.   

What if the DL student doesn't want to go work for a firm?  GASP!  Not everyone who goes to law school wants to work for a firm, you say?!  Amazing!  What if the DL student wants to start their own business, go into consulting, work in arbitration, mediation, financial enforcement in securities?  My point was if you pass the bar, and you go to a DL school, you will have many opportunities.  Also, I presume that many people who attend DL schools don't plan on going into Big Law.  And before you ask, no I don't attend a DL school; I attend an ABA school on a full ride.  I just support the idea that if you can pass the bar, then you have earned your right to practice law.

And just to respond to your question, of why a firm would choose a graduate from a non-ABA school over a graduate from an ABA school; what if the DL graduate has successfully litigated cases and won million dollar settlements.  All the while, the ABA graduate misses a filing deadline and illustrates to his boss that his lack experience has made him a liability.  Just one scenario I can imagine that would make the DL candidate very appealing to a firm.

[duckasourus]

I am calling bs, first off most 75% never pass the bar.  Starting a sentence with AND indicates a lack of education, I highly doubt your claim of a full ride to an ABA school.  90% of new business's fail so I guess if you do the math most DLS will never pass the bar and those who do and start there own business will fail.  I passed my cpr test so I guess I am a doctor as I passed the test therefore I am qualified.

[DO/JD]

90% of new business's fail so I guess if you do the math

Before pointing out other's alleged lack of education, perhaps, one should proofread one's posts...

[duckasourus]

thats actually good gramar dumb ass.