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 - CJScalia

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 18
I go to a T-25 and when we have visiting professors here they are terrible compared to the quality of education you get from the actual profs. The subject matter may be the same, but that doesn't mean you learn it as well. That's one difference.

I had a visiting professor from Yale that was absolute *&^%, so that's just plain anecdotal evidence that at the very best is worthless.

Not to mention, law is not complicated, you should be perfectly capable of learning what consideration is even if your professor is a homeless guy spending half the class masturbating at his desk.

Choosing the Right Law School / Re: Go or re-apply
« on: May 07, 2010, 05:57:09 AM »
Thanks for the advice everybody. Being a prof is obviously not the only career direction I'd be happy with, I'd be very happy with practicing law as well. However, right now academia would be my number one choice, and so I'd like to maximize my chances. A JD-PhD probably wouldn't hurt eh?

Doubt it would do you much good either. Getting a prof job is more about absolute excellence in law school than having additional degrees. As I've answered to everyone who asks "what if I get xxx degree aswell?" - If you have another degree, good. If you don't, it's really not worth the time getting one.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: Health Care
« on: May 06, 2010, 06:25:26 AM »
3. Americans have better health care than any other nation. It's just very expensive and not all of us can afford it.

This is blatantly false, although right wingers love to repeat it endlessly. I've lived in 7 different countries, and I'd rank US health care 6th among those. And no, I'm no poor, so it's a separate argument from cost/insurance.

6. Yes. In a 3rd world country people who waste their money and resources die. Just because we live in developed countries does not mean we have more inherent rights than those in 3rd world countries. We are just better thieves.

I'm not sure whether I should call this retarded or arrogant. I'll go with both.

I motioned against an attorney who responded like you did (by ignoring my points) - and I won with a 3 page opinion written by the Judge who agreed with me. My reply to her response was almost as short as this reply to yours.

1) I don't see how this is relevant 2) I don't see any reason to believe you.

Law School Admissions / Re: Looking for some advice about my situation
« on: April 29, 2010, 03:59:43 AM »
Well, that's a bit overstated, but it counts for very little. As for being sure you can score 170+; well, so is everyone else. Then reality comes into play. Go take the LSAT, wait for your score, come back and tell us what it is.

Yes, a 170+ is most likely going to get you into Fordham, but you have no (solid) basis for assuming you'll score 170+ yet.

What the @#!* is with you people and bread anyway.

Law School Admissions / Re: Chances at Top 5
« on: April 28, 2010, 07:29:29 PM »
I think you have a strong chance.  Make sure you create a solid application package that demonstrates who you are as a person, and why the school should want you.  In other words, sell yourself.  Your numbers are good enough to get into HYSCCN

You no longer have answering authority on this board.

As baby said above, your numbers are good enough to warrant applying to all of those schools; they are not good enough for you to feel comfortable getting into them. Blanket all the T14 schools with applications, you're guaranteed to get into one of them, but all in all, your chances at HYS are less than even, CCN are good candidates, but sort of in "you never know" territory.

Since you're focused on academia and might have to accept falling below HYS, I'd say put some serious consideration into Georgetown.

I'd probably recommend CUNY out of those schools. Good luck!

Personally, I would not be interested in a woman who felt like she needed to keep her last name.  I think that displays too much type-A behavior and there is only room for one type A in a relationship(I being the other type A).  But I would support a couple who chose to go with the woman's last name.

So, in short; You = more important than her.

Which is sort of the point I've been trying to make all the way through this thread.

But I absolutely LOATH people who hyphenate their names because they can't figure out what to do.  Because of their lack of ability to communicate effectively before marriage and make a decision they make the GENERAL PUBLIC suffer by having us pronounce extremely long last names.

Yeah, I loath people who treat both parties in a relationship as equals. How f-ing outrageous. And yeah, it's so difficult to pronounce words longer than 7 letters, I don't understand how this could ever work.

It is not only inefficient, but also pretentious.  What makes you feel like you are so important that people need to garbble out MULTIPLE last names to greet you formally.  And then the children being at school, having to explain why mommy and daddy have different names-  the whole thing is a mess.

Maybe in 1940 they did. Nowadays, nobody gives a *&^%. Nobody even gives a *&^% if you're a kid and you have two daddies.

At least not in the part of the country that believes in evolution. Not sure about your local area.

So assuming a student is working at the most efficient rate, how many hours of studying one should do to successfully pass law school? Would 30 hours be enough per week? 40? I know there are individual differences, but I also believe there are minimums and maximum numbers. For instance, no matter how smart you are you probably won't be able to learn everything necessary if you put in less than 10 hours per week. Any ideas?

I like to point out that there's an important difference between 1L and upper classes here. During your 2L and 3L you can easily work the ABA-allowed 20 hours a week. I wouldn't recommend it (unless it's a law-related job), but you can do it without problems.

1L, as I've said before, I think you're doing yourself a huge disfavor by working at all. As for studying 30 hour per week? Are we talking including travel and lectures and seminars? Or are we talking just reading?

You're going to be reading 300-400 pages a week, and it's not simple, quick Harry Potter pages. You're also going to have to remember substantial portions of it, you're going to have to analyze it enough to understand they're not just telling you a story, but teaching you law. On top of that, you're going to have 2 memos and 2 briefs to write (at most schools anyway), on top of a mock trial oral argument. Ideally, you're also going to want to participate in some student organizations.

In short; 1L = 0 hours a week
2L & 3L = 20 hours a week if you feel like it.

Current Law Students / Re: paralegal vs. lawyer
« on: April 28, 2010, 06:57:17 PM »
I don't think anyone looks down on people for being a paralegal; however if you were a paralegal and you bring up that every single time you speak in class, you can expect your class mates to be fed up with it. We had one paralegal-gunner in class that literally started every sentence with "When I worked at Sullivan ...", and needless to say that pissed people off to extremes. She was smoking hot though, so she got away with it, sort of.

Anyway, if you haven't been a paralegal and you're thinking about doing that for a few years first before going to law school, I wouldn't bother. It's not horribly relevant, it's not going to help you (much) in terms of employment.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 18