|
Roger_Mudd posted:What are the odds that a summer associate knows the "correct" law? Heh I forgot we were talking about the 2L summer associate position.
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 08:08 |
|
|
I just graduated, and I haven't written off applying to law school in a few years. But I'm going to be a unique flower and work for a startup after school. Because it's paying mostly equity, I will need a second job for cash - should I try to work a legal-related job (staff/admin/etc.) in case I apply down the road? Would that even make a difference? I'm probably NOT going to law school - if I really wanted to, I would have applied last fall - but am I pretty much shutting that door if I go off and work at a startup for a couple of years? Should I even bother taking the LSAT if I have the time to prepare for it?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 21:31
|
|
|
nous_ posted:I just graduated, and I haven't written off applying to law school in a few years. But I'm going to be a unique flower and work for a startup after school. Because it's paying mostly equity, I will need a second job for cash - should I try to work a legal-related job (staff/admin/etc.) in case I apply down the road? Would that even make a difference? As far as LSATs and application/admission to law school goes it makes absolutely no difference whether you work for a start up or get a second job in a law-related field or whatever. Maybe in terms of getting a job as a lawyer or whatever then you might be able to do some networking whilst working in a law-related job which may help later down the road but as far as getting into law school goes it doesn't make a difference. LSAT and GPA are really all that matter. except for northwestern who apparently values experience or something. but you shouldn't go to law school because it's a scam
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 21:36
|
|
|
entris posted:Heh I forgot we were talking about the 2L summer associate position. As opposed to those 2L summer partner positions, right?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 21:41
|
|
|
done with 1L. everyone is going out to drink. i just want to sit here and do absolutely nothing.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 21:49
|
|
|
Tetrix posted:done with 1L. everyone is going out to drink. i just want to sit here and do absolutely nothing. Not everyone. The Joshua Tree is a crap hole. There are better places to drink (e.g. in a gutter).
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 22:09
|
|
|
nous_ posted:I just graduated,
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 22:30
|
|
|
Please bear in mind I am trying to be helpful and not a jerk even though I sound like a bit of a jerk below.entris posted:I can't tell if you are serious or not. Here is what will happen: a partner will tell you to research something, you will research it and then tell them what you found. Then they may say something like "I think the law is this." DO NOT SAY "you're wrong." They just listened to what you researched and disagreed. Your name isn't going on the filing and if you've explained your research to them and they disagree what possible benefit is there of telling them they're wrong. Also, even if they are wrong what are you looking to get out of it? Do you think that if you tell them the right answer they will love you and respect you and give you a job? hint: they will not. Just make sure you understand what you've researched and do a good job of explaining it and then let it go. Once you have an offer and have worked for a partner you will have a better understanding of when you should stick to your guns and push the point. You will not have this understanding as a summer associate. evilweasel posted:We were specifically warned to not take on too much work since doing a bad job on one thing will significantly outweigh having done a lot of things. However, you'd better be able to justify why you're too busy (and they suggested you say "well, I have all these things to do: x,y,z, I don't think I can do an excellent job on all those and this", and let them work out which one you should stop working on. gvibes posted:I disagree. You'd rather do amazing work on fewer projects while saying no "to" a few people than spreading yourself too thin. If you are working in NY this is the wrong answer. Solomon Grundy posted:The answer to the question "do you have time to . . . .?" is always yes. This is the correct answer. This is important: work is more important than your summer lunches and events. If you think an event or lunch is more important, ask your associate mentor what they think. If there are deadlines you will not be able to meet because of conflicting projects then let people know that, but if the issue is that you will have to stay until two to get everything done when everyone else is going out to the bar then stay until two.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 22:44
|
|
|
builds character posted:This is important: work is more important than your summer lunches and events. If you think an event or lunch is more important, ask your associate mentor what they think. But yeah, Chicago != New York.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 22:50
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:We were specifically warned to not take on too much work since doing a bad job on one thing will significantly outweigh having done a lot of things. However, you'd better be able to justify why you're too busy (and they suggested you say "well, I have all these things to do: x,y,z, I don't think I can do an excellent job on all those and this", and let them work out which one you should stop working on. Yes, we always tell the lawclerks this too. And we don't mean it. But you say the nice thing to be nice. And the ones who are going to work out "get it" and say yes to all work and do whatever they have to do to get it done and do a good job. The ones who were too busy just never seem to work out. gvibes posted:I disagree. You'd rather do amazing work on fewer projects while saying no "to" a few people than spreading yourself too thin. I have never seen a summer clerk do amazing work. I have seen a few say "no" to projects, but I didn't see them for very long. builds character posted:
Let me agree and embellish a bit. In law school, they teach you to see both sides, balance the issue, compare the weight of authority, and objectively determine what the right answer is. That is the completely wrong approach when you are a lawyer, and acting as an advocate and a client representative. You must learn to think in a results-oriented way. Here is an example. My first year as a lawyer, the biggest, scariest partner gave me a research assignment. He wanted the answer to be "yes." I burned the midnight oil and gave him a comprehensive review of the law, which concluded with the answer being "no." I dropped it off. An hour later, I get called in and screamed at. He said "I can find a hundred lawyers off of the street that will come in and tell me 'no.' How do I get to yes?" The point is, try to put yourself in the attorney's shoes and find a way to make his or her life easier. I am not saying you should hide or minimize contrary authority, but be aware of how you present your result and don't be part of a problem, be part of a solution. To steal a line from the curmudgeon's guide to practicing law, the law firm is a free market. If you want to stay employed, satisfy the people who can give you work.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 23:31
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:Yes, we always tell the lawclerks this too. And we don't mean it. But you say the nice thing to be nice. And the ones who are going to work out "get it" and say yes to all work and do whatever they have to do to get it done and do a good job. The ones who were too busy just never seem to work out. This is awesome, thanks. Are there any other things I might be getting told that are complete lies and I need to not believe? Solomon Grundy posted:The point is, try to put yourself in the attorney's shoes and find a way to make his or her life easier. I am not saying you should hide or minimize contrary authority, but be aware of how you present your result and don't be part of a problem, be part of a solution. This is also really helpful, thanks.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2010 23:47
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:This is awesome, thanks. Are there any other things I might be getting told that are complete lies and I need to not believe? The last couple of pages have been great. I start at my SA job on Monday and I'm excited but scared as hell.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 01:19
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:Here is an example. My first year as a lawyer, the biggest, scariest partner gave me a research assignment. He wanted the answer to be "yes." I burned the midnight oil and gave him a comprehensive review of the law, which concluded with the answer being "no." I dropped it off. An hour later, I get called in and screamed at. He said "I can find a hundred lawyers off of the street that will come in and tell me 'no.' How do I get to yes?" It's funny how this can differ between practice areas, though. I spent most of my summer on a litigation floor and I think your anecdote is bang-on. I did some work with a tax planning group, however, and got told to never do that - tax planning isn't about whether your argument is plausible, it's whether the relevant tax authorities have a leg to stand on when they're trying to audit you. All depends on what you're trying to achieve, I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 01:53
|
|
|
I've got a friend who got a partner mentor in a field they'd hate: does that mean they're likely to end up in that part of the firm this summer? This firm has a pretty small summer class this year, if it matters.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 02:15
|
|
|
Schitzo posted:It's funny how this can differ between practice areas, though. I spent most of my summer on a litigation floor and I think your anecdote is bang-on. I did some work with a tax planning group, however, and got told to never do that - tax planning isn't about whether your argument is plausible, it's whether the relevant tax authorities have a leg to stand on when they're trying to audit you. I think tax is different. With litigation and transactional work, it's you against somebody else, and it's up to each party to bring forth its strongest argument. In tax disputes, it's the client against the government, and an otherwise weak argument that might fly in litigation would go nowhere in tax courts. If a law firm is seen to be giving bad tax advice, the firm itself can be held liable and pay penalties. Also malpractice lol.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 02:35
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:This is awesome, thanks. Are there any other things I might be getting told that are complete lies and I need to not believe? Alright, maybe I overstated things. I guess at the time we tell the law clerks not to overextend themselves, we probably mean it. But then later, in the heat of battle, it is the furthest thing from from our minds. The point stands - the clerks who don't take work never seem to work out.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 03:32
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:Alright, maybe I overstated things. I guess at the time we tell the law clerks not to overextend themselves, we probably mean it. But then later, in the heat of battle, it is the furthest thing from from our minds. The point stands - the clerks who don't take work never seem to work out. No, I fully believe you and I'm sure it's important, what I gathered from what they were saying is that doing a lovely job on something was going to hurt you more than turning something down. Obviously, doing a great job on everything is going to be the best thing and they did emphasize you better have a real good reason why you turned it down, and people who turned work down without a good reason weren't kindly looked on. Plus, your perspective is more likely to be useful because you're not trying to impress students about your firm and so you can be bluntly honest about this stuff. They're not going to say "if you go home before me often it looks very bad" because part of the recruiting thing is appealing to students.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 04:31
|
|
|
New OSCAR's up and running...I'd like to think I could get a federal clerkship SOMEWHERE but we'll see. It seems to me it's all about how many of the judge's search parameters can you fit into...I think I'm pretty good at that except for one minor one, that little criterion of not attending a TTT but that can't be that relevant right?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 07:30
|
|
|
J Miracle posted:New OSCAR's up and running...I'd like to think I could get a federal clerkship SOMEWHERE but we'll see. It seems to me it's all about how many of the judge's search parameters can you fit into...I think I'm pretty good at that except for one minor one, that little criterion of not attending a TTT but that can't be that relevant right? You are literally going to have to network your rear end off if you want to get a federal clerkship from a TTT. And by that I mean you may or may not have to offer your rear end to someone in exchange for a referral I went to a career services event about clerkships and they basically straight up told us "because we don't have grades and law review and because the OSCAR system means federal judges get thousands of applications the only way you're going to get one is if you have a professor vouching for you so we've compiled a list of professors who know federal judges and well uh good luck" Granted the lack of grades and law review at Northeastern are a big ol' hindrance there but yeah basically I figure that federal judges must get hundreds or/of thousands of applicants (especially in this economy) and I'm guessing they put them in an excel spreadsheet and sort for "harvard" so you really shouldn't count on that working out for you unless you have an in sorry to burst your bubble but the only thing keeping me going atm is bursting peoples bubbles
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 08:14
|
|
|
Yeah I know dude it's a small chance. One thing I've got going for me is I'm from Michigan's frozen north and there's one magistrate judge stuck up there in exile that might need a clerk.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 15:55
|
|
|
I have a stack of class papers/notes that is at least a foot high and also a legislation and regulation book that is getting a new edition and so the bookstore wouldn't buy it back. Is there any reason to keep any this stuff? I am moving in a week. All I could think of is if I had to challenge a grade, but I don't know what good this stuff would really do.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 16:35
|
|
|
Tetrix posted:I have a stack of class papers/notes that is at least a foot high and also a legislation and regulation book that is getting a new edition and so the bookstore wouldn't buy it back. Is there any reason to keep any this stuff? I am moving in a week. All I could think of is if I had to challenge a grade, but I don't know what good this stuff would really do. Have you seen Drag Me to Hell? The only way to break the curse is to gift the accursed object on someone else. You doom their soul to hell but save yourself. I suggest the admissions staff that let you into school in the first place.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 17:25
|
|
|
Tetrix posted:I have a stack of class papers/notes that is at least a foot high and also a legislation and regulation book that is getting a new edition and so the bookstore wouldn't buy it back. Is there any reason to keep any this stuff? I am moving in a week. All I could think of is if I had to challenge a grade, but I don't know what good this stuff would really do. If you get a real sturdy bag you can throw all your old casebooks into it and use it to do heavy carries, its great conditioning. Otherwise there's probably somewhere at your school that you can donate old books if you can't sell them.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 17:52
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I've got a friend who got a partner mentor in a field they'd hate: does that mean they're likely to end up in that part of the firm this summer? This firm has a pretty small summer class this year, if it matters. Don't think anyone can really say since all firms are different. We got to choose which groups we rotated through during the summer at my firm. Unless things have changed drastically since I was a summer, he shouldn't be stuck in one area for the entire summer though he may rotate through. Here's my advice: If you're rotating through several different departments and there's one you're pretty sure is the area of law you want to practice in, do an extra spectacular job in that department and get to know them - better than anyone else. Keep going to lunches or getting coffee or talking them up at events even after you rotate. In the end, your preference as to placement is secondary to which department wants you, so you want to be sure that the department you want to be in is willing to fight for you more than any other department. Don't do a lovely job in other departments but save your stand out moments for the department you're aiming at or it could backfire on you.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 18:11
|
|
|
I'm entering college next year and I have to decide whether or not to ask for credit for some courses I took last year during the summer, with the caveat that the grades I got will be permanently entered onto my transcript. I want to keep law school open as an option post college, but I don't want to have to work my rear end off to cancel out the grades I got in those classes. So, I was wondering what sort of GPA I should have to get into a law school in the top five or six spots -- I know that usually it's basically a 4.0, but I'm going to be at Harvard, so I thought that might make the GPA requirement a little less stringent. I don't know though. (I'm definitely asking my academic advisor as well, I just thought a second opinion couldn't hurt)
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 21:05
|
|
|
semicolonsrock posted:I'm entering college next year and I have to decide whether or not to ask for credit for some courses I took last year during the summer, with the caveat that the grades I got will be permanently entered onto my transcript. I want to keep law school open as an option post college, but I don't want to have to work my rear end off to cancel out the grades I got in those classes. So, I was wondering what sort of GPA I should have to get into a law school in the top five or six spots -- I know that usually it's basically a 4.0, but I'm going to be at Harvard, so I thought that might make the GPA requirement a little less stringent. I don't know though. First of all, it doesn't matter if you went to Harvard or Buttfuck State for undergrad; the schools just care about the numbers, because they are what makes their USNews ranking go up. If you and a candidate from Buttfuck State are totally equal, then they might choose you over him, but if his numbers are any better, he's probably getting in before you. Second, the GPA you need is dependent on what your LSAT score is, and vice versa. The LSAT is slightly more important than your GPA at most schools. Everything else is almost irrelevant unless you have done something truly outstanding and/or special with your life thus far. If you have to ask if what you've done is outstanding and/or special enough to make a difference in your admissions chances, then chances are it's probably not. Try the predictor at http://www.lawschoolpredictor.com/ and play around with different numbers. Generally, you would need, at a bare minimum, a GPA of around 3.6 and an LSAT of 170+, unless you're an under represented minority, which is a huge boost in admissions chances. The conventional wisdom is that URM status is worth about 10 extra points on the LSAT.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 21:33
|
|
|
Did anyone here have a graduate degree in engineering (in my case, MS EE, 3.7+) and then go to law school? From what I understand, they are rare, and highly sought after. I read the whole OP and nothing was mentioned about post-graduate degrees going to law school. I'm trying to decide if I'd be happier working 9-5 in a cubicle designing a circuit or working 14 hour days...
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2010 23:34
|
|
|
semicolonsrock posted:I'm entering college next year and I have to decide whether or not to ask for credit for some courses I took last year during the summer, with the caveat that the grades I got will be permanently entered onto my transcript. I want to keep law school open as an option post college, but I don't want to have to work my rear end off to cancel out the grades I got in those classes. So, I was wondering what sort of GPA I should have to get into a law school in the top five or six spots -- I know that usually it's basically a 4.0, but I'm going to be at Harvard, so I thought that might make the GPA requirement a little less stringent. I don't know though. You're supposed to report all grades taken from all post-secondary schools to LSAC, so it's really irrelevant. Congrats on Harvard! Network like a motherfucker and you could easily land a cooler job than biglaw or whatever.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 00:04
|
|
|
jonmitz posted:Did anyone here have a graduate degree in engineering (in my case, MS EE, 3.7+) and then go to law school? From what I understand, they are rare, and highly sought after. We have 1 or 2 in my class. I don't think they're highly sought after by the schools, your masters GPA doesn't matter. Employers, however, are more likely to look at you, at least your first summer, especially if you have taken the patent bar. The reason your masters GPA doesn't matter is because they don't use it for USNews. It's a soft that will boost you, but your undergrad GPA/LSAT/URM status matters much, much more. Also, unless you really--REALLY--want to be a lawyer, be an engineer and make some money. Odds are against you making more money as a lawyer than an engineer unless you get into a top school and get a job in biglaw.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 00:17
|
|
|
jonmitz posted:Did anyone here have a graduate degree in engineering (in my case, MS EE, 3.7+) and then go to law school? From what I understand, they are rare, and highly sought after. Don't ruin your marketability by going to law school. You have a legit degree, do something with it.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 03:47
|
|
|
More Summer Associate advice: Be nice to the staff. They are one big crazy gossip machine. And you are very likely sharing secretaries and paralegals with folks on the hiring committee. And a story about a 2L summer being "right on the law" and it helping to save his rear end: I fell flat on my face four days into my summer position. I said something in an email that was taken the wrong way by a senior associate and that person didn't talk to me about it. That person was on the hiring committee. That person did however talk to my associate mentor about it. I was seen as being rude, having a bad attitude, not knowing my place, etc., all rolled into one. Whoops. My associate mentor didn't talk to me about it either though. I didn't find out about it until my mid-summer review. I was wondering why that associate and the people he/she worked with a lot were being cool to me. Know I knew. I talked to my partner mentor about what to do to fix the situation. I went back through my e-mails and found the one I though had offended the associate. And I can see how it did. I went and talked to the associate the same afternoon as my review, apologized, and explained. The next week bigshot partner who that associate works with very regularly e-mails me out of the blue and says he/she is assigning me and a first-year an MSJ. I do my portion of the MSJ, but as I am doing it I think of a jurisdictional defense. I run the jurisdictional defense by bigshot partner and he/she says no that will not work because of x y and z. I tell him/her I want to look into it more and offer to write a memo and sample motion arguing this defense. Now this work was in addition to the stuff I had actually volunteered for. So I was working quite a bit. I pulled an all-nighter 3 days in, right before I'd said I would have it ready for bigshot partner. And I was right. The jurisdictional defense was absolutely colorable, even winnable. And it would potentially save our client lots of money by not having to submit to full discovery prior to jurisdiction being decided. At my summer-end review, they brought up the thing where I offended the senior associate again, heard that I had handled it, and they talked a lot about the work I did for bigshot partner. They were impressed. They used superlatives. They kept coming back to my review from him/her. It was a strong review. I got the job. It probably wouldn't have happened if I hadn't screwed up in the first place. srsly fucked around with this message at 03:53 on May 23, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 03:49
|
|
|
Jive One posted:Plans http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3307408#post377185269
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 03:59
|
|
|
Gonna be me 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 06:33
|
|
|
jonmitz posted:Did anyone here have a graduate degree in engineering (in my case, MS EE, 3.7+) and then go to law school? From what I understand, they are rare, and highly sought after. Yeah, I have an MSEE and worked for a couple of years as an engineer. The job market is pretty tough right now, even for an MSEE. The firm that I clerked at for a year could only retain me on a contract hourly basis since work forecast is so uncertain. Fortunately, I was able to get an offer at a small firm, but only because a couple of senior attorneys where I worked basically vouched for me. I'd say to stay as an engineer. mongeese fucked around with this message at 09:11 on May 23, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 09:09
|
|
|
jonmitz posted:Did anyone here have a graduate degree in engineering (in my case, MS EE, 3.7+) and then go to law school? From what I understand, they are rare, and highly sought after. I go to law school with a crapload of engineers. When we all started everyone assumed the engineers were going to get summer associateships and all kinds of poo poo from IP firms, it only really happened to one of them who managed to squeak one out at the patent fair (giant IP cattle-call type job fair held in a few major cities I believe).
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 14:59
|
|
|
I wish I could make something that wasn't paper.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 15:55
|
|
|
diospadre posted:I wish I could make something that wasn't paper. You might want to take a laxative then.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 16:30
|
|
|
You guys remember IzzyFnStraddlin? The crazy "i want to read all law books before school" ur-gunner who apparently has degrees from Yale(?) and drug problems? And posted a meltdown autoban about how "the dumbs/poors" in here didn't appreciate his genius? Heeeeeeee's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack: IzzyFnStradlin posted:Ah the interactions of the proletariat. IzzyFnStradlin posted:Clearly it is not a legal question (I should know; I am going to Harvard Law in the fall), but rather a moral/ethical/self-preservation question. emphasis quote: IzzyFnStradlin posted:Clearly it is not a legal question (I should know; I am going to Harvard Law in the fall), but rather a moral/ethical/self-preservation question. from this thread (which is full of "blah blah blah legal advice blah (i am not a lawyer)" posts): http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3307449 EDIT: Holy poo poo: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3285721&pagenumber=4&perpage=40#post375359537 IzzyFnStradlin posted:what the gently caress are you talking about? the best... ...troll? Beautiful Flower fucked around with this message at 16:47 on May 23, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 16:34
|
|
|
People like that are why the internet is so hilarious and yet so drat annoying at the same time. I guess his troll is both white supremacist and anti-lower class; I'm sure his future law school professors will love someone with such strong opinions. Also I am 2 hours into the Bluebook exercise and I've made it through one sentence.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 17:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 08:08 |
|
|
Hot drat, I love me some IzzyFnStradlin!  I like to imagine that he isn't a troll and that somewhere there is some bi-polar angry guy furiously pounding on his keyboard.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2010 17:19
|
|
