|
entris posted:Grumblefish you didn't respond to my Pythagoras reference I am disappointed. I thought I was being gracious by hopping outside the box and giving a modern example where members of the bar are restricted in their ability to advertise themselves.  at the numbers that was a quality reference, though, and you're right that the bar should be organised as a pythagorean society
Lykourgos fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Jul 6, 2010 |
#
?
Jul 6, 2010 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 15:23 |
|
|
High class or highest class? http://www.claytonlawoffices.net/
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2010 18:32
|
|
|
EvilJimmyCarter posted:Hey question for you guys, maybe a suitchat question. I'm meeting with a lawyer at the end of the week for coffee, and it's just a networking/let's talk about the lay of the land/let me pick your brain/I can't give you a job but I might know someone who can type meeting, not really sure what the appropriate dress is. I was thinking business casual, wearing a suit feels like overkill but a t-shirt and jeans is for losers who haven't passed the bar yet. What say you, single female lawyer? I wore a suit to 99% of my informational interviews - you can always downplay being overdressed but it's hard to downplay being underdressed. The one time that I dressed casual was with an informational interview with a family friend who was an attorney, and even then I wore a nice sports jacket and slacks, with no tie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2010 18:48
|
|
|
poofactory posted:High class or highest class? somebody gonna get sued edit: "if you are a perspective client" ahahaha e2: ahaha he calls her a bimbo on one line and insists he's not a bigot on another, this kid is my favourite person ever
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2010 19:06
|
|
|
entris posted:I wore a suit to 99% of my informational interviews - you can always downplay being overdressed but it's hard to downplay being underdressed. If your truly networking I'd say go business casual. A suit says "I'm only here for the job" unless you are meeting at 5:30 for drinks after work, then the suit says "I have a job".
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2010 19:07
|
|
|
poofactory posted:High class or highest class? I can't see how this could possibly go wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2010 19:16
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:I can't see how this could possibly go wrong. so many perspective problems
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2010 19:17
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:If your truly networking I'd say go business casual. A suit says "I'm only here for the job" unless you are meeting at 5:30 for drinks after work, then the suit says "I have a job".
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2010 19:29
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:I can't see how this could possibly go wrong. The sad part is that this kid was actually getting interviews. I don't even get a chance to gently caress poo poo up this badly!
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2010 22:28
|
|
|
Anyone taking the IL bar exam this summer?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2010 22:32
|
|
|
Gary Peeples posted:Anyone taking the IL bar exam this summer? Me. Looking at a barbri book right now. Boring and involves a lot of subjects I didn't touch in law school and don't give a toss about
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 00:10
|
|
|
Lykourgos posted:Me. Looking at a barbri book right now. Boring and involves a lot of subjects I didn't touch in law school and don't give a toss about Same. Commercial Paper wasn't even offered at my law school.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 00:18
|
|
|
I remember sitting in the Commercial Paper and Secured Transactions lectures and thinking that there would be no way I'd have any loving clue as to what they were talking about if I didn't actually take those classes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 01:38
|
|
|
mrtoodles posted:Five in a row... booyah. It's fun being smart and poo poo and being up against newbie DA's. I mean... I'm a newbie too but Christ they forget to ask the most basic questions. So I had an 11550. Guy wanted to go to trial. I wanted to go to trial. Facts were pretty good (almost no indicators, though there was a failed piss test). I answer ready, the DA pops up and dismisses the drat thing. Goddammit. poofactory posted:High class or highest class? nm fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Jul 7, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 02:50
|
|
|
So one of my friends has a strong interest in tax law, lives in DC, and thinks she might enjoy working for the IRS. I remember some chatter earlier in the thread about open entry-level positions requiring an accounting background. She has her JD, a degree in economics, and some accounting coursework. If those positions are still open, do any of the IRS people in the thread know if that might get her in the door? Thanks in advance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 03:23
|
|
|
Gary Peeples posted:Same. Commercial Paper wasn't even offered at my law school. Commercial Paper is a whole class? My professor just briefly mentioned it in Corp Finance I assumed that meant it was simple...
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 03:58
|
|
|
Schedule of classes just went up - No idea what to take. Aside from not loading up on "Law and ______" courses, does it really matter what I take? I'm signed up for the Business Law specialization, but I'm fully aware that all it will accomplish is earning a few extra words on my diploma. Not sure I want to go through with it, but not sure that I don't want to, either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 04:17
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:So one of my friends has a strong interest in tax law, lives in DC, and thinks she might enjoy working for the IRS. I remember some chatter earlier in the thread about open entry-level positions requiring an accounting background. She has her JD, a degree in economics, and some accounting coursework. If those positions are still open, do any of the IRS people in the thread know if that might get her in the door? Thanks in advance. Check in the Federal Jobs thread in A/T, we have an IRS goon there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 04:27
|
|
|
Gary Peeples posted:Same. Commercial Paper wasn't even offered at my law school. read my mind; that was actually the page I was looking at. Anyway, I have a bar advice question. I just bought some second hand barbri books from last year, and I have taken a lot of the MPE sample tests. I've been scoring somewhat higher than the book says I need to for the subjects I've tried so far (Crim, Con, Evidence, and the mixture one); for example, first sets usually require 12/18 and I get 14-5/18. Given this, I reckon I need to just study up on the essay formats. I took a look, and christ almighty my shot at an essay looked nothing like theirs. I understand the format, but there seems to be a tonne of memorisation involved that, in real life, I would simply pick up a book or have written a brief beforehand on. What're some pro-tips for acing the essay part? Also, are these the only two things I really need to concentrate on (getting above barbri recommended score for the sample MPE questions, and memorising the format and content for essays)? Lykourgos fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Jul 7, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 04:38
|
|
|
Yeah, you've got it. You need to practice the essays enough so that you're comfortable writing an answer, but practicing the multiple choice a lot more for MBE subjects will teach you the stuff you need to know so you can answer the essays. Basically start making flash cards now, 80% of the work is memorization and you'll be surprised at how much you can pack into your head if you work at it. Also as soon as you're comfortable writing full essay answers stop doing that for the majority of them and just jot down outlines for answers and compare those to the sample answer instead of wasting time writing for 20 minutes. Mattavist fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Jul 7, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 04:42
|
|
|
Here is the BarBri Essay Writing Technique in a nutshell. 1) Begin essay with "The issue is," followed by the issue. 2) State applicable law. 3) If you don't know applicable law, make something up. 4) Apply law. Paragraph structure goes: 4a) "In this case," 4b) State conclusion 4c) "Because" 4d) Apply law to fact You will get points for doing everything in that list, meaning that actually knowing the law is only worth a small fraction of the points an essay is worth. You could literally know no law whatsoever and get nearly-full credit on the essay by doing everything else correct (e.g. applying the bad law you make up).
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 04:50
|
|
|
5. Explain to the grader how the question is immoral and they are immoral for propagating a corrupt system and how Socrates would have imbibed all sorts of hemlock before he answered even ONE negligence question.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 05:09
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:5. Explain to the grader how the question is immoral and they are immoral for propagating a corrupt system and how Socrates would have imbibed all sorts of hemlock before he answered even ONE negligence question. socrates imbibed hemlock rather than answer the question "so why shouldn't we kill you" he wasn't big on answering questions
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 05:15
|
|
|
Draile posted:Here is the BarBri Essay Writing Technique in a nutshell. wait... seriously? So, am I right in understanding this to mean that I can do the following: 1) identify the issue (anybody can do this part with little to no studying) 2) invent a law that sounds good (same as above; little to no studying required to invent a law) 3) recite the relevant facts, put them into the law I invented, and give the conclusion (again, no study needed because all of this is stated in the question or invented by me personally) By doing this, I will get a passing grade on the essay? Because if so... that is just ridiculously easy. You literally don't appear to need to study, so long as you can score where barbri suggests on the sample MPE, and learn an essay structure. How ridiculous can I be in my invention of a law; can I say "Illinois law requires that all economic transactions involve the transfer of large iron bars; use of gold coinage or commercial papers is punishable by death" and then have the characters from the question executed without risking too many essay points? I'm going to keep studying of course, and will definitely spend the bulk of my time memorising the laws to insert into my essays, but still... evilweasel posted:socrates imbibed hemlock rather than answer the question "so why shouldn't we kill you" he wasn't big on answering questions ...he did answer, they were just too dumb to listen (at the time) Alaemon posted:5. Explain to the grader how the question is immoral and they are immoral for propagating a corrupt system and how Socrates would have imbibed all sorts of hemlock before he answered even ONE negligence question. a tempting suggestion indeed Lykourgos fucked around with this message at 05:41 on Jul 7, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 05:34
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:So one of my friends has a strong interest in tax law, lives in DC, and thinks she might enjoy working for the IRS. I remember some chatter earlier in the thread about open entry-level positions requiring an accounting background. She has her JD, a degree in economics, and some accounting coursework. If those positions are still open, do any of the IRS people in the thread know if that might get her in the door? Thanks in advance. The IRS is interviewing at my school for both 2Ls and 3Ls. That suggests there are openings. Or will be, next summer, at least.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 05:42
|
|
|
Two days left to submit articling applications. I just received my first letter of reference a couple hours ago. The writer of the second hasn't gotten back to me in a month. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 05:53
|
|
|
Lykourgos posted:wait... seriously? So, am I right in understanding this to mean that I can do the following: Maryland Essays grade on 0-6. If you literally don't write down anything, it's a 0. If you put down ANYTHING, no matter how bad, it's a 1. As long as you put down the bare minimum on all 10 of your Maryland essays, you get at least 10 raw points. 1 point on the MD essays means you missed almost all the issues, have almost no knowledge of the law, offered almost no reasoning, and your conclusions were entirely unsupported. But the gap up to 2 is very minimal. 2 points on the MD essays means you missed most of the issues, have little knowledge of the law, seriously flawed reasoning, and mostly unsupported conclusions. So you can put down some absolutely terribad nonsense and STILL get a 20 on the Maryland essays. But you still pretty much have to try to write an essay that bad. Most people's lowest score would be a 3. A 3 is an incomplete factual understanding, you completely missed some of the major important issues, you missed some key principles, you had incorrect or partially incomplete reasoning, and you didn't support your main issues. Most people can bullshit this level even if they don't know the entire law, because they probably can guess or remember enough to get by. A 4 is a target passing score on the MD essays. (Actually, it's somewhere between a 3 and a 4 but it's much closer to 4 and gives you wiggle room if you got some 3's) Even with a 4 you only need an Adequate factual understanding, only need most, but not all of the important issues identified (and the other scores imply you don't really need any of the minor issues), a "good" understanding of the law, merely adequate reasoning, and support for your main issues. So if you approach the essays with a formulaic tack, you'll basically at a minimum guarantee yourself 2, and probably 3 points without even getting to the law.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 06:01
|
|
|
Lawschool update: Bids for a regional interviewing program are due Friday. Career Services has not given an updated class rank yet. Law reviews have not mentioned membership lists. I think I'm going to get lazied out of a job.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 13:33
|
|
|
JudicialRestraints posted:I think I'm going to get lazied out of a job. Pshh that's been my fate since first semester
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 13:42
|
|
|
Bar exam tip: for NY there is a question where you have to write a memo. Write MEMORANDUM at the top. That is worth like a third of a point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 14:45
|
|
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/business/economy/07generation.html?hp That's a whole article about a whiny kid turning down a 40k job. quote:“Going it alone,” “earning enough to be self-supporting” — these are awkward concepts for Scott Nicholson and his friends. Of the 20 college classmates with whom he keeps up, 12 are working, but only half are in jobs they “really like.” Three are entering law school this fall after frustrating experiences in the work force, “and five are looking for work just as I am,” he said. What a great plan!
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 15:14
|
|
|
_areaman posted:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/business/economy/07generation.html?hp
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 15:56
|
|
|
SWATJester posted:So if you approach the essays with a formulaic tack, you'll basically at a minimum guarantee yourself 2, and probably 3 points without even getting to the law. But that would still be a fail, unless there were some questions where you hit a 5 or 6 to compensate. Are you allowed to make up the poor score on the essay portion with a good MPE score? Also, what is the MPT? I have a book on it here but I haven't even opened it yet. Someone made a post saying it was pointless or a waste of time, but if it is worth some percentage points then I don't really want to give them up entirely. Is there some MPT trick that gives me auto-points like the essays?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 16:46
|
|
|
Lykourgos posted:But that would still be a fail, unless there were some questions where you hit a 5 or 6 to compensate. Are you allowed to make up the poor score on the essay portion with a good MPE score? It's called the MBE, not MPE. I suspect it's an overstatement to say you don't need to learn any law, but I think the idea is that the law you learn for the MBE + some minimal knowledge of state specific subjects + right format = good enough score. You should probably look to your specific state to see how the bar exam scored, but at least in NY there's no minimum score for an individual portion of the test, so you can make up a bad essay score with a good MBE score. The MPT is the Multistate Performance Test. It is like a closed memo assignment for a legal writing class where you're provided the facts and the law and you have to write a memo or other document. People say you don't really have to study much because there's no substantive law to learn and hopefully you know how to write a memo by now. In NY there's one of them (some states give more than one, I think) and it's only worth 10%. There are always directions in the assigning memo about the format you should use, and that seems like an easy way to pick up points (like if you're writing a memo, write "memorandum" as someone suggested before).
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 17:41
|
|
|
_areaman posted:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/b...eration.html?hp I for one am happy to let him keep freeloading on his parents, so that more deserving people can take whatever McJob he is snubbing his nose at this week.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 17:48
|
|
|
40K? poo poo, that's pretty good for a job out here. Of course, in New York, I'm sure it's poverty level or nearly so.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 18:27
|
|
|
_areaman posted:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/business/economy/07generation.html?hp “My parents are subtly pointing out that beyond room and board, they are also paying other expenses for me, like my cellphone charges and the premiums on a life insurance policy.” Why would this single 24 year old male have life insurance premiums?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 19:30
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:“My parents are subtly pointing out that beyond room and board, they are also paying other expenses for me, like my cellphone charges and the premiums on a life insurance policy.” So his parents can get back the money they spent on him when they have him killed by a hit man? Seriously, his parents probably pushed for it in the first place. A lot of people somehow think that life insurance is just something you "need."
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 19:44
|
|
|
Mookie posted:Seriously, his parents probably pushed for it in the first place. A lot of people somehow think that life insurance is just something you "need." For who? I mean I have it so my wife and daughter will not have to live on the streetz if I die. Who's his beneficiary? fluffy the cat? Ohh silly rich people!
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 15:23 |
|
|
$40k in New York City will get you a crappy studio in Manhattan and will get better housing out in the boroughs, although it'll be hard to live on your own without living way out in the less desirable boroughs. You better be good with roommates or else life is going to get cramped. I was making $50k and living on my own in Manhattan, but it was definitely wearing on me after 2 years given the spaces available to me and the inflationary pressures on rent. If you have student debt, are not getting parental assistance, and are living in a big city like NYC, you better hope the pay jumps will be high if you really, really need to live on your own. Otherwise, it's really financially irresponsible not to look for a roommate. Roger_Mudd posted:“My parents are subtly pointing out that beyond room and board, they are also paying other expenses for me, like my cellphone charges and the premiums on a life insurance policy.” Maybe it's some kind of investment vehicle. Maybe the life insurance policy has a disability component? Also, like Mookie said, some people are really weird about how essential life insurance is. What the grandfather says in that article about claims adjustment is pretty on the money, though. It would be pretty dead-end and I don't see the skills really translating to anything else but more claims adjustment. Claims adjustment departments actually recruit a lot of attorneys/former attorneys as well, so only having a B.A. could be an issue too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2010 20:03
|
|
