|
evilweasel posted:yes it does, it says "sue over every single process rejection because there is no accepted standard for those" I don't know what Baruch is bitching about... sounds like job security for his entire field.
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2010 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:56 |
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:I wonder if prisoners have templates they just copy, or what. I think that is dependent on the facility, but yes it is common from what I've heard.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2010 20:54
|
|
|
Attention Fordham students: We have stolen your dean.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2010 23:33
|
|
|
SWATJester posted:Even more awkward: I found out once that a girl I cybered in a MUD back in like 1996 (I was 13) was an insurance adjuster my dad knew. ...how did you find this out? What sort of conversation leads to this sort of information?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2010 11:59
|
|
|
Readman posted:First two clients for our new firm! Pretty excited! Formal agreements to refer clients? In my jurisdiction, that is a big no-no in the ethics department.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2010 13:16
|
|
|
Y-Hat posted:2. I don't want to do law because a lot of stuff is counter to common sense, and I don't want to change my way of thinking for work. Hahahaha grow up. "Common sense" is what lazy people hide behind when they can't explain something. And you'll probably change your way of thinking as you get older and a little more mature. quote:One friend has it made, though. He graduated as a finance major and decided not to go into the industry because it was the start of the financial crisis. He took a year off and took the LSATs, getting 90th percentile. He's now got a full ride to Cardozo. A full ride at Cardozo is not having it made.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2010 13:23
|
|
|
Readman posted:It's not with other law firms, don't worry. I'm not calling you out by any means, because states have different rules about this thing. In my state, you can actually split fees with an attorney on a referred case by having them stay on as co-counsel, even if they don't do anything, but you can't have any sort of formal referral arrangement with anyone, attorneys or non-attorneys. "Formal" being the key word of course, you are still allowed to reach out to other organizations and make it known that you are more than happy to provide legal services for their customers / employees / whatever. What kind of law does your new firm do?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2010 15:22
|
|
|
I bought $60 worth of fireworks for tonight, none of the really good stuff but some fun things, and now I'm debating whether to bring our kitchen's fire extinguisher with me. There is a park nearby, and apparently that's where my neighborhood goes to set off fireworks. So that's where we're going. I would never have thought about bringing a fire extinguisher with me, before law school. And now that I've thought about bringing the extinguisher, part of me is saying "Well, if you're so worried about someone getting hurt, maybe you shouldn't be lighting fireworks and maybe you shouldn't go down to the park where other idiots are lighting fireworks." SHUT UP ATTORNEY BRAIN YOU NEVER LET ME HAVE ANY FUN
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2010 21:03
|
|
|
Lykourgos posted:
I love lawyers who dislike advertising, because it means that I can treat my law firm like a normal business and out-compete them. If a billboard ad brings in X new clients, and X*Y new revenue, and it only costs <X*Y, why wouldn't you do it? Too many law firms act like non-businesses, and it's a stupid, antiquated attitude. Maybe that attitude worked back in Pythagoras' day, but nowadays a business is a business, and it's all about the numbers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2010 03:51
|
|
|
Grumblefish you didn't respond to my Pythagoras reference I am disappointed.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2010 11:20
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Mookie posted:After I got sick of the Bar/Bri graders giving failing scores to even good essays, one time I hand-copied their "excellent" sample answer into a bluebook and submitted it. This is why you get paid the big bucks. Hilarious.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2010 19:33
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpM07PQYNns That is so magnificent. I wonder how his character review will go when he applies for the bar. I know that here in Virginia, that sort of behavior would be treated pretty harshly. Probably wouldn't bar admission, but a lot of groveling would be necessary.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2010 22:56
|
|
|
Linguica posted:oh. hi So sad. If only we could have gotten to her in time...
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2010 23:39
|
|
|
HooKars posted:I haven't had a whole lot of interviews since law school but of the few I have been on, none have actually even asked me for my transcript. ...well, that's probably because you are a woman. /everyone knows that women are smarter than men. //at least, that's what I think, having lived with my wife for 6 years now.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2010 14:42
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:you'll break up and then what the gently caress will you do not her anymore, I'd bet
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2010 04:01
|
|
|
Ainsley posted:What was your background? poofactory posted:diablo/civilization I think Diablo and Civilization are two great video game metaphors for the skills necessary to run a solo practice: Diablo - constant hustling and slaughtering Civ - long-term strategy, careful planning, etc.. Going by these two, I'd say poofactory was amply prepared for solo / small firm practice.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2010 13:43
|
|
|
builds character posted:And neither require any human contact at all. Perfect. Hahaha. Also, WoW is the perfect metaphor for BigLaw: endless grinding and to get the good stuff you have to collaborate with a collection of other people who may or may not like.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2010 14:12
|
|
|
fast food chat ITT We sent an engagement letter to a client via email, PDF format, and the client responds by telling us that he can't open the file format. ...who doesn't have Adobe Acrobat Reader these days? WTF. I ended up sending the letter in two Word formats, one .DOCX and one .DOC, since I can't be sure that this client can open .DOCX. I almost sent him a download link to Adobe Acrobat but he's not paying us to correct his techno-ignorance.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2010 16:10
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:look at this lil nub who was still loving his pillow when I was rollin barrio logan bumpin Too $hort Is pillow loving a thing? Because I have a lot of pillows and I've always been a curious person.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2010 16:11
|
|
|
JudicialRestraints why would you agree with that non-attorney in the legal questions thread  Don't encourage the rabble, even if they do get lucky and occasionally spout a truth.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2010 16:23
|
|
|
nm posted:Guess who also isn't an attorney. Yeah but at least he's a law student. I cut them some slack.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2010 16:24
|
|
|
CaptainScraps posted:You fuckers don't know what a burger is supposed to be.  Please. Don't even try. Ray's Hell Burger, right outside DC, serves burgers that are made from incredibly high quality butcher cuts. They too have a burger on their menu that has foie gras on it, but Ray's comes with truffle oil. Truffle oil. You can also get burgers with cognac + sherry sauteed mushrooms, or with shallots, etc. http://www.allmenus.com/va/arlington/273616-rays-hell-burger/menu/ Ray's Hell Burger has hosted the only black President of the God-blessed United States of America. Twice. http://dcist.com/2009/05/obama_and_biden_lunch_at_rays_hell.php http://www.csmonitor.com/From-the-news-wires/2010/0624/Ray-s-Hell-Burger-Obama-and-Medvedev-have-historic-hamburger-summit /I had to put "only black" as a qualifier because I'm pretty sure McDonald's holds the record for most Presidential visits to a hamburger place, given Bill Clinton. entris fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Jul 16, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2010 17:03
|
|
|
Mookie posted:Please add "efb" to this post. Thanks. I don't understand your instruction. is "efb" = "edit: gently caress, beaten" ? Because I don't see a reference to Ray's within the last few pages of burger chat.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2010 18:19
|
|
|
TyChan posted:How did Obama ruin Hell Burger? Who said he did? I only said that he visited there twice (that we know of... he could've slipped in all incognito.)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2010 18:29
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:Can I have both? Yes, just live in your car! Problem solved!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2010 20:02
|
|
|
International human rights law should be replaced by tree law. http://www.sp-law.com/tree.htm
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 18:28
|
|
|
TyChan posted:Did you guys have classmates who erased all their illegally-downloaded mp3s before they had their character and fitness interviews? I stopped that particular activity once I was enrolled in law school and haven't looked back. Out of all of my friends, I'm the only one who doesn't have a single illegal piece of software or music in his possession.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 18:49
|
|
|
Linguica posted:If you're been charged for piracy, then sure I guess. I just think I'm too risk-averse to engage in that, especially when the alternative ($1 on iTunes) is so easy. Also, youtube has basically every song you could want, so and grooveshark / pandora also provide free music. And these days, with the RIAA playing rough, you might just get sued if you aren't careful.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 19:13
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Sure but that's no reason to delete years worth of hard work in college. I disagree with your characterization that the acquisition of pirated property is equivalent to hard work, unless you mean the hard work of the original creator of the property.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 19:25
|
|
|
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704682604575368783687129488.htmlquote:But last week the patent office snuffed out the promise of federal recognition. On Tuesday, after questions about the new pot-trademark category from a Wall Street Journal reporter, a patent-office spokesman said the office planned to remove the new pot classification by week's end, and the category is now off the website. Dammit Baruch Obamawitz you ruin everything!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 20:57
|
|
|
Petey posted:law school: no jobs, die alone and humorless I think a lot of people treat piracy as though it isn't wrong, but it is, and I try to point that out. And the way in which I phrased my response was overly verbose on purpose because I was trying to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 23:43
|
|
|
The Arsteia posted:media pirates are just underdogs in a distributional struggle Since this is the law goons thread, I suspect that most people here would agree that people shouldn't unilaterally break a law they disagree with. I'm attacking piracy on rule of law grounds, rather than economic grounds (although I don't concede economic criticisms).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 23:55
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:I saw a headline somewhere that suggested piracy was this generation's possession of marijuana -- yes, it's a crime, but one that isn't perceived as particularly malevolent. There may be truth to that. I think possession of marijuana is this generation's possession of marijuana, seeing as how it is still illegal. I think we can make colorable legal arguments for the repeal of many of the "absurd" older laws - eiither right to privacy or some other conlaw argument for invalidation. I don't think we can make a reasonable argument for the repeal of intellectual property law so that piracy suddenly becomes ok. There's a big difference between legal absolutism and saying that it's wrong to steal other people's property- which is exactly what piracy is, despite young peoples' strange inchoate objections to the contrary.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2010 00:56
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:everyone in CA better vote yes on Prop 19 What does it do?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2010 01:28
|
|
|
Ersatz posted:Actually, That's a very good point, I accept that. Piracy isn't simple theft, it's a more complicated form of criminal activity that involves property rights. My point still stands: it's illegal. Ersatz posted:
A lot of people in this country disagreed with George Bush's election and with many of the things that he did during his presidency, and yet we didn't see rioting or civil war - people did not just decide to break the law. There were a few soldiers who refused to go along with the stop-gap business, but very few. The Tea Party folks hate Obama, hate his proposed laws, etc, but they aren't just breaking laws in response. In both cases, Americans turn to the democratic process to fix the problem. Having dissenting citizens just breaking laws is generally a terrible idea for a democratic society. Obviously, there are exceptions to that rule, such as the civil rights movement, but we're not talking about a generation of oppressed young people who are struggling to gain their freedom, we're talking about a bunch of lazy, semi-wealthy young people who don't want to pay for music, movies, and software despite the fact that they have money for housing, electricity, a computer, internet access and probably an mp3 player of some kind. This isn't about civil disobedience in the face of injustice, this is about young people rationalizing their illegal behavior so that they can get free stuff. This is not a reasonable position, this is a childish position. Soothing Vapors posted:you and phil mousekewitz are really repping the "crazy old man" vibe hard in the past few pages I'm 29! Hardly "old man." But this will be my last post on piracy in this thread. entris fucked around with this message at 15:10 on Jul 21, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2010 14:55
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Aren't they being sued by LSAC for using questions without paying for them or something? Yeah, they got in a lot of trouble last year for not paying licensing fees. Pretty hilarious.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2010 19:55
|
|
|
Geschi posted:They read the schools website and listened to friends who probably weren't lawyers and believed that Law School= $$$$ and then they thought about how they like to debate/argue. Don't forget the very large contingent of wide-eyed Save-the-World types who will use The Law to prevent one or more of the following: - human rights violations, including but not limited to, discrimination, economic oppression in all its capitalist forms, war crimes, political disenfranchisement, and American hegemony. - animal rights violations, including but not limited to whale hunting, animal testing, animal cruelty, and the continued existence of Michael Vick. - environmental catastrophes, including but not limited to oil well drilling, deforestation, acid rain, gas leaks, water contamination, and polar ice cap melting. These same types are also the ones who are going to finally make the big bad corporations stop exploiting and harming the helpless naive masses. Sometimes, these are also the same people who are going to stop the big bad government from imprisoning minorities on drug charges and from illegalizing immigration.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2010 19:21
|
|
|
Gadamer posted:Serious response: right, but I had a 4.0 in my major and was above a 3.5 for my last 5 semesters. I started college when I was 16, was obviously immature about it, but I still don't think I could find any care for Speech 101, where I got an A on every assignment but was given a C because the professor didn't think I was serious enough about the class. Serious Response: Your 3.1 GPA is all the schools look at, nobody cares about your major GPA, nobody cares about upward trends in the grades for your last 5 semesters. Sorry to burst your bubble. Don't go to law school with your numbers unless you get a full ride somewhere good. Are you URM?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2010 16:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:56 |
|
|
Gadamer posted:Thanks. I'm going to go ahead with the masters and from there apply to PhD programs and jobs, and see which road seems best. I went ahead and fixed that for you, now we can quote you in our testimonials of saved souls in the OP.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2010 17:39
|
|