Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 11/11/17 in all areas

  1. 18 points
    Jesus Christ ... this thread. I'll say something far less practical and probably something that is not even my place to say. I might even be completely off base in my assumptions but I write this for sunnyskies and anyone else reading this thread that has suffered from depression. I am really sorry to hear that. It's frustrating and painful. What makes it painful is that you may have already been dreading it. In some ways a meeting like that vindicates every depressive instinct you may have. You are not good enough. Apparently, it's now a matter of contract. It is probably not a surprise to hear the reasons why. You already know where you are failing. You may even think you are failing in ways your employer doesn't even care about. You are probably so quick to characterize things as "failings" that it did not even occur to you that I could have easily said "areas where you can improve." You might think being hard on yourself reflects just how seriously you take your obligations. Believe it or not, many people do not have the instinct to think themselves failures. People who never experienced that instinct cannot comprehend what it is like to live with that instinct for decade after decade. You likely have an idea of the kind of lawyer you want to be and by not meeting your own expectations the person you are really letting down is yourself. In that sense, it does not really matter what I or Diplock think about what it means to be a lawyer. I am confident you know what it means to be a good one. You already know where you need to improve and you are already doing things that you are supposed to be doing to fix the problem. Congratulations! You know you have the capacity to be an intelligent, capable, and effective advocate. This is correct. You also know that you are not perfect. Please remember this means it is OK if you aren't recovering yourself in the "optimal" way. We put so much time and energy into law that it is easy to forget: you are a lawyer but a lawyer is not all you are. You are many things to many people, and you are more than just a lawyer to yourself, too. Whether you meet your employer's expectations or fail them, whether you leave this position and find another lawyer gig (or a worse gig), or leave law altogether ... whether you find a cure for all your life's ills and become the kind of person you wish you were always - none of those things need to happen for you to be OK in the end. You will be OK in the end, I am telling you that. You did not come here by accident and trust yourself that you will steer your life to the best of your ability. All you can do is live every day according to your own values, however you can manage, and if you have a bad day shoot me a PM because Jesus [email protected]#king Christ sometimes it really [email protected]#king sucks.
  2. 15 points
    The first thing I did when I woke up right now was to check OASIS on my phone and I saw the good news. I'm so humbled to have been admitted so early, Osgoode was my top choice. I applied with a 3.78 CGPA and a 161 LSAT.
  3. 14 points
    Some of these things are stuff she has no business asking. Move out from home? Travel? Are these suggestions/examples to illustrate what might be a good idea, or are they non-negotiable demands? Because if it’s the latter you don’t want to stay there. You talked about setting boundaries and this is a good start.
  4. 14 points
    Got hired today! For anonymity reasons I won't say which firm (but it's not Blaney, WeirFould, or Loopstra). For all those still grinding, keep going. I was so defeated after OCIs. I pushed hard in preparation for this interview (downtown Toronto firm), and it paid off. You all can do it, just don't give up! /sap
  5. 12 points
    Just got the call!! 3.82 OLSAS / 175 LSAT / weak ECs (TAing)/ strong PS Ahhh Last name B
  6. 12 points
    Hi all, Guess I'll be starting up this round. Just got the call a few minutes ago. LSAT: 158, 167 GPA: 3.68 B3: 3.84, L2: 3.39 Surname: H Note: the assistant dean I spoke with mentioned that because I was registered to take the LSAT tomorrow, they wanted to give me a heads up early.
  7. 12 points
    A huge part of why I make sure I keep coming back to this forum even (ye gods) eleven years on is because learning about the legal profession before committing to it requires a certain degree of privilege or access. I'm very happy to have been a part of the decision-making process for the law applicants that contacted me through this forum and got an opportunity to bounce their ideas off an Actual Lawyer. Most of them, like me, had no one close to this profession to ask and just defaulted to the internet like the good little Millennials we are. The top five things of which I find myself disabusing starry-eyed applicants: 1. "International lawyers" are basically like James Bond. Lots of travel and tangos, sexy mysterious strangers, Champagne, yachts and fashion shows. (No, international lawyers just opine on the Canadian side of deals, so they're in their office at 5 AM talking to Tokyo on a painfully translated conference call.) 2. Once I'm a lawyer, I'll be able to use the law to advance the causes I cherish. (No, you'll be a mercenary. If you want to champion a cause, become a fundraiser and hire me to do your litigation. I can only do a fraction of the advocacy work a non-profit CEO can with flaks, lobbyists, litigators and marketing professionals. Plus, 75% of the applicants in this category are planning to be "environmental lawyers", not realizing they will almost definitely either work in a dusty municipal office or in the bowels of heavy industry. They certainly don't think they're about to become real estate lawyers.) 3. If I do well enough in school, I can prosecute genocides and things at the UN or NATO or whatever. (Yeah, maybe. If you're an incomprehensibly talented superstar that will rise above everyone else in the nation to attract attention and you actually feel that you'll enjoy the day-in-day-out pursuit of a foregone conclusion.) 4. I'm going to go to Bay Street and it will be nothing but parties and box seats and unfathomable stacks of cash. (There's a lot of paperwork and client management in the middle of all that. But... yeah, that's not too far off the mark. Hope that's literally all you ever feel like doing!) 5. Constitutional and human rights law are the things that really matter! I want to shape society in favour of social justice! (Awesome! We desperately need talented criminal defence counsel and immigration lawyers. Hello? Are you still there? Helloooo...?) All by way of saying, no one expects you to know what you're doing even during your articling period. It does take a lot of privilege and access to understand the difference between a planning and a development lawyer. But you should get complete fantasies shaken out of your head before signing a cheque, and you can do that here if you have to.
  8. 12 points
    Reporting back, have gotten some grades back this year. All in the B range. Definitely addressed my issues. Now Im wondering what that transcript is worth in terms of employability. A terrible first year followed by average 2nd and 3rd. Does my performance in 2L and beyond mitigate my first year performance? I have sought help and addressed the issues that led to the first year grades and seem to be on a good path.
  9. 11 points
    Happy to be starting off this thread!! 4th year UG general applicant cGPA 3.86 L2: 3.93 LSAT: 163 ECs: very involved, lots of variety but nothing too significant Last name U Says accepted 12/6/2017 but only updated today
  10. 11 points
    Well I received offers from 2 of 3 schools that I had the most interest in. It just doesn't make sense to hang onto a spot here when it could go to someone else.
  11. 11 points
    Family lawyer here. And one who enjoys it! Family law does not necessarily have to be adversarial. There are collaborative-based lawyers. Lots of feelings, signing of mutual respect and the like. Interesting approach that requires committed parties. It seems like OP sees that and is excited about that prospect. It also allows lawyers to get to know their clients, write their words, etc. There are many family law practitioners that run solicitor practices. I get some of their business when things go south and it heads to court. It takes a bit of time to establish yourself as a solicitor-based lawyer, but many people want to stay out of court. Especially once they realize Applications are public. Solicitor-work involves opinion letters on foreign divorce, all forms of contracts (cohabitation and separation agreements come to mind). I find most of the lawyers are somewhat collaborative. I mean, our clients can be jerks. But many of my colleagues actively work hard to ensure that disclosure obligations are met, solutions are found, etc. I know that I have fairly casual email exchanges with opposing counsel on many files. I do say the larger city lawyers are kind of jerks. As are the old guys. Family law requires a personality when dealing with clients. My clients make unreasonable requests all the time. I've made many of my clients cry. I've been threatened to be fired because I wouldn't run a no-access motion. Part of my role as counsel is to keep my client's delusions in check. Costs are a very real issue and that can dissuade a client. Ultimately, I do represent my client and will advance claims that I believe to be against my legal advice but will get written instructions in those circumstances. A family lawyer cannot just give in. If I just agreed with opposing counsel, my client would owe $250k on one file. Another would never have access again. While I also agree that the lawyer crossed a boundary, I do believe that some issues need to be addressed. It is important for OP to get their mental health in check. Counselling is a great start. I had wonderful results via mindfulness and Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT). I do agree that OP likely needs to "get out there" and get more life experiences. Especially if they still live at home. Travel could be one way of doing it. I fail to see how 1 week of travel will make you worldly though. You'll also likely be disappointed if you set out to travel and experience some life altering event and realize that European hostels are terrible, terrible places if you're not 19. I am more concerned that you're not working on your own files though. Offer to handle a legal aid case, from start to finish. Generally the financial aspects are simpler to deal with. And you'll learn invaluable client management. Improv or toastmasters would be great. But so would a bookclub if that is more up your alley. Essentially, your boss is advising you to find your voice. You were hired because you have the technical knowledge - you just need to find your style. Some people will forever be more of an introvert. That's life. And you can find a firm that is more up your alley. I would strongly suggest staying away from entering the paralegal world - you'll be restricted to simply drafting affidavits and doing financial statements. If that is what is of interest though, you may wish to explore the solicitor side of things. And branch into wills and real estate. Tears, sweat and grit went into your law degree. You have more autonomy as a lawyer than as a paralegal. It's certainly not an easy time. It seems like you do have some motivation. Keep working at it, put yourself out there, keep attending counselling, and take it one step at a time. Just out of curiosity, how many of the people arguing "OMG SO MEAN" are law students/non-lawyers vs the lawyers responding? Also, to all those wondering, Adrian is a labour consultant following a legal career in labour law. Just as consideration when he gives a bit of his opinion regarding these issues. Flavour and all. I mean, I would take his opinion on unions with a grain of salt (pfft, management. :P) but he's generally fairly informed on these issues.
  12. 10 points
    It's easier to change your job to suit your personality than it is to change your personality to suit your job. I don't know if she's pushing you out the door - it sounds like, despite a fairly intrusive approach (as @Hegdis noted), her heart is in the right place. But your concerns seem exactly right to me. I think you should accept her suggestion that you start standing up for yourself more. And you should begin by aggressively seeking a new job, right now.
  13. 10 points
    You know, it's unusually petty of me to make such an obvious strawman argument, but I genuinely believe this is true. When people say that "anyone" can get into law school, what they really mean is "anyone like them." As in, you know, the people that matter. People who are already academically successful, by any reasonable definition. People who are free from crippling or even moderately disabling conditions such as physical and mental impairment, or addiction, or psychological disorders. People who aren't burdened with excessive obligations such as parenthood, or families living in crisis in other parts of the world for whom every $5 we might otherwise spend on a latte represents a huge amount of money, or even just the need to pay their own rent every month. In other words, people who are already incredibly advantaged and privileged. For other people, I would never say it's impossible to get into law school. As a few examples here attest, and examples in my own experiences, there are incredible success stories that come from nowhere. But it sure as hell isn't easy, or anything that can justifiably be called less than incredibly difficult. You know, in discussions like these, I usually avoid turning excessively philosophical because for the audience I'm arguing with, it truly is casting pearls before swine. No one is going to appreciate a nuanced argument from me on a topic like this. But hell, for the rest of everyone else. With the clients I represent every day, it sometimes represents an achievement just to hold a decent job and pay taxes instead of doing drugs all day and ending up in jail. And when I say it's an achievement I mean that - as in, it's a genuine fucking achievement. Coming from where these people come from, and considering the hands they were dealt, it's entirely possible that the dude who's working as a roofer now and supporting his family has achieved more than I have, in terms of the work it took him to get there and what he had to overcome to do it. I respect the hell out of that guy. And it really is infuriating, and insulting, to hear anyone suggest that if he wanted to he would go to law school and really achieve something, instead of just doing semi-skilled manual labour. I'm a great fan of Charles Dickens. I recommend Hard Times to almost everyone. It's a great book to remind us that there's a dark side to the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" philosophy. And it's a dark side that's really bearing some dark fruit right now, particularly in America. If everyone gets rich just by working hard and wanting it badly enough, then everyone who isn't rich is just fucking lazy and undeserving. There's no getting away from that. So yes, I acknowledge there's a lot of positive force to the view that you stay motivated, believe you can do anything, and work hard to get ahead. But you need to deploy some careful double-think to benefit from the motivational force derived from that view and not become an elitist douche in the process. You act as though it's true but you have to remember that it really isn't. Anyway, I'm on a tangent. But the thing that sets me off here isn't the irrational positivity. I believe that needs to be corrected, but it isn't distinctly offensive. What offends me is the whiff of elitism that goes with it.
  14. 10 points
    Is this the time of year when all the students who are applying to law school come around and tell all the lawyers that we're full of shit and don't know anything? And that all the students who aren't in law school yet have superior insight and should be listened to instead? Did I miss the Goggle alert?
  15. 9 points
    Well, now that we've heard from two more students who are repeating exactly what they themselves want to believe ... does anyone think that actually contributes to the OP's knowledge of their real situation? "Trust yourself?" "A compelling personal statement can go a long way?" "If it's what you truly want it'll work out eventually?" Do you even realize how obnoxious that last one is? I mean, it's great to feel like your life exists in made-for-tv-land where desire and persistence lead ultimately and inevitably to success for anyone who deserves it. But the necessary corollary of that idea is that in every case where it doesn't work out the person for whom it didn't work out was just inherently undeserving, and it wasn't their grades or their LSAT that kept them out of law school but rather some defect in their character, since you just presumed that anyone who does deserve it would get in. In direct reply to Kate, who is decidedly and admittedly not from any law school as yet, this is a forum about law schools but populated by and large by people who are now in and in many cases graduated from law school years ago and are now practicing lawyers - myself included. There are at least half a dozen lawyers, on quick scan, who already replied. There was a time (I said this elsewhere, recently) when this forum was filled almost exclusively by wannabe law students. And at that time, it sounded almost exclusively like you two sound. It was relentlessly positive, filled with anodyne reassurances that knowing the right person, volunteering at the right place, and being the President of your pre-law club would make all the difference, and that anyone could get into law school if they just write a compelling personal statement and explain that their 3.0 GPA and their 150 LSAT doesn't reflect their real ability 'cause...whatever. I'm sorry to be harsh. Or hell, maybe I'm not. Maybe I enjoy laying some reality on people sometimes when the stakes are low. Because honestly, compared to most of the shit I do all day, the stakes here are low and no one's going to jail for a few years no matter what happens. But we don't hang around here to shit on people because we like to be miserable. Your idea that a forum filled with students themselves would be discouraging - that's been actively disproved in practice. It isn't the students who discourage one another. The real students - the ones still hoping to attend law school themselves - are by and large incredibly supportive. It's just that they are also delusional. And I don't see how that helps anyone. As I also said elsewhere, recently, if Morgan wanted to create a section of this forum for baseless reassurances, so that everyone can tell everyone else how awesome they are, I'd stay away from it. I also think it would get pretty dead pretty soon, because no one would bother posting there. You have friends and family to tell you that you're special and that you will surely achieve your dreams. To strangers on the Internet you aren't special, and when you ask strangers on the Internet for advice you're going to get (and you should get) the truth, even if it's rough. Not everyone does achieve their dreams. And since you aren't special, you might be one of them. The positive side of this advice, which isn't harsh to no purpose, is this. Get your fucking shit together and control what you can still control. Get the best grades you can in the time remaining if you are still in school. If not in school, get the best LSAT possible. If you are utterly determined to attend law school "no matter what" and your grades suck and there's nothing left to do about that, then consider the few schools that might be willing to consider post-graduation grades and/or graduate program grades and seriously consider the fact that you may have to do some further studying between now and law school. And even then, be realistic about what you're up against. Because hearing and believing that a compelling personal narrative is going to make all the difference isn't just bullshit. It's toxic bullshit. It may stop you from doing something that you can still control, and which might make a real difference.
  16. 9 points
    The answer to every question about ethics is that you report yourself to the Law Society, report everyone else to the Law Society, inform every one of your clients that you may have committed an ethical violation, inform your insurer that you may be subject to one or more potential civil claims, voluntarily surrender your license to practice law, dress in sackcloth, cover yourself in ashes, and wait to be executed. I jest. But not by a lot.
  17. 8 points
    @benjuryon had a great idea in another thread. We often talk around here as though we're infallible and we know the answers to every question, when in fact we just don't make rookie mistakes anymore --- we've moved on to a whole different level of mistakes. As we all know, law school and articling are pretty good at hammering into your head that perfection is expected and mistakes are unacceptable. So maybe it would be good for everyone if we occasionally updated a list of screwups and faceplants to remind everyone still working through student-and-new-call jitters that although the standards of the profession are very high, your accidental Reply All is not really the end of the world. I'll go first, with a few of my memorable screwups from my first couple of years: (Summer) I was asked to put together a big book of documents with tabs and an index. The partner on the file brought me in for a conference call with the client. He told the client I was working on an affidavit of documents. I pulled him aside to tell him that I wasn't, and this was the first I was hearing about it. He was furious. Client was incredulous. The next day I realized that "affidavit of documents" was the technical term for the book I was assigned. It was actually already finished. (Articling) Sent a litigation brief binder to all the executives of a major client, but accidentally included a tab full of markup and brutally frank notes instead of the finished product. (1st year) A witness was near tears during her cross-examination by opposing counsel. During a break I told her she was doing great, and that one answer in particular was really strong and helpful. As soon as the cross started back up I realized that was witness tampering and felt immediately sick. I ran to my articling principal after the cross to spill the beans. She asked if that issue ever arose again on the examination, and the answer was no. "So there was no effect? It couldn't have influenced any more answers?" "No, the rest of the examination was about something totally different." "Okay. Don't do it again, but in the meantime, chill, dude."
  18. 8 points
    You need to take more responsibility for your own future. It wasn't your law school's career development office's job to find YOU a job. There are options other than living where you are living. You mentioned relocating to your parents' place. Are they in a larger centre? Is that something you can do without emotional or physical damage to yourself? If you're interested in crim and a solo practitioner offered you articles, why didn't you take them? You said criminal law is all he practices so he doesn't have articling students? What do you mean? Lots of people practice only crim and have articling students - and he offered you articles! So I'm not quite understanding that objection. And if you don't like networking and don't see yourself practicing law long-term then why are you so worried about getting articles? You need to figure out what you want.
  19. 8 points
    A little birdie told me that the first round of acceptances will be heading out in the next few days. Bear in mind that these are (primarily) offers to people with high stats. The holistic analysis starts next month.
  20. 8 points
    I'm not in any law school yet, but as a long-time creeper of this forum, I've seen countless people post "chances" threads, be told they aren't likely to be admitted by other law applicants, and then be admitted themselves. I recently had a meeting with the Dean of Law at Calgary, who confirmed that a lot of the comments made on here are completely baseless and not to be trusted. And even if you are a practicing lawyer, you still aren't an admissions officer. I can't believe a practicing lawyer would have the time or energy to type out such a long-winded, pointless response that adds absolutely nothing to any of the discussions in this thread -- which is a criticism you yourself made of me!
  21. 8 points
    Well the OP's language is all over the place, but basically he or she is saying: 1. Don't go to law school unless you want to become a lawyer. 2. Try and find out what kind of law you want to practice, and get experience in that kind of law; and 3. It's important to get good grades in first year. I can't disagree with any of that, and if anything would just repeat it for emphasis.
  22. 8 points
    If this is a major part of your rationale, you really owe it to yourself to have an in-depth discussion with someone (potentially on this board, but probably not in this thread) about the degree to which such a field of practice even exists (short answer - barely so) and the degree to which there are meaningful opportunities for anyone who is not already a very prominent lawyer to do anything in this field (short answer - almost not at all). I would never discourage someone away from their interests. But you deserve to know the truth going in. Law is a jurisdictional qualification. If you become a lawyer in Canada, your opportunities will be to practice law in Canada. You could potentially pursue a career in policy or diplomacy and hope to do that elsewhere (and, arguably, that's one of the things that a MGA could be good for) but if you actually want to practice law please be aware that most people who use a line like "international criminal law" could not even accurately define what that means. It doesn't mean going to Pakistan and getting involved in a case that's going on there. Crimes in Pakistan are governed by Pakistani law and defended and prosecuted by Pakistani lawyers. The only international criminal law that even exists would need to stem from international authority. Meaning, essentially, the UN, and treaties. At this point, btw, I'm generalizing to a degree that I'm in danger of being wrong. So if anyone wants to correct me, please do. My point being, if you're hoping to somehow be involved in prosecuting international war criminals who are brought before international authority for justice...that's at least a rational, if an incredibly competitive, career goal. Like becoming an astronaut. But please be aware, the vast majority (and I mean the vast majority) of even war criminals, and the most heinous shit you can imagine, are prosecuted domestically and within nations governed by their own laws and by lawyers who are qualified in those jurisdictions. Not by anyone from Canada. Sorry, this is just a massive pet peeve of mine. A lot of would-be lawyers seem to think that by saying they want to do international whatever, it means they'll be traveling around to other nations in the world and being a lawyer in those other nations. And it really, really doesn't.
  23. 7 points
    LOL, don't go into corporate law or tax if you hate dealing with criminals!
  24. 7 points
    Good old Diplock (at least I think it was Diplock) said something like this a long time ago: if you're constantly finding that you are surrounded by ppl more impressive than you, then it's likely a symptom of being successful at what you're doing - you're being pushed into new environment with smart, ambitious ppl (e.g. you enter a law firm, no one will be impressed by law school X, unless it's Oxon/HYS or something, and even then they prob already have several partners and associates who went to those schools.) I think the converse is also true: if everyone you talk to is impressed by you, then you may not be hanging around with a very impressive group of ppl...
  25. 7 points
    OP's boss can certainly talk about things that could drive clients away - an inability to communicate and apparent insecurities/poor confidence are fair game to comment on. But telling someone to travel or move out of their parents' home? Now it's different if there is a close personal relationship developing between the two and the employee expresses that living at home is difficult or they would like to travel more and the boss gives friendly encouragement to do so, not tied to the job. When I was clerking, I had a father-daughter like relationship with a judge and in the course of work we would sometimes have heart-to-hearts and he would ask and I would express what was going on in my life. And he expressed some opinions as to what I should do in my personal life and I took his advice. It was good advice and it helped me. But it was never tied to my employment, job performance, references etc.
  26. 7 points
    I'm replying to the OP and not to Constant, who is shitting on this thread for no valid reason that I can see, or chvrches who has valid issues to raise but who is, I would agree, seeing in excessively personal terms. Here's now I'm similar to the OP. I also attended law school at least somewhat older. I also never imagined I would practice in highly remunerative "big law" areas of practice. I wasn't married at the time but like the OP I had fairly modest expectations for the future. I came from a working class background and while I'll spare the long essay on this topic, people who come from money simply cannot imagine the psychological difference between borrowing six figures when you know your family can and would help you out in a pinch, and when you've been around money your whole life, vs. coming from a place where you are the one everyone turns to for support, even though you don't have much, and we're talking about more money than you've ever even imagined in real terms. So while the OP hasn't spelled out this background I feel like we share this also. Here's how things worked out for me. I do practice in an area of law that's not known for money, isn't "big law" and which I chose for my own reasons rather than financial pressure. For me, it's criminal defence. In my practice, there have been several "gut check" moments relating to finances in order to get to where I am now. In other words, similar to the decision to pursue law at all, there have been a couple of times where I thought "shit, can I really do this? What if it doesn't work out? What if I don't get clients? What if, what if?" Those moments don't really go away. There may be more in the future. But thus far, things have worked out quite well and beyond the modest expectations I went in with. I'd say I'm earning more than I anticipated and the upward trend and the upper potential both remain quite good. In terms of life goals (you talked about family, buying a home, etc.) mine do not mirror yours exactly but I would also say that I'm well on track towards achieving things that were rather hypothetical to me not so very long ago when I graduated law school. And that's after complicating my personal life unnecessarily in the meanwhile. So, in direct terms, yes, I can be done, and I'm sure if you just reduce it to math going to law school is a sound financial decision for you. I know it's scary. People who are going to pretend that it isn't are probably coming from privilege and there's really no talking with them. You're just coming from drastically different places in life. But in math terms, it makes sense. I'd give you further personal advice but you're already following almost everything I'd advise. Make conservative estimates. Stay frugal. Understand that once you start adding lifestyle costs to your habits they are very hard to remove in the future, so when it comes to things like a car (or two cars) or eating out frequently or ultra high speed Internet or whatever it is you spend your money on - delaying the point in time when you say "hey, we can afford this now" will help a lot. Because once you get used to it, you'll stay used to it. And if you have a choice of law schools, choose the one that minimizes your debt. Your circumstances there will be different from mine because any needs based funding will take into your wife's finances, which will probably suck for you. But pay attention to the differing rules at whatever choices you have and make it an important factor in your decision-making however it shakes out. I'll add this final thing. After doing all of the above, do not let yourself be excessively risk-adverse. Again, I'll try to spare the essay. But this is one of the ways in which people who don't come from money tend to keep themselves down. Paying for education, as well as other "investments" in life (housing, recently, among them) are often very scary expenditures to someone who doesn't have money. But these investments can be genuinely "good" bets most of the time. In other words, everything is a gamble, but these are gambles where the odds are significantly in your favor. People who can afford to take those bets without worrying too much come out consistently ahead and don't even notice why and how it happened. People who can't afford to take those bets comfortably maybe shy away, and never benefit from those odds. So don't dismiss your concerns. But also don't handicap yourself too much from spending money where it will, most likely, pay off over time. Anyway, good luck. Sounds like you do have your head screwed on straight.
  27. 7 points
    Client and other side had flown in to town to do 4 straight days of in person negotiations. I was spending most of the days (and nights) running between the conference room jotting down notes and back to my office to turn drafts of the main docs. One round, I walked back into the negotiation room and promptly placed in front of the other side's lawyers copies of the documents that had all of my internal notes - what we were willing to give, etc. I noticed as I started to put them down in front of our partners, and had to walk back, pick it up from in front of a senior partner from the other firm saying "sorry, wrong redline". Five more seconds and I was a dead man walking. Partner got pissed at me for slowing things down and being unprofessional and it was everything in my power not to say "yeah well if you like that you should have seen what I almost did".
  28. 7 points
    The search has come to a successful end. Thanks to everyone who gave advice! It was all tremendously helpful. Good luck to those still searching! All I can say is just keep at it, and listen to this community! There's a lot of value here.
  29. 7 points
  30. 6 points
    "Excuse me sir, what time is it?" "Eleven o'clock - oh my gosh, I have to be at Osgoode for eleven-thirty. I'm late for OSGOODE. Law school!"
  31. 6 points
    Here is my take on it, from a person who was in law school some fifteen years ago: law student applicants by their nature are playing a short game. The next goal is getting in to a law school somewhere, and since it's the only step over which you have some control, it's looms hugely in your mind. U of T is an easy choice, and so is Osgoode, in the sense that absolutely no one is going to criticize you for accepting an offer there, and you can tell yourself all day long that you've made the best choice and there are real, legitimate reasons why that could be so. And it's an excellent school, and you will have opportunities there that you won't get at Dal, and it's a new part of the country with a lot more jobs on offer at the end. BUT. Playing the long game, what you leave law school with is a degree and debt. Hopefully a job. If you do not have a job, or have a low paying job, the amount of debt you have now governs the next five to ten years of your life. If you can look past the feel-good immediacy of getting in to U of T or Osgoode and really sit down and look at the numbers, and chat with your spouse, and think about if you're going to give your kid a sibling, and consider if some one's parent is getting on in years and may need support - well, that debt is not just something you carry around. It affects your family. And maybe you'll go to law school and absolutely love corporate law and get all A's and get a job on bay that pays six figures out of the gate. And maybe you'll love criminal law and win your moot and article for a respected sole practitioner who can only afford to pay you 40k and occasionally spring for lunch. It's impossible to say what will happen. But the difference will matter a whole lot more if your debt is $100k versus 30k in five years, won't it? Play the long game. Really analyze what those schools can offer in terms of financial incentive. And don't forget costs like rent and travel.
  32. 6 points
    What a lot of the advice given here neglects to address is how depression factors into this situation. Professional and personal slights may have a far more significant impact on an individual suffering from depression. On the one hand, because they don't respect themselves they cannot bring themselves to acknowledge mistreatment since they think they deserve it. On the other hand the impact of the mistreatment is amplified because you are dealing with a thin skull. The individual already had a compulsion to think themselves inadequate to the point where it impacts their professional life. They need assistance and compassion. If you are unwilling to offer that as an employer, mentor or colleague, then it falls on the individual to decide what relationship they want with you. Employers have a lot of limitations and often it's not clear what they should do. But they doesn't justify what is essentially disrespect. I don't really care that this disrespect falls within what is allowed by statute, contract or the minimum of professional obligations. It's mean. That matters more to some people than others. Writing this off as the way the world works is not really helpful. Everyone knows the world can be awful. Yeah a lot of people have it worse. Speaking frankly, grandma's advice is on point here: if you have nothing nice to say ... I have found that being compassionate to people furnish them with the strength and courage to move forward. Telling them they need to be stronger just feeds into their inadequacy. Ultimately, the answer involves treatment and the individual discovering their own fundamental values and interests. This is a question far broader in scope and can make this job just another line on a resume. Perhaps one that will be erased and forgotten. I don't mean to imply that there is a final and obvious answer to that question for everyone. But it is something the person must engage on some level. That answer might be to stick it out or bow out. It seems like the choice is what matters. It's not. Both choices may arise from valuing strength, resilience, self respect, love, reliability or any number of other values. What matters is the individual's disposition. CBT, counselling and medication may assist them. Everyone else's role, to the extent they want to be helpful, is supportive. Mental health in the legal profession is one part self diagnosis and one part community support. Fundamentally this support requires caring about the lawyer as a person. None of this implies that mental health excuses professional negligence. None of this implies that the employer's financial or business interests are irrelevant. I don't think that employers are obligated to suffer financial hardship in order to accommodate lawyers. Putting your business first doesn't mean you have to be unkind or disrespectful. All of this assumes the person understands their mental health is at issue and is trying to address it. It's a whole other ball game if they are in denial.
  33. 6 points
    I’m in complete shock and only wanted to post to give some hope to the lower LSAT scorers like me. Got in with a: cGPA: 3.81 / B3: 3.93 / L2: 3.94 LSAT: 148, 158, (waiting on December) Last name: close to the top of the alphabet. I would say my PS and application as a whole were mediocre at best. It’s so hard to believe I got in, but I guess the LSAT isn’t everything, goodluck everyone!
  34. 6 points
    Got the email a few hours ago!!! 4.0 GPA, 162 LSAT, very strong ECs, out of province, went into queue Nov. 15 I believe. I'm really delighted to see sub-160 LSATs here -- I got a 152 on my first write so I'm extremely salty about the whole LSAT process, ahaha. Huge congrats to those accepted. For those still waiting to hear back, hang in there!!!
  35. 6 points
    Congrats to all admitted! Can only imagine your excitement. With that being said - can we change this title to 2018, to match the rest of the accepted threads/avoid confusion?
  36. 6 points
    I think the idea that people would come into law school knowing what kind of law they want to practice or knowing what a law career looks like comes from a certain place of privilege. I remember at the beginning of 1L, people were discussing this, and many of them had parents/grandparents/aunts/uncles/siblings/family friends who were lawyers and knew all about Bay Street, big law, clerking, wills and estates, family law etc. So of course they had an idea of what it was like and what to do. I was the first person in my family to finish high school. I really didn’t know what a non-minimum wage menial job looked like. I only knew about criminal lawyers from Legal Aid and had a pretty negative view of them. It was essential for me to have the time in law school to even learn what my options were.
  37. 6 points
    I suppose your employer could have just canned you at the probationary stage. Depending where you are located - almost no risk in that. My guess is that they must see something in you or they would not have taken the effort.
  38. 6 points
    That’s all fine and good, but, and I say this as someone who has several years of actual work experience, an employer has no right to attempt to arbitrate what an employee does or does not do with their personal life away from work. If someone has hygiene problems, or dresses poorly, or interacts poorly with clients, sure, fair game. That is all directly related to your employment and is within their purview. But once you leave the office? Barring extreme hypotheticals what that employee does is their own business. Speaking personally, I’ve always kept my personal life and my work life separate. If an employer tried to sit me down and say “here is what you need to do in your personal life to be a better employee”, I would let them know that they are crossing a boundary and that it isn’t appropriate, that my private life is and will remain private, and that I expect that this will be the last time we have a conversation like this. I get what you’re saying, and from a work point of view I agree with you. I just think boundaries are important.
  39. 6 points
    I know that a lot of what's here raises questions about boundaries, appropriate workplace suggestions, and all the rest of it. And I know that many students who haven't been exposed to workplace realities will immediately scream, and many lawyers will gasp. But I was immediately more sympathetic to OP's boss simply because the second sentence was about how she's improved her client retention rates. Because I was thinking ... what? What percentage of them were you losing? And how many are you still losing? Because that's the whole ballgame in a legal practice. If you can't keep your clients as your clients, you have no job. And anyone who's stupid enough to keep employing you anyway, will soon have no job themselves. So, here's the counter position. It may well be true that your boss is way, way over the line and you simply need to get out. Or it may be that they are trying to help you as much as they reasonably can, and that some of their advice is unavoidably personal. Speaking as a small-time employer who doesn't even try to be HR correct at all times, I'm actually very sympathetic to this problem, from their perspective. Take an employee who just presents badly. Assume their problems are fixable, but if they aren't fixed I simply can't keep them around because they are losing me business. But to even discuss those problems, I need to get personal. Should I dismiss them for non-specific reasons, and thereby cover my ass? Or should I get into the real issues and give them a chance? The second position is actually the kinder, and the more human one. And I'm not saying I know for sure that's what's happening here. But it's at least possible that it could be. I agree 100% that it's easier to find a job that suits you rather than change to suit your job. But I guess the problem I'm having is this. It isn't clear to me that the OP can be a lawyer at all and not change at least some of what's under discussion. And here's where I hit a real wall in what I know. Maybe the OP's specific boss is very demanding. Or maybe her problems are significant and pronounced. Or maybe some of both. Anyway, you need to figure out if these personality tendencies are in danger of costing you just this job, or the possibility of even a career in law. And then decide if you want to change and are willing to. It's still perfectly valid to not want to change. But at least see what's on the table first. I hope that doesn't sound unreasonably pessimistic. Clearly you have things going for you, because you were hired in the first place and someone is going to bat for your long-term prospects. But the practice of law is adversarial and the business of law is entrepreneurial. You need to sincerely ask yourself how much of that you want in your life, and how much you're willing to change to accommodate it. It's not for everyone. Nor should it be.
  40. 6 points
    Yeah, I'm pretty sure social niceties is one of yours.
  41. 6 points
    Yeah, I don't think being angry for someone else's mistake that in no way effects you is really that rational.
  42. 6 points
  43. 6 points
    Since it’s been spliced and it’s come up I would like to comment that U of C is head and shoulders above all other schools in terms of forum reading / participation / keeping up on who appears to be posting. Good for applicants and students to know.
  44. 6 points
    What is the difference between "hard" and "challenging?" I would imagine that for the vast majority of people, there are parts of getting into law school or becoming a lawyer that are hard, challenging and/or difficult. Yes, there are probably some people for whom everything goes smoothly - they are able to complete their undergraduate degrees with good grades and no personal or financial struggles, they are able to write the LSAT with no problems paying the fee and get a good score with minimum preparation, they understand the application process and are able to navigate that easily to get into their first choice of school, they have no financial issues with law school tuition, they understand the classroom material and get good grades with minimal effort, they never have any personal or emotional problems during law school, they are able to pass the bar exam easily, they cruise through the job search to their first choice of articling position, their articles go well, are exactly what they expect, their firm loves them, and hires them back. There are people like this. But most people have bumps along the way. It's not necessarily that the material is intellectually difficult for them but there are all kinds of hurdles and obstacles that arise during the 8+ years it takes to become a lawyer. I was fortunate in that I got good grades throughout my undergrad and law school and had no issues with the LSAT, and I didn't have to study like crazy for any of those things. But I would never say that becoming a lawyer was easy or "not hard." I became a single parent at a very young age so I had to do my undergrad studies in less than ideal circumstances. The work was not hard but finding the time to do it was between working and raising a family on my own and . Then when I was applying to law school, I had absolutely no guidance or support as to what I was doing. I had a hard time scraping up the LSAT fees. I didn't even get to do one practice test in one sitting - I had to do it section by section. I didn't always have power or food during that time. Then a personal issue arose and I had to defer law school for a year. And when I finally went, I knew in my heart that it was going to end the relationship I was in and drive a further wedge between my family and I. Then when I got to law school I had no idea what I was doing for about two months and the culture of law school and lifestyles of a lot of the students were a struggle. Money was a constant issue. And then just when I figured things out personally, I had a personal crisis, and the breakup I had feared, all right around first term exams. After that it got better and my grades were always top 10%, but I would never, ever say any of it was easy. I still had to figure out what I wanted to do with my law degree, which was a torturous process for me, and there were all kinds of ups and downs studying as a single mother. Sometimes it still amazes me that I actually stuck with it because there were so many times that I wanted to quit. So when you say it's "not that hard", that's an experience I certainly never had.
  45. 6 points
  46. 6 points
    "You are all future titans of the corporate world and champions of justice and peace in the face of oppression and war. You will command board rooms, defend war criminals, lead political parties, argue in front of the Supreme Court, and bear the burden of a single mother's fight for justice. But, I mean, we can't really ask you to cope with the sort of pressure an actual grade curve would present."
  47. 6 points
    I'm a current Osgoode student from Vancouver, but I obviously can't give any insight into UBC law. I'll try my best to answer your questions: (a) I love Osgoode's student culture. If you go to O-Week you won't have any trouble making friends. Sure, there are a lot of people from Toronto that go to Osgoode, but law school is such a collective experience that even those individuals will be looking for friends. There's a weekly pub night downtown (Thursday) and a bar in Osgoode open every Wednesday. I got a better vibe from Osgoode students the UBC students during my application process, which is part of the reason I came here, but I'm sure UBC students are perfectly nice. Osgoode won this category for me, but your mileage may vary. (b) Osgoode's professors are excellent, will get to know you (mine all know my name) and are more than happy to give extra help if asked. I'm sure UBC is the same. I'd call this a tie. (c) York is awful. Osgoode is nice. You'll spend all your time at university at Osgoode, so it hasn't really mattered much to me. UBC's campus is beautiful, and their law school is beautiful (both Osgoode and UBC Law had the same architect). Toronto is pretty, but it doesn't really hold a candle to Vancouver's ocean and mountains. UBC wins here. (d) I've found the TTC to be better than Translink. Commuting to either school is a pain in the ass. In Vancouver you're likely taking the Skytrain and the 99 (which is a godawful bus). In Toronto you'll be taking a bus to the subway and then a straight shoot to Osgoode since York is getting two subway stations opening this December. I think Osgoode wins here. Vancouver is more driveable than Toronto, in my opinion. But I never lived outside Vancouver proper. If you're living on the other side of a bridge you may find Toronto better. (e) Toronto wins for the "big city" experience, hands down. There's more food, more concerts, more pubs, more malls, more everything. Vancouver wins if you like skiing/snowboarding in the winter and hiking in the spring/summer. One of my frustrations with Vancouver was that you have the downsides of a big city without all the upsides. That's not true of Toronto. You won't hate Vancouver if you're an indoors person, but you'd prefer TO. (f) Yes. Mainly dark and cloudy. Sorry. Additional considerations: One of my big frustrations with Vancouver is the fact that the earning capacity is lower while the cost of living is much higher. That's one of the reasons I moved out to Toronto for school.
  48. 6 points
    Does "I yelled and raged and swore at my difficult client at the jailhouse for about 15 minutes straight when I had PMS and then burst into tears in front of him" count? (That was 2 years ago. He's still my client.)
  49. 6 points
    There were 85 space missions in 2016. There have been 24 cases tried throughout the entire history of the International Criminal Court.
  50. 6 points
    An ongoing thread of mistakes seems like a valuable contribution to the mental health of the community.
This leaderboard is set to Toronto/GMT-05:00
×