Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing most liked content on 12/06/17 in all areas

  1. 9 points
    Just got the call!! 3.82 OLSAS / 175 LSAT / weak ECs (TAing)/ strong PS Ahhh Last name B
  2. 9 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.
  3. 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?
  4. 4 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.
  5. 3 points
    This is correct. This is how UBC characterizes their sessions. 2018 Winter is Sept 2018-April 2019.
  6. 2 points
    LOL, don't go into corporate law or tax if you hate dealing with criminals!
  7. 2 points
    Just got the call as well!!! 3.6 CGPA, 167 LSAT. Strong softs, lots of involvement with the community. Good PS.
  8. 2 points
    Got the call a few minutes ago! So excited! 165, cgpa 3.87 Strong ECs Last name B
  9. 2 points
    Congrats Utor21! I also just got the call. 167, cgpa 3.78, only ec's being a practicum at a criminal firm. What I felt to be an average/mediocre personal statement? Last name A.
  10. 2 points
    Yeah now is definitely not the time for panic. If you check past years, people with incredible stats didn't get in until February/March, even if they weren't waiting for an LSAT score. I'm just hoping to hear back from at least one school by Christmas so I can confidently tell my family I'm going to law school next year.
  11. 2 points
    Congrats guys! For anybody more in the know, are admissions usually in batches or do they roll out during the day?
  12. 2 points
    No, Lawschoolhopeful2017 called the whole thread useless because 1 GPA wasn't posted. If you are curious about something, ask.
  13. 2 points
    Because lawschoolhopeful2017 didn't actually ask for it. It costs nothing to be respectful!
  14. 2 points
    I think you need to expand your social circle a bit; you might find a greater diversity of opinions on how impressive it is. In all seriousness, some ppl who aren't in the legal industry are impressed by law school, doubly so if you're going to a law school they have heard of before (which is maybe a handful across Canada, and mainly for historic reasons). The rest of the world isn't so impressed...
  15. 2 points
    I understand, but no one actually asked them for their GPA. I'll do it....
  16. 2 points
    If you'll notice, I said for the most part and 100% of people care? Who are all these people you're telling you go to Osgoode? And why are you telling them? I suppose it may depend who it is you're telling and why it impresses them but, trust me, the only ones who discuss 'prestige' persistently, are law students, not lawyers. And I say this as someone who also only applied to U of T and Osgoode, and got into both, with a large entrance scholarship to Osgoode, but who chose U of T. My reasoning was primarily because I didn't want to move, or commute. It had nothing to do with prestige and I'm in my sixth year of practice and can't say that I've had any conversations with anyone about my prestigious JD.
  17. 2 points
    Well, if we've learned nothing from the Weinstein affair, you probably shouldn't be "handling" them. I'm a big fan of a modified throw them to the Wolves routine. They're learning to be lawyers, and the only way to do that is to do the work that lawyers do. But, they are learning, so you need to account for that. My approach, for what it's worth, was this. First, give them detailed and thorough instructions. Explain the context, what you expect from them, and where it fits in to the entire piece of what you're doing. If you ask them to do something without context, it's not likely to be what you want. Give them precedents, where relevant, and suggest starting points for research (leading cases, texts, articles, databases to use) - assume they haven't a clue what they're doing, they probably don't. Encourage them to ask questions, and to come back for more questions and clarification if they need. Tell them that there's no such thing as a stupid question. Maybe have them check in at different phases of their work (dig around for a bit, then let's talk about what you found, then you can dig around a bit more as needed before starting the memo). Second, set a deadline that is well ahead of when you actually need their work product. That seems unfair and students always complain about that, but the thinking is two-fold. First, they're still learning, which means no matter how good they are (or think they are) whatever they give you will likely need some work before you can turn it into final work product for the client/partner. It is a rare day indeed when a student produces a memo or document that you can just flip along to a client. Second, they're still learning to manage their practice, so odds are they may fuck up the timeline you give them - don't box yourself into a corner, give yourself some buffer space (and if you don't have any buffer tell the student that it is a hard deadline). And do yourself a favour, if you need something Wednesday morning, don't tell the student "get me something on Wednesday" tell them end of day Tuesday. Third, give feedback. They're not going to learn from their mistakes unless you tell them about it. You may not be their principal, but you still have an obligation to help them develop. If they give you written work product, go through any changes you made to it with them. If they were substantive changes, talk to them about why you think the analysis was different - maybe they have a response that you haven't thought about. Similarly, explain stylistic comments. The best mentors are the ones who take your marked up email, memo or agreement and walk you through their changes. That's how you learn from your more experienced peers.
  18. 2 points
    I'd say he's pretty clearly joking here, I wouldn't even go so far as to call it speculating.
  19. 2 points
    A very reliable imaginary source has informed me that the OLSAS carrier pigeons with GPA/ LSAT scores arrived first at the House of WIndsor, then to the Halls of Osgoode, then to Chateau Western, Queens, and Ottawa. The UofT pigeon could not survive the Mississauga smog so a drone will be sent in its place. In following, the admissions committee received said bundles and have begun identifying their early applicant decisions. The schools this year have decided to employ a variety of techniques in choosing their future law cohort: Windsor- A more comical version of 52 pick-up Osgoode- dart board Western- Pawned off to 2nd year Ivey students. They had to submit commentary on each student's app by Dec 2. Queen's- all apps to be raffled off to a poor soul at the ad-com secret santa party Ottawa- traditional reviews Toronto- outsourced to Taiwan Consequently, as a result of these innovative adcom decisions, the first three remaining schools to release decisions (en-masse) will be: Western (Dec 6 midday), then Osgoode (Dec 7), then Ottawa (Dec 8)
  20. 2 points
    I've worked through every Christmas break for the last five years. This year I might be checking out after the 17th. Mrs. Uriel doesn't believe me. I don't believe me. And yet, there's the calendar.
  21. 2 points
    I only examined an expert witness once in my legal career and I felt like Perry Fucking Mason. Afterwards I realized that I had been wildly mispronouncing the name of the disease in question. No one in all the prep of the expert and discussion with my articling principle had been able to tell me. I assume that they were just too embarrassed for me.
  22. 1 point
    The thing about French is that people have constitutional rights to receive French language service in court. So there is always a certain level of demand for French-speaking lawyers. But as noted, this needs to be beyond conversational French. So for litigators French can be a definite asset in a way other languages like Mandarin, Arabic, German or whatever will never have. That being said the large majority of anglo lawyers (outside of maybe Ottawa and NB) are unilingual, so you can tell it isn't a necessity. But it can be an asset for sure. For provincial government employees French can be a bigger asset since there is a need to be able to provide French-language services. An applicant with my Crown's office would have a significant advantage if they could conduct trials in French (warning though - the trials people demand to run in French are in my experience not very interesting). And at certain levels with the Federal government French is required. So again, a big advantage. And of course if your ambition runs to being appointed to the SCC...
  23. 1 point
    I got in with a 3.5, 3.5 and 159!
  24. 1 point
    Did you apply to Windsor? It shows up on your myuwindsor
  25. 1 point
    It looked nice, but from what I known, unlike in US (or at least in NY), LLM degree holders are not qualified to call to the bar in Australia. Unless you want that degree just for experience or for academic purpose, I don't see how many people really want to do that despite it sounds great.
  26. 1 point
    I think it generally lasts a few days, just judging by past accepted threads + past posts on their blog.
  27. 1 point
    Accepted at around noon this afternoon! LSAT: 169, GPA 3.87, strong ECs. Applied last minute, thought my personal statement would be the issue. Last initial: B!
  28. 1 point
  29. 1 point
    It's true that telling people you go to Osgoode usually elicits the most impressed murmurs, at least here in Toronto, but that's because: (1) most everyone who lives in the city knows the building and assumes I go to school there; and (2) the vast majority of people think it's U of T's law school. I should emphasize that it's not because the general population is so impressed with U of T as a law school, it's just that it's a more recognizable name and people immediately make the connection because of where Osgoode Hall is located. But I promise you that's as far as the thinking goes for the vast majority of laypeople. In other words, you should give absolutely no credence to someone being impressed with you going to Osgoode (or U of T for that matter), because it's meaningless. I mean, everyone's different I guess, but I try to avoid telling people that I'm in law school or what school I go to. First off, the people who you'd want to have care about that sort of thing don't, and everyone else's opinion doesn't matter. Second, I think it's a really superficial thing to care about, and I find that the people who make the most impressed noises upon hearing that I'm training to be a lawyer are also the kinds of people who I really don't want to be friends with.
  30. 1 point
    Looks like today is a busy day for admissions! Congrats guys
  31. 1 point
    Just got the call. ECSTATIC. GPA is hard to explain. 3 years community college + 1 Year Bachelor 3.4/4.0. Masters 4.19/4.3 LSAT 150. Rewrote it in December. 4 years full time professional experience + coop. Access claim. Strong northern Ontario connection.
  32. 1 point
    Where does one check their status? Did the change happen where it used to say "applied" or is there somewhere else people are looking?
  33. 1 point
    Hey all! Just got the call LSAT 168 cGPA 3.54 L2 3.9 Above average ECs and good LRs Good luck to everybody waiting!
  34. 1 point
    I might know a handful of tax lawyers with accounting backgrounds - most don't have one and certainly it's not needed, tax law is not the same as accounting. Whatever accounting knowledge you might need, you can pick up readily enough. There's no magic - you take all the tax courses you can in law school make sure you have a sound understanding of commercial/corporate/trust law (the Tax Act isn't a complete code and draws on corporate/commercial/trust law concepts), and maybe take some tax policy courses (often offered both in law schools and economics departments) Beyond that, it wouldn't hurt to join the Canadian Tax Foundation (they have a cheap student rate) or the tax section of the provincial bar association.
  35. 1 point
    Especially if it's a corporate law matter; students seem to get in-depth introductions to civil litigation and public law at law school, but in my experience the "corporate/commercial"/transactional skills are mostly learned on the job. (We all take contracts, business associations, and income tax, but that just gives the basic starting points of that kind of practice.)
  36. 1 point
    Would you mind sharing your GPA?
  37. 1 point
    I sent them a voicemail and they still have not gotten back to me. I also messaged the Windsor Law FB Messenger and they said they don't know so they referred me to Mary Mitchell - where I left the voicemail and still waiting. I promise I will get an answer guys! Bear with me
  38. 1 point
  39. 1 point
    Accepted Yesterday! 3.83 GPA 157 LSAT (Still waiting for December 2nd score)
  40. 1 point
    In my humble opinion, 100% of people care and you're 100% wrong. Saying that I go to Osgoode impresses everyone I tell.... and I mean everyone. Had I told them I went to anything except Osgoode/U of T, I can guarantee you I wouldn't get the same response. If anything, I'd say the only people it doesn't impress is law students. Going through OCIs, virtually everyone had the same shot at many of the firms.
  41. 1 point
    I don't think learning French would be a major asset to your employability prospects in Toronto, but I do occasionally see a few positions within the government (within the Ministry of the Attorney-General) that considers French as an asset, sometimes even a necessity. If you aren't interested in the public sector, then it would be worthwhile to focus on another language as others have mentioned (i.e. Mandarin, Arabic, Punjabi, Korean, Vietnamese, Farsi, etc.).
  42. 1 point
  43. 1 point
    Hi @nocturnowl I know one of the very first candidate that was admitted last year was from PEI. I don't think McGill offers places to candidates within Quebec first. As far as I know, your location doesn't influence the order in which your application will be reviewed, only your grades do. Hope this helps! Good luck!
  44. 1 point
    *twitching nervously with eyes wide open* ...But. I....M-must....Let...E-everyone...Know...I'm...a...Law....Student...
  45. 1 point
    It's enough of an asset that many employer's will pay for you to take french lessons.
  46. 1 point
    I speak English and French and haven’t found it to be a huge factor. Employers treat it as an asset and it comes in handy with the odd client or piece of statutory interpretation, but I have never had a job where it was required or necessary. It is important if you want to be a judge.
  47. 1 point
    I got accepted into MLS couples of years ago but instead I went to Calgary for law school and I never regret that decision. I have friends (>10 ) went to MLS or Sydney or Monash so I could draw some comparisons from limited sample I known. Before I start, the Ranking is IRRELEVANT unless you are such a genius that aimed to get 1st Honor in Mel, BCL in Oxon and end up teaching in law school or work in Top Barrister Chamber in London. U of Calgary probably ranked in the bottom or at least bottom half of the Canadian Common Law School, but even in a bad year we have ~90% articling placement rates and almost 50% of class got OCI job. First of all, the job prospect for Law Graduate in Australia is BAD, period, most of the JD students has to compete with the local LLB students (most with another Bachelor Degree), and generally speaking Employer prefer LLB to JD from what I heard. Even that, there are more than half of LLB students won't end up doing law because of the tight market or poor compensation (See below). Can you imagine a top law school graduate such as Sydney Law or MLS law graduate end up doing paralegal work? (In compare, U of Toronto), I know A LOT of JD graduates end up in Australia being paralegals. Yes, MLS has dual degree with Cambridge and NYU..all that sounds perfect but only the top student (1st Class honor) might get that, for majority of students, it required at least a Second IIA degree (~top 25-30%) to get some interviews. If you grade is below that, you better have some great local connections or just forget the whole idea to be a lawyer. And the PR status is a MUST in apply for summer/vacation student positions for most firms in Aus, unlike in Canada or US which basically no one cares or ask your immigration status (as myself, I did not get my Canadian PR until third year but I still got summer job interviews, job offers and my immigration status has not been asked ONCE in Canada), in Australia, most of the large firms REQUIRE you to have PR status before apply for a summer/internship. There comes the dilemma, in order to get a PR, you need apply for 189 Visa or 190 Visa which need you to have a degree and complete your PLT training and usually a job offer, but how can you get a job offer without a PR status? Difficult task..of course you can still get your PR without a job offer, but your job prospect after that is still poor, it's like the NCA student, even you pass all the hurdles that in front of you, you still missed all the GOOD firm jobs since firms already secured their students 1 or 2 years ago. Finally, the pay in Australia for Solicitor is pretty bad compared to Canada (similar in Dollars but considering the living cost in Aus), not to mentioned HK or US, that's why I know HUGE amounts of Aus Graduates (especially Asians who have knowledge of Mandarin or Cantonese) ended up work in law firms in Hong Kong, the Aus Degree is relatively more valuable there. (Still.. you have to complete the additional requirement courses, apply for TC contract and Stupid PCLL course, which is a whole different story). My conclusion: if you really want go to MLS and still want a good lawyer job, study hard, get a great transcript, marry a local or do whatever to get your PR; or learn to speak Mandarin/Cantonese and head to Hong Kong.
  48. 1 point
    One must bear in mind the widespread belief that Osgoode is the law school at the University of Toronto.
  49. 1 point
    No we aren't. It is a logical fallacy to equate "unknown" with "worst". There is no data to work with for this new school. And I am the last person who would assume a big prestigious firm is the optimal goal for an applicant. It's important to acknowledge that unconnected NCA students have difficulty finding work anywhere. My provincial classifieds are full of students from foreign law schools begging to work for free just to get licensed. Anywhere. For anyone. A Lakehead degree teaches you Canadian law. You are situated in Canada for those three years where you can network appropriately. And you have the stats to get in which indicates a certain standard of work ethic and aptitude for legal reasoning. None of that is necessarily present for a foreign degree. The two things are not anywhere near the same level.
  50. 1 point
    I have a slight principled and limited disagreement. I once read that the reason for legal documents sometimes having multiple words that seem to mean the same thing (e.g. 3 words instead of 1 in a different sense) is that going back to translations from Norman French, one word might not fully capture what it meant and so one used 3 to make sure nothing was inadvertently missed. And even today (I know I've read examples in the past, but not searching them out now) there are cases where failure to omit a "traditional" word from the phrasing gets seen by courts as a deliberate choice to limit the scope of something. Similarly, so long as courts put such importance on a missing comma (later reversed but on appeal and it took years) and when even the SCC says a basket clause confers jurisdiction on a court to grant relief as having been prayed for, there's a limit as to how far plain-English drafting can go. All that said, I agree with plainer-English drafting, especially for documents intended for the general public (e.g. form contracts) where (arguably, don't rely on this) a slightly legally less-comprehensive wording, at the gain of much-improved clarity to the reader, may improve the likelihood of enforcement because a court is less likely to find any scope for misunderstanding of what the contract meant. Similarly in written arguments, brief briefs be better.There are huge amounts of unnecessary verbiage (in legal documents for which I am paid, unlike posts, I spend the time to be brief... ), I think I've mentioned before a talk by Eugene Meehan Q.C. with real examples (with client permission) of what he was sent and helped improve and make much clearer, briefer, and more persuasive for appellate arguments or leave to appeal. Anecdotally, and partly pretentiously, I can think of some few historical examples of legal documents that were much better drafted by being brief. One of the Dead Sea Scrolls from the exhibit a few years ago was a contract, a lease, and discussing the (translation!) of its terms with another lawyer, we agreed it was a pretty good contract for being so brief. Less ancient, the republications of some Nero Wolfe books a few years ago included some items of interest in appendices. One book included a copy of a typed (i.e. on a typewriter) clearance letter from the lawyer for the publisher which was clear, concise, and I think even had a bit of a dry sense of humour (one character had described a woman's maid as looking like a professional wrestler, the lawyer's letter included as one of the numbered points, clearing that there was no female NY radio personality with a maid who looked like a professional wrestler... ).
This leaderboard is set to Toronto/GMT-04:00