Jump to content

habsfan93

Members
  • Content count

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

17 Neutral

About habsfan93

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

259 profile views
  1. This probably goes without saying but seems to be worth mentioning. The pay differences between the different firms at the summer student/articling student/junior associate level are negligible in the grand scheme of things. You will come out ahead in the long (and even medium) term if you pick a firm you actually like and that you will stick around/thrive in over one that pays you a couple hundred dollars more a week in your 2L summer but that has no other redeeming qualities that will keep you around and motivated. What I'm trying to say is that the pay scales for summer associates should not be a big factor in your career choice.
  2. How much does it matter where you go to school?

    If you are asking about common law schools, I think the general consensus is that quality of education is more or less equivalent across all Canadian law schools. This is probably true particularly for first year for which most of these schools have similar curriculums. Torts class is probably not that different wherever you take it. In terms of reputation, it depends on the market. Across Canada, U of T, UBC, Oz, and McGill are IMO the most "prestigious" schools. But again, Canadian schools all have good reputations in Canada. The only schools that might struggle a bit in this regard are the newly established ones, but that will continue to change as these schools churn out more successful graduates and employers become familiar with them. In terms of "breadth of opportunities", schools diverge in terms of upper year courses, clinics, particular specializations, exchanges, access to particular legal markets, etc. But all of them give you a more or less inescapable opportunity to become a lawyer.
  3. To strike a more optimistic note, it is not unusual for lawyers to work in big law for a few years and then move into areas such as management consulting, policy work, and business to name a few. In my view there's nothing wrong with going to law school with an open mind to alternate career paths. What I think others are effectively saying is that law is not the straightest or surest route to any of these alternate careers. So if you already know before law school that you really want to be in consulting, for example, better to just do an MBA or something that will provide you better access to that type of job rather than taking a detour through law.
  4. Going abroad first

    I taught English abroad for a period between undergrad and law school and I have absolutely never regretted not going to law school sooner. If you feel like that's something you want to do, I'd highly recommend doing it before you get locked into the legal career track. Generally speaking (and knowing nothing about your particular personal variables), there's no harm to starting law school later. If you use your time abroad wisely (i.e. learning the local language/culture, meeting people, travel, personal development, etc), you can add an interesting dimension to yourself that may potentially benefit your law school applications/eventual career.
  5. U of C v. U of A

    I don't mean to knock Edmonton (which by all accounts is a decent city) but it's not exactly the first place that springs to mind when considering "new" and "exciting" places to experience, especially coming from Calgary. I would go to U of C, and fulfill the wanderlust with a student exchange/summer travel.
  6. Articling Jobs 2018

    No need to stress out about the paperwork. I articled with a government employer and didn't receive any sort of documentation until 2-3 months after the telephone call. If they offered you the job and you accepted, that's all the peace of mind you need.
  7. Job Mobility in Big Law

    Interesting, thanks.
  8. Job Mobility in Big Law

    What makes competition law more portable than other areas?
  9. All post-secondary transcripts required for summer jobs?

    They matter more for 1L positions since when applying to those jobs you will not have many law school grades to show firms. Once you have your full 1L transcript under your belt, employers will generally care much less about undergrad grades. Even some articling and associate level hirers will continue to request them though, although I can't imagine them looking at them too closely so don't worry about that C in Astronomy 101: Life on Other Planets holding you back too much.
  10. "Senior Call Pays" Rule

    Still relevant, but expect cheaper restaurants.
  11. Value of Clerking at a Lower Court?

    Any clerkship is a valuable experience in itself and well worth pursuing, in my opinion. That said, if you are set on working in litigation on Bay Street then some lower court clerkships will further that particular career more than others. I would definitely target the commercial list division of the SCJ. You could also discuss with your firm what clerkships they would think would be worthwhile for you, but don't let them talk you out of a clerkship if that's what you want to do. A clerkship at any court is beneficial if just for the exposure to the judicial process/advocacy.
  12. D+ in contracts blows, but the rest of your grades are good and the strong upward trend should demonstrate to employers that the lousy grade in 1L is not indicative of your ability. In any event why not apply? You have nothing to lose. I know a few people who struck out in the formal articling recruit in 2L summer who applied again after graduation and got interviews. I can't really speak to whether firms view that kind of re-applying unfavourably, my guess is that it varies between firms/markets. It might raise some eyebrows but potential employers understand that the market is tough and that there are a lot more good applicants than there are positions. I do know of one person off-hand who didn't secure articles, worked in a non-law position at a bank, and then got an article through the recruit at a large full-service firm.
  13. Second Clerkship - thoughts?

    Apply. A trial level clerkship could be valuable to an academic career, especially if you pick a court that is specialized or hears a lot of cases in your chosen area, e.g. FC for IP, the tax court for tax. As for the SCC, you sound like you have an outside shot at it. You don't have to be a gold medallist to fit their profile, especially since they just increased the number of positions available and changed the eligibility criteria. So I would say go for it. You mentioned working on your French. I wouldn't really bother (unless you are being modest about your current abilities). French is pretty useless at the SCC unless you have working proficiency in it, in which case it is a major asset. If you claim some French in the application but then can't respond to questions in the interview you end up looking like an asshole. Learning a language is hard and time consuming, and you may not have as much time to devote to it as you think you will given that you are about to start articles. I still encourage you to study the language, but I just wouldn't assume that you will be proficient in time for the interview or the clerkship.
  14. Clerkships 2017

    It's a pretty perplexing move. They are increasing the total number of positions while significantly cutting their pool of eligible applicants. Also kinda screws academic minded applicants who might not want to work in a firm or clerk at a lower court.
×