Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


theycancallyouhoju last won the day on September 14 2016

theycancallyouhoju had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

341 Good People

About theycancallyouhoju

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

471 profile views
  1. Beginner's Advice

    The best practice is doing old exams. Some people find it beneficial to use the books that try to teach you methods to solve problems, but I don't think working through more than 2 of them will be helpful for the great majority of people. On the outside, I would plan for 2 months of prep, and I think 8 hours a day is probably going to risk harm. You'll do your best on the LSAT when you think clearly, calmly and patiently. I tutored it and most people who I saw doing worse than their potential were very anxious and rushed. They wouldn't clearly finish a whole thought because they were trying to anticipate how long the next thought would take. I think if you try to do 8 hours a day of what is, in the end, very repetitive thinking, you will be mentally heavily fatigued and your mind will start to rush through questions. It's probably more accurate to think of LSAT prep as prepping for a race - you should actually be winding it down by the time you get to test day, and you shouldn't be running a marathon every day to train. I think 2 months prep, 5 days a week, 4 hours a day at the absolute most. My approach was to start by giving myself 2x the allotted time to finish sections/tests, then 1.75x, then 1.5x etc. At the end I was doing the full test in about 90% allotted time and was very calm throughout.
  2. Given Credit for Work

    They are your client. Your job is to make your client look good. That's it. If there are seniors you like working with more than others, just hustle your way into doing more of their work. One lesson I learned quickly is that either you will keep yourself busy, or others will do it for you. In the former case, you have some control over the type of work you do, and in the latter you have none.
  3. The rule of thumb is that the amount of skilled you need to be is equal to the square of the amount of weird you intend to be. In other words, if you're going to write in the third person, you have to be more than a couple standard deviations away from the average writer. You would know if you were that good. Then again, my personal statement was objectively horrible and it didn't stop me.
  4. Style of Firm Dinners

    I'm aware of past studies. I'm curious about your experience, because mine did not match up with what I was instructed to expect on the basis of those studies.
  5. Style of Firm Dinners

    There's a lot of anxiety that can result from that feeling and the echo chamber of law school (at least, UT) can exacerbate it. When I was prepping for the recruit drive, people talked about how to hold wine glasses as if what was really at play was a social/economic class test that I wasn't confidently in a position to pass. On the other side of the river, I'm happy to report that I still don't know which spoon is for soup, can't tell one wine from another, have never played tennis or squash and yet all is well. No one cares. Or, some people care, but not enough and they're not necessary. If anyone reading this is thinking through recruitment and worrying about whether they can fool the crowd into believing they take Friday lunch at Canoe - don't. Just don't worry about it. Figure out how to be a mildly entertaining conversation partner and be respectful of people around you and the rest is essentially inconsequential, at least in my experience. On the other hand... Do you think that's a real factor? I've heard a great deal about the advantages of having a lawyer in the family and having experience wearing a suit at a dinner table, but I never felt an impact during recruitment events.
  6. Job Mobility in Big Law

    It is entirely possible if you begin with an NY shop. People go to foreign offices, people move to Singapore to work with a Magic Circle firm, people move to Dubai to do whatever the hell is going on in Dubai, etc.
  7. Why the Bay St Hype?

    I never personally understood when classmates said they felt pressured to go to bay or do OCIs, but with the benefit of hindsight I think 'path of least resistence' is the right caricaturization. It's an easy way to obtain social standing: get the offer, everyone knows you got the offer, everyone knows you're employable, which makes you feel more comfortable that you're employable and smart and handsome and charming. And it pays. This the reverse of NY. In an NY firm, the hours get worse and the expectations go up as you get more senior. I rarely go home at 7 and as I get more senior, rarely will turn into never.
  8. Is a JD a 'graduate degree' or a 'professional degree'?

    I remember sometime mid-first year I found out the only way to fail law school was to literally not show up to any exams and I had a sudden, tv sitcom-esque flashback to the day my mom explained that my friend Avi wasn't moving onto grade 3 because he hadn't passed the requirements for grade 2. I couldn't - and still can't - tell if I was happy or devastated to realize I'd found a place where moving up was easier than grade school.
  9. What area of law should I pursue

    Oh boy. The first thing I want to mention is that which classes you take in law school will be extremely unlikely to determine if you end up doing transactional work you find boring or transactional work you find interesting. I would not consider that. The second is that if you're interested in international arbitration, you will most likely spend your early career doing document review and other yeoman work. The third is that LLMs are not important unless you want to be a prof or you get your first law degree in a less prestigious jurisdiction. And fourth is that treaty negotiation happens through foreign policy officials and policy wonks, and lawyers with 20+ years of applicable trade law experience, often both solicitors and litigators. Some lawyers like the things you're putting down. M&A work moves from being diligence/fact-based grunt work to drafting work to reviewing/project management/client managing work to structuring/business development work as you move up the food chain in a law firm. It can also lead to a significant number of exits onto different career paths, including different areas of law within a firm, government work, regulatory work and international policy work. Litigators actually have - I understand - far fewer exits.
  10. Tips for getting through

    I never thought of applying to law school, or finishing it, or being a lawyer, as something that required an intellect or ambition significantly greater than the population. The people I've admired most in life either pursued much more difficult fields of education, or took up much more risky and less well-trodden paths. One acquaintance founded an air purifier company in his mid-20s, around the time I was writing down what a prof was saying so I could rewrite that same thing on a piece of paper again in a few months. Another works on black holes. We're all simpletons compared to someone. It sounds like dealing with schools is literally the thing you have done most in your years on earth by a very long shot. Going to more school is the path of least resistance, not the toughest road.
  11. Conflicted - Law school this year or waiting?

    Every time I've seen someone who wants to go Bay struggle between Western and UT/Osgoode, the board has generally recommended the latter. OP asks an either/or question, same deal. This is about where those conversations generally end, though. Someone from the non-Toronto school says "we still send tons of people who want bay to bay", then we end up disputing what "tons" means, then we settle on "who knows how many wanted it". All I am comfortable saying at this point is the following - to believe that schools that send 2-3 students a year to bay are equivalent launching pads for bay, you have to believe that only 5-6 students at those schools would like to work on bay. Whether you believe that or not is your call.
  12. 0Ls: do this.

    The quote system is all wonky for this, so excuse the structural incoherence below... I've not been swayed on 0L. It still sounds grating to me. The funny part of your hypothetical story is that someone had the funny idea that no one should defend a potentially guilty person - the idea is funny, not the person's status or rank. If anything the fact that the speaker was not a professional makes it less funny: if a grown-ass lawyer said that, then it would be hilarious. Like if a four year old said that it wouldn't be funny at all, because what the hell could a four year old know? If a teenager said "you help evil corporations do evil tax evasion" I wouldn't find it story-worthy, I'd just find it teenager-ish. -- Both pulling the firm's name and the year rank were obnoxious to me. First, because it's gross to assume that anyone who isn't a lawyer or banker knows your silly law firm. Second, because it's gross to assume someone who is or isn't a lawyer will be impressed by what year you are, and even if they were, that fourth qualified for that. I will grant that I might have a bit of the Marxian underpinning - any club that would have me ain't that great a club - but my conceit is to think that's at least less vocally annoying than its opposite. And yeah, I'm sure he didn't mind I stopped paying attention. I'm sure she didn't either.
  13. 0Ls: do this.

    I've never heard anything like that - isn't there something kind of weird in the quasi-gloat of "I know quite a bit more about my career than someone much younger with no experience"? I'd be inclined to walk away from any professional who said that in an immediate recognition that we will not get along. We had a summer one year that tried to explain to me the difference between what you do as a mid level and a senior associate and, while hilarious at the time, it's not the sort of story I'd normally share because it's...déclassé. Maybe I should adjust that if it's widespread enough, but I'd be grateful if we just kicked the 0L thing. My perhaps-just-a-bit-less obnoxious variant on that is, "this kid who just got into law school...". I use 'kid' for anyone my age/year or younger as a sort of leveling mechanism, but at some point I'll get old and out of shape enough that it no longer works. That's sort of the difference to me - "kid" is a leveler, whereas all the "-L" stuff is very explicitly a status hierarchy qualifier for no particularly good reason: a kid who got admitted has not accomplished less than a third year student, they've just paid less money to a law school. It seems like a pretty weird thing to tether status too. I once saw a lawyer introduce himself to a woman at a bar as a "fourth year associate at such-and-such" and that was the end of that conversation for me. The 0L/SNAIL language always struck me as the same thing - all it does is reinforce "oh I'm part of this fancy, knowledgeable club...hadn't you heard?"
  14. 0Ls: do this.

    That's funny. I've never heard it used by a lawyer and have only heard it used in the I'm-self-deprecating-but-also-see-how-I-get-the-lingo sort of way.
  15. 0Ls: do this.

    That's entirely possible. Our summer associates only just left.