Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 02/05/21 in all areas

  1. 74 points
    You know, there are lawyers who volunteer their time and who work unpaid on many causes that they care passionately about. And whether I agree with their causes and goals, I respect those lawyers. There are also lawyers who treat legal advocacy as a job, and only work when someone is paying for their work as a lawyer. Provided they are decent human beings otherwise, I also respect that choice. I have no fucking time in the world, or respect for, lawyers who suddenly decided that now is the time for a massive drive towards pro bono advocacy for the poor and downtrodden, oppressed by working from home and being told to wear masks in Costco. You're entitled to whatever opinions you have, stupid or otherwise. But there are Indigenous communities in Ontario that haven't had clean drinking water in a generation. And THIS is what you expect the legal community to rally around and provide pro bono advocacy towards? Because some douchebag with a BBQ stand thinks Covid is all a plot hatched by pedophile satanists and he's going to fight the power by letting people eat indoors instead of serving them sandwiches to go? Yeah. No.
  2. 65 points
    LOL. Can't you try facebook? It specializes in conspiracy theories and misiniformation.
  3. 40 points
    Accepted today!!! Been waiting for this moment for years. Almost gave up. Almost dropped out of undergrad, but I hung in there and here we are!!! OLSAS cgpa: 3.7 LSAT: 154, 158 (nov) Applied access due to substantial health problems during undergrad. ECs: Nothing crazy but I explained that this was due largely to my health struggles. Also fully bilingual so maybe that helped. Redemption has been earned. Will be accepting.
  4. 37 points
  5. 37 points
    It struck me that there are a lot of things we in the profession just sort of Know, and think we have Known Forever, that probably confuse the hell out of people wanting in on the profession / education. So I thought I'd invite everyone to share what they have learned that they really wish they'd known earlier. Me first. 1. Up until about erm, five to eight years ago, the standard Canadian law degree was styled an LL.B.. So if you see senior counsel with "LL.B." in their signature, rest assured that is very likely a Canadian degree. Schools changed it to a J.D. a while back because something something American legal culture and prestige. If I wanted to pay Queen's a hundred bucks I too could have my law degree converted into a shiny Queen's J.D. - but I think I'll keep my LL.B.. 2. In Ontario, people seem to term any four year degree as an Honours degree. In other provinces (loosely speaking), an Honours degree means you went with a vaguely specialized course selection and possibly more of a rigorous path to get the designation. This confuses applicants during every cycle. 3. It's "per se", not per say. Also please learn the difference between advice and advise. And don't "talk up" - words are not good at approximating meaning, and if you're trying to sound smart you're very very likely to be having the opposite effect (not affect). 4. Suits lied to you and "the LSATs" has become my personal albatross. It's just "the LSAT" ie "the Law School Admissions Test". Singular. Not plural. 5. You're going to hear various phrases especially around hiring. A PFO is a rejection letter, short for "please fuck off". An ITO is an Intention To Call, so goody for you. And OCI is "on-campus interview" which takes place way too fucking early in your education for the hiring to mean anything but it's kind of like a general hazing ceremony they're gonna put you through and you're gonna come out battered and bruised and worried. Next?
  6. 33 points
    Hi everyone! Just accepted this morning. cGPA: 3.51 LSAT: 156 EC: Worked full-time throughout university on Parliament Hill, tons of volunteering, etc. Honestly, I wasn't expecting to get in this soon, or even at all, with my stats. I almost couldn't believe it when I got the email this morning. Best of luck to everyone who has applied
  7. 31 points
    My experience as a summer student at a big full-service law firm: Luck: 10% Skill: 20% Concentrated power of will: 15% Pleasure: 5% Pain: 50% Partner won't remember your name: 100%
  8. 29 points
    ...you just asked us to exclude two of the most important factors. There's a personality type attracted to law that isn't great with things like self care, slowing down, or admitting limitations. And law doesn't do a great job of checking in on those things. Law school is not great at showing students that there are a million options for a future career that aren't tied up in OCIs. So very early on, students get this narrow focus that OCI = desirable prestigious job = success. They get funneled into a certain type of law without really having the ability to analyze whether that area interests them. Law school carries tremendous debt. More so than most other professions. By the time you graduate you NEED to work crazy hours, you NEED a high-paying job. Things like ideals and happiness come a very distant second to your debt load. Around this time a lot of people start buying preperty and having kids, piling on the debt, so eventually, unless you carve out time for your mental health, you burn out. Being a woman makes this all harder. Less pay, higher hurdles, and if you go on mat leave there's real fallout. Women leave law in droves.
  9. 29 points
    So we've got two youtube videos and four academics with dubious expertise in this area: Dr. Cahill, who does not appear to have ever published on epidemiology and has not published an article in a peer reviewed journal in the last five years according to her faculty profile, let alone publishing on COVID specifically; Dr. Ioannidis, who admittedly has relevant expertise but whose most well known research paper on COVID has been widely panned by the academic community. Notably, this study is still a non-peer reviewed preprint despite having been released almost a year ago. His more recent, peer reviewed work actually concludes stay at home orders are effective but perhaps do not need to be as strict as in some Western countries, a decidedly less controversial take(I browsed this too quickly, he suggests they may have a negative effect although states the data is inconclusive); The aptly named "Knut Wittkowski", who the Rockefeller University felt it needed to press release that "Wittkowski was previously employed by Rockefeller as a biostatistician. He has never held the title of professor at Rockefeller." A quick perusal of his researchgate confirms that his only publication on COVID is not peer reviewed (I'm sensing a pattern here); and Ex-Professor D.G. Rancourt, a physicist whose employ with the University of Ottawa was terminated in 2014 who is also a climate change skeptic. Notably, his researchgate does not describe any peer reviewed research related to epidemiology (despite listing it as an area of expertise he again only has a non-peer reviewed self published article). It does reveal that he has published a book with some dicey views on race: "In another theme, Rancourt is highly critical of critical race theory. He argues that suppressing the expression of racist opinions prevents real, enlightening debate and thereby undermines the individual’s political development and the struggle against racism. " I'm detecting a pattern in this list of individuals lacking: relevant expertise, peer reviewed publications on the subject, or both. Look, you're going to have to do better. If you want to cherry pick some people that frankly seem like they might be conspiracy prone in spite of their education, that's fine it's just not compelling. The scientific method, as anyone with a passing familiarity with it knows, operates on the basis of consensus generated over time. Peer review is an important part of this process and none of your picks appear to have super meaningful peer reviewed contributions to the corpus of science on this point. There are the occasional discoveries that flip longstanding paradigms, but it's pretty rare there is a single publication that undoes it all. You said you were going to point to some studies with serious errors, identify four or five in top tier journals that you're saying have those errors and undermine the case for lock downs. I suspect that won't happen because you seem to be taking the extremely unscientific approach of selecting the outcome you want and reasoning backwards which is why you've assembled a collection of youtube videos and academics that are seriously far removed from the mainstream.
  10. 27 points
    Pour avoir fait la course l’année dernière et avoir consulté le forum à maintes reprises, je vous encourage, à tous ceux et celles qui y participent cette année, de faire preuve de sensibilité et de modestie lors de vos publications (pensez-y avant de le publier) ! Je vous invite, par ailleurs, à indiquer, le plus possible, votre université et votre GPA lorsque vous recevez un appel. La simple mention que vous avez eu un appel sans aucune autre information n’est pas très utile ou le fait de réitérer que vous a eu un appel il y a quelques jours déjà. De plus, c’est loin d’être tout le monde qui a un 4.0 de GPA (contrairement à ce qu’on pourrait croire en lisant le forum) et, rappelons-le, tu n’as pas besoin de ces notes pour avoir un stage. Tes expériences de vie, ton dynamisme et ton empathie sont tous aussi important. Donc, toi qui lis ce message et qui s’inquiètes peut-être peu trop, sache que les appels ne sont pas finis, que tu as encore toute ta carrière devant toi dans tous les cas et que la course ne te définit pas (on ne le dira pas assez) ! En somme, n'oubliez pas de prendre soin de vous ! Bon courage dans vos examens intra et, surtout, soyez fier de vous ❤️
  11. 26 points
    I was born with glass bones and paper skin. Every morning, I break my legs and every afternoon, I break my arms. At night I lay in agony until my heart attacks put me to sleep.
  12. 26 points
    There is no question that very reputable lawyers are working on these issues. And I do not for a second suggest that this reflects to their discredit in any way. But I'm also quite sure they are getting paid. If douchebag with his BBQ stand wants to tell the health authorities to go fuck themselves, get himself ticketed and/or charged, and then he wants to hire representation to fight it he absolutely is entitled to do so. Hell, I'll work for him myself. But I'm sure as fuck not giving him a discount. The scorn here is related to the idea that these causes should attract the pro bono support of the legal community as a whole. And I believe that scorn is absolutely deserved. For me, this isn't even a Covid-related issue. Covid is just the latest and greatest iteration of this. I represent clients from across the spectrum. Some have nice homes, good jobs, and resources. Some are homeless and mentally ill. And it always pisses me off - it always pisses me off - when some otherwise privileged mother fucker has gotten himself charged with dangerous driving or something and he's so incensed at the injustice of it all that he feels automatically entitled to legal representation either for cheap or for free because his cause is so obviously righteous. And I'm thinking about that homeless mentally ill client the entire time and the more that asshole keeps talking about how I should care so much about the terrible injustice done to him the more I'm adding to the quote I'm going to give. Litigants fighting Covid restrictions and the consequences of breaking them deserve the best lawyers they are willing to hire and pay for. And there are issues here worth litigating. But they sure as fuck don't deserve my charity, and I'll mock anyone - law student, lawyer, or otherwise - who thinks they do.
  13. 25 points
    I ended my PS for UOttawa with "and for these reasons, I was drawn to the JD programme at Osgoode Hall Law School" and still got in.
  14. 24 points
    Course aux stages- Checklist Unfollow les cabinets qui m’ont refusé- ✅ Follow mes derniers choix mais qui m’ont appelé ✅ Faire une ptite prière pour BCF- ✅
  15. 24 points
    On veut pas de vous et on va vous le dire en deux langues 🤣🤣🤣😭🤧
  16. 24 points
    I started law school when I was 39, with three young kids. I was ever-so-slightly better than average in terms of grades, but really not remarkable. I went to Western. I mooted a lot and worked in the clinic. I easily got an articling job, easily got a job-job, and now am happily working away in-house (three years post-call). I say this only to offset the doom vibes in this thread. I'm just an anecdote, but a heartening one.
  17. 24 points
    One of the small pleasures in my life is working on Bay Street alongside UofT grads knowing that we get paid the exact same salary and my tuition was half of theirs.
  18. 22 points
    But how will we determine our sense of self worth if we can't look down on those who went to a worse school than we did?
  19. 21 points
    Mais non. Personne n'a fini d'appeler, ils commencent à peine. Donnez-vous le temps. Quand j'ai reçu l'appel, la dame au téléphone m'a dit qu'il restait encore de la place à tous les jours et j'avais beaucoup de choix. Ils y vont par batch et ils ont beaucoup de gens à appeler. Y'a rien de joué encore. Stikeman et Fasken n'ont même pas commencé à faire leurs appels encore. Je sais que c'est stressant, mais ça va aller. ❤️ Et si jamais ça n'allait pas, dites-vous que ce ne sont vraiment pas tous les avocats du cabinet qui y ont débuté leur carrière... Vous pourrez toujours commencer votre carrière dans un autre cabinet et y être engagé plus tard. Y'a rien de final, c'est juste une course, c'est juste un stage. Faites-vous confiance.
  20. 21 points
    (For #5 I think you meant ITC, not ITO, @Hegdis 😄) For 0Ls/1Ls/2Ls: If you find your casebook tough to chew through and process, try a treatise! Reach out to your law librarian and ask them how to get your hands on a copy of a treatise for the 1L class that's making you tear your hair out. Chances are the treatise will break down and explain the legal doctrines in a much clearer and more concise way. I've never written an assignment about contracts without leafing through Waddams' treatises and citing from them liberally. There is absolutely no correlation between using Latin words and sounding smart (TM). If you've never heard of the word before, look up "aegrotat" in your law school's Academic Handbook (or whatever your law school calls the rule book that governs how the academic program is run). If you ever find yourself in the unlucky situation of something unexpected happening during an exam, like sudden/severe flare-up of a long-term medical condition, a panic attack, etc etc that prevented you from performing at your usual level of competency on an exam, "aegrotat" may be the emergency escape hatch for you. Learn how to use Styles in Word. Learn how to generate a table of contents. It's okay to go to office hours without fully formed questions and/or with only half-formed thoughts. Profs really just want to talk sometimes. Get them talking about something they are passionate about. Invest in building relationships with profs you like, the sooner you start the better. It will probably come in handy when you need one or two or three references when you apply to certain jobs and/or clerkships.
  21. 20 points
    So basically what I have achieved with this thread is rounding up all the various opinions I've heard on this topic that confused me to begin with, and gathered them into one place to read one after another. Perfect.
  22. 20 points
  23. 20 points
    So here is what you promised on page 3 of this thread: You've yet to do that. Here is what you've now presented about a day later after someone requested a follow up on the above. Of your "16 peer reviewed papers from universities around the world on why lockdowns are useless" (universities don't typically publish peer reviewed papers but leaving that aside): 1) A country level analysis measuring the impact of government actions,country preparedness and socioeconomic factors on COVID-19 mortalityand related health outcomes, from pdf p. 5/8: "The government policy of full lockdowns (vs. partial or curfews only) was strongly associated with recovery rates (RR=2.47; 95%CI: 1.085.64). Similarly, the number of days to any border closure was associated with the number of cases per million (RR=1.04; 95%CI: 1.011.08). This suggests that full lockdowns and early border closures may lessen the peak of trans-mission, and thus prevent health system overcapacity, which would facilitate increased recovery rates." So this actually is a pro-lock down publication. 2) Modeling social distancing strategies to prevent SARS-CoV2 spread in Israel- A Cost-effectiveness analysis, Please note this is a pre-print, and therefore explicitly not peer reviewed as you suggested. That being said, the conclusion is: "A national lockdown has a moderate advantage in saving lives with tremendous costs and possible overwhelming economic effects." 3) Did COVID-19 infections decline before UK lockdown?, Please note this is a pre-print, and therefore explicitly not peer reviewed as you suggested. The discussion portion suggests the analysis is incapable of making the point you try to support with it: "This paper does not prove that the peak in fatal infections in England and Wales preceded lock down by several days. Indeed the failure to undertake the sampling that could have gathered data to directly measure infections early in the epidemic means that it will never be possible to be certain about timings,given the substantial biases in clinical data other than deaths and fatal disease duration." 4) This article does not actually appear to have a title and is decidedly not peer-reviewed as you suggested. This thing, whatever it is, is in no way formatted like a scientific publication. What appears to be part of the conclusion is that: "The data indicates that the lockdown policy can be stopped within a few days and replaced by a policy of moderate social distancing." So, lockdown and then open again. Far from lock downs being "useless". 5) Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19 in Europe: A quasi-experimental study, Please note this is a pre-print, and therefore explicitly not peer reviewed as you suggested. Part of the abstract is: "From both sets of modelling, we found that closure of education facilities, prohibiting mass gatherings and closure of some non-essential businesses were associated with reduced incidence whereas stay at home orders and closure of all non-businesses was not associated with any independent additional impact. Our results could help inform strategies for coming out of lockdown." So, some lockdown like measures are effective but more on top may not be. Compelling. 6) Full lockdown policies in Western Europe countries have no evident impacts on the COVID-19 epidemic, Please note this is a pre-print, and therefore explicitly not peer reviewed as you suggested. The conclusion being "We also show that neighboring countries applying less restrictive social distancing measures (as opposed to police-enforced home containment) experience a very similar time evolution of the epidemic." Now, I'm not sure what people have in mind when they mean lock down but I'm not convinced it's police enforced containment orders. Nor is it that different from what was used in the Netherlands and Germany but I'll await some peer reviewed literature to determine that... 7) Trajectory of COVID-19 epidemic in Europe, Please note this is a pre-print, and therefore explicitly not peer reviewed as you suggested. This article effectively suggests that herd immunity, rather than lock downs, is what's responsible for a decline in infections. This is laughable in light of estimated infection rates everywhere and the requirements for herd immunity. It is also inconsistent with a number of your other sources above, include 6). It also appears to include no independent research. 😎Effect of school closures on mortality from coronavirus disease 2019: old and new predictions , peer reviewed and oddly in opposition to your view: "The UK-wide lockdown as a result of coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) was implemented as a highly effective way of reducing the spread of the epidemic" 9) Too Little of a Good Thing A Paradox of Moderate Infection Control, while peer reviewed this is a review article about listeriosis. It has literally nothing to do with what you're citing it for. It does not address lockdowns as a thing or COVID as a pathogen in any way, shape, or form. 10) Smart Thinking, Lockdown and COVID-19: Implications for Public Policy, this paper is actually relatively lockdown agnostic. It does not suggest that they do not work but that more limited measures may be effective. It generally cites to economies that have taken measures, some of which would probably fall within the purview of "lockdown", but have done so in a more targeted fashion or for a shorter period of time. 11) SARS-CoV-2 waves in Europe: A 2-stratum SEIRS model solution, Please note this is a pre-print, and therefore explicitly not peer reviewed as you suggested. This paper does not dispute that lockdowns can reduce spread. It suggests that individuals who wish to ignore them should take out insurance and that this is an equitable solution for certain age groups. 12) Did Lockdown Work? An Economist’s Cross-Country Comparison, Please note this is not a peer reviewed article as you suggested. This paper has the author explicitly apply non-epidemiological modeling to answer the question: "In this paper, I instead approach the question using a standard approach and standard econometric tools used in economics and political science instead of epidemiological modelling or single-case studies.". She also relies heavily on Sweden without satisfactorily addressing their abysmal mortality statistics. Compelling. 13) Four Stylized Facts about COVID-19, Please note this is a "working paper" and is explicitly not a peer reviewed article as you suggested. This paper essentially argues no one knows why COVID transmission declines (but it's not lockdowns). Similarly compelling. 14) Covid-19: How does Belarus have one of the lowest death rates in Europe?, This note appears to observe that despite the lack of lockdowns in Belarus, the citizens took it upon themselves to self-isolate and distribute PPE: "Citizens began practising self-isolation early on. On 26 March a crowdfunding campaign “ByCovid19” was launched in order to buy safety equipment for hospitals across the country. The movement collected around $360 000 (£277 000; €304 000) in three months and, with the help of nearly 1500 volunteers, they purchased and distributed around 450 000 pieces of personal protective equipment, oxygen tanks, and other medical equipment." Also, they have few LTCs: "Another factor is that Belarus has very few care homes (203 beds per 100 000 of the population compared with 854 in the UK), with most elderly citizens living separately.10 This has helped shield its most vulnerable. “In many cases in Belarus, you have already had some isolation of elderly people, particularly in the countryside or in single flats” says Nilsson." 15) Association between living with children and outcomes from COVID-19: an OpenSAFELY cohort study of 12 million adults in England, Please note this is a pre-print, and therefore explicitly not peer reviewed as you suggested. This is a paper about whether or not kids in the UK spread to the adults they live with, given whatever measures are in place in England. The phrase lock down does not appear in the study. The conclusion is: "Our results demonstrate no evidence of serious harms from COVID-19 to adults in close contact with children, compared to those living in households without children. This has implications for determining the benefit-harm balance of children attending school in the COVID-19 pandemic. " 16) Exploring inter-country coronavirus mortality, Please note this is a "working paper" and is explicitly not a peer reviewed article as you suggested. This does conclude as you say it does. It also suggests quality of health care has no impact on COVID outcomes which is self-evidently idiotic: "We test and find wanting the popular notions that lockdowns with their attendant social distancing and various other NPIs confer protection. Health care quality also fails to display any statistical benefit despite the intuitive appeal it has. "
  24. 20 points
    Just a mod note that we will not be deleting this post.
  25. 19 points
    Update: I got the job! I hope that future law students questioning themselves see this post and apply despite their grades!
  26. 19 points
    here a year later and yup i can confirm. definitely too naive, stupidly ambitious, and blissfully unaware of the upcoming pandemic that will upend everything. ah, wish i could go back.
  27. 19 points
    What nobody in this thread has considered is the long-term outcomes. Given a long enough timeline, I can confidently say that the outcomes are exactly the same regardless of which law school you attend. What I'm saying is that we're all going to die at some point.
  28. 18 points
    I bet they're not very ergonomic
  29. 18 points
    who came up with this system lmao, so wild
  30. 18 points
    I just wanted to say thank you for this. I just received a request for an interview this morning and if it wasn't for your encouragement I likely wouldn't have applied.
  31. 18 points
    Salut toi ! j'espère que tu vas bien. Je vais l'écrire ici parce que je suis certaine que tu es pas la seule personne qui est dans la même situation. J'ai pas autant de succès que le monde qui écrivent sur le forum (4 appel sur 10 places), mais ce qu'on sait pas c'est que la majorité des gens qui se font appeler partout, c'est une minorité ; personne va venir écrire : « j'ai 0 appel et j'ai appliqué à 12 places » Pour répondre à tes questions, c'est ma première course. Pour ce qui est de la GPA ,j'ai 3.7, j'ai beaucoup d'implications dans mon C.V. et de l'expérience en contentieux à cause de mes stages Coop. Il a beaucoup plus de participants cette année, plusieurs personnes avec de très bonnes GPA et des beaux CV ont reçu des lettres de refus et il y a plusieurs cabinets qui ont dû faire leur cut à une plus haute GPA. Je pense que quand tu as une plus basse GPA, la meilleure façon de se faire appeler, c'est en établissant des liens avec les personnes du recrutement. Si je l'avais pas fait, j'aurais probablement même pas eu d'appel parce que la majorité des cabinets se seraient même pas rendu à lire ma lettre. (D'ailleurs ceux qui m'ont pas call, justement j'avais pas vraiment fait de réseautage avec eux) C'est vrai que c'est possible de se faire appeler sans en faire, mais c'est surtout le cas des personnes qui ont un dossier exceptionnel. Pour ce qui est du reste de la course, j'ai pu remarqué que tu étais très actif sur le forum. Honnêtement, j'ai été comme toi au début et ma santé mentale en a pris un coup. Ça peut rapidement devenir très toxique ; on a l'impression que tout le monde ont une course qui va à merveille, mais je te promets que c'est juste une minorité. Je te le dis sans aucun jugement, mais je te conseille fortement de juste aller prendre de l'air ou te divertir parce je sais que c'est difficile cette course ; on a le contrôle sur rien. Par contre, je t'assure que savoir quel cabinet à appeler qui et quand ne va pas t'en donner plus, au contraire. Laisses ton téléphone ouvert et si tu es pour te faire appeler ça va arriver. N'oublis pas, la course ne définiras pas ni ta carrière, ni ta valeur. Prends soins de toi et hésites pas à m'écrire ne privé si tu as d'autres questions.
  32. 18 points
    I only have one: No matter how you pronounce "prima facie" you're wrong. If someone tells you that you're right, they're also wrong. The sooner you accept this the smoother law school will be.
  33. 17 points
    BCF la semaine prochaine: bonjour
  34. 17 points
    Literally an hour after writing this I received my first acceptance. Hold out hope folks!!
  35. 17 points
    Accepted via OLSAS Feb 3 cGPA (OLSAS): 3.01 B2: 3.5 B20: 3.7 LSAT: 154 (nov) A lot of leadership involvement and ECs, strong LORs, BSc. *This thread isn't representative of everyone accepted, mainly I've seen high GPAs/LSAT at schools but anyone can get in depending on their full application components so don't worry, trust the process.*
  36. 16 points
    I AM SHAKING!!!!!!!!!!! just got the letter via email. Accepted!!! L2: A average LSAT: 150, 155 I'm currently at work and tearing up as I write this lol.
  37. 16 points
    Howdy. I am a UBC student and did get out-of-province clerkship interviews, but at the trial rather than appellate level (I never actually applied to an appellate-level court, although I don't think I would have been competitive). I also participated in formal recruits for government and boutique jobs, out-of-province. My grades have consistently been closer to average than the top of the class. Not to boast, but I received an interview for almost every single job I applied to throughout my time in law school (exceptions were one clerkship, one government job, and two research assistant positions that were likely spoken for before the postings were even published). I only have my experience at UBC to go off of but I frankly doubt I would have fared as well with comparable grades at most other schools in the country. Based on my experience I think the following: People tend to either overstate or understate the relative strengths of different schools. On the one hand, we obviously don't have anywhere near as much of a tiered system as in the US. And basically all schools do have strong local placements. But there are still tangible differences. There is a difference in national (and international) reputation/brand among schools, and that does affect mobility. How much that matters to an applicant will obviously be a personal matter. More (nearly) universally importantly, as you allude to, you can be competitive for the same positions with a lower class rank depending on your school. People are going to get to pick and choose opportunities when they are at the top of their class regardless of school, and will likely have to hustle when they are at the bottom of their class regardless of school, but it's just easier to land okay as a fairly average student at UofT, McGill or UBC than Windsor, Lakehead or TRU. There's empirical backing for this in terms of published hiring numbers in the regular reports related to the recruits so I am not sure why this is somehow controversial to say on this site. The "study where you want to practice" mantra of this site is somewhat overstated. At least when we're talking about a "stronger" out-of-province school vs a less well-regarded local school. There's truth in that in the sense that studying where you want to practice is very important for networking and establishing ties to the local bar and all that. But I found it quite effortless to secure articles in a different province than where I went to school, and I don't feel I would have been better served by attending the law school local to where I'll be articling. In fact, between law school, articling and jobs during school, I now have ties established in the legal community in three different major cities in Canada, which gives me a lot of options and I'm sure will serve me throughout my career. And the practice area I'm interested in tends to have pretty small local bars where everyone knows everyone, so it's easy to settle in and adjust to the local climate once you get hired somewhere.
  38. 16 points
    Have you ever worked full-time before? If 40 hours a week seems like a lot to you, then I am kind of assuming you haven't. I would recommend taking a couple years off before pursuing another degree and spending that time working anywhere. I think it'll give you a bit more perspective on what you actually want in a career. I worked a ton before law school - I got my first job when I was 14 and had a different career before law school that also entailed pretty long hours. Being in a ton of different work environments, ranging from customer service to white collar positions, taught me that I am fine with long hours, but I cannot stand being bored. I also really hate being micromanaged or not getting to work with other people. On the flip side, I love having clients, getting to problem solve, being given assignments and then left to my own devices until they're due, and constantly learning. I am just articling now, but I worked a similar amount of hours before law school. I am personally don't mind the hours - I knew before law school that it's a trade-off I am willing to make to be in jobs that I find intellectually stimulating, challenging, where I get to work with a lot of interesting people, have clients, and do meaningful work. In my experience, it is basically impossible to find a job that fulfills those criteria but also entails less than 40 hours of work per week. Obviously, other people value different things in their careers - some of my friends love working with children, others love being in a lab and doing really technical work, others love working with their hands etc. None of us would be happy at each others' jobs. But I think it's hard to know what you actually enjoy until you have been in a few different work environments.
  39. 16 points
    Je comprends que ça peut en stresser certains, mais un moment donné, je crois qu'il faut passer à autre chose en ce qui concerne les accusés de réception. Ça a été dis que ça ne change rien. Focusons sur l'essentiel lol
  40. 16 points
    1. "0L" is not really a thing. It's used as a stand-in for anyone who has been accepted in law school but hasn't started yet. But it's still not really a thing. 2. A "court clerk" is an officer of the court who maintains court records and performs other functions in support of courts of law. A "judicial law clerk" is someone who conducts legal research and writing for judges. Court clerks don't need to attend law school. Judicial law clerks have law degrees. 3. "Big firm" can mean a law firm with lots of lawyers or a national/international firm with multiple locations. It depends on the context. 4. In Canada, the "v" in a style of cause is read as "and" not "versus." So "Allard v UBC" is read as "Allard and UBC." 5. Osgoode may or may not be in Toronto. It depends on who you talk to.
  41. 15 points
    I wake up in the morning feeling like P. Diddy. Got my glasses, I'm out the door, gonna hit this city. Before I leave I brush my teeth with a bottle of Jack. 'Cause when I leave for the office I ain't coming back.
  42. 15 points
    It's somewhat comforting to see that law students, and applicants, continue the discussions/arguments/rants about rankings and about whose undergrad is more difficult, every damn year. You guys never disappoint!
  43. 15 points
    Yes. You have no chance of admission at those schools with a 142. Based on your current score, I would caution you against thinking you can score a 170 because your tutor scored a 180.
  44. 15 points
    Got the email today!! I never use exclamation marks but !!!!!!! Wasn't expecting to hear back till later in the cycle or at all actually so I'm feeling very grateful. CGPA: 3.61 LSAT: 160 Lots of leadership roles in ECs but decent/ average, nothing too crazy. Applied general. Going to go nap bc I'm buzzing and don't know how to process this information.
  45. 15 points
    I have to disagree with others a bit (except Hegdis) - I do think lawyers who make $100k+ work more than all the people I've worked with in other industries who made comparable salaries. Those people worked a lot too, but it really wasn't on the same level, with the exception of Big 4 accountants, who also work insane hours. Lawyers also don't have a "busy season" that you can plan for the way accountants or some other industries might. Lack of control of foresight of when you'll be busy could be a big issue. For example, if you're a securities lawyer, you really do have to cater to your clients - they often won't give you a ton of notice when they decide to do something, and if they tell you on the 18th that they want to close a flow-through placement by year-end, your holiday plans are pretty much shot. I have heard from people who were asked to skip weddings they were part of the bridal party for, come back early from their honeymoon, pull all-nighters on New Years Eve. I'm just articling so I have only had a couple 80-hour weeks, which I was fine with, but I had no idea they were coming before they happened. It was no big deal for me to make it work but I imagine that would be really rough for someone with children. Or read Uriel's comments about how much he worked during articling, although I think he's on the more extreme end. I think another issue is that lawyers really have the ability to fuck up your client's life if you make a mistake, regardless of the area of law you're in. Deadlines are a lot more stressful when the consequences are that your client loses by default or has their stock halted, rather than the consequence just being that your boss is mad at you. Not to mention the emotional toll that family law, poverty law, or criminal law can have on a person. I have done a decent amount of pro bono and I love it but it's draining for sure. And I have so much respect for people who do family law or criminal law - I honestly could not do it.
  46. 15 points
    I actually find the petition somewhat offensive after reading it closely. "All people with disabilities?" This is extremely presumptuous and disingenuous. There is not a consensus on this issue among those with disabilities, by any stretch. It seems rather backwards to me that providing someone with an option is somehow "infringing on [their] rights." And per @Hegdis's post above, "[t]hey must make a voluntary request for MAID that is not the result of external pressure and must give informed consent." There are legitimate concerns to raise and debate to be had here, but this petition is hyperbolic in the extreme and ironically disrespects those with disabilities who don't take the same view, under the guise of advocacy for people with disabilities.
  47. 15 points
    Imaginez que c'est Droit Inc. qui fait ça pour avoir du gossip et sortir un article 🤣
  48. 15 points
    You cite to a study about listeriosis that has nothing to do with anything in this topic. I'll admit I'm not giving you time of day to read your sources in full but I suspect I spent more time reviewing them than you did. Where I'm wrong and excluding context, provide it. Edit: I'd also add I'm almost exclusively quoting from the abstract or conclusion/results sections of the papers. Please let me know what your response is with respect to misrepresenting non-peer reviewed sources as peer reviewed journal articles.
  49. 15 points
    As the “gleeful mod” I suppose I am the one who gets to note that you have not been censored in any fashion and your thread has not been locked. So stop all this “my freedom of speech is under attack” nonsense. Your opinion is under attack. Not your freedom to express it. This is a very common and very basic misunderstanding in these kind of debates. Learn the difference. Also, I repeat that this thread will not be deleted. It’s a warning I give a LOT of posters for a lot of different topics or reasons and it’s really with everyone’s best interests in mind. The warning was not actually directed solely at the OP so please, everyone, calm down.
  50. 15 points
    To tone down some of the flaring tensions that have been raised by this forum post. I will provide my unique perspective on this matter, as I genuinely believe that OP has asked a legitimate question. On a personal note, I can understand OP's thinking process, having been in a similar predicament myself a few years ago. At that time, it wasn't easy to connect or hear from anyone having attempted the UK route for three primary reasons: The majority of information having being posted on the forum consisted of second-hand knowledge of Canadians having gone abroad to study law or downright speculation of the UK legal pathway. Additionally, forum posts from the 2000s were rarely made by law graduates or licensed barristers and solicitors. Establishing inconsistent and conflicting forum perspectives in regard to studying abroad. People who have attempted the UK Route and have been unsuccessful aren't incentivized to talk about their failures. People who have been successful are too busy to provide their perspective. Unlike most members on this forum, I have graduated with an LL.B. from a "top 10 UK law school". So, I'll do my best to provide you with some unique advice that goes beyond what community members have already highlighted as potential issues with the UK route with some more relevant specifics. Firstly, to address your underlying question of whether there is a difference between attending a Canadian Law School and getting an LL.B. abroad: To put it simply, there is a substantial difference. Without established connections, you will undoubtedly face substantial difficulty locating articling positions in medium to large firms. Many employers restrict their job postings by noting "Canadian Graduates Only" under their employment education requirements, and you can find numerous examples of that on many job search engines. Furthermore, the economic impact of deciding to attend a UK Law School as an International Student is significant. For instance, I'll provide you with a rough cost breakdown of attending my Law School in the UK as of 2021 based on my conservative financial history for the past few years, specifically from 2017-2020: £20,000 per annum fixed rate over a three year period = $105,140 CAD £8,560 per year for assorted living expenses including transportation = $32,772.43 CAD £2,050 pounds over a three year period for flight costs out of YYZ = $3681.05 CAD £1,758 pounds for initial Visa applications and mandatory healthcare coverage = $3,081 CAD Overall, you can expect to take on roughly $135,000 to $150,000 in student loan debt over a three-year period. Plus the additional 6-12 months of wasted financial opportunity attaining a Certificate of Qualification from the National Committee on Accreditation (NCA). Additionally, it is also essential to be mindful that over the past few years, Canadian banks have become increasingly difficult to approve student loans for Canadians intending to study abroad, and in some cases, have stopped offering them entirely (I.e. Scotiabank). Where they do offer loans, it's rarely enough to cover the entire amount, and you'll likely find yourself in a position where you'll have to be asked to provide a co-signer. In my circumstance, I was rejected by most Canadian Banks, and I had to fund my entire law school tuition in cash. The financial bleeding will start from the moment you decide that you want to travel abroad for education. As a Canadian, you need to apply for a Tier 4 student visa; this will cost you thousands of dollars and presented a significant challenge in my initial application process. UKVI required financial disclosure documents that were difficult to deliver. I had to disclose that 24 months' worth of tuition fees and monthly living costs for my specific LL.B. program were in my bank account for 90 days. Considering that most Canadian banks refused my student loan applications at the time, I was put in a position where I had to be listed as a joint account holder with a family member who had $90K cash in their account to satisfy their border requirements. Keep in mind, this was years ago, and the process has likely changed, but I imagine there is still a financial disclosure requirement of some sort. Moreover, while gaining admission to a UK Law School is comparatively easier than a Canadian one. Once you're in, UK Law Schools can be equally as academically challenging as Canadian institutions, if not more difficult. At my University, you were required to take several year long law classes that concluded with one unseen 4 hour summative examination that accounted for 100% of your grade. We had two UofT students on exchange at my Law School that encountered some difficulties with the academic requirements of attending a British law program early on in their semester. If you're already facing mental health issues and are not entirely confident of your future academic capability, it would be best advised to factor that into your decision before considering the UK. It certainly does not get any easier abroad. Ultimately, when considering the limited job prospects, overall difficulty of UK LL.B. programmes, and significant financial implications of moving abroad. It would undoubtedly be more logical and convenient to attend a Canadian Law School where you can access more financial support, networking opportunities, and better job prospects (even outside UofT or Osgoode Law). In your situation, considering the overall debt you already carry from your undergraduate and in light of the personal circumstances you have already shared. I would highly advise you to exhaust all Canadian options before considering studying abroad, because failure to do so might cripple your legal career prospects before you can even start it.
This leaderboard is set to Toronto/GMT-05:00

  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up

  • Create New...