Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/29/16 in all areas

  1. 50 points
    Like many of you, I could not believe it when I saw it. After getting rejected everywhere last year, I wasn't sure if I was going to get in. I am happy to say that I was accepted today. LFG!!! cGPA: 3.62 LSAT: 156
  2. 29 points
    Never thought I'd post here, I'm still in disbelief. Saw my status change to admitted! LSAT: 155 (4th take!) CGPA: 3.57 General category.
  3. 27 points
    Yeah, but they take your left kidney as a deposit and only give it back once you've billed the number of hours that Tony Merchant claimed to docket the previous year. That's a law fact.* *Views expressed above are not factual, do not reflect the views of the lawstudents.ca community, and do not reflect this hat's best effort at humour. To the extent that Bennett Jones' defamation lawyers may read this, I have no assets, only debt, go away.
  4. 25 points
    I wrote a response yesterday - deleted it, thought about it some more, and came to the understanding that this might not help the OP but I want to say it. THIS PROFESSION IS NOT THAT GREAT. All over this site are people who are putting their entire heart and sole into the fulfillment of a dream. That's great, wonderful, reach for the stars, rah rah ... [NTD: insert a great deal more bs here] But, many years out - the happiest "lawyers" I know aren't practicing law. (note in point - probably the smartest guy I knew in law school now does this: http://www.mycozyclassics.com/ ). We have a huge burn out rate and our predictors for mental and physical health are among the lowest of all professions. A large enough portion of us as to be very scary have alcohol and drug dependency issues. The majority of the lawyer/parents I talk to would not recommend this job to their kids - I know I wouldn't (if either of them come decide to do it of their own accord - they will have my support of course - 'cause parenting- but believe me I am really working on how fun STEM subjects are). It also just isn't the path to riches and easily attainable upper middle class living it once was. And I say this as someone who has worked very hard to create a practice that is sustainable from a mental and physical health perspective. I know we are suppose to overcome every obstacle climb every mountain [ntd: more of that bs here as well please] - but please take a long second look - "failing" at this specific objective maybe the very best thing that ever happens to you. Edited to add - I am more than happy to talk one on one if you like. I don't know what skills i bring to the table in that regard. What I do know is that when you say "i want to die" that I can speak for all of us here and in the profession when I say "we don't want you to". We want you healthy and strong.
  5. 22 points
    I turned down this offer earlier today. Thank you all for your input.
  6. 21 points
    Was having this discussion with some colleagues and thought it would fun to continue it here. Mine continues to be when a client calmly cracked a beer in court while a cop was testifying. Think about how loud that sound is, and then amplify it by about a bajillion to account for the silence and decorum of the court against the backdrop of my total and utter lack of preparation for that moment.
  7. 20 points
    Accepted today! GPA: 3.0 L2/B2: 3.91 Lsat: 161 General category!!!!!!!! I can't believe I've been accepted in one of the first rounds. I applied to the MA econ/JD program and really focused my PS on why I specifically wanted to go to Queen's for that program. I started bawling when I saw the acceptance because I really couldn't believe it! It's my first choice so I will most likely be accepting Good luck everyone!!
  8. 19 points
    I've been meaning to make this point for ages, in response to this subject and in particular the title. I just haven't had time. I have two related rules I live by which, when taken together, render this question meaningless and even self-destructive. Those rules are: 1. Never assume you are going to out-perform the people around you, and 2. Never be afraid of competing at any level In application to my own practice, it would go something like this. Sometimes people in smaller markets want a defence lawyer from Toronto. I have no idea why. It isn't like we have no crappy lawyers in Toronto, and it isn't as though small market lawyers are necessarily bad. I understand, to some minor degree, why clients feel like they are getting something special from Toronto. But that's a delusion particular to clients. I would never, ever, walk into a smaller courthouse and assume that I'm a big deal just because I come from the city. That lawyer I've never heard of may be great. Hell, he or she may be far smarter than I am, to work someplace where the houses are affordable and the quality of life leaves time to actually enjoy a professional income properly. On the other hand, I can't succumb to anxiety over my relative abilities either. I litigate before the same judges who see the best defence lawyers in the country. I argue with Crowns who have 30 years of experience. If I wasn't sure I could handle the big show, I couldn't do my job at all. These two rules are not contradictory. They are complimentary. You can't be afraid of competition. You also can't take it for granted, or assume you're better than anyone else just because of some real or imagined achievement in your past. So, in application to choosing a law school, if you somehow believe you can guarantee you'll be a big fish at Windsor, Lakehead, or anywhere else, you're simply wrong. No one is stupid in law schools. Yes, the class on average may be stronger at certain schools. But there will be brilliant students at every law school and you may not be one of them. In fact, you likely won't be. Imagining you'll stand out at any law school is arrogant beyond belief. You have no idea what you're facing in terms of competition. At the same time, you can't be afraid of competing with "the best" at U of T, UBC, or anywhere else. If you're afraid of the competition as students, what the heck are you going to do in legal practice? At some point, you'll be facing a lawyer at a school you were afraid to go to because you might look bad by contrast, only that lawyer graduated 20 years ago and now she has two decades of experience on top of the presumed superiority to start with. You can't adopt that view. Assume you can compete everywhere, and don't assume you'll dominate anywhere. Anything else is an impossible and unproductive attitude to take into a legal career.
  9. 17 points
    1. Some people will not graduate with an articling position and will have to go to great lengths to find a position. 2. Some people will have awful experiences articling. I had a position that lasted one day, I left and never went back. I was yelled at and berated by a sole practitioner. Don't "stick it out" it's not worth your self-respect and dignity. Anyone that tells you to stick it out doesn't care about you. No-my "reputation" wasn't ruined. Yes- I found another position within two weeks. 3. Some people will job hunt for 8-12+ months. It can be depressing. Apply to non-law jobs in the meantime, it's not the end of the world. 4. Many lawyers are too proud to admit they struggled to find articling and/or an associate position but trust me you are not alone if you found this post by googling "i cant find an articling position" or "i cant find an associate lawyer position" or "im an unemployed lawyer". Keep your chin up and stop letting a title define your worth. 5. Yes this can happen if you have good grades, summered/articled at a "top firm" or went to a prestigious Canadian law school. 6. Yes it can leave you feeling worthless. But you're not. Stop the negative thinking it will get you nowhere. 7. Yes there's a whole wonderful world outside of our law "bubble". Get out of the damn bubble. 8. I went through all of this. I survived. I have a wonderful position now. 9. I am posting this to give someone the support they need to push through. 10. You are smart and talented. There are so many opportunities out there for you. The world will beat you enough, don't add to it by beating yourself up.
  10. 17 points
    Death is bad and lasts a very long time. Take advantage of the outrageous ancillary fees you are paying at wherever you are, and see a crisis counselor immediately. It's good you're asking for help. Here, or anywhere, seeking help is a start. But what you need is professional help, rather than off-the-cuff ideas from people on the Internet. Seriously. Go now. Everything else can wait.
  11. 16 points
    Ok. Now I know all I need to know. Tell these people to go fuck themselves. Edit to add: Don't actually say that. But this is shady as fuck.
  12. 16 points
    Baby Lawyer sounds like a really bad movie starring the Rock as the part-time dad of Baby Lawyer who gets looped in to helping Baby Lawyer take on a big bad pharmaceutical company all the way to SCOTUS and along the way learns the true meaning of fatherhood.
  13. 15 points
    I can't wait to get rejected either.
  14. 15 points
    To be fair, this is more an observable fact than a partisan opinion.
  15. 15 points
    Beyond advice, I just want to say I'm sorry you're going through this. You're valuable, and worth something. You will amount to something (even if you do change paths). People care about you. Merry Christmas.
  16. 14 points
    Hi everyone, I found this forum very helpful while I was preparing for the LSAT so I thought I'd share my story here and perhaps it can help others. A little bit of background information about me: I moved to Canada around 5 years ago and decided to go to law school about a year ago. I did not have much previous exposure to the LSAT and I consider myself ESL in terms of vocabulary. I started studying in June for the September LSAT. I took an in-person course with PoweScore and found it useless. The instructor did not really care about the students and the numerous LR categories really confused me. Although to be fair, it helped me build on my LG foundations. By the time the course was over I was scoring in low 150s and I was not happy with it. I decided to work on my LG first using the Fool Proof Method on 7Sage. (You can look it up here: https://7sage.com/how-to-get-a-perfect-score-on-the-logic-games/) I made 5 copies of each game from PT 1-40 and started foolproofing them. After a month I was getting around -6 to -8 wrong on LG I was not being consistent so I decided to change my strategy a little. I decided to split my game board less and practice a strategy that would produce more consistent results. I had one session with a tutor who taught me about the Square of Opposition method. (If you like to know more about this method you can message me). For LR, I took 5 sessions with a different tutor and she really simplified LR for me. Instead of power scores' infinite categories, she divided the categories into only 3. Basically, the first category is question types that you can predict the answer almost 100% and these are usually MP, Sufficient Assumption, Method, and a few more. The second one is the category for which you can predict answers more loosely and you should approach these answers with more flexibility. And the last category is unpredictable so instead of spending time predicting we just dive into the answer choice (Must be True, Resolve, Most Strongly Supported). Reading Comprehension was my weakness. Ironically, I had always enjoyed reading and had always tried to read books in English since I moved to Canada. But I had trouble understanding words like parody, convoluted, sporadic. To address my weakness I purchase a set of GRE flashcards and memorized 5 words per day. I also started reading books with more convoluted wording. (Just before my November LSAT I started reading "Brief answers to important questions" and it introduced me to the concept of entropy and my last passage on the LSAT was about entropy!!! I ran out of time for the last 4 questions but it definitely helped ) So these are some details about each section but I want to also talk about my journey in terms of my mindset and attitude. When I started studying for the LSAT in June I was scared, negative, and stressed. I stopped going to the gym because I thought I need to focus all my life on the LSAT. I stopped socializing and didn't see my family for 4 months. I can't say that my failure on the September LSAT was only because of this (on September I got a 155 but I was PTing in mid 160s) but I am sure that it affected my score and my mental well-being. After I got my September score I was devastated. I thought I could never get a good score! But keep in mind, especially if your actual score was lower than your PT average, that luck also matters. Example: On the November test I got 3 linear games which I was really good at and got a -3 on LG. From September to November I changed my attitude. I realized that doing intense cardio helps with my mental stamina and also helped me to manage my mood and my back pain. I studied in moderation and around 4 hours per day. Most importantly, I decided to not think about the outcome of the test and started actually enjoying doing PTs. Did everything go perfectly on test day? No! The night before the test I slept for 3 hours only. I decided not to panic, did the body scan meditation by Jon Kabat Zin which helped me fall asleep, and had a bulletproof coffee (coffee+MCT oil+butter) in the morning to compensate for the lack of sleep. During September-Novemebr I was PTing in the mid 160s although my average was a 163 so I was happy when I got my 161 in Novemebr Feel free to send me a message if you had any questions.
  17. 14 points
    I'm not quite as virulent on this topic as I once was, but I would strongly urge the OP (and anyone else presuming to advise the OP - especially those without a history in this profession) to remember that the articling relationship is not an ordinary job. This is true both in terms of the articling candidate's rights and obligations, and the employer's rights and obligations. I took a glance at the OP's history. They graduated in April of last year and only found articles recently. Not long ago they were looking for anything at all, I'm sure. And while a PI firm offering low pay isn't ideal (I can't even fault them for the commute - that's on you for applying there) they at least were willing to pick up a student in the off season and it's still paid. It could be a lot worse. And so far I'm seeing nothing that goes to any dissatisfaction in the actual articling relationship - no issues with supervision, learning experience, etc. My biggest concern is this. Does your new proposed employer know that you are already doing articles elsewhere? If no, you have a problem, and you should probably come clean with them. Because lying your way through this profession is a bad, bad idea. If yes, you may have an even bigger problem. And that's simply because it is almost inconceivably bad form to hire an articling student who is already employed. That isn't to say it can't be done with appropriate caution. But I can barely imagine another firm saying "this person has articles elsewhere, but we'll just offer them a job and see what they do." My point being, if that's what they are doing you probably don't want to work there anyway. It's a little like hooking up with the guy who's cheating on his wife and his existing mistress to be with you. You gotta ask yourself - even if you end up with him, what do you expect in the future? I won't say you need to stay where you are right now. But talk with them honestly about it. A month ago you would have killed for articles anywhere. Maybe this isn't the best time to immediately burn the only bridge anyone has extended to you.
  18. 14 points
    I should also say that if you choose to post here to express what you need to express, the mods will make an exception to our never-delete rule if you request the topic be removed. Your mental health is what is most important and the people here can be incredibly supportive and kind. Again, no one here is a professional so please, do seek out help offline too, and understand that all advice here is well meant even if any of it strikes a wrong chord.
  19. 14 points
    They only think about nature if your degree was in environmental science.
  20. 14 points
    I think Uriel *was* that student. But I remember it being tripping the fire alarm that emptied the building. I like the addition of real flames tho. Let’s go with that version.
  21. 14 points
    TIL, as I return from a lovely vacation to my professional managed, newly renovated rental apartment, with a fully stocked fridge, comfy furniture and a big TV, check my bank account that is continually increasing, and then hop on the subway for my 20 minute commute to work, that I am merely “surviving”.
  22. 13 points
    This will seem petty but I swear it isn’t: it’s “advice.”. Advice is a noun. You want advice. Give me advice. Inviting advice. It is pronounced exactly as it is spelled Advise is a verb. I advise you to wait. You advise action. Advise me. It is pronounced as if the “s” were a “z”. It is a very very common mistake but as a new lawyer you need to know the difference.
  23. 13 points
    Chicago Kent is a bottom second-tier law school in the US ranked around 72 of the 200 law schools there. Why would a Canadian who presumably wants to practice law in Canada AND has good stats apply to crappy foreign law schools?
  24. 13 points
    In my other life I work in emergency management (part of trying to stay healthy eh!) That is one area where i have seen a real shift in perspective around mental health. It still needs work, don't get me wrong, but the change from - oh if you can't handle a little blood and guts this isn't for you, and "drink it off" to today's debriefs, mental resiliency training and proactive approaches is night and day. The legal profession has been talking about this in the corners and around the periphery for too long in my opinion. We still hold up as pillars people who are living really unhealthy lives. We still don't take care of people that deal with just totally horrible situations on a daily basis. I did one child porn case when I was just starting out and still get actual physical symptoms when I think about it. How legal professionals (defense, crown or judge) go though some of the child abuse trials that you hear about without some level of assistance is beyond me. I really hope they get the help they need. As a first-responder, if I go to an incident where someone is stabbed. I will likely go back to the hall, fill out a form (I know weird eh - but PTSD is cumulative- so we want to make sure we are tracking exposure), I will do a debrief with my crew, if we have any issues/symptoms we can take it up the chain and professionals will be brought in. We then talk about healthy approaches to what we have dealt with- exercise to help flush adrenaline, mindfulness, talking with our team) we will be reminded of the symptoms of PTSD, our family are invited to talk to our mental health practitioners and most importantly we commit to watching out for each other. The defense counsel who will be going through all the gory details of that incident with the victim, perpetrator with the family of both right behind him or her gets what? We do have the Lawyers Assistance Program - which I encourage all students and lawyers to learn about hopefully prior to needing it - http://lapbc.com/ I just think we need to be serious about this issue and it requires a culture shift.
  25. 13 points
    Okay, so I have a civil/corporate story. I'm a junior associate at a small town law firm. Our firm represents a hotel. An oil company is going through a CCAA reorganization. The partner forgets to file whatever paperwork he should have filed in order to get the outstanding hotel bills paid by the oil company. So he send me to the city. Honestly we don't have a leg to stand on other than the fact our debt is really small potatoes compared to the overall re-org, and no one else is really challenging the re-org. This was a long time ago so I forget a lot of the actual legal details. We have to wait for the judge for awhile, and eventually we get told to appear after lunch. The lawyer for the oil company agrees to just pay our hotel bill. We come back after lunch... and the judge is gone. We check with the judge's chambers, and he's left the building. This is a problem - I have to get back to my small town practice (pretty sure this was a Friday afternoon), and this other guy wants to get this reorganization finalized and signed off on. So the lawyer goes "I think I know where he is". he takes me to this ritzy social and sports club. We start wandering around the club, until we eventually find the judge in the men's change room. So the judge signs off of the CCAA order in the change room at the club.
  26. 13 points
    Tell his lying ass to kick rocks
  27. 13 points
    Boy do you have an interesting view on life. I get COL is high in Toronto. But to say 75k a year (a single person salary) is nothing is just so crazy to me. And both my parents are professionals. I'm not saying this even from personal experience. I just have my eyes open enough to know how ridiculous that sounds.
  28. 13 points
    Pay your employees. To any students reading this, having prior law firm experience is entirely unnecessary to getting hired at a large firm and more often than not is not at all a deciding factor. You're better off earning some money and getting any form of work experience than giving away your labour for free to someone that wants to take advantage of it for the promise of "exposure". Read up before you work "for exposure": https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jul/09/creative-careers-is-it-ever-worth-working-for-exposure https://www.forbes.com/sites/lizryan/2017/03/13/no-i-wont-work-for-free-for-the-exposure/#6af4dab64402 https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/10926-no-working-for-free.html
  29. 12 points
    In today! 3.7/158, decent PS and pretty good ECs.
  30. 12 points
    Did you call and inquire before you applied? That would have been the intelligent thing to do if this was a real concern of yours. Come on, people. All these cries of 'unfair' are a bit silly. Who ever told you that life was fair? If you're this upset over a stated policy that you didn't investigate further, what are you going to do when you don't like being graded on a curve, or you don't get more OCIs than a classmate, or someone else gets hired back and you don't? I would caution those of you making the negative comments about those who have received acceptances, to remember that you may get in and then those people you are denigrating will be your classmates. Is this really the way you want to meet new friends, classmates and future colleagues? Lastly, it's mid-March. There is still lots of time to go in this cycle and there are likely to be many more offers made. Waiting sucks but allowing it to direct your confusion/anger/resentment towards others isn't productive and ultimately will only make the waiting worse.
  31. 12 points
    Where did you read that? Whoever wrote it clearly doesn't know what they're talking about. Look, there are some good articling experiences and some bad ones. Just as there are some good jobs with great co-workers and bosses, and terrible jobs with a toxic work environment. Overall, the reason articling involves stress and long hours is because that is exactly what the practice of law entails. This is not because a "toxic work environment" has been normalized in the profession. It's a simple reality that most lawyers are expected to be on call 24/7, have to work longer than 9-5 out of sheer necessity, and deal with stressful situations purely by the fact that the entire job is about dealing with conflict. If I had an articling experience where I was working 9-5 with only moderate pressure (all of which would have to be artificially enforced) I would have completely crumbled as an associate when I could not work 9-5 and would have the entire weight of a file on me. This is not to say that there aren't genuinely abusive articling positions out there. There are. But this view that the entire profession has a disposition towards exploitation is just silly. Insofar as people are complaining to the law society because they think their working hours are "unreasonable" or they are too stressed out, I'd suggest they quit right now because the practice of law is not for them.
  32. 12 points
    What people normally mean by "strong ECs" is "weak grades and/or LSAT." I've known students who had ECs that would make the average applicant cry out of frustration, if they knew that's what the competition looked like. But those aren't the students talking about their "strong ECs" at all. The students who talk up their ECs were the Presidents of their "pre-law" clubs. The ones who are on the Boards of national NFPs, who wrote books, were published in scholarly journals as undergrads, who compete internationally as athletes...they don't say anything at all. And generally they ALSO have strong grades and LSATs.
  33. 12 points
    I don't know if it was an off-the-cuff addition when you wrote about your sister's "deep depression" but assuming this is at all accurate, your approach to this situation is entirely wrong. I'm sorry, but it is. Put it this way. If you were concerned that your sister was falling into a deep depression because she couldn't find a boyfriend, would you be on a dating site right now, trying to solve this problem for her? Or would you be focused (as you should be) on your sister's precarious mental health rather than the thing that triggered her precarious mental health? Stressors and hurdles in law and legal practice are pretty much never-ending. After finding articles comes the stage where a job very likely doesn't live up to one's dreams, and you're working really punishing hours for a lawyer or a firm that may not appear to appreciate or value your work. Or you're working on a file (to use an immigration-related example) where your client is likely to be deported and he's telling you his life isn't worth living if that happens and he's going to kill himself, and yet there's nothing you can do to prevent it from happening. Or it's simply that you article, don't get hired back, and you're in the same situation - unemployed. This isn't going to stop for your sister. Right now, she's experiencing an ordinary sort of problem. If it's seriously impacting her mental health, then that's the problem - not the challenge she's immediately experiencing right now. You aren't in a position to solve your sister's career for her. It's nice you want to try, but you aren't reasonably equipped to do that. Get your sister support with her depression and with her mental health. That's how you help.
  34. 12 points
    I’m not even sure UT lets you graduate if you don’t own your own caviar spoons. Anyway, as long as you have one tux for each day of the week, you’ll be fine.
  35. 12 points
    Most exams are 100%. Some classes are 100% final essay. In your first year you get core classes like Torts, Property, Criminal, Contracts, and Constitutional Law. Generally these are exam only. Aboriginal law and foundational skills courses are also included in first year in many schools. Classes can be big or small. You have assigned readings for ahead of class, you attend lectures and take notes. The profs have office hours if you need help with concepts. Smart students check out previous years’ exams and learn what each class/prof wants you to know. Some people rely on the textbooks, some on the classes, some on a combo of both. Upper Years’ outlines or CANS (condensed annotated notes) get passed around and lots of people use those as study aides. Each student is different. Lawyers are masters of communication. While essays may not be your strong suit, I bet you can analyze and distill information into component parts. Use that skill and work in your prose and law school won’t be an insurmountable challenge. I have never heard of students at a Canadian law school complaining about utterly ridiculous levels of malicious competition or even sabotage amongst classmates. That appears to be an American trope. So don’t worry too much about that kind of thing. Law school also gives you opportunity to do clinical work, like the student legal aid clinic. There are a ton of groups and organizations that do all kinds of interesting things to bridge the gap between school and profession. You will probably sign up for too many and then just stick with one or two. In first year your focus will be exams and adjusting. Second year your focus will be on your moot and summer jobs and picking the right classes to align with the places where you apply. Third year your focus will be on your looming articles. There is a saying: first year scares you to death, second year works you to death, and third year bores you to death. Loosely speaking it’s somewhat accurate.
  36. 12 points
    Well, put it this way. I can and do deny the additional rigor of those disciplines. Which means you've already introduced one false assumption into your reasoning. I will concede that different disciplines are rigorous in different ways. But ultimately, for law schools to give additional credit to one vs. another, you'd have to believe there is some kind of greater overall demonstration of ability in one vs. another. And I do deny that. I'll also say that if you were better trained in liberal arts style "rigor" you'd have seen this one coming.
  37. 12 points
    Finding out that the "girlfriend" of a client I needed to get an affidavit from was the spouse of another client.
  38. 12 points
    http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/51230-factors-other-than-cgpalsat/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/44193-a-limited-confession-about-bas-versus-everything-else/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/44164-about-to-graduate-from-biochemistry-bsc-but-want-to-go-to-law-school/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/42634-is-business-school-worth-the-gpa-risk/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/40990-how-true-is-this-article-grade-deflation/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/40645-does-difficulty-undergrad-program-matter-to-the-admissions-committee/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/40051-should-i-go-to-u-of-t-or-york-for-my-ba/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/38399-do-canadian-law-schools-care-about-prestigious-american-undergrad-degrees/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/31531-do-law-schools-consider-the-strength-of-the-undergraduate-program-from-which-you-came/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/31107-do-law-schools-consider-the-difficulty-of-programs/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/29210-best-undergrad-for-law/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/29179-just-got-into-university/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/28941-is-geography-a-dumb-major-for-law-school/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/28900-unorthodox-undergraduate-degrees-andor-applied-studies/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/27083-undergrad-school-choice/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/26292-will-my-undergraduate-major-have-any-bearing-on-my-acceptance-into-law-school/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/22551-does-a-u-of-t-undergrad-make-it-harder-to-get-into-law/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/21149-who-went-to-ryerson-for-undergrad-and-got-into-law-school/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/9346-easy-majors/ http://lawstudents.ca/forums/topic/5573-switching-from-york-to-a-better-university-harder-degree/
  39. 12 points
    You realize that by giving law students less grants you're directly impacting how many people can choose to work in poverty law areas? Especially when considering that, even though income in poverty law has a generally high increase rate compared with other professions, its start is very low as someone starts their own business? Bay street isn't all of law. It's a small fraction of first year jobs in law.
  40. 12 points
    In, as of of this morning!!! cGPA: 3.5 (including fall grades) L2: 3.6 LSAT: 144, 149, 166 ontario resident.
  41. 12 points
    I do have to say that lifestyle creep and the wealth effect have affected my life a lot more since I entered law than I thought they would. When I was working $12/hr jobs throughout school, I always thought making six figures would be far more than enough to sustain my lifestyle. $100,000 per year seemed like a dream and a never ending amount of money. However, I find that I spend a lot more money now without thinking and I’m often thinking about my next raise or bonus and comparing myself to my peers at other firms to see if I’m “underpaid”. I think ambition and striving to improve one’s lot in life is positive, but l’ve been trying to make a conscious effort lately to tell myself that what I have now is enough to live the life I want. When I find myself unsatisfied with how much money I make, I often think about the story where Kurt Vonnegut tells his friend Joseph Heller that a certain billionaire makes more money in one day than Heller has made throughout his entire life. Heller replies to Vonnegut, “Yes, but I have something that he’ll never have. Enough.”
  42. 12 points
    I think the starting question here was both original and interesting, and so it's a shame this discussion has so quickly spiraled into the usual patterns. I'll answer the original question first, before I contribute to further derailment. Speaking as a criminal defence lawyer in sole practice, I am happy with my income at present. It's also improved lately. I wasn't unhappy with it previously, but I can see how I might have become unhappy with my income before too long if it was entirely stagnant at the level it was at with no clear path to improvement. And that is, undoubtedly, one of the frustrations and difficulties with self-employment. When you work for someone else there are milestones clearly in front of you. If nothing else there's the reasonable and rational prospect of an annual raise that should be by at least some small margin greater than inflation. When you work for yourself ... well, Legal Aid hasn't raised their tariff rates in several years now. So if you do a lot of Legal Aid and aren't working more or bringing in more private clients, you're actually making less in real terms every year. That's got to hurt. I don't want to speak too specifically to criminal defence right now, and in practical terms I know very little about personal injury law or what the income is like. But I will theorize that part of the difference is between self-employment in crim and working in an organized firm in PI. Because PI is certainly not "Big Law" in a true sense, but it's bigger than crim. Working as an associate locks you in at a reasonable mid-point. A firm has to pay associates at least reasonably well or no one with even half a brain would take the work. But I wonder about the upper-end prospects for anyone who doesn't become a partner or start their own practice successfully - and launching a practice in that field is still harder than crim. Meanwhile, the entry point for crim and the entry-level income is lower. But when you're doing your own thing in crim you can end up with a very good income in the future, and beholden to no one. I'm not talking only about the Marie Heneins and the Alan Golds. There are a lot of higher end criminal lawyers that no one outside the field has heard of that earn very good incomes. Their practice isn't flashy but it is lucrative. And for whatever it's worth, it's a hell of a lot more dignified than PI work. At some point KingLouis and I might take this off-line, because the rest of what I have to say would be very specific. But just because you can't easily see the path forward in sole practice doesn't mean it isn't there. I'm hardly an authority on this topic. But I'm far more confident than I was in the earliest stages. Now on the topic of the derail, I'll just say that shawniebear's tone rubs me the wrong way also, but he's at least put his finger on the real issue. He says that what's good enough for most people - even the large majority of people - is simply not good enough for him. That's fine. I mean, it isn't an attitude I can easily deal with when it's stated so nakedly and embraced so fully, but let's at least allow that he's set a starting point for his assumptions. If you feel the only way to live properly is to have far more than most people around you, then it's certainly your right to pursue an income appropriate to your "needs." But I think it's also more respectful to state these self-identified needs as such, rather than implying that most everyone else around you are stupid losers who have settled for table scraps and lives of failure. To be perfectly honest, I'd have a lot of trouble going back to a "normal" income myself, now. But I also know that I could do it if I had to, and it wouldn't make me miserable. There's so much more to life than money. And it's a privilege to be able to say that, and to focus on things in life that aren't about food, shelter, immediate safety, etc. But that's a privilege we all enjoy even on what passes as a modest income in Canada. Once those safety needs are taken care of, it's simply wrong to describe the rest of what you want as a need of any sort. It's a priority you choose to have. And if that's where your priorities lie, that's your choice and I'm really not going to suggest you need to apologize for it. But I will say that these priorities inevitably compete with other priorities, and as I point out often when you focus on X you invariably need to give up Y. Money has a way of obscuring that trade-off sometimes, and it can be dangerous. Don't lose sight of what you are passing up to earn more money. I guess it comes down to this. There are people in law - even a large number, I suspect - to whom earning potential is a huge draw into the field. Again, I truly won't denigrate them as a group. But when you introduce their attitude into a discussion as though it's the only reasonable way of looking at income at all ... yeah, that's going to start arguments. It implies that a lawyer who isn't making a large income (large by any ordinary definition) is somehow a failure. And I know lawyers who live very modest lives but have successful careers by any definition I care to apply - they are busy, respected, fulfilled, and do important work. Does it really matter so much if they go home to a rented apartment? Maybe it matters to you. But don't imply that they're wrong and you're right. And also, I work with and represent clients, quite often, who just don't have much. I know I'm more successful than they are. I know I have far more. But I don't feel better than my clients. I truly don't. I'm not a superior breed of human being who needs to spend $8 on a cup of coffee every time they spend $2. If I felt that way, I couldn't do my job properly anymore. Anyway, that's it.
  43. 12 points
    That feeling when you have a couple of festive soda-pops with the lads, only to come home a little wobbly-legged, log-in to OASIS and realize that you've been accepted to Osgoode! Not sure if it's the excitement or the beer, but I'm gonna go wake up all my neighbours now. Mature Student cGPA: 3.33 (from false-start 20 years ago) L2: 3.96 LSAT: 167 Softs: University Senate, volunteer work, novelist, dad
  44. 11 points
    The trick to succeeding at property law is realizing that it is fun. People try to make it boring or confusing, but they are wrong and bad. You can dig into just about any part of property law and find some interesting bit of trivia, or an exciting bit of history. For example, you have of course watched Showtime's wonderful program, The Tudors. Has your professor pointed out that the various equitable interests generally stem from reforms done by Cardinal Wolsey (played by Sam Neill)? Or all the fun property law based prosecutions he did to prevent the enclosure movement? The statute of fraud's rise due to the increase of the use of uses (now trusts) and the fact that you can't pass a trust through livery of seisen? And the torren's system - it can be a dry subject at time, but there is drama behind its introduction, practically everywhere that has adopted the system has had to fight against the local legal profession to get it put into place.
  45. 11 points
    Accepted today! cGPA: 2.98 L2: 3.70 LSAT: 159 General applicant
  46. 11 points
    I find the 3 things that help me keep stress under control are: 1. Exercise - most people in high-powered jobs turn to either exercise or alcohol/drugs to cope. Stick with exercise and make it a daily part of your routine, if possible. Do something where you're moving and/or reacting quickly and don't have time to think about work (e.g., team sports like hockey or basketball, cross-fit, running, etc.) 2. See my friends every weekend - it helps to associate with people who are not in law so that you can talk about things other than work 3. Perspective - When I go to bed and when I wake up, I try to make a conscious effort to be thankful for how good I have it in life compared to many others, or to myself in the past. If I'm stressing about work at those times of day, sometimes I'll think about the laborious, low-paying jobs I worked before law school and find myself thankful I'm working in a comfortable office with a view and getting paid more than both of my parents combined. Sometimes I'll think about how several of my friends have had parents get sick or pass away recently and find myself thankful that my family and I are all in good health and get to see each other every day, and that's far, far more important than some work deadline.
  47. 11 points
    Let me chime in here, as someone who practices this daily. I could spend a lot of time thinking about what does and does not keep my clients happy (which is a thing worth thinking about - though my problem is finding the time with all the work I have piling up, so I'm probably doing more right than wrong) but I want to be clear about one thing. My clients do not understand what I'm doing for them. It's a real issue in criminal law. It's why objectively bad lawyers who are nevertheless good entrepreneurs (with all that implies) are able to keep a string of clients coming and coming back to them. You can be a criminal lawyer standing in front of the court with your client sitting two feet away from you, screwing up in real time, and most clients wouldn't be able to see it. It's a problem that exists, I'm sure, in all areas of law. But it's worse, not better, than most, in crim. Frankly, I don't know why this is even a point of debate. Here's what I consider to be obvious and uncontroversial starting assumptions: 1. The law is a complex and multi-faceted environment. It's not easy to understand for anyone, in real nuance. The broad strokes, maybe. But the real gist, and the stuff that matters, almost no layperson is going to get. 2. No areas of law are really simple. There are occasionally simple and straight-forward issues and situations, but no area of practice, as a whole practice area, is an exception to the assumption above. 3. To the degree that anyone stands a chance of getting most of it, sophisticated clients are more likely to get it. So, combining these several assumptions (and if you're going to argue with any of them, please tell me how and why) we end up here. Criminal law has many, many unsophisticated clients. Even the more sophisticated clients (say, an educated professional accused of impaired operation) is still ignorant when it comes to criminal law. It's not like you're a solicitor dealing with an insurance company who routinely interacts with lawyers. So in a sea of unsophisticated clients, in a complex area of law (because they all are) why would you imagine clients know what's going on with crim? The only reason anyone thinks that, that I can fathom, is that the consequences are fairly apparent. As in, you go to jail, you don't go to jail, etc. But that's an incredibly simplistic way of looking at criminal law. That's exactly the simplicity that clients bring, and which is why they don't understand what's happening. One guy "wins" a case and thinks his lawyer is great, even though it's a case that a monkey could have won. Another guy "loses" and after a ton of persuasion takes a deal and pleads guilty, but it may be an incredible deal that's saved him substantial jail time and he just can't see it. A third guy gets walked into a deal that's terrible, only his lawyer talks it up and convinces him it's great. The first and third clients may leave happy, and the second leave unhappy. I can't say it enough times. Clients in criminal law do not know what's going on the over-whelming majority of the time. At the risk of getting preemptively prickly, I consider it obvious and apparent that my clients aren't particularly sophisticated. Do you really think there's no nuance to what I'm doing? Why in the world do you think that my client knows if I'm doing it well or not? This isn't even arrogance. I'm defending an auto mechanic later today. If he were fixing my car, I wouldn't have a clue what he was doing. And there's a reason people get ripped off by mechanics also.
  48. 11 points
    You know, this may be a bit of a distraction to the overall topic. But if living like a student and living on a median provincial income feel similar, and are in fact similar, then something is wrong with one or both of those experiences. And I really think that the problem has more to do with student lifestyle at this point. I mean sure, the median provincial income can/should be higher also. But when students are living in their own apartments, eating out regularly, and carrying on fully independent lifestyles that aren't being sustained on their own income but are, rather, paid for either by taking on debt or out of someone else's (presumably their parents') pockets ... that's just not normal. I won't claim I'm the patron saint of fiscal restraint. But when I lived like a student, I lived like a student. Not like an employed adult making an average income. There can and should be a difference between those two things.
  49. 11 points
    I couldn't agree with this more. And it isn't just this thread. There was another thread about UofT grading and several others that raised the same themes. More broadly...and I mean this in the absolute nicest way possible...people need to chill out. Lately, we've heard from people trying to pick law schools based on what will give them the highest grade or what grading scheme will make them feel good about themselves. People concerned with a single "bad" grade after they've been accepted to law school (and by bad, I don't even mean all that bad). People thinking they need to start preparing for 1L 9 months before it even starts (I've seen these threads before, but not this early). People thinking they will be so shackled to their desks that they can't pursue any hobbies at all. Etc. I don't really mean to mock (most of) you who have posted these things. But none of these are things that you should be worrying about. You can't really predict what will happen in law school or beyond and you will later probably feel silly to have worried about some of these things. All you can really do is try to be confident about your own abilities, not be too concerned with what other people are doing or their qualifications, and to try your best.
  50. 11 points
    You may have picked the wrong profession.
This leaderboard is set to Toronto/GMT-04:00


  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
×
×
  • Create New...