Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/18/18 in all areas

  1. 32 points
    My Law School Rankings: 1. Queens. I went there. Ergo, is best school. 2. UBC. I live in Vancouver and it is closest geographically to me. Ergo, is second best school. 3. UVic. See #2 and extrapolate. Also craft beer. 4. TRU. See #3. Also wine country. 5. UNB. Probably should include an Eastern school somewhere around here. 6. U Of M. See # 5 and extrapolate. 7. All remaining Ontario schools are all exactly the same because this will make most of you foam at the mouth, and that’s funny. 8. U of S. I know nothing about this school at all so it gets the benefit of the doubt. 9. Dalhousie. I once dropped poutine here and a seagull came and ate it and seagulls are the assholes of the sky so you get last. 10. McGill actually gets last because I speak no french at all. 11. If I forgot anyone else they are tied for very very last. 22. U of C and U of A don’t even rank because booooo Flames and Oilers.
  2. 31 points
    I was asked to provide tips on being a great summer student at a large firm via PM. I thought that others on the forum could also make valuable contributions to the "tips" and that the information could be of value to the LS.ca community at large (even though there are many threads already on the topic). My top tips to being a great summer student are: 1. Take notes when you're given instructions - seriously, walk around everywhere with a note pad and pen so that if anyone grabs you and starts giving you instructions you can immediately write them down. There were times (especially as a first year summer student) when I had to write down instructions phonetically because I had no idea what the heck I was being asked to do and if i didn't have a note pad with me I would have been screwed. 2. when you are taking your instructions from a lawyer who you've never done work for, ask the important questions: what file number is this being billed to? how much time should i aim to spend on it? do you want this in memo form? do you want the cases printed and highlighted or will electronic copies be fine? Large firms also have data bases with loads of precedents so whenever I was given a task for a lawyer I never worked for I always went into the data bases to see how that lawyer liked their memos to be set up - I also spoke to Junior associates or lingering articling students for advice regarding how to approach certain tasks for certain lawyers. 3. Save all of your questions for one meeting rather than asking them as they come up. What I mean by this is once you get your instructions, go away and do your task. As you are doing the task you may have some clarification questions, write them down in a coherent manner and then, when you absolutely cannot do anything more, go and ask them all in one shot. Don't go and bug the instructing lawyer every time a question comes up - you'll be perceived as annoying and incompetent. 4. Always attach a "research trail" at the end of any task you've been given. It's important so the lawyer knows what you have done (and what you haven't done) when completing your research. It's also the best way for you to learn how to improve. 5. I always try to finish the task the night before it's due, sleep on it, and then have a fresh read of a hard copy the day I submit it. Make sure you proof read - nothing is worse then spelling mistakes. 6. Always ask for feedback on the tasks you've been given, whether it's a week or two weeks after you've submitted it, if you don't hear back, pop your head in and ask if they've had a chance to look at it and if they have any suggestions for improvement. 7. Work as a team with your fellow students. Competition between students is really pointless - it just makes you all look bad. The lawyers want to see you getting a long well with people. Keep your speech positive and be kind to everyone you encounter. 8. Be the one the lawyers can depend on. If they are staying late in the office, you should pop your head in and ask if there is anything you can do to help. If they ask you to do something urgently and it means you have to cancel your plans - do it, stay and go the extra mile. 9. If you have nothing to do, go around to the lawyers and tell them you have capacity to take on tasks - even as a student you need to learn how to drum up work. 10. No task is beneath you. You are the guy that will work the weekend in the copy room putting together evidence books for upcoming trial. You are also the guy to proof read factums, do legal research and draft pleadings. If it needs to be done, volunteer to do it and be happy about it (no one likes a complainer). 11. be nice to your support staff. Tell them how thankful you are for their assistance, ask them for help when you need it and, every once and a while, bring them baked goods Good luck to all who will be starting next month!
  3. 28 points
  4. 25 points
    UPDATE: FOUND AN ARTICLING POSITION! I have finally received an offer for an articling position! It is from a small law firm that practices mostly real estate law along with some business law. Real estate law is not one of primary areas of interest but the lawyers seem very pleasant to work with and it seemed like a great opportunity, given my circumstances, so I accepted it. I know many others on this forum disagree with my reasons to article or do the LPP but I thought I would post an update here so that anyone else who has been searching for an articling position for a long time and feel like they have no hope can see that there is always a chance. If someone like me, who has made so many stupid mistakes with regards to articling and post-law school decisions, can find one, then so can you! Hang in there! Also, I am so f****** happy right now.
  5. 23 points
    Before we all get too worked up, LinkedIn indicates that the publisher of this "magazine" graduated from high school in 2014 and will complete his BA later this year. So, like, good for him for the entrepreneurship, but this is not a Thing.
  6. 23 points
    For anyone upset about rejection from Windsor - don't worry. I was rejected last year from every law school I applied to, including Windsor, and this time around after rewriting my LSAT twice and pushing myself in my last year of school, I got into every law school in Ontario. If you have been accepted elsewhere already, then congratulations. If not, and your cycle is, perhaps, closing, then just know that it is certainly possible from this very point to turn things around and achieve whatever it is that you want to achieve. I am the example. Best of luck to all of you!
  7. 23 points
    Rule 1. Ignore jordan peterson. This will increase your IQ.
  8. 20 points
    Hello guys, first time poster on here. I just wanted to say that I have been accepted off the waitlist (waitlisted on April 26th) for the 2018 class today. My CGPA is 3.11 / L2 is 3.84 / L3 is 3.6 /// My LSAT scores are 148, 149 , 148 (Dec score) I am posting this to give hope to people like me who have consistently struggled with the LSAT (and may never get better at the exam). I personally could not get over my nerves - and i tried everything (studied for a whole year and was PTing consistently at 165. My diagnostic was a 136. But on exam day I would just get so much anxiety - I couldn't think straight and the time constraint then obviously got me. I remember crying after the exam thinking why I couldn't do this. But so many professors told me that the LSAT means something but not everything on your application. So - I focused on how else I could prove myself worthy. I believe that it is my extra curricular/softs that has helped me get accepted. I have done Canadian feminist archival work, worked as an editorial assistant for the production of a feminist book, I have received a fellowship from UofT to produce my own research (about gender barriers South Asian women face in India and in the Canadian diaspora // traveled to India to make the documentary), created a club on campus that collects and donates food to local food banks, member and served on board of directors for the Women's and trans centre. ETC. I also made sure to prove I could handle law school - by getting my act together and maintaining high grades for my final years of study. I have wanted this ever since second year but I started to lose hope after consistently doing poorly on the LSATs. Imagine prep testing at 165 consistently (15 PTs all under same time constraints, early morning like the real LSAT and ending up with a 148 on your third attempt). but I am so grateful for this opportunity. I felt obligated to come on here and post this because I know there will be a lurker like me who has lost hope because of the LSAT. My advice to you is to focus on what you are good at and let that show through your application. I genuinely love to do research in feminist activism. I also wrote a strong personal statement. For those wondering - I'm also waitlisted at Windsor (SINGLE JD) and under review for the DUAL. Also, if anyone has any questions about EC or my softs - please DM me. I would love to help out in any way that I can. Last couple months have been brutal for me (lurking on this forum, contemplating life, losing hope). I am beyond excited and grateful - started to cry at work when I saw the email. Well deserved CANT WAIT TO MEET EVERYONE IN SEPTEMBER
  9. 20 points
    100% this. Some of you have apologized for being guilty of contributing to this, but it’s still happening with annoying frequency. Id rather people self correct, but everyone has noticed this, we get a lot of complaints, and people are starting to just not participate vs having to put up with it. If this applies to you, figure out how to be a better poster who can say their piece and leave room for other people to contribute with fewer multi-hundred post back and forths amongst the same posters. If you can’t, we’ll do it for you, and that’s not an ideal outcome for anyone.
  10. 19 points
    "I did not do especially well in 1L, but I prefer to believe that the only difference between me and the students who did do well can be summarized in a few trite lines, and that the difference has nothing at all to do with ability, work ethic, or real knowledge of the material. By telling everyone this is true, I make it a little more true for myself. For authority, I cite the fact that I'm dating a professor in an unrelated field."
  11. 18 points
    Accepted today! Im a reapplicant who was waitlisted for 6 months last year. I received my rejection letter right after my Dad's funeral, so Im over the moon right now. LSAT 159 158 166 L2 Pretty bad. No idea how they calculated foreign courses. Low end of 3 ECs courthouse volunteering, international language competition, instant noodle instagram REFs Very close with both professors and have done tons of activites with one of them. Green circled Jan 22 no change until today.
  12. 18 points
    No, in fact I have less. I don't remember complaining about my low score. In fact if you look at my very first post on this forum a year ago, I wrote in the U of T rejected thread: Rejected a couple days ago. Stupidly imagined I could wing the LSAT like I did the SAT. Nope. Rewriting in September! cGPA: ~3.56 LSAT: 155 I clenched my jaw and worked like an animal for the next few months to do what needed to be done, and conquered the exam. It wasn't easy, and my life hasn't exactly been a walk in the park either, although I have been fortunate in some respects. I relied almost entirely upon myself and did what needed to be done. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't recall making a post on this forum presumptuously claiming that the LSAT is weighed too heavily by law schools and that law school admissions are biased or unfair. I steeled my resolve, sacrificed a lot, aimed singularly at what was necessary, and reached a 170 and got in to U of T. Some people climb the mountain to reach the top. Others complain that there is a mountain top, and declare wherever they are to be the new mountain top. Now mind you I'm all for supporting OP in her endavours, and if she has any questions as to how she might improve on the LSAT, I'm more than happy to help. I've helped around a dozen people on this forum raise their LSAT scores by answering their messages and providing them with my humble guidance. I love helping people succeed. But I won't validate anti-hierarchical claims coming out of left-field by someone who hasn't done what it takes to succeed in an explicitly hierarchical and competitive pursuit - law school admissions. Especially as someone who also had a low first write, and did what it took to succeed. However I do apologize for my earlier remark, it was unhelpful at best.
  13. 18 points
    I take it back, you're right. The law schools will ignore your LSAT and rewrite their admissions criteria the moment they see your application. Thank you for making me see the error of my ways. Good luck, Your Honour.
  14. 18 points
    If I was your fun broker and you came to me and said “I have $30,000/year to spend for the next 3 years and I’d like to have a lot of fun” I would probably steer you in another direction.
  15. 17 points
    I believe I've found the listing also, and I'm going to follow Bob's discretion and not link to it because based on this thread so far it would seem to be indirectly bad-mouthing the employer, who doesn't deserve it. But this is what I found: " From $20/hr during probation period (negotiable) with bonuses, subject to experience and performance, ability to bring new files a plus and will be compensated but NOT a requirement." So, here's the bottom line, folks. And if you find this news shocking, it's better to get used to it now than later. This is a lower-end job. It's near the bottom of the spectrum for full-time employment as a lawyer. It's an entry-level job doing mainly the least well-remunerated work available to lawyers (I base that on the remainder of the ad) and at a small practice. The pay being offered is not at all impressive, but also not ridiculous and/or exploitative. I quoted the line above because I think the employer is actually being quite reasonable (remember that - if you identify them) and reading between the lines I think you can assume they know their base pay is low but they are willing to consider more for the right candidate, to award bonuses for strong performance, to reward bringing in files, etc. This is a perfectly reasonable job posting. Anyone who is shocked by this needs to get the fuck over themselves. Why? Because this is still a lower end job posting. Implicitly, this is the sort of job that you take if you are (a) not a competitive applicant for any job on the market that pays better, for doing higher-end work, and (b) in addition to not being able to get a better job elsewhere, you are also not able to successfully employ yourself doing even lower end work. Honestly folks, what the hell do you all expect? If you aren't good enough to interest any of the employers out there who are paying well, and you're not even organized enough to serve your own clients ... how well do you think it pays on the legal market to do this lower-end work while employed by someone else who is fronting the bills for the operation and (obviously) taking a cut of your production value? Here's why you need to get the fuck over yourself. If you work hard, if you present well, if you know your stuff and you're even a moderately ambitious go-getter who is able to secure some work for yourself, this won't be you. Or at least it shouldn't be. There is plenty of good work on the market out there. This just isn't an example of it. This is an example of what you get paid when you fight high-end traffic tickets and lower end small claims in another lawyer's practice. But if you aren't any of these things, and if you just limp your way through law school and make it out the other end with a degree and very little idea of what the hell it's used for ... yeah, you could end up here, if you are lucky. Did you really imagine otherwise? A law degree isn't a license to print money. If you didn't know that already, you do now. Wake the fuck up because you've been warned. You are part of the same competitive economy as everyone else. You aren't special, and your accomplishments to this point in your life do not exempt you from the same need for hard work and the same uncertainty that all the rest of the world deals with. There are many good employment opportunities in law. There's also some bad ones. And there's a minority who can't find work at all, too. That tends to come up in other threads, but might as well combine the topics. Law does not promise universal employment. Never has, and never will. Not everyone who goes to law school is so fucking special that they deserve, or can reasonable be worth, a lot of money to an employer. If you're bothered by that, then your goal is to not be among the least effective students in your class and it won't be your problem. If, however, your bar for success is just not failing, then yeah. Consider this in your future and possibly modify the criteria which you apply to yourself.
  16. 17 points
    The rest of what I have to say is so importantly different from what I wrote above that I felt the need to do a different post. I had some mainstream and I had some less mainstream views in law school. I never felt I was somehow in unsafe space when it came to sharing those views. I sometimes felt people would rather I shut up, and see Hegdis' very good points above. That's not the same thing. When conservatives say "I don't know if it's safe to share my views" I have two distinct reactions. First, I try to emphasize and take those views seriously and engage with them. So, let me make this promise. In any context where you are not hyperventilating and trying to force everyone in the room to agree that the points you are making are obviously right, and that the way you have chosen to make them is obviously necessary, and despite the fact that you've hijacked a lecture on an unrelated topic everyone should stop and listen to you now ... anything short of that and you won't face violence or active opposition. People may ignore you. People may think you're an idiot. People may even say so. But that's not the same thing. Attending law school doesn't guarantee you an audience. And I don't think anyone is saying it should. That's as far as my distinct, sympathy goes. If you find yourself barred from campus, we'll talk. Anything short of that is hypothetical. Now here's where my sympathy ends. Speaking as someone who finds myself almost entirely in majoritarian identities and whose right to speak and hold the views that I hold is almost inevitably acknowledged, I find it hilarious when similarly privileged people say "I don't feel safe." As in seriously, you privileged ass. Get the holy fuck over yourself. You say "somewhere else, at some other time, in another fucking country people have been ridiculed and abused for expressing views similar to mine. And based on this, I feel unsafe." You realize that at other times, in other places, and in other countries, people are still being fucking killed for being gay, right? Or for promoting racial equality. Or for expressing any of the standard views that the left, writ large, often expresses? I mean, you do realize that, right? When was the last time you approached a conversation in Canada about gay rights, or equal marriage, or any other such time, and went into the room trying to actively remember the costs that people face in other countries entirely, and in other contexts, for raising those views? Come on, man. You go in with the same attitude I do. You aren't fussed about it because it's Canada. We accept and take for granted that discussions about sexual orientation here are now, for the most part, safe and uncontroversial. So, I'm not saying that you are entirely and factually wrong that there may be times and places where conservatism is greeted badly. But if that makes you nervous in a Canadian law school, I have two related messages. First, get the hell over it. And second, if you can't get over it, at least appreciate how typical your experience is. This is what it feels like to not be white, straight, male, hetero-normative. This is what it feels like to not be entirely in the majority all the fucking time, and to realize that sometimes people who disagree with you have, at least the potential, in some cases and in some places, to respond violently. This is what it feels like to some people all the time. So if you can't get over it, at least learn to emphasize from the experience.
  17. 16 points
    For what it’s worth OP most of the reaction in this thread has been off the mark. The idea you shouldn’t breach a contract is obviously silly. People breach contracts every day. Nobody enters into a contract on the understanding it can’t be breached. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what a contract is and pretty unforgivable on a forum full of lawyers. Your firm isn’t going to sue you for damages, and if they did you can pay them. That’s all that contract law says. You think they’re going to get specific performance? Lol. All discussion of your “contract” or “reputation” is a red herring. You’d piss off firm 1 but really who cares. People leave jobs for other jobs that pay more money every day. That’s how the labor market works. What an awful world it would be for employees if it didn’t work that way! Having said that you unfortunately live in a province where legal practice is governed by an anticompetitive cartel that makes up silly rules about legal practice and they seem to say this is not allowed. So unless you think you can come to a mutual understanding with firm 1 it could land you in hot water with the law society to move to firm 2 now. That’s really all that matters here.
  18. 16 points
    I sent an email to CTV Windsor over an hour ago and it looks like the article just got retracted. Here is my email: I am writing to express strong concern regarding the article that you published on CTV Windsor online regarding the law school ranking of the University of Windsor titled, "Windsor cracks top five for best law school in Canada". The reason for my concern is that you have published an article linking its source to a student publication that contains glaring misstatements, inaccurate statistics, and plagiarized content. For example, the student publication lists Windsor Law's GPA and LSAT statistics as 3.7 and 157, respectively. This is outright false. According to the University of Windsor Faculty of Law official website, the GPA and LSAT entrance stats are not disclosed as admission to the law school is based on 7 different criteria, and nowhere is a GPA/LSAT statistic listed. I called the admissions office, and they did not disclose statistics for me. http://www.uwindsor.ca/law/1163/windsor-law-admissions-faq 2) There are blatant untruths and misstatements in the article. For example, the University of Alberta Law School's tuition is NOT $29,727.80. For domestic students, it is close to $15-16K. Similarly, the average LSAT/GPA is 3.8/160 as per the law school's official website (https://www.ualberta.ca/law/admissions/juris-doctor/applicant-profile), NOT 3.7/161. The student author simply lifted these statistics from Wikipedia, which is not accurate. Similarly, the average LSAT entrance requirement for York University, according to its law school, is 162 (82nd percentile), as per their official website. It is NOT 165 as stated in the student publication. https://www.osgoode.yorku.ca/programs/juris-doctor/jd-admissions/eligibility-requirements/ 3) The amount of plagiarized content is staggering. The author has simply lifted the content of her profiles for each school from Wikipedia (compare University of Toronto, McGill, and Windsor profiles for instance, to the Wikipedia pages of these respective schools). Similarly, the author lifted profiles directly from the official Ivy Global LSAT website for schools like York University (Osgoode Hall). The result is that the article contains outdated and incorrect statements that are not current, truthful, or correct. https://old.ivyglobal.ca/lsat/school_osgoode.asp The credibility of this student magazine, "University Magazine", and by extension, CTV, is undermined and called into question when you provide thousands of readers with literally false reporting and false news through an outlet that fails to uphold basic journalistic practices, namely, accurate and truthful reporting. I respectfully ask that you retract this article immediately. Your viewers and the general public deserve truthful and accurate reporting, and also deserve to know that the news content that they rely on upholds the basic journalistic practices of truthfulness and accuracy.
  19. 16 points
    lol, rankings are dumb and Osgoode and UBC were practically indistinguishable in them anyway lol, if you're going all in on DOJ Tax Law Services, you're going wherever the job openings are lol, in like 1889 lol, running to BC (of all places) to get away from the leftists. Good luck finding your safe space, snowflake lol for a moment there I had an eyebrow raised at your gratuitous blame-casting, but now that you have assured us you are TOTALLY NOT RACIST we're cool I hope you go to UBC
  20. 16 points
    Hey all This could possibly belong in off-topic, and if so feel free to move. But here's an article worth reading to see what it looks like to build a career in "international human rights" law. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/02/asma-jahangir-obituary/553043/ Honestly, I didn't know a damn thing about Ms. Jahangir before I read this article. She seems like a formidable lawyer, and she obviously had a great impact on her nation. Good for her. What prompted me to post here is a short section in the article where it mentions, almost in passing, that after a career spent shaking the pillars of the legal and political establishment in Pakistan, Ms. Jahangir had a role in the UN and was present more internationally. Which isn't surprising at all. Now I'm using this article to jump into a point I often make, but I really do hope some eager young student takes and learns the lesson here. The lesson isn't that you should get a legal education in Canada and then move to Pakistan to help the poor and dispossessed. There are two very good reasons why not. First, in Pakistan you will not be a lawyer and you'll have no standing before the court to do any of the things Ms. Jahangir built her career doing. And second, despite the fact that Ms. Jahangir has now unfortunately died, Pakistan, and other nations in the world, no matter how troubled, have their own internal crusaders for human rights who are educated in the country, licensed to practice law there, steeped in the culture and the language, and so on. To whatever extent any freshly minted graduate will have any opportunity to practice "human rights" law at all, why would anyone imagine that opportunity will be best served by flying someone halfway around to world to a nation they don't understand, can't function in, and where they aren't licensed to appear in court? It's nonsense to imagine that would happen. Anyone who wants to practice "international human rights law" the way Ms. Jahangir did should follow in her footsteps and build a practice and a profile the same way. Represent the people you are licensed to represent. Help the people who don't have anyone else to help them right here where your advocacy for them is actually meaningful. Contain your need for fame and acclaim and your expectation that you'll be applauded just for showing up. That is - and I'm sorry to say it - a symptom of Western privilege that you want to be the special person flown across the world just to show them what you learned in law school. And it's an absurd conceit that they need or want you. Do the thankless work in the trenches. And if you do it very well, and get the results that everyone thought were impossible because no one else wanted to take it on exactly because there was no fame or money in it ... well, maybe you'll develop a profile of sorts. And maybe, years into a career of doing the hard, thankless work domestically, someone will ask for your involvement in another part of the world. Maybe. Enough with the Amal Clooney crap. This is what international human rights law looks like. I didn't know this woman. And maybe someone here did, but I'd guess she was largely unknown in Canada. And yet she's a hero. There's a hell of a lot of work that needs doing on Canada. We have no lack of poor, dispossessed people who have few advocates because there's no fame, money, or glory in representing them. You want that job? No one is stopping you. In fact, plenty of people will beg you to take on the work. It's there for anyone who wants it. You know what you need to be a human rights lawyer making an impact on people's lives? You just need to give up on your dreams of fame and travel, stop expecting a parade for showing up, and realize that your dreams of being a (white) Western savior are insulting and insufferable when stacked against the reality of lawyers like Ms. Jahangir who are already doing this work far better than you ever could, in their own home nations. So take the lesson and work in your home nation instead.
  21. 16 points
    I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if thousands of IP lawyers suddenly cried out in dismay
  22. 15 points
    It's really remarkable that you've managed to hit so many tropes about clueless applicants in such a short post. So I'm going to reply to a few ideas in your introduction, first, and use it to come home to some hard advise. - Your CGPA won't move much at this point no matter what you do. But that's not the point. If you can turn in a year or two of very strong grades (we're talking A-average here) it won't matter so much what your overall average is. What will matter is that you've demonstrated the ability to get grades like that. That's what law schools really care about, despite their differing applications criteria. - The idea that you can study hard and get a 170 LSAT is ridiculous. I won't swear it's impossible, but it's far from likely. Everyone wants to imagine that limitless improvement is possible, with practice. 17 points doesn't seem like so much, does it? But you're ignoring how it's scored, where 120 is getting literally every question wrong and 180 is getting every single question right. So let's put it in percentage terms. At 153 you are out-performing roughly 55% of all test-takers. Which is to say you're slightly better than average. At 170 you're hoping to out-perform 98% or 99% of all test takers. As in, imagine a room full of 100 people including yourself. Right now, you're beating slightly more than half of them. What you want is to beat every last one of them. Again, not impossible. But hoping that you'll get there with practice is probably unrealistic. We're talking about a room full of people who all hope to out-perform each other. - The fact that you've planned to be a lawyer for your entire life since high school is relevant to no one aside from yourself. See below to have this turn into useful advice. - All of your extra-curricular involvement will amount, at best, to a tie-breaker between you and candidates with similar grades and LSAT scores. Right now, no one who is even in your range of grades and LSAT scores is getting into law school. So please, stop leaning on that or hoping it'll save you. - Don't blame the school you went to or the competitiveness of your program. It's an illusion, or at best a distraction. 25-30% of every class at U of T does get grades in the A-range. Trust me, I do know that. If you can't out-perform 70-75% of your classmates most of the time, how do you expect to out-perform 99% of the people taking the LSAT? Sure, it may theoretically be harder to get A's at U of T. I can't pretend I know for sure. But I know that many students do, nonetheless, get A's. Be one of them. Anything else is an excuse. So here's the summary take-away. There are applicants to law school who wake up sometime in the final year, realize they want to go to law school even though it never occurred to them before, they take their strong grades, write the LSAT, do well, and they get in. And there are applicants to law school who dreamed about being a lawyer for the past 10 years, they volunteer, they debate, they run their pre-law clubs, and they have weak grades and don't do well on the LSAT and they don't get in. You may feel that's wrong, and that somehow law schools should reward desire rather than achievement. But you know what? They don't. So that debate is irrelevant. I'm not even taking sides at the moment. I'm just saying that's the reality. Your game plan is very simple. Stop trying to demonstrate interest in law school. No one cares. Get straight As (yes, it's possible), write the best LSAT you can rather than dreaming about what's probably impossible, and in a couple of years you may yet get in. But at this point, you're playing catch-up, and pretending otherwise is a waste of time. You need to start doing the things that matter instead of dreaming about what you want. And seriously, you need a wholesale shift in attitude about how you approach work and life. Because if you were doing what matters, at some point in the last five years, you'd have actually figured out what it takes to get into law school and this information wouldn't be news to you. I'm not trying to beat you up or say it's impossible now. It isn't. But man, you've got to radically reshape your approach to everything. You don't need a pep-talk. You need a life change. Good luck.
  23. 15 points
    TL; DR Yes, I will be your pen pal if you ever want to chat. Feel free to DM me :). Please seek professional help if needed. The story below is only anecdotal and worked for me while going through a similar situation and wanted to share so you know there's others feeling the same. I went through similar feelings of lethargy at my current place of employment. I tried to overcome this by setting goals for myself in the most remedial of tasks. Cook all my meals during the weekdays, try a new restaurant every Saturday, lose ten pounds, bench two plates, write the LSAT, finally attempt to pursue my dream of law school, etc. I succeeded in all of my goals but this did not satisfy my need for growth or feeling of emptiness. I went beyond, I started telling myself I'd lose 20 pounds and go to the gym everyday at 5 AM before work. I started not only cooking my meals, but only cooking clean whole foods. I added reading a book a week to my schedule, I made sure I took time for a coffee regardless of how busy I was to reflect on my accomplishments every morning after my work out. I always wrote out on a sticky note what my goal was and crossed it out once completed or if recurring kept it up as a reminder. Sooner than later I had a long list of crossed out goals, I became obsessed with progress and growth. Now I'm taking Spanish lessons twice a week, reading 1 - 3 books a week, working out everyday, and finally going to law school next year. The meaning of (or better said as - IN) life is not in accomplishment or obtaining goals, it's finding the balance between maintaining your routine and comfort in certainty and making the decision to step out of your comfort zone to go on an adventure to the unknown. You knew you were smart, you knew you'd go to law school, you knew you'd have an articling position, you knew you'd get a job. Now that you have your routine and comforts, starting slowly stepping out of your comfort zone while maintaining your routine. Sign up for salsa lessons once a week, don't let yourself convince yourself it is stupid. Learn to scuba dive, progress through the PADI ranks, take a trip every year to Bermuda, start crossing off places on a map you've dove. Your commitment to personal development will attract like minded people and eventually someone you'll end up spending the rest of your life with or maybe not, but you will have a lifetime of accomplishments and consistent balance of routine and unknown keeping you busy. You are an exceptional human being with a capacity to do great in this world and have already done more than most can imagine, the problem is you are not like most people. You owe it to yourself and those around you to challenge yourself and try new things. Go on an adventure. Good luck, keep us updated. And send us a post card :).
  24. 15 points
    Did you come to the UofT Waitlist and Rejected threads just to paint everyone who wants to attend UofT with the broad brush that they're "pointlessly" taking on debt for prestige? Might as well do it in the Accepted thread too and make it 3/3. There are tons of reasons why someone would want to attend UofT over some other school rather than "prestige" - location, career opportunities, clinics, professors, school atmosphere, close friends going there... list goes on. You chose Osgoode (2017-2018 tuition at $26k) over Queen's/Western/Ottawa (tuition at $19k/$22k/$18k) which you admit all of which can place you on Bay if you try hard enough. If everything is just a "choose the cheapest option", then why'd you choose Osgoode to take on "pointless" debt? Also, UofT has the most generous financial aid program out of any of the Ontario schools. For example, Ottawa's bursary program for law students if you're eligible is Year 1: $2,000, Year 2&3: $1,500. UofT Law's bursary program, which was given out to 50% of all students, averages $10,900 per student per year for 2017-2018. If you qualify for financial aid, UofT also pays a portion (if not all) your interest on the PSLOC while in school. If you graduate and make less than $60k a year, UofT covers a significant portion of your debt through their PDRP (which is on a sliding scale as your salary goes up). Don't get me wrong, there are people who only consider prestige and choose a school based on that. But I think it's pretty frivolous to come to the UofT threads and think anyone who wants to attend UofT is only doing it for prestige. If you came and said "Hey look, it's not that bad that you got waitlisted/rejected, at least you won't be paying all that debt!" in good humour, that's fine. But unless I (and many others) have misinterpreted your comments, you didn't - you came and said "Look at all these fools thinking a degree from UofT Law is worth the price."
  25. 14 points
    Hello, I thought I would give my honest review of my 1L experience at uOttawa. Hopefully this helps some of you. Some Good: 1. The quality of professors (at least for me) has been solid. Even the professors I have not particularly liked have been extremely well-versed in the subject they were teaching, and were always engaging lecturers. They found ways to make subject matter I hate be relatable and interesting. Every professor I have had has been approachable (even the scary ones). I feel like professors really respect their students, and are very aware of the stressful periods of 1L (aka the nightmare that was late November). There have been multiple times where I had a "shit this sucks, I don't want to be here anymore" attitude, only to have a professor give some solid morale boost in class to build me back up. I am sure others feel the same. 2. The student body is very collegial. It is hard to not compare yourself with your classmates at times and stress about marks. But with that said, I have never had a classmate actively root against another or try to do any type of competitive bullshit. It's very much been a "if you see someone down, you pick them back up" kind of atmosphere. My biggest fear of law school was the competitiveness, but really, the only person you are competing against is yourself when you think that way. 3. Pub grub and beer. There are so many places within a 2 minute walk of Fauteux that if your day really sucked, or you just want to have a couple drinks with friends, they're right there. Many a "quick beer" turned into a 4-hour chill sesh. 4. The small group set-up. I had a very good experience in my small group and felt that it was a way to get a better look at a topic I knew nothing about. My small group topic was something I had no knowledge of whatsoever, and without it, would probably have struggled. But the small group format meant we spent a lot of time on tedious cases that would have confused the hell out of me had I been in a lecture of 80 people. 5. For as much as people shit on the administration, they have always been very good with any issue that has come up in my experience so far. So I may be the first to say this but the administration never messed any of my stuff up, always facilitated my needs and responded to my questions and emails in a timely manner. 6. There are always information sessions and guest lectures being held. Some are helpful, some aren't, but I like how much is always going on in the law building. There is always something going down if you pay attention, lots to check out. 7. Scraps of food and coffee are everywhere. If you choose uOttawa, you will learn to scavenge in Fauteux like the rest of us raccoons. You will probably never want to eat a wrap again after first year. 8. Upper-year peer mentors have been really helpful. They've shown us the ropes. I didn't know what the hell a case brief was, a summary, a short summary, a long summary, a framework etc., it was all gibberish and I was completely lost. But our peer mentor gave us the down low on every damn thing, hooked us up with a tonne of helpful strategies and tips, and eased the learning curve. I should add as well the students who run my tutorials have been pretty solid, so thank you to them as well. 9. I think we get a fall reading week next year (?). I can't remember if that's a real thing or if I just dreamed it. Some Bad: 1. The building sucks. Genuinely every building I have gone into on campus blows FTX out of the water. The bathrooms are few and far between, most notably in the library. Women get the short end of the stick on this one for sure. I think there is one nice classroom in the whole building - I forget the number at the moment but the third floor one with pink and purple seats. It's like they just decided to update that one classroom, then said "okay good enough lol" and forgot the rest of the building. The others have these horrible plastic chairs that just make your get gnarly swamp ass. The fourth floor of the library is nice, but it fills up rather quick. The fifth floor might as well be purgatory, and of course there are no bathrooms on the fifth floor. The library's computer lab is good though, it's usually pretty empty. 2. The building is overcrowded. They're trying to fit too many people in it. At peak times in first semester it was really noticeable. The mix is also weird. You got 25 year old common law students mixed in a building with 18 and 19 year olds. Just separate the two programs. 3. More hate on the building: those damn double doors when you enter. Just seriously flatten FTX or give us one of those fancy new buildings down the road. If you have mobility issues, I could see FTX being a major headache. On the first floor alone you have to get in a tiny elevator JUST to get to the main elevator, and you would still need to go through a fire escape door if you wanted access to the 5th floor of the library. 3. Legal Research, Alternative Dispute Resolution and Property. These first two courses aren't stressful, but they seem to add stress onto first semester for no reason. ADR was pretty meh, I don't understand why any of it was needed in the first semester as you take it for 3 weeks in January and learn all the same stuff. Same with Legal Research - that easily could have been a single semester course. Why they make property the single semester course out of these three makes little sense to me. Property was dense, and felt more applicable in future practice than both LR and ADR. In property I felt like I was duct-taped to the roof of a car ripping down the highway passing important signs like "oh shit what did that one say?" haha. 4. January term. I cannot stress how pointless I think January term is. It is 3 weeks of slacking off, then everyone banging out an assignment the night before so we can all go home or go on vacation. Christmas and New Years is done, and then BAM you're back in Fauteux thinking "what the hell, I was just eating turkey wasn't I?" Then you get this garbage reading week at the end of January term, that isn't even a reading week and is only 3 weeks after winter break. You can't get ahead on assignments. No one wants to read because they just crammed 1 week of ADR work into a single night. Some people actually get stuck in cold ass Ottawa when they could've spent an extra week back home or wherever, and now have to buy a plane or train ticket to go home again. That just sucks. When you come back from that week you don't feel rested, and you face a shortened semester with a bunch crammed in. 5. Alluded to above - the shortened winter semester feels very rushed with some prof's trying to cram a tonne in, and then some prof's just phoning it in later in the term. 6. The winter. This has nothing to do with the school at all. I love winter. I love the snow, I love skating outside, I love that feeling where the wind hits you just right and suffocates you for a good 5 seconds. I love all that shit. But I. Fucking. Hate. Ottawa. Winters. The weather here is the worst. It throws everything at you, freezing rain, snow dumps, -40 wind chill. This is all bundled together with shit sidewalks that are never cleared. It's March and it's still miserable! Anyways, there are some thoughts. As with any place, some good, some bad. All what you make it. Sorry if there are any mistakes, mainly wrote this post because I am procrastinating on catching up on readings and don't feel like starting a paper.
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