Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 08/18/18 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. 32 points
    Don't know much about the Seven Sisters, but I can confirm that the Three Brothers pay articling students with either a stone, a wand, or a cloak. Hope this helps.
  3. 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.
  4. 29 points
    Good luck to everyone tomorrow. Wish everyone gets a favourable schedule, and for those without ITCs some surprise calls, etc. Either way, it'll all be okay and we'll all be laughing about all this some years down the line. Remember you're all very talented people, and this process doesn't define who you are or your potential.
  5. 28 points
    I think it's more common during articles.
  6. 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.
  7. 26 points
  8. 26 points
    I don't mean to derail this conversation any more, but "work your ass off" means very different things for those who come from an extremely financially stable background vs. those who don't. It's a lot easier to "get into university, maintain a high GPA, pass the LSAT, get into law school, maintain good grades in law school, kill articling interviews, work yourself to the grindstone during articling, pass the bar" when you don't have to worry about financial burdens. utmguy is not guilty - he/she is just recognizing that he/she had it better than other people. No need to lambaste someone acknowledging that.
  9. 25 points
    Each year at Dal, they gathered us in the atrium and offered everyone who wasn't interviewed by either Stikeman Elliott or an appellate court near the Laurentian river as a sacrifice to the ghost of JSD Tory. This helped ensure that school's recruiting numbers stayed high. I only escaped by hiding in the basement under a fort made of old McGill guides and feeding on scraps that fell from wine and cheese events above. Needless to say, 2L and 3L grades felt functionally meaningless, given that the only two options were (1) a life of work on Bay St. following your first year of law school or (2) literal death.
  10. 25 points
    Some people may tell you, at times, that you should regularly acknowledge your privilege when you have it. I'm not one of them. What you choose to acknowledge, or not, if your business, and people who shove your face in it at inopportune times are assholes. However, if someone else chooses to acknowledge their privilege, and you are triggered simply by hearing that, then you have become the asshole in the exchange. Big time. I'm not even going to refute your ignorance. I'll choose another time and place. You don't need to agree with every commonplace fact to function as a lawyer - and yes, the existence and nature of "privilege" if not its absolute contours is a commonly acknowledged fact - but you do need to be able to hear things you don't agree with without completely losing control of your sense of the appropriate. You're responding to an off-hand comment, and objecting simply to hearing someone else offer perspective on their own life. Right, wrong, or otherwise, someone else's perspective on their own life is none of your fucking business - even if they were wrong and you're right. Neither of which are true here, btw. Grow the fuck up.
  11. 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.
  12. 24 points
    I don't want to derail this thread and wasn't going to comment further, but this just irked me quite a bit. Do you know that immigrants and first generation Canadians are flooding professional school programs like medicine, dentistry, and law? Something they all have in common is that they worked hard (very hard) to be there. You yourself admitted to not working harder in undergrad. I came from a relatively poor background and was working multiple jobs in undergrad while commuting 4 hours to university everyday. I went to Osgoode and got into a number of other schools as well. My parents came to Canada with nothing and could not afford to pay for my education even if they had wanted to. Yet you have the luxury of travelling abroad for law school and are calling the people here who worked their asses off to get into Canadian programs elitists...tell me, who is actually privileged - you or me? If I did not get into a Canadian law school, my legal aspirations were done. I took out OSAP and a student line of credit at prime interest rate to pay for the whole thing. I depended on bursaries from my law school. While you can take out a line of credit to attend a foreign school, you need a co-signer with good credit (which I did not have) and the interest rates are high. Scotiabank just recently stopped giving out loans to students travelling abroad altogether. We need to stop these kinds of nonsense statements in its tracks. I see it a lot from my friends and peers who went abroad for law school. Something they all have in common is that they come from money, are well-connected, and they didn't work as hard as us elitists in undergrad to get into a Canadian school. But, hey, bring out the banners and march on the streets because us elitists are blocking them access to these "high paid jobs" to maintain the status quo.
  13. 24 points
    I too struggled with answering this question. There are certainly elements of my life with which I am very satisfied, and law is a defining part of it. I'm very satisfied with my job, with what I do everyday, with the people I work with, with the people I work for, and the compensation I get for it. I am also satisfied with my general position in life. Growing up, I was repeatedly told that I was a failure, I would not amount to anything, and that people like me don't enter this profession. Everyday I can wake up and do what I do as a massive "fuck you" to the people who said I couldn't or shouldn't do it. That is pretty satisfying for me. But at the same time (and mindful of potentially stepping into the cesspool created by Mycousinsteve) I do feel guilty about my success. I am incredibly conscious of the fact that I earn now as a young lawyer what my father was earning, after a lot of struggle, at the peak of his career. My mother works a close-to-minimum-wage job and works way harder than I do, but I charge 20+ times more than she makes an hour. Something just seems off about that sort of discrepancy. I get it that I am smart (relatively speaking) and that has its market value; but I wouldn't say that it is all effort and no luck of the draw. I just happen to retain and understand more information than the average person, am able to direct that towards seemingly useful ideas, and am able to express those ideas in a coherent and polished way. All of that means that I get to live way better than my parents ever could. So when I take my parents to a nice restaurant, I am equal parts satisfied that I can take them to that place, but also guilty that more value has been placed in me than them because of some random combination of values.
  14. 24 points
    There is no employer, no 'sweat shop', that would prevent one from having the time to take advantage of other pursuits of interest. None. I know hundreds of lawyers. I grew up in a home with a parent who is a lawyer. I have cousins, extended family members and family friends who are lawyers. I have law school friends, clerking friends, colleagues, who are lawyers in a wide variety of practices from large firms to in-house to government to small boutiques to sole practitioners, and at all stages of career from new associates to senior partners, GC, etc. I cannot think of even one person who does not have hobbies/interests/activities/community involvement. Not a one. Sports - hockey, hiking, skiing, competitive running, cycling, softball, soccer; book clubs, theatre, teaching, mentoring, board members, volunteer work, - I know lawyers involved in all of these and this is just a list off the top of my head. And this isn't even to mention the added responsibilities of children for those who are parents. I wouldn't want any prospective student, current student or young lawyer to think that what prohacvice is describing as his/her experience is anything but extremely uncommon, and is more likely to be a personal choice that is unwise. @DarklyDreamingDexter There is no reason to think that you are being unrealistic about having time to pursue your art. You may not be able to do it every day but there will be nothing stopping you on a permanent basis.
  15. 23 points
    ALEXANDER How can I, bastard, orphan son of a whore And a Scotsman, dropped in the middle of a forgotten spot in the Caribbean By providence, impoverished, in squalor, become a fancy Osgoode Haller? DIPLOCK I get it, young man, no doubt you've seen your share of strife But's there's this thing I call the Fallacy of the Perfect Life Your dad's gone - that sucks, but it's not a claim for Access How's that gonna explain your repeated mediocre LSATs? Yeah, so, if the shoe fits wear it Your application sucks but you've got years to repair it And if you make that effort I sure do wish you the best, sir But don't you fucking come back here and ask 'bout going to Leicester
  16. 23 points
    This is not how this thread works, but congratulations on your offer.
  17. 22 points
    For those of us who are already forced, ethically, to do pro bono work for vulnerable clients, I'll lower any remaining boundaries and say this is a fucking disgrace. A fucking disgrace we all could see coming--but, nonetheless, a fucking disgrace. The reactionary bullshit of "Well, don't commit a crime then," is just too much to handle after a long and difficult week. I don't want to believe things are that bad. Though I know they are. My LAO clients (and the ones who can't even get LAO) are the most vulnerable and marginalized persons likely to die in the ditch they're calling home. To suggest that they set their own trials and advocate their own Charter defences and/or factual defences is a sick joke. I'm tired of this. I can see how my clients live before they die at 35. Hey, no problem paying a Crown $200,000 to prosecute some homeless and mentally ill person. But I guess our government draws the line at paying a lawyer (maybe even now a duty counsel lawyer) a pittance to defend that client. We'll see how these cuts shake out--what services are cut, what jobs are slashed. From what I've seen working in courthouses 5 days/week, there's no "fat." Maybe it'll be the entire non-CCC (i.e. refugee/immigration/landlord-tenant) wing. Who knows. I see duty counsel run off their feet in every jurisdiction. I guess we'll see. It's goddamn sad.
  18. 22 points
    Hi all - this forum has been so helpful (and anxiety-inducing, at times!) that I wanted to share my personal adventure on the road to law school acceptances - for those needing a bit of love and support at this time in the application cycle. When I first considered applying to law, I wrote the LSAT on a whim and scored in the 140's; a few months later, I tried again, with a one-point increase in score. I had applied to UVic that year (also on a whim, so stupid), and was rejected (duh). My self-confidence was bruised, and I figured law wasn't for me, so I put the idea of law school to bed. After a good deal of wallowing, some painful self-discovery, and way too many episodes of Gilmore Girls, I decided to pull my socks up and try, try again. I was in graduate school at the time and self-studied while completing my thesis (so stupid - see a theme here?). I wrote the exam and scored in the 150's. Forever the idealist, I re-wrote a few months later, still in time for that application cycle at UVic, and scored the exact same as before. This was a fantastic wake-up call, fueled by two years of rejection. The LSAT is a beast, I was not "smart enough" to take it on without support - that's something I needed to accept. I dished out a painful $1,000, took time off work, and gave myself one month of full-time studying to try, try again. I told the instructors of the course that my goal was a 160, because I truly thought that's all I would be able to achieve. Progress was slow, but as the month came to a close, I saw improvement, scoring on practice tests between 160-162. I wrote the exam for a fifth time, and scored a 163. This year, I applied to five schools: TRU, U of M, U of A, U of S, and UVic. I've been accepted to all/waitlisted at UVic. My approach to the LSAT was sloppy, I recognize that. I was nauseatingly idealistic about my ability to self-study and receive an offer with some cheesy 80's music playing the background with smiles all around. For the majority of us, getting into law school is tough, admissions committees are ruthless - but that stubborn determination paid off, even if it took a few years! So, for those of you tackling the LSAT right now, or waiting anxiously to hear from the schools you applied to, know that if it doesn't happen this year, or on this exam, you have options, and you have time. One way or another, you'll make it happen. Be ambitious, stay strong, keep hoping, and be the badass future law student that you are. Cheers! 🍻
  19. 22 points
    I turned down this offer earlier today. Thank you all for your input.
  20. 22 points
    This post highlights the the exact type of person you are. This is ridiculous.
  21. 22 points
    You'd be surprised. I was in court in a medium-sized city a couple of weeks ago for a routine matter on consent. I wasn't expecting anything special to happen; the court was making its way through the list, I was barely paying attention, when a tort issue came up between a female plaintiff and male defendant. What caught my attention was the judge's question: "Before we proceed any further, defendant's counsel must acknowledge that the protection of women's rights are the most important thing in the law, much more important than any male entitlement." I was pretty shocked, but the defendant's lawyer - a highly esteemed member of the local bar with lots of family law experience - coolly rose and replied: "Your Honour, who is responsible for the protection of our fundamental rights in Canada?" The arrogant judge gave a Soros-like smirk and replied, "The Attorney General of Canada - who is a woman, as it always should be." "Wrong. It's been 58 years since John Diefenbaker created the Bill of Rights. If Jody Wilson-Raybould were responsible for protecting our rights, we would all be in internment camps by now." The judge was visibly shaken, dropped his gavel and copy of The Rights Revolution. He stormed out of the courtroom (and nobody stood) showing the same childish rage that left-wingers display when they demand 'equity' in the legal profession. There is no doubt at this point that the judge wished he had sought power by running as a PPC candidate in the next election rather than some unelected unaccountable sunshine list public sector appointee. The lawyers, the court clerk, the court reporter, and the interpreters all donated to Maxime Bernier that day and bought copies of Twelve Rules for Life for themselves and all of their friends, family, and colleagues. An owl named "enforced monogamy" flew into the room and perched on the Canadian flag, shedding a tear on the ((gold fringe)). O Canada was sung several times with the godly 1926 lyrics, and the Duke of Edinburgh himself showed up and declared that there are only two genders. The judge and the entire Canadian Judicial Council were removed by Order-in-Council the next day, they all had to move to northern Manitoba and died because they refused to use fossil fuels for heat. So you'll be fine, OP.
  22. 22 points
    That’s a beautiful summary of why privilege is invisible. For a long time this profession was the almost exclusive domain of white men. Every one of them would say he earned his place on hard work and hence wasn’t “privileged”.
  23. 21 points
    Without wading into the underlying debate, I just wanted to specifically respond to this comment because I couldn't have said it better. Although I'm only a 2019 call, so I don't want to derail this, I just managed to secure a better than expected associate position in a niche area of law in a small practice group with colleagues who seem to just be all around great people. And from the ground running I will be making way more than my grandparents ever did, who both worked in a factory for 50+ years while raising me as a kid, and now experience real health problems from how hard they had to work in less than ideal conditions, with never having anything like a financial cushion (one of my grandparents was an orphan, the other the oldest of 12). When I get them simple gifts, like craft coffee beans or other things they like, I literally have to rip off the label and say it bought it on sale or they will not use it because it is "too good for them." I really wish life could be more fair, but it isn't, and so I'm just thankful for what I have and trying to be a more open-hearted person in the process.
  24. 21 points
    As a follow-up, I accepted a paid position from a promising personal injury firm just now. Thank you all for your sound advice.
  25. 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.
  26. 21 points
    Please show some respect for all of the other talented people who are working incredibly hard to get an acceptance from any Canadian school. You received two acceptances before December, relax. There are so many others here who would do anything to be in your position.
  27. 20 points
    associate: "sir madam" partner: "My lords and ladies" managing partner: "Your highness"
  28. 20 points
    Op, tbh, only do it if your gf is OVER 2 points above you on the scale, and has discussed marriage with you. That’s, in my option, the only way to rationalize it.
  29. 20 points
    Hi Everybody! It's been a while since I checked in on this site...hope you're all doing well! I wanted to take a minute tonight to post about something that happened recently at my firm. For context, I'm a female mid-level associate at a biglaw firm in Toronto. I'm posting for a few reasons - first, because I need to vent somewhere, second, because I think it's important that people acknowledge when these things happen, and third, because I want to record how gender stereotypes have an impact on lawyers in 2018. One of my (also female, also associate) colleagues recently quit. She is by all accounts a skilled and well-liked lawyer. She left our big firm to go to another big firm for better opportunities - a combination of mentorship, file type, partnership prospects, etc. Her decision was a loss for our firm, and a windfall for the firm she's joining. When I spoke with a senior partner about what we could do differently going forward, he said a few things that were surprising to me. He started by saying that different people have different "reasons" for leaving their jobs, and he said that "not everyone is interested in private practice and the path to partnership". At first, I couldn't understand how this related to my colleague's departure - she was going to another prestigious law firm, to continue her private practice with an aim to becoming a partner. As I continued to press him, he shared his theory - he felt that my colleague might have left our firm because she wanted to be an in-house lawyer, and posited that she would use her new position at this other big firm as a stepping stone. Given that I know she has no interest in going in house, I might be biased. Maybe this is something that actually happens sometimes. But I do not believe that a male associate with her qualifications and skills, who decided to go to a competitor firm, would be accused of having a secret plan to go in-house. The suggestion that the senior partner was making was that she wasn't "cut out" for private practice - that in his opinion, she was probably seeking an easier path or a less demanding career. (for the record, I am not at all suggesting that lawyers who work in-house have it easy - many work similar hours to lawyers in private practice, and many are required to have broad knowledge in multiple areas - but I do think that's what this partner was suggesting). Here's why this matters: quite apart from the broader issue of retaining associates, we all (as big firms) have a hard time retaining skilled female associates - especially as they become more senior. Female associates face a host of obstacles that are overt, and to me, this experience really underscored the additional subtle pressures and assumptions that female associates experience on a daily basis. In terms of things that are still overt, they mostly relate to child-having and child-raising. We are frequently asked whether and when and how we plan to have children. We are consistently worried about the significant drop in our salaries during maternity leave (because remember that although many firms are supportive of female associates taking twelve months of maternity leave, they will only pay you for four). We still struggle to be invited to male-dominated events. And every day, many of the people in positions of power at our firms still assume that we are less interested or capable or able to become successful partners. For all of the discussion and effort that takes place about understanding and fixing the problems that prevent female lawyers from staying at law firms and progressing, it still seems to me that many female associates are "written off", or aren't fought for, because it's assumed that they will take time out of their working lives to have and raise children. Here's the tough thing to fix about it: in many cases, it's true. Women are still expected to take a twelve month maternity leave, whereas men (in my personal experience) are not expected to take paternity leave of more than a couple weeks, if any. Women are still generally expected to take on a bigger role in raising their children when both parents continue working. Without addressing these later assumptions, it's difficult to criticize people for making the earlier assumptions that women will eventually require more flexibility - they often will. But is that right? Relatedly, I found the recent episode of that Netflix series "explained" about the gender pay gap very interesting, and would recommend it. It suggested that unless men are equally expected to take leave to have and raise children, the gap will remain difficult to close. Anyways, those are my thoughts as a full service law firm associate in 2018. I'd be interested to know what others think about this story and/or these ideas generally. Feel free to share your own anecdotes if you feel comfortable, I would be interested to know whether others are having similar experiences.
  30. 19 points
    I did not know I needed to explicitly state reasons to post on this forum - I ask because I am a young associate myself and I want to hear more from women who’ve been doing it longer. i want to hear their genuine experience without being sugarcoated for workplace formalities. As a woman on Bay St myself I find myself wondering what makes YOU assume we’re not? 3-5 years were in brackets as an example. Personally, that is my experience. I am asking how to balance killing it at work, as I try, and having quality time with my husband. I want to hear Senior Associates + Partners’ with children experience Reality is, on Bay, there are women, like me (thats what makes me assume), who want to make Partner and want to start a family and who may also be of colour and are more likely prone to code switch often. Side note though (I’ve been reading your comments on the forum for a while) I dont believe you’re on Bay St + I am certainly not interested in your male partner’s experience, so I don’t understand why you’re commenting in a manner clearly intending to undermine the purpose of my post.
  31. 19 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!!
  32. 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.
  33. 19 points
    Accepted today - no e-mail but status changed on ozone and I have my PDF in front of me as proof LSAT 156 cGPA 3.1 and L2 3.3 Older student with an MA and tons of work experience I have been working at this for two years (studying LSAT and applying). I was rejected in 2017, waitlisted in June of this year and am now finally accepted. I'm on the verge of tears right now...
  34. 19 points
    I found law school was a time suck too, but let's not resort to hyperbole and raise anyone's anxiety unnecessarily. I had plenty of time for 8 hours of sleep a night and hobbies about 95% of the time as a law student. As a lawyer, I still have time for both. Sure, some nights go longer than expected. And sometimes I get a little less sleep than usual or I have to choose getting takeout and going to the gym instead of cooking, going to the gym, painting, and then playing video games. If your entire life is utterly consumed by law, I think that speaks more to time management than the nature of practice. If you can't find 40 minutes a day to relax and draw, it might be time to reassess your time management skills and become realistic and efficient about how you schedule and prioritize your activities. Every lawyer I know pursues hobbies. You'll be fine to keep drawing.
  35. 19 points
    Hey guys! After neglecting the board for a month or so, I came back to find this thread still at the top of the list & thought I ought to update everyone as to what's become of me. You were all so kind with your advice and encouragement. Thank you! You're good eggs. I inexplicably managed to fall ass backwards into an associate's position at a bigger, better firm. It's in a practice group I loved but my articling firm didn't have, and it even pays better than my articling firm would've. I don't doubt a huge part of this is the hot market in Toronto, because I'm not a straight A student or at all connected or anything like that. I did all of the things you guys told me: I got letters, had people make calls on my behalf, asked around, went to every networking event I could afford, checked the TLA/ Advocates' Society/ all other job boards religiously, cold called people like it was my day job & went on what felt like a thousand coffee dates. And that shit panned out- into jobs I wouldn't have been aware of otherwise, and interviews I probably wouldn't have gotten but for the hustle. Oddly enough, though, the job I got materialized out of a cold application. I didn't know anyone at the firm, and I didn't have any intel that they were hiring new calls; I just saw on their website a posting for third year associates and figured what the hell. I have no idea what they decided they liked about my application; possibly someone else's transcripts got mixed in with the rest of my stuff. Anyways, I'd like to add just one thing to the awesome advice you guys gave me. When you're cold calling people for coffee dates, everyone says look for someone who shares something with you: hobbies, schools, whatever. That's good advice. But IMO, the best possible commonality in this situation is someone who also moved around after articling. The junior and mid level associates I found who didn't get hired back and then went elsewhere went above and beyond to help me because they shared my shitty experience and felt bad for me. They rocked. You guys rock! In conclusion: thank you thank you thank you THANK YOU!
  36. 18 points
    To me, the key part of this subject title is the anxiety over giving up something "for good." That's something you (and all law students) need to make peace with. When you are young and talented and privileged you go all your early life getting told you can do anything. You internalize that message. And to a degree there's truth to it. But the other side of that truth is that you won't do everything. You can't. Obviously. Don't try to keep all your options open. It's an idiotic and self-defeating way to live. Every choice you make, every path you commit to, implicitly rejects other choices and other paths. If you fear closing off options, you'll continually hedge against committing to the things you actually want. And that's no way to live.
  37. 18 points
    Thank God someone finally showed up and told us the TRUTH. Seven years into practice, I've finally found the guru who'll educate me.
  38. 18 points
    Hey this happens all the time. Everyone moves around for reasons like this. You arrange a meeting with your boss. Tell them the truth, keep it simple. You like working at this firm. You have been offered a position elsewhere for more pay doing x, y, z. You are giving them x weeks notice (whatever is in your contract). You are going to take this position but want to discuss your departure with regard to passing on files, training a replacement, etc. Most of all you want to emphasize how wonderful the firm has been, that you are appreciative of their support and training, and how much you want to maintain a good relationship going forward. This is a professional decision and not a personal one. Then end the meeting. Don’t start carrying on and essentially asking them to make you feel better about this. It’s a professional decision, not a personal one, so be a professional throughout.
  39. 17 points
    Echoing Diplock, and adding my own perspective: our parents did us no favours by saying we could be whatever we want to be. It just ain’t so. I also think that tagging along on that myth is the impossible expectation that The Right Career Solves Everything. That somewhere out there is your dream job (this parallels the everyone has one soul mate myth). The truth is there are a bunch of jobs that have the potential to be your dream job - but they take goddamn work. They take sacrifice. They take days or weeks or months of slogging away to learn the thing before you feel confident, successful, respected. And then some years before I think you can really classify that as a settled degree of happiness or satisfaction with life overall. Yes, committing to a specific path over time is a risk, but so is every other damn thing including marriage or kids. I think one of the things we all struggle(d) with in our 20s is that there is no immediate feedback loop of validation. There is no burst of applause -or chorus of boos - when you make your decisions each step of the way. There’s no soundtrack telling you if you’re about to enter the Success/Wealth/Friends Montage versus the For God’s Sake Don’t Go In there! Montage. So you go wary, and question, and dawdle, and backtrack, and panic, and feel paralyzed. I am satisfied right now. I am also in a space where the stresses of the job have led to serious consideration of a sabbatical. Because my job isn’t Everything, and never will be - and the best advice I have to the Me of twenty years ago is: make sure you have room for something else in your long life, because happiness comes and goes and hinging it on work alone is asking for a breakdown.
  40. 17 points
    I did the LPP. It's an 8 month program (Late August to Late April). You spend 3 weeks in-person at Ryerson (last week August, second week October, and mid-December) and the rest of the 4 months is done online via a 4 or 5 persons virtual law firm with a supervising lawyer. You have two supervising lawyers in the program. One from late August to mid-October and the second from mid-October to mid-December (when the classroom component ends). You complete work in many areas of law including business, administrative, criminal, civil litigation, wills and estates, real estate, family, construction, and professional responsibility. It is the best preparation if you want to be a sole practitioner or run your own law firm someday. You learn practice management skills and docket your hours daily. You do real legal work in the program (in a mock environment of course), so I think it could be better than a lot of articling positions out there that have you only doing research and fetching Joe's coffee. Personally, I think it's too many areas of law to cover in just a 4 month time period. And as someone who went to a Canadian law school and did practicals in law school, I didn't find this component to be as beneficial as others who never worked in a practical legal environment and wanted to brush up on their Canadian law in various areas. If you know that you want to do business or criminal for example, you might find it frustrating to have to learn family, admin, civil, etc. Now, let's come to the real juice that everyone wants to know about - the placements. In the first or second week of July, the LPP will release a list of summer employers you can apply to (around 40-60 positions total). They hold interviews in mid-August. These positions are harder to get because there are 230-250 students applying for them. The remaining positions will trickle out throughout August-December. Almost all of them are paid, but what the LPP doesn't tell you is that almost none hire back and they pay $15/hr - so minimum wage. There are in-house corporations, major banks, some Biglaw firms, government, general firms, soles, etc. Overall, I'd say 70-80% of the placements are paid, but most pay minimum wage or close to it. I did not have a problem with this though since it is only for 4 months (for most people at least). Here is the biggest catch all though with the LPP placements. You must accept all interviews and must accept your first offer received (they encourage you to apply broadly so that you can ensure you secure a position). So it does not matter if your dream job in New York comes calling a day later if Joe's General Firm in the middle of nowhere offers you a position first. Failure to abide by the LPP rules may result in serious consequences, including not being allowed to apply for further placement employers or completing the program. You can see the list of employers for the previous years here - http://www.lpp.ryerson.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/LPP-Program-Overview-Candidate-Feb-2019b.pdf (pages 8-17). The best placements are highly competitive to land of course. This past year we had heavy competition for the financial institutions and corporations, government, and Blakes. The split in the program is around 60-40 - foreign law school graduates to Canadian law school graduates. Many of the foreign trained lawyers in the program have extensive work experience and credentials; there were law professors, MBA graduates and PhDs and many whom have practiced law in other countries prior to coming to Canada. The LPP is the path of least resistance for them (like how OCIs and articling recruit are the path of least resistance for Canadian law students). You often hear about Canadian law school grads in the program complaining about how the placement rate was not what they expected. It's because they were not competitive candidates, to begin with, and are now competing with foreign trained law graduates who have years of experience on them. Employers view the Canadian who went to Bond very differently from that person who was born and raised in the Middle East or Asia, went to law school there, and maybe even practiced law. I hustled and landed something pretty great in the program and was also hired back by my employer. Most of my peers were not so fortunate and most placement employers do not hire back their students because to them it's akin to a co-op program and the in-house teams are small and hire experienced lawyers generally (from the Biglaw firms). The program is what you make of it like anything else. I would definitely take a good, paid articling job over the LPP program (10-12 months articling is better than a 4 month placement in my strong opinion); however, the LPP program is a solid alternative if you want to take a chance and don't have good articling prospects. Anyone want further information about the program, feel free to PM me.
  41. 17 points
  42. 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.
  43. 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.
  44. 16 points
    That's the right attitude. It's the system, man, that's keeping you down. If only they would stop judging you based on the fact that you haven't been very successful to this point in school, you'd just be so much more successful in the future. God damn elitists, letting in students based on their past performance, and not on how much they really really really really know they'd be great lawyers.
  45. 16 points
    Not sure where you're getting your info from. I watch this documentary about lawyers called Suits and they yell at each other all the time.
  46. 16 points
    Still can't believe it. Been ugly crying ever since I saw the email this morning. Still feels like a dream I haven't woken up from. cGPA: 3.34 L2: likely anywhere around 3.65-3.8 (I had a part-time course load a few semesters and also took summer courses so I'm not sure how they calculated it). LSAT: 157 (Jan.), 159 (March) ECs: Nothing special, honestly. Volunteered at a couple non-profits that worked with kids, worked throughout undergrad. Feel free to PM me if you'd like to know more. Filled out Part B. I was ready to move to Kingston in the Fall - I'd already provisionally accepted Queen's, but I will be firmly accepting whenever it shows up on OLSAS. Can't wait to meet all you lovely humans in September!
  47. 16 points
    I foresee many such post-facto justifications
  48. 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.
  49. 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.
  50. 16 points
    I don't have any answers for you, but I love the honesty. I have no doubt that this thread will get juicy.
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...