Jump to content

Grey

Members
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

36 Decent People

About Grey

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1180 profile views
  1. I lost my ID card after the barrister exam and it was a really simple process for replacing it. Log into your LSO account and go to the messages tab, then “compose message” and set out the basics of what happened and that you need a replacement. I got a response from LSO within the hour. They’ll invoice a fee to your account and then you pick up the replacement card on location the day of the exam.
  2. To go a little against the grain of the rest of the responses here, I would say that at the very least I regret not looking into other post-undergrad options in more detail before deciding on law school. From a purely financial perspective, if I had pursued consulting or banking straight out of undergrad (from which I graduated debt-free), I'd be in a much better position than I am now at age 25 with > $100k in debt and essentially zero income over the past three years. Even with a good articling position secured, the foregone earnings and level of debt I've accumulated I think will delay a lot of the near-term major life events (e.g. saving for a wedding, a down payment, investments, etc.). I definitely enjoyed my summer of actually working in a law firm after 2L, but it's hard to say whether I enjoy it any more than I would have consulting or banking.
  3. I'm a 3L at Queen's and chose it over Osgoode. Without going into any discussion on the potential differences in "prestige" or "reputation", my biggest reason for choosing Queen's was cost. Queen's tuition for 3 years (~$20,500/year) + $700/month in rent = total of $86,700. Compared to Osgoode at $29,000/year + assuming $1,000/month in rent = $123,000. While your financial situation may be different, for me I couldn't justify paying 30-40% more to attend Osgoode. If cost was not an issue, I likely would have chosen Oz given its proximity to the Toronto firms I was interested in. If you want to work in BC, however, this may not be a huge factor for you. Happy to discuss more if you have any other questions about Queen's.
  4. Yeah, there were some students working a bit more and others a little less, but I think around 70 is generally accurate. Someone else earlier in this thread mentioned that a lot of students tend to self-select into (and out of) Davies because of its reputation. I think that's a fair statement - the firm is not for everyone, both in terms of hours, how you go about getting work, types of personalities, etc. Those who are attracted to what Davies markets itself as offering, however, all seemed to really enjoy it, myself included.
  5. I did my 2L summer at Davies this year. On a normal week I would do about 8:00am - 7:30/8:00pm, plus another ~10 hours over the weekend. On busy weeks this could go up significantly. Most of the associates I worked with were pulling longer hours than that. Not sure how this compares to other firms on Bay, but that's my 2 cents on Davies specifically.
  6. I found Freedman to be great, he's a straightforward guy and a real practitioner (not just an academic) who teaches what he thinks is useful in practice. He doesn't really lecture off of readings or much case law, but more just his own notes in a pretty informal manner. If you like structured lectures with powerpoints you probably won't enjoy his teaching style. Edit: In respect of your original question, having a full course load and doing the formal recruit while maintaining good grades is definitely achievable. You may fall behind on readings for some classes, but you have almost all of November after the recruit is finished to catch up if you work a little harder. As someone else mentioned, trusts may be a better option than tax given that Freedman provides you with all the notes you need so actually doing the readings is relatively optional.
  7. There's also a difference in how firms do their tours. The utility of going on a group tour where you're one of 30 other students is much less compared to the firms that allow you to go individually and tailor who you meet to your interests. When I did tours last summer I was able to meet one on one with the student director of the firm that I ended up getting hired at -- making a good impression in that meeting likely had some small impact on that hiring decision. That said, even going on the group tours is a good way to get a preliminary feel for the firm which is useful (a) so you don't go in to OCIs completely blind, and (b) to give you some material to throw into your cover letters.
  8. I'm a summer student at a large Bay St firm right now as well. My first few weeks I was only docketing like 20-30 hours, whereas recently I've been up to 50-60 due to getting put on hectic files. I would think my general average would be 35-40 hours of time docketed, which translates into 50-60 hours of actual time at work. But, like bob said, my firm stressed that no one cares about student hours, so long as you're not sitting around doing nothing and leaving at 5pm every day.
  9. I'm going into 3L at Queen's. I would say that the drinking/partying culture associated with Queen's is primarily reflective of the undergraduate student body rather than grad programs, law school, etc. Although there are definitely social events in law that have a big drinking component - e.g. weekly "Smokers" at a bar in downtown Kingston where tons of law students go to meet up, socialize, etc., there are also a lot of other types of events unrelated to drinking. E.g. Lawlapalooza, Cabaret, etc. are big law events each year that involve stage performances, dances, and so on where drinking isn't involved at all. While there's definitely a Bro clique in the law school that's all about shotgunning brews on the weekends, I feel like that's probably true of all schools. I know tons of other law students who either don't drink at all or do so very little, and they have their own groups of like-minded friends. At the end of the day, everyone in law school is relatively mature and won't have any issue with you choosing not to drink.
  10. I made Dean's List last year in 1L with a 3.66. I would speculate that the range for falling in the top 10% to be between 3.6-3.8, with those > 3.8 being in medalist territory (e.g. all As with maybe one or two A-).
  11. I've never heard of anyone living there - I just googled them and they're farrrrrr not just from campus but from the downtown area where all the student events, bars, restaurants, etc. are. Unless you have a car and are willing to drive to class + pay for a parking pass (which I believe is over $1,000 and has a waiting list) and don't mind ubering to downtown whenever you want to have a few drinks with people, then I would recommend against it.
  12. Yeah, it's alright. I'd say it was fun in 1L - you meet all new people, learn a ton, feel way smarter and more accomplished by the end of it, etc. - but now that I'm at the end of 2L it feels more like a grind. Especially if you're going straight from undergrad to law school with no break in between it feels like a lot of schooling with very little exposure to the practical working world.
  13. I had something about the performance of my investment portfolio as well as the fact that I built my own computer. Both were huge topics of conversation throughout my 2L interview process. Echoing what others have said in this thread, though, is that if you're going to put that kind of thing on your resume then you'd better make sure you're able to talk about it. I had a partner at one firm grill me on all the stocks in my portfolio, what I thought of them going forward, general market trends, etc. - it would have been super obvious if I didn't know what I was talking about in that situation. I also think these types of interests are good to put just in the sense that they're probably more unique than a lot of the more common cookie-cutter interests (e.g. hockey) a lot of people will put on their resume.
  14. Having just gone through the recruitment process as well, I want to echo what Dart and a few others have said. I secured a job at my top choice firm, so I'm not salty about my own situation. But just to chime in and confirm the experiences of a few others here, I personally experienced multiple firms not just bending - but outright breaking - the LSUC rules by trying to pressure a "first choice" out of me (i.e. "we're making you an offer, but only if you tell us at this very moment that you'll 100% accept). I also know of a few close friends who were told straight up that they were going to get an offer at 5pm Wednesday, and monopolized their time all Wednesday, only to leave them out to dry once 5pm rolled around. It definitely made me a little bit more cynical about the whole process. Before I went through it I thought it was ridiculous to advise people to say first choice to more than one firm - and I still think there's consequences to saying it and then rejecting an offer from a firm... but in the long run, I think the alternative of not saying it and being left out to dry could be worse. I guess my point is that I was surprised at how many firms completely disregarded the LSUC rules - obviously my own sample size is small, but take it for what you will.
  15. Some firms already have - e.g. Davies, Wildeboer.
×
×
  • Create New...