Jump to content

Chuckles64

Members
  • Content Count

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Chuckles64

  1. I made this exact transition. Good news and bad news: Good news: you may have misread the transfer procedure. My experience is that you only need to write the BC exam if you are transferring to BC from a non-reciprocating jurisdiction. Ontario is a reciprocating jurisdiction. Check here: https://www.lawsociety.bc.ca/becoming-a-lawyer-in-bc/transfers/transfer-to-bc-from-another-canadian-jurisdiction/ Bad news: you're going to have to pay something like $2,500 in administrative fees to LSBC to transfer over. Good news: other than the fee its relatively painless Bad news: unless you surrender your Ontario license, if practicing law in BC you will still need to pay 50% of your LSO fees (if you can't find a job and have no income, don't worry, LSO will find it in their heart to only charge you 25% for the right to not practice using your Ontario license) Good news: when Ontario friends complain about sub -20 temperatures you can respond that you feel their pain and had to suffer the indignity of putting on a light sweater that morning. Bad news: trying to surrender your Ontario license may take months (or over a year), during which said fees still accrue. Good/Bad news: you get to / have to sit through another call to the Bar ceremony. Shoot me a PM if you have any questions about my experiences in transferring over.
  2. Well this got personal quick.
  3. Everyone but you is a bot on the internet, obviously. Beep boop.
  4. Playing lots and lots of Stardew Valley. Too much Stardew Valley.
  5. So, first thing, law school is not undergrad, you will be facing much stiffer competition in a more stringent bell curve, and your marks will have a very direct impact on your early career. What this means is that people will be motivated to really use everything at their disposal to get the limited A's available. Second, there is a further benefit to going to class - getting to know your cohort. I cannot stress how useful it is to network in law school. I'm a couple of years out from law school at this point and my entire career trajectory has been the result of a dungeons and dragons buddy in law school that invited me to apply at his firm. I have helped out at least two other friends by putting them in touch with firms that I knew were hiring as well. Someone here said the phrase "your network is your net worth", and I hate myself for agreeing with something that sounds like it could be on a banner at an Amway convention, but its true. Build a good network in law school and it will pay dividends for the rest of your life. Third, studying law is very unlike studying absolutely anything else you've studied. Full stop. I don't care what your undergraduate degree was. Whether you were in political science, philosophy, pre-med, music, or mixology. Processing nothing but jurisprudence and legislation is a skill that you NEED to learn, and it is a hump that every first year will go through. Learning how to do so efficiently and effectively at home with no guidance is possible, but I have yet to meet anyone that did well in law school that skipped a significant number of classes in first year. With all the above in mind, after first year I think you can get away with skipping a lot more classes. Once you have the necessary skills down, you can probably do a lot of the readings alone and shore up differences in understanding by looking at past students' summaries and talking to the teacher outside of class or by email. Its not uncommon for a significant number of third years to be less than committed to showing up regularly to class, but doing so from the get-go sounds like a recipe for disaster.
  6. This was me 6 years ago. Its great, do it! Saskatoon is very different from GTA, and frankly I feel like I got a much better appreciation for Canada in the process. I also had about 5 other people in the same boat as me, we all did just fine. Be prepared for people who suggest Toronto isn't the center of the universe.
  7. In my class in law school was a retired cop that was 51 years old in 1L. He was in better shape than any of us, his work ethic put all of us to shame, and he was an all around awesome guy. He was able to leverage his life experiences and get a very lucrative criminal defense job at a good firm fairly quick. I also had at least another 2 classmates in my year that were in their early 40s as well, and I believe they did just fine too. You'll definitely have some unique challenges due to your peers being half your age, but I don't think its the end of the world. Especially if the financial proposition isn't an issue, I say go for it. I would kill to go through law school again - I loved it. Regarding preparing for the LSAT, there's a lot of tools/courses out there, but my approach was one of self study and brute force. I kept doing practice tests until my score was consistently in the range I wanted it to be. This took about 2 months of doing tests 3x a week under timed conditions. Its what worked for me, but largely because I was cheap and didn't want to spend money so your mileage may vary. Good luck!
  8. The problem is that as a new call you're virtually indistinguishable from every other applicant. And to be perfectly honest, you're not much more useful than an articling student for the first 6 months. Its just a tough proposition for many firms, which is why so many smaller (read: not biglaw) firms prefer to hire a 2nd or 3rd year associates instead of fresh calls or articling students.
  9. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you do insurance defense. Those client reporting letters are all to familiar to me and those are basically the same expectations
  10. I think the difference between the two is warranted. I articled in PI and then jumped to Insurance Defence for my first year. Plaintiff side gets paid via commission, Defense side bills hourly, usually at substantially discounted rates. Plaintiff side wins big and loses big while defense side is generally satisfied with consistency. Plaintiff side generally gets more for acting bombastically and dumb in front of their clients who are generally unsophisticated while Defense side works for an adjuster who is likely managing 150 other files with various counsel. It may sound weird, but in my experience the best and worst lawyers tend to end up in PI while the competent ones wanting good work/life balance end up in Insurance Defence. Obviously there are plenty of exceptions to this. Terrible lawyers end up on PI side that do nothing but settle cases at less than what they're worth, and are often just a pain to work with in the process. Really the only skill they need to have is look lawyerly enough to at least get a steady flow of clients, due to clients' being unsophisticated most of their mistakes don't really affect them. They couldn't keep a job with Insurance Defence if they wanted it, just because their adjuster would call their shit out in a heartbeat and let the firm contact know how you were screwing up the file. I'm sure you could think of a few law firms this applies to. Great lawyers end up on PI side because you can make BANK if you work cases properly - in my articles my principal won $1.5 mil at trial, and contingency fees are generally around 1/3 + your costs and disbursements. This is of course is in addition to the plenty of other files that settled throughout the year. They wouldn't want to work in Insurance Defence because PI is so much more lucrative and you get to never have to worry about god forsaken billable hours. Insurance Defence I've found are lawyers who are decent at their job, but not interested in dealing with all the headaches that comes with working PI (read: dealing with dumbass clients that expect a 14 million dollar payout for 3 km/h bump because "thats what my friend got, and they had the same case"). Been doing this for a year now and life on this side is much more boring and predictable and I could see why that might be preferable to some people, even in the long run. I will say that I've found the most disagreeable lawyers are GENERALLY plaintiff side though.
  11. You'll be fine. Litigation skills gained in PI are absolutely invaluable and you'll quickly realize as you go into general practice that the vast majority of lawyers do not like going to court. This includes lawyers practicing in civil litigation. Do everything you can to get into examinations for discoveries, applications, small claims matters, and especially in actual superior court/supreme court/queens bench trials. I started off like you in a small PI firm in a small city outside Toronto. It wasn't quite a solo practitioner, but it wasn't far off. It also sucked, a lot, as most articles do. By far the worst experience of my legal career. I ended up doing insurance side litigation at a significantly larger firm in downtown for the next year and then finally accepting a position at a Bay street general litigation boutique. The biggest key is building a good reputation. My jump from small 3 lawyer firm in nowheresville to downtown midsize firm was entirely based on the verbal recommendation of my articling principal. He put me in touch with the firm that hired me as they were often on the other side of our files. I'm decent at my job, but I didn't do anything beyond making sure i was reliable and keeping an ear to the ground for new opportunities.
  12. If you're worried call LSO and speak to member services (I think thats who would be doing it) to ensure there are no steps your missing. They have all your data in front of them and can give you a heads up if any i's need dotting or t's need crossing.
  13. You're fine for July. One year is brutally excessive for studying for the LSAT. If you're self studying, just practice and keep doing past LSAT tests under realistic conditions (i.e. timed) and you'll see your score improving. I prepped for about a month and a half this way, 3 tests a week, each under realistic conditions, which ends up taking 20 hours / week. The important part is making sure its timed. Anyone can ace an LSAT with enough time, its that crunch that makes it difficult, and its dealing with that crunch that makes all the difference. If you have difficulty with any specific section look into guides and other written material on tackling specific areas and just try to integrate that into your routine.
  14. I honestly don't believe people scoring above a 155 on a cold diagnostic is that common. Doing well on the LSAT is a very particular skill that requires practice to get better at, I do believe some people will be naturally great at it, but I don't think its very common. And no, I don't believe that people getting above 170 on test day are lying - unless they bring it up in conversation .
  15. lol, no, of course don't quit. Anybody who says that they took the LSAT with no prep and scored anything above a 155 is either (a) lying (and a tool) or (b) really naturally gifted at logic games and prolific reader (but most likely (a)) On my first go I got a 148. A few months of regular practice tests and tracking my progress had my score increase until I was regularly hitting mid 80th percentile. The key isn't being smart, its persistence and more importantly learning how to take the damn LSAT. Doing well on it is a skill in and of itself that has nothing to do with what you'll be doing afterwards in law school. Try to nail the logical reasoning sections, those are the most important given that they comprise the biggest portion of your score. When I did it, my logic games scores were all over the place, I'd get 25% at times and others I'd hit all but one. My way of dealing with this was being super consistent on the rest of it, mainly by doing tons and tons of practice tests followed by then reviewing my answers and seeing why I got the wrong answer and trying to correct going forward. 149 on your first go around is definitely not too low. With practice and hard work you'll be just fine.
  16. Granted that consensus is predicated on making numbers up. No one knows and LSUC keeps it pretty close to their chest. My pet theory is that the public would lose faith in the profession if they knew how low it was. Thats how I'm getting any sleep leading up the Solicitor exam anyway. I found the barristers more difficult than I expected and definitely rushed through a bunch of the questions. Spent about a day trying to come to terms with what having to retake it would entail, then continued studying for solicitors. Such is life.
  17. I agree. I used the powerscore books to understand how to deal with them conceptually and then used the kaplan answers to questions approached them individually. Absolutely Powerscore's method is superior.
  18. I don't pretend to understand the machinations of the admissions committee, but if I were to guess I'd say your profile would be very borderline. Although you do have a (very) strong connection to USask, multiple LSAT tries ending with a sub-160 score does not look very good. Your b2 marks look good, is your cGPA along the same lines? Either way, that LSAT score may indeed pull you down.
  19. John Richardson's public talks are also great since he's good at answering questions about law school. I was at University of Toronto, and an exec on the pre-law club, we called him in once a year to give a talk about law school admissions.
  20. That LSAT may give you some trouble. Other than that you seem like an excellent candidate IMO. How many previous LSATs did you take and what were the marks?
  21. Well I met him and he seems like an awesome guy. No pressure on getting things done his way and he was fully supportive of me checking out the competition as well. I checked out RBC as well, but they seem to want repayment while in school.... Either way, will keep you guys updated with Joshe Page @ Scotia.
  22. Hi guys, I got my acceptance to USask, and barring acceptance to queens, western, or dalhousie, will most likely be going there. I realize that its a bit early, but I'm just really excited to get started XD (as well as meeting a future classmate). So that being said, is anyone else planning to span that distance before school starts? Would be splitting gas and hotels along the way.
  23. I'd say you have very little chance to not get in. Mind you what SHOULD happen is often very separate from what does happen, so take it with a grain of salt. However, I'm surprised you haven't gotten an acceptance already.
×
×
  • Create New...