Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About lawgurrl

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1067 profile views
  1. I'm not going to pretend that there is no stigma attached to doing the LLP. However, plenty of people choose to do the LLP regardless because the upside potential is worth it. LLP is no different from articling in that some people will come out of it doing spectacularly well, while others will flounder. It really depends on the candidate. If the OP is telling the truth, then it appears as though he/she has no obvious flaws on their application, and has a very good chance of landing a competitive articling position from LLP. Of course stigma is a real thing, but how well one performs at their placement will likely outweigh whether one was able to secure a placement right out of law school. If an employer was so biased so as to reject an LLP candidate outright, regardless of the rest of their application, maybe the problem is actually the employer. Finally, I think we need to acknowledge that the whole LLP stigma thing is limited only to the legal profession itself. Large corporations or small businesses generally have no idea what LLP or articling even is. Most likely none of your future clients will care or even ask. Stigma or no, I doubt it would make a difference in the long run.
  2. I am, and I guess my work is significantly less emotionally wrought. I don't work in family law. I do corporate/commercial litigation, and while my clients get angry, they're usually not angry at me, and they tend to have more realistic expectations. All good lawyers get the ocasional crazy client, it's not exactly news, which is why so few lawyers have perfect reviews, and even when they do, they typically only work in very specialized areas, like wrongful dismissal. I get your point. At the same time, it really is family law that sees the most number of self-represented litigants, and it is these people who would benefit the most from a little bit of legal coaching, hence why I'm exploring the area. I have checked out most of the existing services, but there's such a huge number of people who are currently without any representation, that one wonders if there isn't a way to better cater to these people.
  3. Doctors get rated, teachers get rated, electricians get rated. Why are lawyers adverse to the idea of being rated for their performance?
  4. Good to know it's the lawyer rating part that turns people off!
  5. Hi all, Like most of you, I've realized that technology wise, the legal profession is at least a decade behind every other major industry, with the exception of perhaps medicine. Unlike most of you, I come from a humble background, and one of the first things that struck me about the practice of law is the number of firms that do not even accept clients unless the client can put up a retainer of at least $5,000. This is inaccessible even to reasonably well-off people, hence the rise in the number of self-represented litigants. These people can't afford a full retainer, but many of them can afford a few hours of legal coaching. At the same time, there seems to be an excess of lawyers who are willing to offer unbundled legal services, some of whom are incredibly experienced, but for some reason, cannot seem to be able to attract enough business. There should be some kind of intermediary enabling people who need limited help with lawyers who are willing to provide that help. I know there are existing directories for contract lawyers offering unbundled legal services, but I haven't found a single one that I would even consider using. Why? the sites tend to be unattractive, with no ratings, offer limited information regarding experience and competence, no pictures, and most don't even provide hourly rates. We all know that when we use any sort of program, we want it to be easy to navigate and provide all the information we need. If there was some kind of platform available that was more accessible to the average layperson, would anyone here be interested in joining?
  6. My advice is that everyone should take family law and administrative law, because they're both intellectually interesting and relevant to just about anyone.
  7. Doing just a JD at Western is not a bad thing. You know why? Because there are now many one year MBAs that rank more highly than Schulich, and you can get one of those when the time comes and you actually need it/can pay for it.
  8. I have a business undergraduate degree and I've worked in both oil and gas and construction, so I know a lot of MBAs. From what I've seen and heard, the MBA market really has become over-saturated. I don't know what the "general community" is saying, but I can tell you that most of the recent and not so recent MBA grads agree that out of all the Canadian MBAs, Ivey seems to be the most worthwhile, because it is case-based and has terrific placement rates. If you're going to do it in the USA, unless you actually get into either Harvard, Stanford or Wharton, it may not be worth the cost, unless you already have some background/connection in your desired field. As for EMBA, I can't imagine it's too much different.
  9. FWIW, people who take family law usually end up liking it, and I really liked real estate. You shouldn't dismiss a course just because it doesn't immediately strike you as "interesting".
  10. That is so sad. I can name a lot of people who have minimal time to meet people outside of work.
  11. Is office romance generally frowned upon? Even when it's between lawyers? or between a lawyer and a support staff who's not one's own assistant?
  12. A number of concepts were hard to understand, and even when you think you know it, the professor would combine them in different ways, forcing you to figure out how different concepts interact.
  13. Trust is not a hard course at all. Freedman gives you all the notes you'll need. Having said that, all your classmates will have the same notes and you'll still have to put in the effort if you want an A. Tax was, in my opinion, extremely conceptually challenging, even though it had way less reading than most of my other classes.
  14. a) Colloquially, at least at this moment, this seems to be true across the country. b) I didn't attend, but I hear that Osgoode really does in fact deliver when it comes to breadth of opportunities, from course selection, to clinics, to intensives, or other opportunities to gain practical experience. Can someone please confirm this?
  15. Going into specifics usually help build your argument.
  • Create New...