Jump to content

FineCanadianFXs

Members
  • Content Count

    453
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

FineCanadianFXs last won the day on August 29 2016

FineCanadianFXs had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

728 Good People

About FineCanadianFXs

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1620 profile views
  1. Who cares? If you want the job, apply. If you want the bad news, I applied for the SCC and never heard back. My grades were decent, I had already clerked at the provincial level, had published articles to submit, and got really nice references from judges, my dean, etc. Not a peep. So what, though? I wanted the job. I applied for it. I don't regret applying. It didn't take that much work to put an application together, and you already have a successful FC package to work from. Why are you even asking? "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Woyne Grutzky
  2. I paid my deposit to uOttawa before I was accepted at Osgoode. Never saw that $500 again. I just pretended my 1L tuition was $500 more. Actually forgot about it until I saw this post. Repression is your friend. Consider it a drop in the bucket compared to three years of law school, and, in the end, a fair price to pay for getting into my top choice of school.
  3. Wow. This seems an incredible burden to me. I've done a number of work/home commutes across cities, but I'd say a weekly trip from EDM to TOR would be too much for me. I don't know that anyone on this forum can answer this question for you. You need to do the math yourself based on where you live in Toronto, the average drive to Edmonton airport, and which airport you'd be flying into in Toronto between Pearson and Billy Bishop. You're looking at, after cabbing or driving and parking, airport arrival and security checks, then potential delays, an enormous commute time (14+ hours every weekend) let alone the cost.
  4. I think @Rashabon's advice was reasonable. My recollection was that it did not elicit sympathy when students with straight As vocalized anxiety (or arrogance!) about their grades. While OP didn't ask for it, I agree this is standard advice given out of caution and in this context. I don't see any low blow here, or derailment (well, now there is).
  5. The only times I'll ever admit I'm a lawyer is to get the best quality service, e.g. "I'll have a hot dog and Orange Crush and I'm a lawyer". As you can imagine, I've never had an undercooked hotdog, and my Crush is never flat. Otherwise, I just tell people I'm a clown.
  6. Generally agree. I highlighted way too much. Effective highlighting should be scant and precise. Pick a colour and highlight important statutes in that colour. Pick a different colour and highlight timelines. Pick a third colour and highlight any specific courts. A better suggestion, perhaps, is don't highlight shit until you've done practice questions. Once you know what kinds of things you frequently wish you had highlighted, highlight those things.
  7. Advice above is all great. I typically did some combination of the above: avoided contact with colleagues at all costs (politely) (per @Rearden); assumed the absolute worst (per @AnomanderRake); and immediately engaged in something fun and distracting (@Hegdis). Thing is, sometimes no matter what you do, the uncertainty can still find its way into your active thoughts. This potential for "worry-creep" never goes away, particularly through your legal career. Job interviews, court performance, etc. There is no shortage of opportunities to say "I could have done X, Y, or Z, and that would have led to success." Sometimes, that is healthy, where there are opportunities to fix errors, seek improvement, or otherwise deal with peripheral incoming issues. Sometimes though, the thing is done. It is over, out of your hands, and who cares anymore. Law school exams are that thing. You can't do anything about it once its done, you are probably getting a B, and also you are one step closer to being a lawyer. Great! There is nothing to worry about here. For me, what helped every time was repeating the mantra "who cares". You're done. Congratulations, but who cares. It sounds silly, but the more you repeat it, the more it becomes reality. Even better, if you can muster it when you get stuck in a pack of blabbermouth colleagues after the exam.
  8. Fair. It is totally fine to put your head down and study independently. I did a lot of that! I didn't do study groups, left many social events early or skipped them altogether. So long as you understand that, career-wise, a modicum of social ability and networking can yield positive results, and you are entering a competitive environment and job market where many other students put in more than a modicum. There is little downside in putting some effort in improving in those areas if you can. I certainly recommend any incoming law student keep a very open mind about that side of law school, and that they get to know their professors, administration, career office, and certainly start early on figuring out what it is they want to do with their law career. It is one thing to eschew the social community in pursuit of academic study. It's another thing to adopt the same approach to employment, and expect similar job prospects.
  9. Well the short answer is no, but that's to the first question alone, without qualification, because introversion isn't necessarily a bar to networking, social events, making friends, or succeeding in law school at all. I knew plenty of introverts in school, and often describe myself as partly introverted. Many of them were present at networking events, social events, and had no issues getting jobs in biglaw, government, or otherwise. The concern with resting on that answer is the rest of your post. If you're unwilling to interact at all with other students, your professors, or attend anything remotely social for three years, then what you're describing may not be introversion.
  10. I felt the same way. I found 1L extremely invigoration and fascinating. It was a year of pure academia. And while I put a lot of pressure on myself to succeed, I was also really enthusiastic about learning a brand new thing. It did not hurt to be in an environment where (1) my professors were all (mostly) enthusiastic and passionate about their subject, and (2) my colleagues were (mostly) more drawn toward friendly teamwork than lord-of-the-flies chaos. To that point, I think the law school environment can have a tremendous effect on how much an individual enjoys 1L. I have no doubt that professors incapable of breathing life into those 7-point, microfiched, shadowy cases do a disservice to a student's potential for legal passion. And, if your classmates are all jerks, then you'll probably have a rough go (I am skeptical it is ever the case that all one's classmates are jerks. As the adage goes, if you think everyone's an asshole, you're probably the asshole). But there are still things a student can do, personally, to mitigate the effects of those issues. For one, you can suffer through four or five Lord Whistlebottom bores while still making efforts to discover your own legal passions. For another, you can put in some effort to band your classmates together as opposed to letting your circumstances wash over you. In other words, any student can exercise some degree of control over their environment to derive the most out of 1L and law school generally. Personally, once the job recruit and articling search and other responsibilities kicked in, Law School became more of a drag. It was a lot to balance all the different stressors that multiplied as graduation and then the bar approached. All I had to do in 1L was show up and vacuum a bunch of knowledge, make friends, show up to exams with a working laptop, and try my best to get above a B grade (with a relative likelihood that was going to get a B anyway). It was killer.
  11. Though I'll agree with @utmguy that reading Justice Watt's writing is always a pleasure, he can write the way he does because he knows all the rules--both written and unwritten--of good writing (and good legal writing) and grammar. He is also a tremendously respected judge and author. He is well-poised to take risks and break rules in a way that is likely to succeed. I'd be careful about adopting his style without understanding good writing. Justice Watt can rattle off several two- or three-word sentences with confidence. Not everyone can. It takes work. You're 100% right on this. There are great books out there about both legal writing and writing generally. I like Bryan Garner's books ("Legal Writing in Plain English" is excellent, and you can work through it in a weekend). But you should investigate yourself and find a good source for improving your writing that excites you enough so that you'll stick to a program of following it and practicing. Other than that, as @Demander suggests, practice writing whenever you have the chance. It doesn't really matter what it is. You will not get better at writing by only writing things that you're obligated to through school or work. That will also have the effect of making writing always feel like a chore.
  12. I'm not a huge fan of it stylistically, but it definitely isn't "too much for a law firm".
  13. First, I wouldn't do unpaid articles unless I was desperate and relatively certain my prospects were grim, for example, due to weak grades; or, if it was my dream articling gig. Second, I don't understand this week-long trial at all. I've never heard of it and it does not seem standard by any stretch. I agree with @thegoodlaw that its a bit fishy and also a bad approach for them. Is this "trial" to occur the first week of articling? Or is it set to occur sooner? Why on earth would either you or they wait until the last possible moment to determine if there's a match? It seems ludicrous. And then what happens if you fail? They go back to interviewing more candidates? To whom they also give trial periods? Or they just don't hire an articling student. Do they even need one? If they don't, what kind of experience might you have there? I also agree with @Malicious Prosecutor that it also seems ridiculous in the context of articling. I have no idea what their expectations would be, but making it one week--the first week, where you are likely to know absolutely nothing about anything--it does not seem like they put a lot of thought into this. I can't advise as I don't know how desperate you may be. But if I were in your shoes--and so desperate or in love with the position that I'd do unpaid articles--I'd negotiate that trial period right out. I'd say something like (but not exactly): "Look. I appreciate the offer. And I'm confident that you'll have no issues keeping me on after the trial period. I'm pretty great for these reasons [name some reasons]. But I cannot agree now to your offer. It pulls me off the market entirely. This benefits you, but it leaves me both uncertain whether I have an articling position come August (or whenever) and it blocks me from exploring other opportunities in case you indeed decide we aren't a match. This, all in the context of an unpaid position. If you're willing to commit now and forego the trial, I would be happy to consider that. Please let me know if you're willing, too. Alternatively, I'd be delighted to reconnect if I'm still looking [at the time this trial period was set to begin]. Thanks."
  14. Relax. I don't know how recently OCIs occurred, but take some time after to enjoy yourself. Don't beat yourself up. I remember the feeling of striking out at OCIs. It is a bad feeling. Don't put a lot of stake in this unnecessarily harsh feedback: I don't know anyone who struck out at OCIs and easily dusted themselves off and went "Whelp, not a big deal, guess I'll move on". It hurts to invest a lot of time an effort into something you have a strong desire for and come up empty. That hurt--and recognizing and acknowledging it--has little to do with a low emotional intelligence. That said, it is also an unfortunate truth that you have to pick yourself off and get right back into the job hunt. So after you've taken some time for yourself since you probably worked very hard through applications, OCIs, and in-firms (while also keeping aware of any application deadlines for other opportunities like clerkships and summer positions) you need to assess what's out there and you need to develop a strategy. But you'll be fine. Meanwhile, you also should take the advice above about getting involved. Finding extra-curriculars to "buff your resume" is a terrible approach. Figure out your genuine interests and pursue them. I'm highly skeptical, however, about someone who states they "love health law, but also into IP, employment law, immigration , civil lit" yet has absolutely nothing to reflect it. I had a specific legal interest in law school. I edited the journal on that legal area, wrote a blog about it, was a member and executive of the relevant clubs, and I mooted several times on it. If you can't find extra-curriculars that reflect your genuine interests, I don't believe that you've genuinely tried. Or else, these legal areas might not be your genuine interests. Consider that, too. I never called any of my above involvement "resume buffers". I just did them because I wanted to.
  15. SuitSupply is fine. I always recommend going with what you know. But you should also explore before you go dropping Robert Bordens somewhere new. And this is actually hugely important because everyone has a different body and suits look good or bad depending on body type. That's even before your personal style comes into play. Get out there and try stuff on. You'll get generic recommendations here and online, because there's no specific information about you to go on. If you're in Toronto, go to the Bay. Go to Harry Rosen. Go to Sydney's. Go to Gotstyle. Go to Tiger of Sweden. Go to Banana Republic, H&M, and J Crew. Heck, even Uniqlo and Muji have suits now. Try them on, see what happens. As you go, note price tags and fabrics used. Keep a list, and once you've found somewhere you really like that sells suits in a style you like and which make you feel confident about yourself and your appearance--at a price point that doesn't make you frown--you'll have found your place. Buy your suits there. Even better if you find more than one. Note that menswear stores can be pushy or presumptive. If you walk in and say "I need a new suit", then salespeople will sure as heck try to get you out of there in a new suit. To avoid this, when I'm out and just wanna try stuff on, I tell the salesperson something like "I'm just exploring new suit options and I'd love to see what your stuff looks and feels like. Can you help me?" That way, they know you're not likely to whip out your wallet and you don't waste their time. If its a good menswear store, they'll still work hard to sell you on their clothes without being pushy. This is how I discover brands that look and feel good on me off the rack, and also discover places I want to spend my money. Also be very wary if you're shopping and the salesperson says that everything looks great on you. Always a great idea to bring your SO or a stylish friend for support. Make sure it's someone you trust to say "that's not very flattering on you".
×
×
  • Create New...