Jump to content

realpseudonym

Members
  • Content Count

    780
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by realpseudonym

  1. Staaaaahp. This argument has been had way too many times.
  2. But on the plus side, by that time the de-aging technology will be ready, and the four hour adaptation of the book, I Heard You Put Liens on Houses by hellosir80, will properly depict how DiCaprio and Hardy's characters sacrificed the love and trust of Anna Paquin so that they could kill it and impress their superiors.
  3. Life isn't an award show. When you're 83, hemorrhaging internally, and about to kick the bucket, they don't add up a scorecard at the hospital, and declare you the dual winner of Smartest Graduate of Biology 104 and Mommy's Bestest Kid. Your problem isn't that you won't be sufficiently successful as a lawyer. Your problem is that you're seeking a standard of external validation that can't be met, and even if it were, won't bring you happiness and fulfillment. If you want to waste the few decades you have on this planet, trying to fill up a mantle with enough awards to fill a nagging need for approval, that's your choice. But why? Pick something you think seems interesting. Work hard at it. Find an aspect that does fulfill you and be motivated by the work, not by some quest for approbation. In any case, good luck.
  4. It's a regulated market. As mentioned above, you would be bound by the governing legislation and the law society's regulations/rules of professional conduct. Licensees can be disciplined by the law society for non-compliance with the rules. Among others, the rules state that a lawyer shall not withdraw from representation of a client except for good cause and on reasonable notice to the client. There are specific provisions, but one you're retained, withdrawing for inconvenience and being needed on short notice are not likely to satisfy the good cause or reasonable notice requirements.* Your image of legal practice doesn't accord with my still limited experience. Managing client expectations and dealing with unreasonable demands are just part of private practice. *Epeeist-style disclaimer: none of this should be construed as legal advice, etc, etc.
  5. I'm not sure that this forum can completely answer this question for you, but if you look around, there are already many similar discussions. E.g.,:
  6. This isn't true, though. Lots of people have meaningful careers without law degrees or HBAs. I really urge people to think about taking some time off after undergrad. Work some entry level jobs. Maybe save and travel. Get some experience and approach what you're going with an open mind. Professional schools will still be there to take your money. But there's lots of interesting work out there. I have friends who are happily working away at things I'd never heard of before, many of which don't require post-graduate education. I don't know if you have to be passionate about law before you go to law school (it's hard to be passionate about something you've never done before). But, I wouldn't go just because you can't think of anything else. Especially if you haven't really tried much else, yet.
  7. Everyone should consider the financial impact of law school. Everyone. Repaying U of T or Osgoode tuition can be doable with a good paying job. But, OP should be absolutely certain that they want one of those good paying jobs before they drop $35,000.00+ per year on tuition. Because if someone discovers that they have a passion for criminal defence, immigration, family, human rights, or other retail practices during law school, barring a parental bailout, that debt is going to be a real barrier to doing the work they want to do. And yeah, maybe U of T makes you more employable across the Board. But it doesn't necessarily raise the payscale for its graduates taking jobs outside a narrow set of sophisticated, mostly institutional law firms. Debt can impact your happiness, your mental health, and your personal life. Think carefully about how much of it you want, and the tradeoffs involved in making monthly payments after you graduate.
  8. Only name your dogs after precedent-setting English Lords. When using public transit, place a casebook on top of your leather messenger bag, so the common folk know how important you are. Have your intimate partners refer to you as "counsel," or, if you're (i) in a jurisdiction that recognizes the designation and (ii) of the appropriate sexual orientation, "queen's counsel." Whisper "I rest my case" whenever you climax.
  9. If someone needs accommodations during law school, then they should take them. That said, I think the "no one will notice, remember, or care" comments underplay the stigma surrounding disability. I don't agree that negative inferences will only be drawn by assholes -- stigma is a systemic problem and can't be reduced to a few people with problematic mindsets. I've heard people, who I don't consider assholes in any other respect, speculate on the legitimacy of others' disabilities or accommodations. The implication being that the person in question got an unfair leg up. People may also get treated differently when others know they have a disability, and not just in the most obvious possible sense of an employer asking "are you disabled?" during an interview. There can be trust issues, especially around high value tasks. Not every lawyer would delegate important legal work to a junior that they thought had attention or reading issues. That could be career limiting in more subtle ways than just not getting jobs. Again, I'd advise anyone who needs accommodations to get accommodations. But, I'd also be circumspect about the decision to disclose a disability to your peers and colleagues. It can be an unforgiving profession, both by members and the public. Getting the help you need vs. protecting your reputation is a balancing act, and I don't think that the balancing can be properly undertaken without knowing that stigma exists and can have an impact on someone's career.
  10. Without a law degree? You wouldn't have to write any, because you wouldn't be eligible to apply for accreditation from the NCA. 2. Eligibility to Apply to the NCA To be eligible to apply to the NCA an Applicant must have a Qualifying Law Degree, the usual designations for which are LL.B, J.D., B.C.L., and LL.L. For the purposes of this policy, a graduate level law degree, such as a master’s degree (LL.M.), that was obtained following a non-law undergraduate university degree will not qualify, except when it is a Qualifying Law Degree in the Relevant Jurisdiction. https://nca.legal/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/NCAPoliciesFIN.pdf Edit: also, have you read this: https://nca.legal/faqs/? A lot of your questions might be answered there.
  11. Reputation still matters in these fields. Referrals are a huge chunk of generating business in "street law" (this makes me sound much cooler than I am), especially for junior lawyers. So I care about appearances. But at least in my limited experience, this is more about word of mouth than how my bio looks on paper. For example, maybe my articling principal made a favourable comment about me to a colleague and, after I follow-up via email, I get an overflow case or conflict referral. If I do a good job with that, the client tells the referring lawyer and (fingers crossed) friends and family. Hooray - more referrals. I guess in that sense, articling has affected my career trajectory. Just not in the way OP was asking.
  12. I'll google opposing counsel. But if I really need to get a feel for them -- I guess that counsel's competence can inform litigation strategy around the margins -- I'll usually ask colleagues for opinions (eg., counsel said x and y in a conference: are they playing hardball or are they just a dick, etc). To the OP, I think it depends on what you want to do. Big law and the brandname boutiques, like Henein Hutchinson, do tend to hire former appellate clerks. Otherwise, I agree with MP. You're not "destined" for success or failure after ten months. I'm not anywhere near being in a position to hire an associate, and wouldn't be for a long time. But for my areas of practice, I'd be looking at what the candidate brings to the table in terms of substantive experience. If they're a new call, obviously that means considering articling. But I'd care a lot less about the firm name than whether the candidate had the experience to interview vulnerable clients and do all the other things necessary to assume independent carriage of files.
  13. Most schools where I applied state that they have a rolling admissions policy, which is to say that they review and respond to applications as they are submitted, rather processing all the applications at the same time.
  14. Are you exercising regularly? Running, going to the gym, and yoga really got me through some tough times last year. Mindful meditation also helped. I’ve used both the calm and headspace apps. I’d recommend both.
  15. Recording lectures wasn't permitted at Dal law while I was there. Unless doing so was a form of accommodation. Check to see if there's a faculty policy first.
  16. How very George Costanza of you
  17. “December 22, 2019 Via Mail Mr. Reasonable Hypothetical 123 Online Argument Way Toronto, ON A1B 2C3 My Dearest Reasonable: Re: Request for Documents I write to you in the capacity of your close friend to seek disclosure of your tax documents and monthly bank statements for the purposes of making an argument online [...]”
  18. I get that you're making a point about talent and barriers that you perceive to be arbitrary. But the barriers facing Canadian born, UK educated licensing candidates are nothing like those faced by African Americans living in a segregationist society.
  19. Yeah, but this little parable isn't really on point. Licensing candidates returning with just a foreign degree are at a disadvantage vis-a-vis those returning with a foreign degree and several years of practice in a common law jurisdiction. The latter will still need to learn the law of the Canadian jurisdiction. However, the fact that your friend (i) has presumably demonstrated competence by practicing law for several years and (ii) will bring tangible practical and business skills into a Canadian practice bias should mitigate against employer bias. Most people posting in this sub-forum aren't in this situation. Rather, they seem to want to be licensed in Canada directly after graduating, rather than practicing abroad first. Those people won't have the experience to mitigate against risk and bias when seeking articles and employment. It's not the same situation, and a foreign trained lawyer may face a tough, long road to building a lucrative, sustainable practice in Canada. That's why there are cautionary comments throughout this thread and sub-forum.
  20. Yeah, because after paying law school tuition for three years and now renting an apartment in Toronto, it's monthly payments on my marijuana and iphone 6 that are the real difference maker.
  21. Yeah, I had a prof who let us bring in a double-sided one page summary. It forced us to dig through our materials and decide on what we'll actually need to know for the exam. That's a really useful process. It's good to do in law school. And, being able to information down to the absolute bare essentials is a skill that's carrying over into practice, as I'm trying to cut twenty page facta and briefs down into the seven or eight page range.
  22. Doesn't this question answer itself? Just me? To the psychologist - awayyyy!!
  23. Look here. I have no hobbies, no girlfriend, no children, and since Auston Matthews and Mitch Marner got overpaid by at least a million or so each, the Leafs don't have a viable back goalie, meaning I no longer follow a single, successful professional sports franchise. You can't take away bitching about being a lawyer. I won't let you.
×
×
  • Create New...