Jump to content

Ryn

Moderators
  • Content Count

    2471
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Ryn last won the day on September 13 2019

Ryn had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2226 Good People

About Ryn

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

6747 profile views
  1. I can't say for certain because my time on the committee ended in April of that particular year, but it seems logical to me that updated marks will be considered if no decision has been made yet. If you are worried about the cost of sending updated winter marks, perhaps call or email admissions to confirm. I get that you're worried but this is still, at the end of the day, a chances question. I have admitted people with that LSAT score. I have admitted people with a GPA around that mark. Would I admit someone with both of those things? I don't know, I'd have to see their application. Has anyone ever been admitted with both those stats? Probably. Will you be? I don't know. Osgoode's medians as of 2018 were 3.75/163, so you can hazard a guess using that or try the predictor on the website I made. I would not have put a lot of focus on varsity athletics to offset cGPA or LSAT. I did see a few applications from varsity athletes who had much higher grades as well. I don't think a 3.1 is competitive, despite the reasons. Having been the president of the largest club at your university will likely not help your application.
  2. Sorry, I can't really advise you in this thread, as its purpose is not to comment on an individual's chances. If you make a generic chances thread I may pop in to give my thoughts the next time I am reviewing those posts.
  3. 71% cGPA and an LSAT below 160 makes Osgoode pretty unlikely. Ottawa likes high cGPAs and so I don’t think that’s likely either. But you should convert your average into the OLSAS scale: http://lawapplicants.ca/ Edit: Just saw that you said you applied in discretionary. So what I wrote above is probably not helpful. Discretionary applications are highly subjective and I doubt you’ll get much useful advice from people. Depending on the facts and circumstances, and the documentation of your condition, it is possible to get admission with your stats but it is dependent on a variety of factors, including evidence of ability to succeed in law school, demonstrating that you are able to manage your condition, and so on. Best of luck.
  4. No one was accusing anyone of anything. Please let's get back on the topic at hand.
  5. My firm also sent everyone home to work remotely. Things seem to be going smoothly so far.
  6. Let's go back to what you wrote in the first place: [Emphasis mine] "Many similar anecdotes" implies that there are enough instances of "notorious, blatant, undeniable nepotism at [seven sister firms]" that it is notable. That's what I was responding to. This isn't a court or a moot where I lose points for colourful, illustrative language. I was responding to your (and others') not-so-subtle implications that this is a common, or at least not uncommon, problem. Yes, it's true no one literally said this affected a "vast majority of people" or that every other hire is a nepotism hire. But you did imply it was a problem. I suppose you never said the degree to which it's a problem, but we're now on page 3 of this thread where certainly at least half if not more of it is arguing about the nepotism issue, so are you about to tell me that people aren't fussed? If it was such a non-issue, there would have been two comments and people would have moved on. But you were the one that was shocked, shocked I say, that there's gambling going on in this establishment.
  7. I know they didn’t. That’s why I said “like”. I know it’s subtle and so maybe it wasn’t obvious that I was exaggerating but my point was everyone was making a huge deal about the supposed breadth of nepotism in biglaw hiring and I’m trying to say it’s really not an issue that affects the vast majority of people.
  8. It’s not like one becomes a moderator here because we have some sort of super-knowledge about the industry or something. It’s usually just because we waste a lot of time here and Morgan likes the way our profile pictures look. But I also don’t think nepotism is as rampant as people assume. These big firms have a lot to lose by hiring shitty lawyers, despite the fact that their parents bring in a lot of money to the firm. Surely the firm has many more clients than their parents, and if you end up hiring someone who’s incompetent they will ruin a lot of things. How much is that gonna cost? Yes, I’m sure it happens. But let’s not pretend that like every other biglaw hire is because of connections alone and no other reason because that’s ridiculous.
  9. Sorry for the very late reply everyone. Work has been quite all-consuming. I can't answer this as thoroughly as you may like. I did make decisions on a few applicants with disabilities, but nothing like yours. For the most part, the factors with respect to disabilities that we looked at when I was on the committee was whether the applicant was receiving the necessary treatment and/or accommodations and whether such treatment/accommodations were having a positive effect on their stats. In other words, we were quite willing to overlook years of poor performance if, after receiving a diagnosis, treatment and accommodations, the applicant was able to show substantial improvement. This is not as applicable to something like your condition. I would say that, were I to receive a file like this, I would be willing to acknowledge the impact the disability has had on your circumstances and put the rest of your application in perspective of that. I'd want to know what kinds of accommodations you've received and if those accommodations have been helpful. I would want to know, in an ideal world, what further accommodations you would need to reach your peak performance. I'd want to see evidence that you are able to succeed in law school despite your disability. On a personal level, I'd want to know why you want to be a lawyer and what your goal would be with a law degree. Assuming your performance in undergrad is not terrible (say, if it were to be in the B range), depending on your answers to the foregoing, you'd have a pretty good case for admission. I can't say how the adcom may look at it this cycle, but I get the feeling this is usually the approach taken. Or at least it was when I was on the committee. But as I said, having never had a file like yours, I couldn't say with any more confidence than mere speculation as to how it would be treated. Part B is not required, and indeed I don't think it would reflect well on you as an applicant if you filled out Part B without a good reason in an attempt to shoehorn your way into that category. I certainly would have reacted poorly to that (though that wouldn't, by itself, mark you for rejection). I think I made more extensive comments about this earlier in the thread. I won't answer the balance of your question since that's more of a generic "chances" query that you should post in the appropriate forum if you're interested in getting feedback. See my answer above to @Reuben98's question, as I think it's partly applicable to your situation. I think given the necessary documentation and evidence that you are able to succeed in law school, I would have overlooked past poor performance in light of what you've been through and overcome. Your LSAT, however, is not very good at all, and while I'm not sure of the circumstances around which you took the test, I feel like your performance on it was not really affected by your medical condition. It will be a big hindrance and if I were in your position, I would try and retake it. Your ECs are great and your L2 is evidence you have academic ability, but your test scores are really going to hold you back. Now it's possible to get accepted with your 154, but it's not likely. Quite a bit, I would think. At least until April-ish, which is when, I believe, the last of the main offers go out and there is a greater focus on the waitlist.
  10. This is an automated response to a topic that appears to be requesting legal advice. Please refer to the following post regarding such requests:
  11. This is an automated response to a topic that appears to be requesting legal advice. Please refer to the following post regarding such requests:
  12. There's no rule that you have to use French in this section of the forum. I deleted some posts asking that. Please leave the moderating to the moderators.
  13. Except instead of a simple walk and announcement, it's in fact a 30 minute, two-act Shakespearean performance about the founding of the firm and the sage leadership of its namesake partner, Thibeault von der Berne d'Morgan, after whose death in the play the senior partners chant societatem mortuus est, societatem vivit in aeternum! (Or, for you simpletons, the firm is dead; long live the firm!)
  14. I suppose it depends on the school. At Osgoode, you had a choice how you wanted to take an exam: (1) on your own laptop; (2) in writing; (3) in the computer lab. If you elected to take an exam in the computer lab, you weren't with anyone else in the main class. I've also had exams split into two rooms because of space issues, so again, you'd never know who ended up where. And at the end of the day, I feel like no one's really paying attention who's in the exam room on exam day. You're more focused on writing the exam for yourself.
×
×
  • Create New...