Jump to content

BlockedQuebecois

Members
  • Content Count

    6372
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    41

Everything posted by BlockedQuebecois

  1. Lots of solo and small shops practice general commercial work, but you're not going to be servicing major clients – you'll be helping normal people set up and manage their businesses. The area of big law work that seems most amenable to smaller practices is litigation, which is why you see so many litigation boutiques out there. After that, you tend to see quite a few relatively small firms practicing in the following areas: Insolvency Labour and employment Tax (I seem to remember @kurrika posting about a tax court judge who, prior to joining the bench, had operated a solo shop for some time) Although in the case of the latter two, those firms seem to generally service smaller clients. Litigation and insolvency seem almost uniquely well suited to servicing large clients from a small firm. In terms of the more corporate-corporate work done at big firms, things like securities, private equity, and the like seem to be dominated by big firms, with medium sized shops picking up the slack. I don't think I've ever heard of a <5 lawyer securities shop. This is just my general understanding of the market, and I've never really looked into L&E or tax work, so I'm open to being corrected by those with more knowledge.
  2. All things being equal, it's always going to be preferable to get reference letters from people who know you better. With that said, does it matter? It's not like you're debating whether or not you should get a TA who loves you or a prof who called you "GobletKing" one time – and hey, that's pretty close to GoblinKing, so she must kinda know you, right? – to write your letter. It sounds like you've got essentially no option except to ask professors who you aren't close with. And that's fine, lots of people get into law school every year with reference letters from profs that say little more than "they took my class, they did well, they've taken lots of classes, their grades say they did well, they'll probably continue to do well". You can be one of those people. If I were you, I would fill any mandatory academic references with professors who seemed nice and whose course you did well in. Write a nice email setting out where you're applying, the deadlines, and asking if they think they would be able and willing to write a positive reference letter for you. The word positive is important there, because it gives profs an out if they think they could only write a neutral letter. Once a professor agrees, offer to meet with them to discuss, and send them a copy of the following: A table outlining how to submit the necessary letters, to whom they should be addressed, and the deadlines Your transcript Your resume A copy of your personal statement for law school Hopefully, your professor will feel comfortable pulling from your resume and personal statement in order to beef up the letter a bit. At the very least, you'll show them that you're organized, communicate effectively via writing, and that you're serious about wanting to attend law school. After that, consider whether the non-academic references you might be able to get would be better than the academic ones. When I applied to law school, I had one professor write me a letter and one former boss write me one, simply because I thought the non-academic reference would highlight a unique part of my application. Best of luck
  3. Wait, I thought you said that "certain employers" had been understanding of your situation. Now you're trying to say that they weren't? Which is it – is public sector HR "inflexible" to the point of not understanding that things have been derailed a bit by a global pandemic, or have they been "understanding of your situation"? See my post in the call to the bar thread – I think a little compassion goes a long way these days. You're right that it's part of someone's job to prepare transcripts. But you're wrong that it's "an incredibly simple, easy, and quick task to complete" – they presumably have a backlog, it presumably took some time for them to organize an alternative service and set it up to be accessed from home, there may be workers off sick or off taking care of loved ones, the person has other responsibilities, productivity is down, etc. etc. Anyways, this is all a silly sidetrack. I didn't respond to your post, nor did I pretend to provide information in response to your query. I merely stated that "it took 18 days for them to get me my transcript during a global pandemic" was a rather poor reason to not attend a law school. I stand by that assessment.
  4. Osgoode isn't even offering official transcripts at the moment, so UBC is winning that battle. Also, if "certain employers: aren't understanding of "there's a global pandemic that literally shut down my university and basically every other university on the planet, here's an unofficial transcript and I'll get you an official one ASAP", I don't think you should want to work there.
  5. Surely "they took 18 days to send me a pdf of my transcript" is not a good reason not to attend a law school
  6. You know, I finally figured out why all the belly-aching from new calls and current articling students rubs me the wrong way. It's that the same people who were/are desperate for the LSO to accommodate them – through abridged articles, reduced fees, extended payment plans, whatever – are actively complaining that the LSO isn't doing things perfectly. The people at the LSO are normal humans like the rest of us, and have had their lives turned upside down the same way everyone else has. It's unreasonable to expect them to both accommodate you because your life has been disrupted and do everything exactly the way you want them to do it. You have to be accommodating as well. And as hard as it is to believe, figuring out how to livestream their meetings to 296 law students, none of whom expressed any desire in this thread to be able to watch a livestream of a bureaucratic meeting, isn't the top priority for the LSO. Nor should it be – they've needed to figure out how to ensure the public still has access to competent legal services during a global pandemic, they've needed to figure out how to administer the bar exams that were cancelled, they've needed to figure out whether or not to administer the bar exams in the future, etc. There are a billion things more pressing than whether or not you were charged an extra $65 relative to your peers or whether or not you were able to watch a live stream of convocation. Hell, this thread has even devolved into outraged complaints about things that are perfectly normal. See, for e.g., the person who got all upset about the call to the bar fee like it was some magical surprise that hasn't been clearly listed on the LSO website since time immemorial, or the fact that new calls weren't delivered there LSO numbers immediately by carrier pigeon the instant they were called. I think a little compassion would go a long way here. Everyone is trying their best. The LSO has stated that they'll be examining options to celebrate your achievements with your peers and family in due time. The purpose of the administrative call is to help you be able to practice law as quickly as possible, not to replace the typical call to the bar ceremony. So instead of complaining and being frustrated with the LSO, why not take today to celebrate with the people that care about you?
  7. Your school will probably put together an updated list ahead of the recruit. That will be the easiest way to get updated numbers
  8. A lot of the document review/due diligence work that’s available for teleworking is the initial sweep of documents before lawyers at major firms go in and do more detailed reviews. It’s likely to be even more brain dead than the doc review work you’ve done. It’s also, in my opinion, the best target for automation in the legal industry, because the benefit of full automation is incredibly high (hundreds, if not thousands, of hours saved). I’m not saying that’s likely to happen soon, but I’d hate to be a ten year call looking for work with nothing but doc review on my resume when my job is automated away.
  9. 60k isn't a conservative starting salary, to be frank. There are a lot of people leaving law school making significantly less than that. If you eliminate Bay Street jobs, you're looking at starting salaries of ~$80,000 on the high end, with the bulk of shops paying $40-60,000. There's absolutely no way I would go $200,000 into debt for Windsor Dual. There are a billion different jobs out there with lower barriers to entry and good pay.
  10. I feel like most people should know that administrative tribunals, and the administrative state more broadly, are very important by the time they're in law school. I certainly didn't learn about any tribunals I didn't know exist during the course of my admin law class. I also think most of the cases you learn about during admin law are pretty widely known.
  11. @Jaggers, I think the problem with admin law is that it can be boiled down to three key cases, and you don't even have to have a good handle on the facts of those cases. It's a course that one could get a lot out of, if one either thinks deeply about the issues raised in the course or if one has a professor that makes thinking about those issues a central focus of the course. Of course, if you want to think deeply about those issues there are probably better ways to do it, particularly if your professor doesn't make it a focus. Administrative law is really a class that would be better examined via paper. It would force the professor to focus on the societal implications of administrative law and the administrative state, and it would force students to think deeply about this issues raised. As an exam-based course, you can do incredibly well with zero effort.
  12. It’s like that TikTok: We have so much in common We argue all the time You always say I'm wrong I'm pretty sure I'm right
  13. Admin law is a waste of a course, in my opinion. You’ll learn more by reading three cases in their entirety (Baker, Dunsmuir, and Vavilov) than you will from a semester of attending class, unless you have a very good professor. Agree re: Bus As, it’s really not complicated or hard to pick up.
  14. ... Okay, so you're not getting a distance degree. Looks like @msk2012's stating the obvious was indeed necessary.
  15. Bus org and admin used to be nationally mandatory courses, but the national requirement was changed in 2018. Now students still have to understand principles of administrative law, but don't need an actual course in it – the only mandatory courses across all law schools are contracts, criminal, torts, property, and constitutional law.
  16. I'm not sure what you're talking about. The policy is very clear that two thirds of a QLD must be completed via in-person person instruction. If you're getting an LLB in the UK via distance education, your degree won't satisfy the NCA requirements. You will be required to complete two years of studies that satisfy the requirements. If you're getting an LLB in the UK by actually, you know, being in the UK, then it will satisfy the requirements, because you're not getting a distance degree.
  17. I never said it was, and you know that. Although, to be honest, there's a good argument to be made that academic freedom actually is carte blanche for homophobia/racism/transphobia in an academic capacity (and OP is very clearly talking about the professor's role in an academic capacity). See, for e.g. Jordan Peterson's continued employment at the University of Toronto, J Michael Bailey's continued employment at Northwestern University, etc.
  18. @Cookies20000 look, you’re going to do what you’re going to do. You’ve been given the answer about how to proceed, and you’ve been given commentary on how people will perceive you, both positive and negative. Without posting the fact pattern, nobody here is going to be able to tell you whether or not you’re in the right here. You’re also not going to get any more useful responses here – people have told you that you may be viewed as immature and insecure if you handle it the way you want to. And I’ll be honest and say that the way you’ve presented your side here doesn’t lead me to give you the benefit of the doubt. It reads to me like you’re overly sensitive, editorializing, and don’t understand the basic premise of academic freedom. It also suggests you have a personal vendetta with this professor. You may very well be right and the fact pattern may very well be inappropriate, but your posts gives me the sense that it’s likely borderline and you’re blowing it up Others will likely disagree with me, and think that you deserve the benefit of the doubt and you’re probably in the right. That might be true. But short of sharing the fact pattern, verbatim, nobody is going to know which is true. You're clearly set on your path and think you’re in the right, so just buck up and do it already. The internet isn’t going to validate you, and you don’t need to justify yourself to it.
  19. [Emphasis added] For the love of god, don’t do this as a student at any size law firm.
  20. At this point, I would consider enrolling in the LPP in Ontario. Getting called should be your priority
  21. The LSA requires you to file a report when you terminate articles, I imagine said report includes a reason for dismissal. And while it sounds nice to say the law societies should be more involved in terminating articles, I don't think students would actually want that. At the bare minimum, cracking down on articling principals would lead to fewer articling principals, which would harm students far more than the principals. But an obvious and concerning knock-on effect would be that it's likely not that hard to make out a claim of incompetence against many articling students. If principals are suddenly required to truly justify the reason for terminating, many will keep a clear log of the articling students failures. If that happens, what's to stop the law societies from coming in, seeing that the student is incompetent, and wiping clear the months of service they've already completed? So while it's easy to say the law societies should be more involved in this kind of thing, it's easy to see how further involvement could harm students quite significantly.
  22. For what it’s worth, I appreciated the relationship advice 😛
×
×
  • Create New...