Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by BlockedQuebecois

  1. 53 minutes ago, ArchivesandMuseums said:

    I feel that your question is a little bit weird; is there any particular reason that you refer to TRU and Windsor? Both schools are fine, but they are not great enough to provide you with "the best opportunity." With regard to your notion of "the best opportunity" that may concern "reputation, funding, article positions, etc," I do not think that the two schools would be able to give you any significant advantages compared with other law schools in Canada.

    For example, reputation: I have no idea.

    Funding: TRU's tuition is more expensive than that of Windsor.

    Articling placement: Both schools do not provide useful information on this.  

    They probably got accepted to TRU and Windsor. 

    OP: Your opportunities will be essentially the same out of both schools. Decide whether you’d rather live and work in BC or Ontario and go to that school. If you don’t care where you end up, decide whether you’d rather spend three years in Kamloops or Windsor. If you don’t care where you live, go to the cheaper one. 

    • Like 1

  2. 33 minutes ago, makkapakka said:

    Does anybody know if it is possible to apply for tax court clerkship in one's 3rd year instead of 2nd year? 

    PDF warning

    TL;DR: You can apply to clerk at the tax court at any point after (and including) 2L, including after graduation and after being called. 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  3. I mean this nicely: your grades are good, but they’re not that good. Once you adjust to Pub Con being either a C or C-, you’re essentially a mid-to-low B+ average student, aren’t you? A solid 20% of your class is likely above you.

    I think high grades can limit some opportunities. If you’re a straight A student, firms that are used to applications from less academically accomplished students are going to wonder why you want to work there, instead of at Henein Hutchinson or Stockwoods or whatever firm has a reputation in your field for hiring academically accomplished students.

    But you’re not anywhere close to the stage where people start wondering why you’re applying to them instead of Stockwoods. Which means that if firms are writing you off as being too academic, something else is wrong with your application. Maybe your cover letter sounds too academic, maybe it’s something in your cover letter, or maybe you’re giving off that vibe during interviews. Figure out what it is, and fix it. 

    • Thanks 1

  4. On 7/7/2020 at 9:18 PM, utmguy said:

    But that wasn't what the insider's analysis was.  The insider who got the info on the plane activity predicted that OXY shares would jump past $76 (from around $61 per share).


    “Here is where it gets a little more interesting. Warren Buffett does not show up as a holder of OXY or APC or CVX. And a quick search of OXY’s 10-K for ‘Nebraska’ turns up nothing. Yet for some reason, an OXY jet was seen in Omaha yesterday. That strikes us as an odd trip for OXY to make, especially on a Sunday and while it is engaged in a high-stakes M&A battle. While we can’t say what OXY might have been doing in Omaha yesterday, it has occurred to us that it might be trying to bring Buffett into this deal and help with the cash portion of its offer. We have assumed that OXY could go higher than $76 and if it really has paid Buffett a visit, we suspect it is gearing up to top CVX’s inevitable bump. This mention comes with the standard caveat that Corporate Jet information can be noisy and difficult to read.”


    That’s... not what that says. 

    The analyst was predicting what OXY’s bid price would be, as it was “gearing up to top [Chevron’s] inevitable bump”. 

    They were ultimately wrong. I think the bid ended up being approved at just north of $72 per share in cash and Occidental stock. Although query what the value of the bid was when it was made, it’s possible it amounted to $76 per share prior to the devaluation in Occidental’s shares.

    My recollection is that Gordon Haskett never took a position on whether or not the acquisition was a good one or not, but I could be wrong.

    All of this is rather besides the point though, isn’t it? The point is that incidental information can be used to draw conclusions if other information is present. Whether or not people react “properly”, as measured by hindsight, to that information isn’t relevant. 

    • Like 1

  5. 7 minutes ago, utmguy said:

    But... didn't shares of Occidental fall on the news of Buffet's deal?  And didn't they completely tank after it became clear just how bad the deal was?


    Yeah. Which is why shorting or selling ahead of the announcement would have made money relative to if they didn’t know of Buffett’s involvement.

    Shares often fall on news of Buffett’s investments, because they’re often disadvantageous to existing shareholders. In the Occidental case, he was mainly purchasing preferred shares which weren’t affected by potential dividend cuts to the common shares traded publicly. Another good example is Dominion Energy losing a tenth of its market cap since it announced it was selling off assets to Berkshire Hathaway’s energy unit 

  6. 2 minutes ago, wtamow said:

    My comment was literally right there: "why would that many people ever line up to get into the building [in these queues]?" 

    Seems like everyone else who probably read it (along with the NP article I was quoting) realized I wasn't acting like forcing your workers to wait in hour long queues is the worst human rights violation in the world. Reading comprehension usually requires reading the entire discussion (CONTEXT) and making appropriate conclusions instead of bringing up whataboutist examples like "what about Amazon workers?"

    The only reason why I wrote a long response is because you doubled down, insulted my character, and building off of what another user said in another thread, you "can start an argument in an empty room." Now you are accusing me of ranting. Perhaps if you can nitpick a problem out in everyone's posts, it's not our writing to blame. 

    I didn’t attack your character, I challenged the tone of your post.

    And look, all you had to do was say “you misunderstood me, I meant that I can’t imagine the offices actually opening and people actually waiting in hour long lines just to get into the office, not that people are currently waiting in hour long lines.” 

    And I would have looked silly for misunderstanding you, would have apologized, and we all could have enjoyed this lovely evening. Which is what I plan on doing now, because there’s quite literally no reason for huge posts with caps locks and bolded letters and the taking of the lord’s name in vain. Have a good night :) 

    • Confused 1

  7. 6 minutes ago, wtamow said:


    There is some context here:

    A plurality of workers at firms can work most days from home and still be productive. Some workers are even more productive from home due to the lack of division between work/home, resulting in extra hours being put in at work (because why not? I'm one of those people.) 

    Those who are less productive from home (either because of what their job mandates or what their home situation is) may be allowed back into the office. But even with that % of legal workers, you can have staggered start times. There is quite literally no need to have everyone line up at a single time and wait for hours, when most people can be assigned an elevator start time. Of course, that requires cooperation. 

    Hour-long queues sound extremely unproductive and I would not be happy working at a law firm that requires that of their workers instead of just taking the smart approach to this situation and staggering start times based on necessity. 

    Of course, a giant corporation like Amazon that reportedly has workers pissing in bottle is not something that I would look to for inspiration on how to run a law firm that treats its workers like human beings.

    It's a free market though. Firms are allowed to do as they please -- and the workers will choose accordingly. I somehow doubt that a firm that forces their workers to wait in massive lines after a commute will be retaining the best of the best. Also, what a laughably comical comment to make when we are talking about firms that provide catering for their lawyers. There is clearly some element of wanting a productive, satisfied group of workers for these firms. 

    The point is I haven't actually seen anyone populate these long lines for hours. I haven't seen many people in these lines at all. I still can't imagine what reputation a firm would acquire if it were to force its lawyers and staff to spend hours in line, instead of just using a small % of resources to identify which workers need to come back into the office to remain productive, and develop a schedule accordingly. My comment was more to do with the fact that the queues are set up to be really (like, hours) long... whereas I can't ever imagine (most) of these firms having a system where the line is fully populated each morning, where it isn't necessary at all (even the article acknowledges this).

    If I heard of a firm doing this, I certainly wouldn't think very highly of it. I feel like hour-long queues in a high-stress work environment could get aggressive and nasty and competitive.  It is a pretty "peculiarly bad" situation, not to mention a wholly unnecessary one for the reasons I've described. Also, does this not sound fucking weird to you:

    "That could leave lobbies looking like the long queues at theme parks, as visitors wait for their favourite rides."

    Luckily even the National Post acknowledges that scheduled boarding times are a good idea (those would be an example of a policy that is peculiar, but not bad.) The end result of this wacky free market experiment will be the idea that "boarding times" are now a perk only offered at firms with a higher quality of life? Applicants will be choosing firms based on who has a more efficient elevator boarding system, amongst other things. I don't doubt that some firms will take advantage of the competitive edge this offers them. (It's literally right there in the NP article, for christ's sake.)

    As a side note, I take enormous offence with you claiming that I'm acting like this is somehow one of the "worst working conditions" out there and as if I am somehow ignoring the fact that most Canadians deal with much worse working conditions. There is a lot of personal comments that can be made here, but I'll choose to leave this assumption about me, because I don't really care. 

    Glad to spend this hour productively arguing about queues. I can't believe I had to write this all out. Hope you calm down.

    Sorry, for clarity, your complaint was that office buildings have set up ropes to queue people who aren’t, in fact, there?

    Call me crazy, but I think you just spent an hour writing out your post (rant?) because you initial post did not, at all, clearly communicate your point. 

    Anyways, I don’t think I’m the one who needs to calm here, and I’m going to leave the conversation in order to facilitate the temperature decrease needed. Take a few minutes and re-read your reaction here. Have a good night! 


  8. Sure, but when your question is why would that many people ever do that, you’re implying that this is some kind of peculiarly bad situation.

    In reality, it’s not uncommon for plenty of Canadians to deal with much worse working conditions than waiting in line in FCP. 

    I’d agree with you if they had simply said “There’s like hour long lines at FCP, it looks awful”. But that’s decidedly not what the tone of the post was. 


    • Confused 1

  9. 2 minutes ago, wtamow said:

    They have set up really long roped off queues in some buildings. My question is: why would that many people ever line up to get into the building? Some of the lines I’ve seen would take like at least an hour to clear. Waiting in an hour long queue to get into your job sounds like shit, especially after a long commute. 

    Lots of people deal with far shittier things than waiting in a queue to get into their jobs.

    Hell, there was that recent SCOTUS decision that said workers didn’t need to be paid while waiting up to 25 minutes to go through screening before leaving amazon warehouses. 

    As for why people do that? Generally it’s because they, you know, need their job. 

    • Haha 1

  10. 7 minutes ago, Jaggers said:

    They can also represent clients at the Labour Relations Board, Human Rights Tribunal, WSIAT, etc. without being labour/employment lawyers.

    True, but paralegals providing family law services has been a hot button issue in Ontario for years. I don’t think the same is true with regards to labour/employment services.  

  11. 28 minutes ago, OWH said:

    Paralegals can represent at any tribunal that is established under an Act of the Ontario Legislature or an Act of Parliament. 


    I’m surprised they can represent clients in front of the Child and Family Services Review Board, considering they’re not allowed to practice family law generally. You learn something new every day! 

  12. Look, no offence, but you just wrapped up 1L. You’re entering a profession. It’s fine to seek out information about specific issues, but this thread is quickly becoming a “I don’t want to do research, please someone spoon feed me everything I need to know about legal practice” thread. You’ve gone from asking a somewhat specific, but rather obvious, question about bankruptcy law to saying “what can a sole solicitor do”. When you’re asking a question that broad, or asking a question so easily answerable as “is the scope of practice for paralegals different between Alberta and Ontario”, it’s clear you’ve done insufficient research.  

    And in addition to asking people to spoon feed you information, you didn’t even do them the service of telling you what jurisdiction you’re in, so they could spoon feed you accurate information.

    I think you should sit down and do some actual research in relation to fields of legal practice that interest you. Look at what services are being advertised by small firms/soles in your jurisdiction. See what files they’ve been involved in. Then, once you actually have an idea about what the correct questions to ask are, come back and ask them.

    Or, and probably better yet, talk to soles doing the work you want to do in your jurisdiction. This site can be great for questions that your network can’t answer, or for questions that you’d rather not ask mentors or possible employers. But when you’re essentially asking “how do I become X”, asking someone who is X is likely to net you better answers (particularly since this forum is rather Ontario and BC-centric). 

  13. 25 minutes ago, Euroguy18 said:

    I'm confused. How can a paralegal represent a party in court? 

    I was always assumed that paralegals operate under a lawyer, not independently. 

    Paralegals in Ontario are licensed by the LSO and are allowed to represent individuals within the scope of practice, which includes small claims court, certain tribunals (including the LTB), provincial offences, and summary conviction matters.

    Are you in Alberta? If so, that may explain your understanding of paralegals, since it’s not a regulated profession there. 

  14. 11 hours ago, pzabbythesecond said:

    Good to know. Thanks for the heads up

    I think that’s usually for people who open their own practices, and thus would need a revolving line of credit anyways. 

    I’ve heard that employees may be capped at $50k as a line of credit, which obviously wouldn’t cover the debts of a lot of law students. 

    With that said, it’s always possible to negotiate and see what kind of deal you can structure. 

  15. 20 minutes ago, artsydork said:

    I'd be surprised if this niche area had a school with this course as a specialty/program focused. You just want to go to a school with health law, torts, insurance, negotiation, litigation, evidence and the like. So like, pretty much most schools.

    I'd suggest looking up lawyers practicing in the field, see where they went to school, and look at course offerings. You're likely best off choosing a school in the same province where you want to practice rather than attend a school 4 provinces away that might have an extra course or 2.


    UBC actually does offer a medical negligence law course. But yeah, if OP wants to practice in Ontario, they’re probably better off going to an Ontario school. 

  16. 6 minutes ago, brunetteElleWoods said:

    I don’t know if it’s just me, maybe I’m coming on here to see if others feel this way... but in the midst of preparing for the bar between reading the materials and starting to work through practice exams, does anyone feel (or has felt) scary test anxiety about the upcoming bar exams and wondering about if you’ll pass? 

    Sometimes, I get in these ruts of second-guessing yourself about your abilities and competencies. Any advice for those of us second-guessing ourselves? 


    If it helps, I haven’t started preparing yet, and I’m scheduled to write on the 15th. So you’re surely better prepared than me. 

    I would just focus on the fact that the bar exam in Ontario is, largely, procedural. Unless you have a history of test anxiety that severely hampers your performance, or you have no idea how to write a multiple choice exam, you’re probably going to pass. And even if you don’t, it’s hardly the end of the world. 

    • Haha 1

  17. 6 minutes ago, HelloSir80 said:

    We share assistants who technically do that but what I’m looking for is to somehow have a master list of all my active files at any given time and know what’s going on. The reminders on outlook is not had, I use that but I find it doesn’t always save the changes. I think perhaps starting a google docs of some sort might be the bottom line but if there’s a software or some sort of other trick that would be great. 

    In an ideal world my assistant would manually update the data for me but it’s not gonna happen lol. 

    It’s been mentioned above, but I think you need to accept that file management is part of your job.

    Things can obviously be automated to a degree, but it’s ultimately on you to input the necessary data (or ensure your assistant does). No software is going to be capable of automatically updating every time there’s movement on a file.

    In my opinion, you’re missing out on valuable advice by shooting it down because it’s not the perfect solution.

    • Like 1

  18. What kind of malpractice do you want to commit? U of T is obviously the best choice if you want to mess up Bay Street files and cost is no object, but if you want to get innocent people sent to jail you may want to go to a cheaper school so that your loans don’t make a criminal law practice infeasible 

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1

  19. 2 minutes ago, Blurg said:

    Good to know. Is it just the little reminder message that pops up though? Because I’m pretty great at just ignoring those for awhile (which is also why my assistant puts in 1 month/2 week/1 weeks reminders for super important things). Emails I’ll pay attention to. I don’t file an email away until it’s been responded to, so I know whatever’s in my inbox still needs to be addressed.

    Yeah it is, you beat me to editing that in 😛 I prefer emails to reminders as well. 

  20. 9 minutes ago, Blurg said:

    If I’ve emailed someone and asked for a response by a certain day, I forward that email to myself with a note that says ‘follow-up’ and use the delay send option to send it on the deadline I requested. So then I get an email to remind me. 

    Outlook can do this automatically for you, if you want. Message > Follow Up > Add Reminder. Then it will remind you on the date you select. 

    Of course, you may prefer receiving an email and thus having it in your inbox rather than a simple reminder notification. 

  • Create New...