Jump to content

lawstudentmikescott

Members
  • Content Count

    83
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

46 Decent People

About lawstudentmikescott

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1299 profile views
  1. Just want to give a big thank you to everyone who responded. Especially those that took their valuable time to provide an extremely detailed response. From when I first asked this question to how I feel now, is significantly different (in a positive way), due to the abundant of knowledge you guys provided. Thank you so much! I am grateful!
  2. This is exactly right and the explanation I needed. I always find lawstudents.ca helpful. So thanks for taking the time to reply! After I posted this, I ran into a 2L who had the same prof, and I asked them this question. They explained it exactly how you did. Now I understand it better and know what to do in instances like this. Essentially you would work backwards in a sense, from 219(b) to duties (215) for example. And yes 215 isn’t the only duty that was breached in this example. Thanks again!!
  3. Hey, so we are a month in and I’m confused. today we had a hypothetical question and were given a fact pattern. Essentially the question asked was it the right decision to charge the person for criminal negligence (section 219b omitting). when the prof answered the question, he started bringing out other sections of the criminal code, like section 215. my question is how come being charged under 219 is not sufficient on its own with explanation as to why? Is 219 a provision which requires another violation under the CC? I just don’t understand how he flushed out the offence, and if there’s a certain way in which this is done. Any help would be great.
  4. You’re absolutely right, that’s why I’m confused af. I want to help people, I applied with that intention. but as school commenced my peers made it their goal to work for corporate law, and no one that I’ve befriended seem to be interested in family for example (helping people in distress). And I know I shouldn’t be influenced by what people are saying, but then I spoke to some 3Ls and they stated that there’s no much opportunity in family. So it is discouraging to hear that. Further, I spoke to another older student and they said initially people that start law school want to get involved in social justice, but as years progress they switch to corporate. The reasoning being is that the debt and what not really takes a hit at you, and social justice gigs don’t pay that well. To this I’d say the real payout is the satisfaction of helping a person that really needed it and didn’t have the means to do it. But at the end of the day it would be nice to make a lot of money, pay off my debt, take care of the family, etc. That’s why I switched points and highlighted insurance defence as (I’d imagine) it would play to my interest of tort and PI, while paying well. You’re correct in saying this kind of work (to me at least) won’t give me the satisfaction of helping people. I'm just confused, but I think I should just continue following the main reason why I applied to law school, and see what happens.
  5. This was amazing. I appreciate all of this so much. It really clarified a lot. I am grateful for your time! thanks again! however, when thinking insurance defence I thought that involved working for insurance companies to reduce payout to individuals making insurance claims (i.e. fraudulent claims). Again, people think this is grimy (because those individuals that truly suffer are being screwed to some extent), but at the same time I can imagine the work and application and analysis of the law to be interesting.
  6. Hey everyone! 1L here. I know I just started and all, but I want to understand how the career aspect of lawyering works. I am getting a lot of anxiety in regards to knowing where I am going with law school. The debt is really hitting me and making me worry. I will try to keep this short and to the point. I apologize if these questions come across as dumb. They are likely super ignorant, I know your time is valuable and I honestly appreciate any insight you can provide. I wanted to go to law school with the idea to help people with the law. People like regular folk. I was interested in family law (helping people with their familial relationships through the application of the law...helping people in distress, etc.) 1) I spoke to older students and they indicated opportunities in family law are limited, esp. with OCIs. Further, it became apparent that those Toronto firms/big firms that do specialize in family law don't hire too often/a lot. Is this true? 2a) I really like Tort law, I have taken a course regarding it in my undergrad too. I always liked personal injury law. However, I remember talking about it at one of the socials and I felt like people would shutdown the conversation quick. I understand that it has a bad rep, but I am sure some clients do really need help. Is personal injury lucrative/are there opportunities? I know there are some PI firms on Bay. 2b) I read about insurance defence, is this in the scope of personal injury and tort law? Would this be considered as "corporate law"? It sounds interesting. 3) What is corporate/business law? I understand its law pertaining to corporate/business needs. But when people tell me they want to go into corporate and/or business law, what kind of law do they want to practice? Is it just that they want to be legal counsel for a corporation/business? I don't think merging businesses will bring me joy. Is there more to it? To answer this, I reached out to some older students. They indicated that most corporate law firms are full service, where they offer legal services to a wide variety of cases. So, if a lawyer were to work/apply there, would they be expected to be well rounded in regards to the type of law they specialize in? If I wanted to pursue a legal career with a specialization/interest in tort law, do I have a place in a corporate law firm? I hope you can see my confusion. 4) I have people telling me they want to do litigation. I know what that is, but what is that in the sense of a career? Do firms explicitly hire litigators? I thought a lawyer once called are litigators and solicitors. Are litigators people that only do litigation? And if so, do they have a certain type of law the specialize in or is it mixed (I think you can see my confusion lies somewhere with the idea of specializing)? I am assuming they need to be hired at a firm that has good amount of litigation cases. Lastly, is it the case that a law student will find a type of law they want to practice, and apply to a firm that specializes in that type of law? Or is it more complicated than that? I hope these are all appropriate questions. Feel free to be as blunt as possible, any advice would be great. Thank you so much!
  7. Thanks to everyone who replied! You all provided some great advice. I really appreciate it!
  8. Albeit that school started a few weeks ago, I feel that I have done a great amount of reading. Ive stayed on top of most of the readings, but I am approaching it like undergrad. I don’t think this method is good because I don’t really know what I am supposed to take notes of (a part from making case briefs). I tried to refrain from looking at summaries too early but I fell a little behind today and gave in. The summary was clear and told me what I needed to know about certain cases. I feel that going forward, I should just do the reading then look at the notes in the summary and add whatever else I may need to, in regard to that reading. I find that making notes while reading (without knowing exactly what to take notes of) is a bad idea. What do you think? I just don’t know if I am going in the right direction in terms of knowing what I need to know, opposed to what I think I need to know.
  9. I was able to do so by networking. My university had a job fair thing where people come in from different industries and set up booths. There was a lawyer there and I simply spoke to him and talked about law school, asked questions, etc. During our convo. I mentioned I was interested in volunteering. I got his contact info, then he reached out and I was given a volunteer role with a project he was working on. Then through him I met other lawyers, and one who eventually hired me as a volunteer.
  10. I’m only in 1L but I notice a lot of people pursue law for the money. That’s fine and completely normal. But I think some of these people fail to realize that being a lawyer is being in a position of great power. Power to help so many people and change lives. For me money is secondary to my goal of becoming a lawyer. People need help and I want to choose the path of a lawyer to help them. But there are other paths (different careers) that are available too! Based on your question it seems money is an important factor in deciding whether to pursue law school. But are there other reasons why you want to become a lawyer? You say your current role isn’t your dream job, would being a lawyer fulfill that? Do you want a career where you may help people with their legal troubles while taking a pay cut? Would you still find fulfillment in that? I doubt anyone here can give you the answer you’re looking for. Just follow your passion. I’d say the money you’re making right now is fantastic, and if money is the primary motive for you, then stay where you’re at.
  11. Lol! JY definitely over explained but honestly, I feel that really made me grasp Yoni’s classes better. Like JY drilled it in your head. But you’re right I guess either would do the trick!
  12. HR is good but not for everyone. Yoni is good but he’s not always going to be teaching you. The inconsistency with teachers may not be suitable for you. Some of them don’t match up to Yoni. Further, Yoni although very detailed, may rush some lessons. I took Harvard ready and it gave me a decent foundation, but I found 7sage really brought it all together to help me improve from my cold score.
  13. Sorry you had to go through that but it’s great it has provided you with some insight to pursue a legal career. Having just completed my applications last cycle, I can see why you would want to include it but I don’t think their would be enough space to write everything out thoroughly, especially enough to have your point get across properly (to avoid the problems you mentioned).
  14. The fact that you are perplexed that they tend to choose students with A+ grades in everything is wild. You suggest that many students have the capabilities to get into law school, but is it not the case that having A+ grades in everything is an attribute to these capabilities that you mention? So based on what you’re saying you would prefer if law schools admit students that do not have A+ grades in everything? If you have average stats it would seem you lack the capabilities of getting into law school and becoming a great lawyer, no? If you don’t lack said capabilities then your stats would not be average. 😕
×
×
  • Create New...