Jump to content

DavisFromCornerGas

Members
  • Content Count

    110
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

DavisFromCornerGas last won the day on September 20

DavisFromCornerGas had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

87 Decent People

About DavisFromCornerGas

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I hated law school. And by "hate", I mean despised it so much I took a one-year leave of absence, went part-time for the rest of my JD to keep some sanity, and finished in 5 years instead of the usual 3. I spent as little time at the faculty as possible, didn't make any law school friends I'm still in contact with today, and honestly if you asked my classmates about me they'd probably give you a confused look and ask "Who?" I knew I hated law school within my first month of 1L. It was so bad I seriously considered quitting and doing something else. I felt like a fish out of water that whole first year, and it was so bad for my mental health I checked out as much as possible for the rest of law school while still graduating, out of sheer self-preservation. Heck, I nearly failed to graduate- I failed a course, and if you do that at U of T, you either get permission to retake the course from the admin (not guaranteed), or fail out of law school. Remembering those days of extreme anxiety and uncertainty while I waited for the admin's decision makes me shudder. It took me a full month after finally graduating to stop having nightmares where I found out I actually failed a class or forgot about an assignment and couldn't graduate after all. Law school gave me some pretty unpleasant anxiety I still live with today. But I always knew I wanted to practice law. I always loved practicing when I got the chance to do it. I now have my dream law job, make a good living, and am truly happy. But that's the key, OP: wanting to practice law. Do you? Or at least, do you want to do one of the many things you can do with a law degree? If not, then what's the point? But if so, then I would say stick it out and get to that end goal. I'm glad I did. Good luck.
  2. Lol. Okay then. Good luck in law school with that attitude!
  3. Sorry, just seeing this now. It took less than a month for me, and was very simple. Expensive though, so bear that in mind.
  4. Are there any rules around coordinating with robes though? Because if so, my sports-themed masks are going to be a problem 😉 Side note, we are going to look like executioners. The bat wing robes, the mask... heh.
  5. Exactly. This, if I wasn't being clear before, is what I mean. Put 'er in, OP.
  6. Yes, MountainMon, the fact that I got into (and, by the way, graduated from) law school makes my advice more relevant than that of someone who hasn't even been accepted yet. Your posting history on this site is a classic example of the blind leading the blind: you have no idea what it takes to be accepted, because you've never been accepted (and you don't sit on an admissions committee either), but you feel qualified to tell other applicants what they should and should not do. OP, in the end, while advice from other applicants on this forum may at times be helpful, it's best to take it all with a grain of salt. Go with your gut. If you think something is relevant, put it in. If you think something will help give a clear picture of what you would bring to the class, put it in. Let the admissions committee know you. That's extremely important. Again, best of luck
  7. With all due respect, I got into U of T Law. You're still in the process of completing your applications to get into law school. I don't think you are in a position to discount my advice out of hand. (And of course, best of luck on those applications.) OP, law school admissions committees absolutely want to know who you are. The admissions process is more holistic than some people think. If you think these things you mentioned are relevant, put them in. I was able to make varsity cheerleading relevant as an EC, and believe me, that takes some creative thinking! And of course, your personal statement is an excellent place to explain why you don't have more ECs. Not in a "sorry, I don't think I'm good enough without this explanation" sense, more in an "I've persevered through adversity" sense. Again, best of luck.
  8. I respectfully disagree. OP, you should absolutely mention these. Playing music develops your brain in a way nothing else does, and training in sports develops discipline, strength, and confidence. All of these things are desirable qualities for an applicant to law school. I didn't play clarinet at an elite level, but I mentioned it. I didn't make it to the Olympics in my sport, or even to Nationals, but I mentioned it. I made sure I gave them a good idea of who I was, and for what it's worth, I got into U of T law with a lower LSAT than you currently have. Good luck.
  9. And congrats on the job! As a fellow transfer to BC, welcome.
  10. None of the following is legal advice, and you should definitely still speak to LSBC after reading this. With that in mind: I haven't gone through this same situation- I transferred, but I'm exempt because I'll be a Crown- but a perusal of the section on LSBC's website about professional liability insurance says you must be a resident of Alberta if you wish to claim that exemption. They define "resident of Alberta" the same way the Income Tax Act defines "resident of Canada". I'll post a link to a Government of Canada explainer below, but TL;DR: if you don't live in Alberta, you don't still keep a residence in Alberta, and your spouse/common law partner and/or dependents don't still live in Alberta, you will *most likely* not be considered a resident of Alberta. Not sure what your individual situation will be, but that's the gist of it. Link to explainer here: https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/technical-information/income-tax/income-tax-folios-index/series-5-international-residency/folio-1-residency/income-tax-folio-s5-f1-c1-determining-individual-s-residence-status.html#p1.11 Whew! I'm a criminal lawyer, so I can't say I've ever perused tax legislation in order to give someone a TL;DR. It's convoluted as all get-out. How do all you tax lawyers out there do it!
  11. This is probably going to be a very unpopular opinion, and it's entirely based in my own architectural preferences, but... I HATE the new Jackman Law Building at U of T. Hate. It's this glass and concrete monstrosity in the middle of a gorgeous, historic, mostly stone campus... but that's actually kind of okay because once you get inside to the main floor, there's a decent amount of natural light. So far, so good. But then you realize most of your classes are going to be in the basement, with zero windows and zero natural light, and suddenly your only surroundings are stark white walls that would fit in equally well at a psychiatric hospital. Heck, even psychiatric hospitals these days tend to have artwork and other sources of colour to brighten up the space, but the Jackman basement definitely does not. They spent millions of bucks on what is mostly a subterranean concrete bunker, with about as much character as a high school hallway. Super depressing. That said, the Flavelle House part of the law campus is beautiful, as is Falconer Hall (though you do have to think super creaky wooden floors are charming).
  12. @Diplock no more Judge Judy??? Cool cobra and all, but I will forever associate your blunt and brilliant advice with the great Lady Sheindlin waving her hand at us and telling us we're stupid 😉
  13. Hopefully BC leads on this and Ontario follows. I get the concern that fewer articling positions will potentially be available, and it's a valid concern, but...... something's gotta give here. We've been allowing articling students to be treated like crap for so long, and never taking substantial strides forward to help address that power imbalance out of a fear that already shitty articling principals are going to pull out of the articling program because they now have to be less shitty. Are there any greater incentives that can be offered by the Law Societies to induce lawyers to take on articling students who otherwise aren't financially able to? Heck, that's something I'd support my massive LSO fees (and soon-to-be LSBC fees) going toward: generous grants to firms so they can better afford an articling student's salary. There has to be something the Law Societies can do to help get the shitty principals who balk at the idea of treating their articling students a little better out of the mix, and get better principals in there in their place.
  14. Shockingly no (from what I understand)! I believe the fee is $300.
×
×
  • Create New...