LawBlaw2019

Ideally reference letters will say something that the rest of your application doesn't. For instance, having a prof say "X was a strong student with an impressive grasp of the material" won't add to your application if you have an A in that course on your transcript. It may read nicely but it's not new information. With this is mind I think when you email your professor that you can be somewhat specific in your request. Instead of just asking for a reference letter, perhaps say in the email that you're looking to demonstrate to firms that you're an actively engaged student, or whatever. Then you go on to ask your prof if he/she would be comfortable writing you a reference letter. If they agree the letter may read more like "X was a strong student who frequently participated in meaningful discussion". Without actually telling your prof what to write, you can tell him/her what you're looking to convey. May be harder for a prof who doesn't know you well, but I would advise that a reference from a prof who knows you better is superior to a reference from the class you got your best grade in. Again, grades show up on your transcript, but your eagerness to learn, your demonstrated interest, and all those kinds of qualities do not. As a side note you don't need a letter from a professor. If you have 1-2 others that can speak to you more strongly then there's no problem with that. In fact for many firms reference letters are optional, not mandatory. Depends on the prof. I've experienced both.

I'm attending Western but I don't think that that's relevant to the point, which is that in your first year you can get comfortable and may very well no longer want to transfer.

Was this Denning? I thought that was Miller v Jackson.

For what's it's worth Osgoode was my first choice, too. After being accepted elsewhere but rejected at Osgoode I thought "hey, maybe I could transfer next year". Within 2 weeks of school starting I'd fallen in love with my classmates, city, and condo and had no interest in transferring. You may have a different experience but something to keep in mind.

R v Miller. Criminal law case where a squatter lights a cigarette then falls asleep. He awakes to find the mattress he's sleeping on is on fire. Instead of attempting to put it out or vacating the premises he gets up, goes to a different room, and goes back to his nap. Next time he wakes up the whole house is on fire.

Are you asking about law school or the practice of law? Because while I'd hope that you'd enjoy law school, the bigger matter is whether you'll enjoy being a lawyer. And if you enjoy the latter it's tricky to regret the former.

If you turn "aiming" into actual grades and LSAT score then yes, I absolutely think you should apply. Hell, you should apply even with a lower LSAT. You have a decent B2 and adding a decent LSAT (I'd say 160+) would give you a shot at a handful of schools, even if not a great shot.

It's still relatively early in the cycle and EVERY school still has acceptances to hand out. I'd challenge you to try to change your perspective. The fact that people with your stats have been accepted already suggests that yours may well be on the way. I wouldn't assert that there's been discrimination when your application may not have even been reviewed yet. Patience is hard, but it's necessary to get through this process peacefully. Try to wait it out and don't decide that you'll be rejected before they do. Re-assess if and when that's the case, but right now your fears are not based in any evidence. By that I mean that there is nothing to suggest that you will not be accepted. Remember that. Please be sure that your mental health is well enough to start school again before you go. Anxiety during the process is normal, but it's good to check in on yourself regardless. Law school is inducing, and I think it's good practice that we all make sure we're ready for that. Good luck.

Both "bombed" and "butchered" sound negative to me. Guess I'm too old to know the lingo these days. And hey, I think it's a long shot but it's not 0% (plus I'm not on the admissions committee so my opinion doesn't matter ). Best of luck and if it doesn't work out then you're right, always next year. If you're able to offset your grades with a stronger LSAT you'll be a more competitive applicant.

40 is plenty.

Assuming that midterm grades were curved (not sure if they were), then obviously while some grades will go up, others will go down. Your question of feasibility is tricky. Can someone with a B+ get to an A-? Sure, happens all the time. But that means that you'll need to improve relative to the rest of the class. That's a hard thing for any of us to predict. I think the best tip is to speak with your profs about your exams. See what went well and what didn't. Figure out what they're looking for, because it's not the same across the board. Some profs will give marks for great writing, others are exclusively looking for key words/cases.

Sending your peers a picture of your straight A grades is super weird. Completely unnecessary flex. Your grades are good, and I say shoot your shot in the upcoming recruit. As @TobyFlenderson suggested there's nothing to lose but much to gain. Sometimes the users on this site get frustrated by seeing the same kinds of posts and may loop you in with others users who previously posed similar questions but seemed to have less pure intentions. Try not to take it personally.

Since Ryerson law has only had 1 cycle it's hard to predict with any confidence. That said, unfortunately you have low grades, a low predicted LSAT, and you feel that you bombed the interview. None of those lend to good odds. That said, if you aren't accepted this year then you have ample time to improve your LSAT and prep for another interview. I sympathize with your circumstance, but unfortunately working during school (I'm assuming you mean your job was during school, not during LSAT prep) may be a reason for lower grades, but doesn't demonstrate that if you weren't working you'd have achieved significantly higher grades. Typically schools are looking for at least a few semesters of consistently good marks on which to see your academic potential.

Based on your previous posts I'm guessing you're asking this question to try to figure out your grade. Unlike failing, C and C+ isn't unheard of. I've heard stories of students thinking they did well and coming out with a C+. That's not to discourage you though, the opposite is true too. I recently took an exam, thought I got around a C+ on it (reading over the question after realized that I missed/'misunderstood many issues), and it ended up being my highest mark. I'm sure you're anxious to find out but unfortunately nobody on here can tell you a story that'll help you determine your grade. For what it's worth I saw you mention that you missed all of IRAC. I personally have never followed that method (at least consciously) but I've never gotten a mark in the C range.

You're right that 1L jobs are hard to come by but if you have some time to prep an application and your grades are even average I'd recommend it. It's good experience, especially if you get interviews, and you never know. I know people who secured jobs in the 1L recruit with average grades, just as I'm sure there are applicants with great grades who aren't as fortunate. Throw your hat in the ring. Edit: I re-read and noticed about your RA position. I'd choose whether you'd prefer a 1L job over RAing (if they extend it) before applying. You don't want to go through the process and get a job offer only to turn it down and potentially burn a bridge with that firm for when you apply to jobs next year.