Jump to content

needhelp11

Members
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

20 Neutral

About needhelp11

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. What are good websites to post part-time law student intern opportunities for prospective workplaces?
  2. In the particular context it was brought up, one is merely doing one year in Australia. One will graduate with a Canadian law degree. Here are some points to consider : 1.Living in a country for one year is a completely different life experience than going on a vacation. Amongst other things, it's a completely different state of mind. 2. Austrialian immigration laws are onerous and it would be very difficult to get any immigration status there. Student permit also allows one to work up to twenty hours which I did. 3. I had a former undergrad classmate from Canada that also needed a change in his life and I told him to come to Australia. He was able to get some immigration status and came for about six months. I got him an accommodation at the beach and then in the mountains overlooking the beach. He did some great networking there. Overall his experience in Australia was one of his best of his life. 4. I should say it's not just simply the gold coast that is so amazing on its own. Yes the gold coast is paradise, but I would submit that you can be in the most beautiful paradise in the world, but if you don't have the right people, there will still be a feeling of emptiness. I have to also add that my Canadian bond classmates sharing the law school experience abroad is also a huge part of the overall experience. This allowed one to get new friends and without friends or a support network, life in any country is very difficult. In other words, just going to Australia without any classmates to meet as friends will be much more lonely experience. 5. As far as money is concerned, the cost would be less since its only for one year. I can't speak to everyone's financial situation or view about it. However, my view in the grand scheme of things is that life is short and spending on what for me was the greatest experience of my life was undoubtedly worth it. 6. I should qualify all this with another consideration. When I went to Australia, my class was huge - maybe the biggest or second biggest class size. Since the changes to the NCA rules, the Canadian student class sizes are smaller. It's possible that with a smaller Canadian class size, the overall experience may be diminished. 7. So why was the Australian experience so great? I started off licing in one area. Then met new friends and moved to a house as roommates. Then I moved to a house on a lake, with a pool and close to the ocean. I could go and canoe to my university from my backyard. Whenever you are stressed, you can walk down to the beach and go for an endless walk. If you like the mountains or wildlife, you are just steps from it. You start adapting to the culture and the food. Moving to another country, you go through a culture shock phase. At first everything is great and this is the vacation phase. Then, you realize that you are not in Canada no more and start missing it. You feel depressed and miss Canada. Then, you start to adapt and really like Canada. The final phase is then you start to integrate the mentality of living in Australia.
  3. From what I gather Bond student who is top 1/3 of the class has great prospects of returning to a Canadian law school and then they would have to do the second and third year for a total of three years excactly like if they started with the Canadian law school instead. In this fashion, one can view it as an informal, do-it-yourself exchange transfer program First year Bond, second/third year Canadian. Then you also get the life changing experience of Bond and the Gold Coast. Bond also has formal exchange transfer program with Duke University and some other Common Law countries.
  4. Right. And then if one can be motivated to be in the top third of a class by the end of the first year, then can transfer to Canadian school for the remaining second year. Then the Bond student has one year to prove themselves that they are a good fit for the Canadian class. It would be interesting to know how much, if any, that the Bond student drops from the top third of the class in the various Candian law schools.
  5. Driedparks raised an important consideration, I haven't given much thought to. I did have some classmates that transferred to Bond. Some did it half way through or even almost at the end. Now out of curiosity, I checked these lawyers Linkedins now. One of them, probably a slightly weaker student than me (I was about top 20-25%, she was about top 25-30%) transferred to Windsor. She is now a litigator in a mid-size firm. Another one of the top students (top 10%) transferred to Queen's either half way through or one semester after. He is now a litigator at one of the top personal injury law firms in Ontario. There was another classmate, around my level (top 20-25%) that transferred to New York and now works at a prominent firm in Manhattan. So now looking back and analyzing the situation, that's not a bad option. One can go to Bond, get the great experience of the Gold Coast for one year, do top 30% in the class and then transfer back to Ontario. Top 30% may get you to Windsor and Top 10% can get Queens (from the examples above). As far as the Lsat, I would submit that after a year of law school at Bond, studying for and likelihood of getting a good result in the Lsat goes up considerably. This is if the Lsat is a requirement for the transfer ( I have not researched this). Thus, it might make sense to have the plan of starting with Bond and finishing with a Canadian University. I may have done it as well, but I likedthe Bond experience (with incredible classmates) and the Gold Coast so much that I really would have wanted to stay and finish. Maybe I would have tried to transfer in the last semester if that would have been an option.
  6. $650/week is pathetic. I have my own law practice and pay my assistant more than you, and she is complaining about wanting a raise. I have some clients who have no education, can't speak English and make more money than that per week.
  7. Why did they waste the money? My circumstances were such that it was a huge financial commitment and I put everything into it. Where I was at in my life at that time - my IT career was stagnating. I did not see a clear career path for 5, 10, 15, 20 years. I decided to completely change my career. I also wanted to completely change my life. Trying to live in another country 10K miles away and getting into a completely new field was this great new change. It was very expensive and I had given up the opportunity cost of staying in Canada and making money for 2+ years in my existing career, but that's what was motivating me - not to fail the enormous challenge. I was very determined that if I were to make this huge change in my life, I had to be ALL IN and focused on the mission. If I failed the challenge, I would not be able to forgive myself. I could never allow the prospect of that investment being a "waste". This does require great inner strength and personal motivation - and not everyone may have it. Now a word of caution - if someone goes to Australia and does a semester there, but is starting to see that the legal field is not for them, they might want to cut their losses at that point (after careful consideration of all options).
  8. What area of law are you referring to? Most of the issues with incompetence of counsel that I have encountered stem from a supervision issue. This happens quite a bit in immigration law, where the lawyer has a non-lawyer interpreter or case worker dealing with the clients. The client talks to the interpreter and builds a closer relationship with them. The interpreter negligently manages the files or gives bad legal advice. The lawyer may not know what is happening between the interpreter and the client. The lawyer relies on the interpreter. These kind of things also typically happen in busy offices. I do not think it has to do with the lawyer and where he/she went to law school, but his/her suprevision abilities over their staff and client's file. These are skills that have little to do with the lawyer's law school. For example - Farkas, Hohots, Jaszi, etc. - these were all Canadian trained lawyers that were disbarred( or reprimanded) mainly due to their lack of supervision of their staff / management of the client's file. I am dealing with a Judicial Review matter right now where this was the exact issue. Typically, I am very hesitant about pursuing incompetence of counsel issues, particularly if there are other grounds in the appeal. Allegations of incompetence against colleagues are very serious matters and your are impugning another colleague's reputation. There are Practice Directions from the Federal Court that call for first raising the complaint to the Law Society and putting the allegations to the counsel. Likely, LawPro will step in as well. If it was a Legal Aid matter, then Legal Aid may also monitor the situation. So you have to ask yourself if this is the road to take. This will be something that will not be forgotten and there is a chance that others will be motivated to come after you if they see a pattern of this from you. Something to think about. On the other hand, you also have duties to the clients and if the incompetence of counsel issue is a strong legal ground, they should certainly be made aware. In the current case, I received written instructions from the client that they had instructed me not to pursue the legal ground of incompetence of counsel.
  9. I sense this as well. Some of the commenters may feel that they worked hard, got top grades, high Lsat score, etc. --- "So how is it that this stupid student with low LSAT score is at the same level as me?" Their ego and unconscious biases will then project and result in snarky, irrelevant comments . This then further strokes their own egos and then gives them the comfort to further reinforce their preconceived notions, prejudice and biases. The unconscious bias results then in the mind actively seeking to find evidence for supporting these beliefs and dismissing/minimizing/ignoring evidence that goes against it. I also think that part of it is also that the ego strives to defend itself from perceived threats. In this case, many commenters feel that foreign schooled lawyers are flooding the market and this is a threat to the Canadian legal profession. Or they might feel that these stupid foreign grads becoming lawyers result in a general downgrading of the Canadian legal profession. I can make an attempt to step out for a moment and understand this viewpoint. I can probably concede that if I went to Canadian law school, I would likely defend my choice to do so and thus then have these unsconscious bias against foreign grads. Another example - I am a lawyer and likely have some unconscious ego/bias when thinking about paralegals. I may feel threatened that paralegals are trying to obtain more and more standing and respect and this may hurt my ego as a lawyer. If on the other hand, I was a paralegal, I would likely feel the discrimination from lawyers and defend myself and fight for more respect.
  10. That's not a victim mentality. I am not a victim in a sense where I am crying and calling life unfair. I am accepting that others have biases, prejudice, faulty logic, lack of facts etc. I am ok with that. It motivates me to prove others wrong and focus on working harder. The victim mentality is where the person that experiences the discrimination says that because of the discrimination, they could not achieve things. And they stop there and start crying. Those that overcome the discrimination and are successful do so because they don't let others views hold them back and continue to work hard in face of adversity.
  11. -----/Many grads from Canadian schools have real estate, business, paralegal, athletic, or IT backgrounds. There's nothing unique about this. My point was that any graduate who has those backgrounds need to leverage those backgrounds. This would narrow their competition pool against all the others that don't have those backgrounds and where those particular backgrounds would be assets/ have value to the specific employer. You can say it's not unique for instance to have an IT background, but as I clearly indicated in my post - that I had an IT background was specifically the reason I was called for an interview to an in house position where the company was developing its software division. There were no other applicants that were interviewed due to their IT background. Thus, this is a clear example of where my IT background was, in fact, a unique differentiator against other competitors from Canadian law schools. In other words, it was specifically my IT background that drew the attention of the in house employer and this fact was specifically stated to me by the employer. Given that this particular fact was already written in my previous post and you then chose to declare that: "However, propagating the idea that these things make you unique amongst applicants is factually incorrect". How could it be factually incorrect when I gave you a specific fact where it was a unique differentiator? How is this fact then incorrect? Based on your analysis and conclusion, it sounds like you need to develop your reading comprehension and IRAC skills. I heard the Lsat tests for these! ----/Most Bond grads I know don't even end up practicing. There is a very small minority that end up at large firms by virtue of the fact they are good lawyers or have connections. The harsh reality is, the majority of Bond grads don't fall into this category. Most firms won't put their name behind someone who couldn't be bothered to write the LSAT. This kind of analysis and conclusion is riddled with errors of logic and lack of facts. You are making sweeping generalizations based on your own limited and personal experience with Bond grads and then projecting your faulty biases at "most"Bonds grads and" most" firms. You don't know even 0.5% of Bond grads and law firms,thus shouldn't be making declarative statements of a "harsh reality". ----/You're not discriminated against you are privileged! You could afford to go overseas pay all the associated costs with coming back etc. Stop playing the victim. Again, lack of facts and jumping to conclusions. I had a career before law where I saved up and going to Australia was the biggest investment I ever made. However, I was betting on myself. I never play victim. Quite the contrary, my point has been that a Bond grad would have to face an uphill battle and overcome what's to come where people like you will be discriminating against someone like me, based on faulty logic, lack of facts, bias and projection (by people like you). Instead of playing the victim, I chose to focus my efforts on things I can control.
  12. You indicated that you represented clients at sentencing and bail hearings. I am subject to being corrected on this as well, but from my understanding, if someone has not commenced their articles, they can not represent clients. I am not sure how you define "represent", but it would be hard to imagine that you had standing before the courts for a bail hearing or a contested sentencing as a law student. Ditto for "providing legal advice" to the police. I was under the impression that a law student can not provide legal advice.
  13. What assessment critera did these lawyers go through for you to declare that they are the "worst lawyers"? What makes someone a "worst lawyer" in the criminal law context?
  14. Correct and someone can read lots and lots of case law - if they are interested in that - irrespective of if they go to Bond or Osgoode.
  15. Many of my Bond classmates are practicing criminal defence in Ontario. One of them is also a per diem Crown in Toronto. I have a former Bond classmate that is a Crown Attorney in a smaller jurisdiction in Ontario. I had another classmate that started with criminal defence and then transitioned into being a lawyer for a government agency. I have other classmates that started their own real estate law practice (hiring law clerks, etc.) I have other classmates that are in personal injury. Some other classmates are in small family law firms. I have another classmate who is in estate litigation for a medium sized Toronto firm. One other classmate was interested and had experience in patents and became a Patent Agent. As for you Cleanhands - without knowing all of the particulars - I would put to you that you would have been at a similar position to where you are today if you went to Bond or a Canadian law school. For example, you could have still tried to build experience in Australia and worked on Canadian networking. As far as articles, you could have found a criminal defence lawyer you could article for and gained the requisite experience in shadowing him/her. There is a limit to what a Canadian law student can learn in criminal law before articles - outside of setting adjournments from instructions at set date court. After articles, it is still up to you to develop your own practice over the years. For me, as I said, I started first with inhouse counsel. Then I articled for general law practice firm. Then I started my own firm. I have been able to leverage my law school experience, but more importantly my articling experiences. As my practice progressed, I was able to obtain mentorship that was instrumental. I am constantly engaging in self study.
×
×
  • Create New...