Jump to content

Adrian

Members
  • Content Count

    2558
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    19

Adrian last won the day on August 12 2016

Adrian had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1847 Good People

About Adrian

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I'm not a principal since I don't practice anymore, but I am a manager of a team of professionals. My two cents would be that I would welcome a conversation if someone is struggling, but would echo that it should be focused on being constructive about realistic changes that could occur then generalized grousing.
  2. I think your anecdotal data would be skewed by the fact that you are only looking at those who have the finances to engage an investment consulting firm. I'm sure a ton of lawyers are not in a position to consider that. I think you probably realize that now. Sounds to me like you are not, at the moment, 100% happy with where you are at and you are allowing the law to become the solution to your current feelings. I say that because I recently went through a similar experience but just kept plugging away and got out the other side.
  3. Sure, although there is already a Sutherland building.
  4. I also don't recall referring to the building as McDonald Hall when I was there. I would just refer to it as the "law building" (and I don't think I would have been unique amongst the students there). I have seen at least one call for it to be renamed for Bernie Adell which I think makes a ton of sense.
  5. Yeah, I get it now. I thought there was some sort of specialized program, but this is just advertising a strength.
  6. Queens constitutional law program?
  7. I never did family law, but I don't think this is family law specific. I recall as an articling student shadowing lawyers and being in absolute awe of how easy it was for them to just know the right law/process/rule. Any time I asked them how they got to that point, the only answer I ever got was time. You start, you get a question, your find the answer, over and over again. Eventually you just have it. I know this is true with the benefit of hindsight (I'm not practicing, but my role is such that I have to rely on the knowledge I gained while practicing).
  8. It was competitive enough that not everyone got to go back when I was there (which admittedly was 13 years ago now). I can only imagine it has remained the same. Back then I think the best chance was to get your application in as soon as possible. More recent Queen's people can advise if they have changed the process from what was first come first served.
  9. Probably a repeat, but I doubt that lawyers will object to talking about themselves again. I don't practice anymore, but when I did it was in Labour and Employment (with more of a focus on labour than employment). I can pinpoint the pathway pretty easily: 1. Go through the employment law section of 1L Contracts. Enjoy the material. 2. Apply to Labour and Employment boutiques along with full service firms (with a focus on litigation) for 2L summer. 3. Snag a 2L summer job at a boutique firm. 4. Get exposed to more labour files than employment files during summer and articling. 5. Decide to try and focus on support the firms broader public sector clients, which generally meant more labour than employment work given the higher rates of unionization.
  10. To clarify, it wasn't air tight, but I recall that there were the people who did the employment litigation/judicial reviews and the people who did labour law (with human rights a mix between the two). Of course associates would support whoever, but once the associate got linked to their partner(s) they would get sucked into the segregation as well.
  11. I would agree that if the goal is to branch into labour that it would be next to impossible to do that staying where you are at. Its interesting though that your goal would to try and do both employment litigation and labour. My experience was in a management side boutique, and people tended to segregate between one and the other.
  12. Last year when I was travelling out west for the first time (Alberta, not B.C., but specifically to the Rockies so I think this story is relevant) my wife and I struck up a conversation with another passenger on our flight. He was from Calgary heading back from his first time visiting Toronto. We asked him about what to expect about Calgary/Banff/Lake Louise/Jasper (we did all that in like 7 days), and he gushed about all the normal stuff you would think (the beauty, the outdoor activities, etc). He really talked it up. We then asked him what he thought of Toronto since it was his first time, and he marveled at the number of highways there are in the GTA. That was his only comment. If I remember correctly I think he mentioned going to Niagara Falls, but only in the context of the highways you can take to get there.
  13. To be clear, I went to law school and practiced law for a couple of years before I left to non-practicing roles.
  14. I think the point is that there is going to be a long tail of learning in this (and any) profession in any event and so the idea that school is not properly preparing people is not necessarily a safe assumption. I'll also note the value of spending dedicated time simply learning the law, which you won't really get again.
×
×
  • Create New...