Jump to content

tmonster

Members
  • Content Count

    94
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

tmonster last won the day on August 3 2012

tmonster had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

71 Decent People

About tmonster

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. When I'm chatting with a new call I will often make polite conversation by asking the lawyer about her/himself. Common questions include "Where did you go to school?" and "Where did you article?" If the answer to "Where did you article?" is "I didn't, I did this thing called LPP and here are all the reasons why it isn't as sketchy as it sounds..." then I have many other questions. Questions that I'm too polite to ask out loud. But I have them, nonetheless. They include, "Why didn't this person article?" and "What is this sketchy sounding LPP thing?" On the other hand, If the answer to "Where did you article?" is "I articled at [fill in anything here]," the issue of how much the lawyer was paid while articling generally doesn't come up. And by "generally doesn't come up," I mean I've never asked nor have I ever heard of anybody asking, ever. I don't know if you made $100k or $0 while articling, and I don't care. In other words, what happydude said. I hope I've answered your question.
  2. In April 2014 I said: In July 2015 I said: Not to be smug ...
  3. Two my knowledge the requirement to use three different evaluation methods applies to interviews for Assistant Crown Attorney positions (or, on the civil side, Counsel positions) but not student positions. That doesn't mean that multiple evaluation methods aren't used for students. I remember a summer student interview years ago that included two written questions plus the standard interview q&a. It just means that three different evaluation methods are not required (and often, are not used) for summer student and articling interviews. It varies by office. Many summer student and articling competitions will involve an oral interview only. I would describe the examples given by crownattorney, above, as being typical of Assistant Crown Attorney interviews, but a bit more advanced than what you would usually see in a student interview.
  4. Edit: My answer assumes you are referring to MAG in Ontario. I know nothing about the process in other provinces. I don't know how it would be relevant, except that if the interviewers are indeed the same as last year "nice to see you again" is correct and "pleased to meet you" is not. What exactly is your concern? Do you believe it is a strength that you interviewed previously? I don't necessarily agree that it's a strength. Even if it is, I doubt it would be given much weight. Many, many people who interview at crown's offices have interviewed previously (often at other crown's offices) and have demonstrated a strong interest in working for the crown. This doesn't distinguish you from your competition. Do you feel some sense of obligation to disclose your previous interview, even though you'd rather not mention it? I wouldn't worry about this. For this year's competition you will be judged based on your performance in this year's interview. The last one is irrelevant. Be happy about the fact that you've been given another shot, study hard, and hope for the best. Just like the last battle to the general, your last interview is a distraction you don't need. Learn what you can from it, but focus on the challenge ahead.
  5. Well, the Ontario benchers aren't facing a revolt from their own members. Just sayin'. I don't understand your second point. The "recognition" I was referring to was accreditation. LSUC does not give that recognition to any homophobic US law schools.
  6. Yes, yes, and yes. And a couple of other things. It's not just that teachers are not lawyers. It's that a governing body for teachers in BC isn't the Law Society in Ontario. Don't be naive, kids. The benchers of the LSUC are basically a club of some of the most respected lawyers in Ontario, and the country. The LSUC will be found to have more relevant expertise and their decision will be found to attract more deference. They (along with the inevitable entourage of Toronto-based interveners) are going to have better and more respected lawyers creating a better record at the review stage, making better arguments at the appeals, and being more persuasive overall. The whole thing is gonna be different. The bottom line is that some of the most respected of our colleagues got together, had a spirited and principled debate, and decided that Ontario lawyers aren't going to give official recognition to homophobic discrimination at some obscure university out west. It was the right decision and it will stand.
  7. Depends on the area of law. Where I am, it's not unusual for criminal firms to hire 0L's for various kinds of admin work. Some lawyers even send 0L's to appear in remand court.
  8. Am I the only one who thought this topic was going to be about bail?
  9. That's great news and I'm happy for you. I too am curious to know how this played out. I suspect your success did not result from suing the firm for specific performance
  10. You're welcome (for both). Although there is a salary posted for 1L summer students, it's not that common for MAG to hire 1L students. I've only met a few over the years. You're correct that MAG summer students are underpaid compared with private practice. However, once you get into articling the salary is significantly better than private practice (in smaller cities). I articled for MAG in a city other than Toronto. There were big firms in my town, including some national firms. But I was still the best paid articling student in town. MAG pays $60,000 (annualized), but firms in smaller cities often pay around $45,000.
  11. I bought my initial call to the bar package from Imperial. Later when I was appearing regularly in SCJ I bought some more stuff from Harcourt's. In my experience, the product from Harcourt's is superior. As far as I know, the prices are pretty similar (they were at the time).
  12. Compensation for MAG summer law students is standardized across the province: 2L: $667/week 1L: $594.50/week This information is set out on the MAG web page that describes the summer student program. It took me about a minute to look it up, and I imagine a similar effort would have led you to the same result. You should know that Crown's offices generally require summer students to be efficient researchers.
  13. I strongly agree with Hegdis and epeeist. From my point of view, early termination of articles often looks bad for two main reasons: 1. An agreement to article means that you have given your word that you will complete the 10 months, and your principal has given her/his word likewise. Ours is a profession where your reputation for integrity matters a lot. You will ask people to accept your undertaking or your word as an officer of the court many, many times in your career. Breaking your word and withdrawing from articles is a poor start, unless you have a very good reason. I don't purport to define what is a good reason, but from my point of view it should be the kind of reason that would justify withdrawing from any other solemn promise. Otherwise, you may well get away with it, but how will it affect your reputation? 2. Very few people enjoy articling and many people positively hate articling, at least some of the time. Many people believe that they had it bad when they articled. It may be difficult to convince other lawyers that your experience was any different from theirs (even if it really was). If your reason for withdrawing is a serious illness, family emergency, etc. then it's not really an issue. But if your reason is the quality of work or personality/work style of the principal? That sounds like the kind of thing a lot of articling students complain about. Your justification is likely to be met with skepticism by many people, even if they're too polite to tell you so. Maybe you disagree with my opinion. No problem, I don't take it personally. The point isn't whether you agree with me. The point isn't which of us is right. The point is that I (along with some other lawyers) have this opinion, and consequently your reputation could take a hit with me and with other lawyers who share my view. Is it worth it? Finally, here is what the LSUC web site says about withdrawing from articles (this is just an excerpt, you should read the whole page and consult with the Law Society directly as needed):
  14. In Ontario, Assistant Crown Attorneys are allowed one Code per year and have a choice of either Martin's or Tremeear's. Martin's is by far the most commons amongst crowns, defence and the bench. A small but solid minority use Tremeear's, in my observation about 1 in 20. I've never seen Gold's in a courtroom. Ever. To my knowledge Martin's is not available in a bilingual format, which is one reason why some people don't use it. And I agree with MP. The best thing about using Martin's is that (about 95% of the time) I can just tell the judge, "I'm at page xxxx of Martin's," and we're all on the same page.
×
×
  • Create New...