Jump to content

conge

Members
  • Content Count

    1369
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

conge last won the day on September 28 2016

conge had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

908 Good People

About conge

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

3904 profile views
  1. I don't really agree that ppl are being shallow or stupid by deciding to go with a school that is located in downtown TO; it might be a good choice for them because of family support, because they want to live in Canada's largest city for 3 years, because they want access to the opportunities in TO, etc. TO has large population, a lot of ppl from TO apply to law school, a lot of ppl would prob be wiling to go to a new law school in TO. I think making a decision based on those factors is better than making a decision based on perceived prestige.
  2. Perhaps I can clear up my claims: I think location will attract top applicants from rural areas/other school to Ryerson, students that would have gone to UofT but didn't get in; it could attract enough of these top students that it basically becomes one of the most competitive schools to enter, second possibly only to UofT. That was probably an exaggeration, but it could be a very competitive school There are certainly examples of new programs becoming very competitive, and more competitive than more established schools: e.g., UVic . It was founded relatively recently (late seventies?) but it's a very competitive school now. I think it has very high admissions criteria. I think largely because people want to live in Victoria. Anyways, just a thought.
  3. Some valid points. But time will tell. My theory is location is massively important. I don't think ppl will flock to Ryerson over night, but I think it will attract stronger candidates than the other new schools in rural areas, and this will build over time. I think you might be putting too much importance on history and "prestige".
  4. I think UofT is the school that it is largely because of its location. A lot of really strong applicants want to study and live in downtown TO (for various reasons), so you get really high admission stats, therefore a strong class, good/successful lawyers, a strong alumni base, etc. Also, because of the high demand to go to UofT, they can charge high tuition, and therefore hire the best profs, etc. etc. Obviously other factors play a role, but I think location is a big one. Ryerson will benefit from the same factor. IMHO, it won't long before Ryerson has high admission stats, potentially only second to UofT if my theory is correct.
  5. That kind of position would drive me crazy. I like being busy at work; I just don't want to take it home with me, or be doing it all the time (like I was in private practice). I feel like I've got a nice balance with my current employer. They expect a lot from me when I'm there, but don't contact me when I'm on vacation and generally no one emails/contacts you past 5ish (unless there is something crazy going on.)
  6. In-house too; typically 35-40 hours a week (with some exceptions) and better pay than that.
  7. I bet they actually hold 50% of the seats for these students, and 50% for all other students. I don't know exactly how they do that; I'm sure they retain some discretion. E.g., if the applicants from Atlantic Canada are particularly bad or strong in one year.
  8. For what it's worth, Dal does have some kind of allowance for applicants from Atlantic Canada; they aim for 50% of the class to be from Atlantic Canada https://cdn.dal.ca/content/dam/dalhousie/pdf/law/Events/Strategic Planning Primer 2016.pdf I've always heard (with no confirmation) that NS, PE and NL residents also get preferential treatment for admissions (i.e., admitted with lower stats) because those jurisdictions have no other law school; I don't know if that is true. I've also heard that Memorial med school sets aside some seats for NS residents to help increase the number of NS doctors (not enough are trained at Dal alone for NS), and, in exchange, Dal Law sets aside some seats for NL students - again, I have no idea if that is true.
  9. Fair enough. OP indicates they have 3 years of experience at MAG, and their grades are objectively really good. I think OP will be just fine; probably better than that.
  10. I dunno whether or not they'll ask for grades; it will prob depend on the firm. But, in any case, your grades are good. You only have 3 grades that are "average", the rest are above average, and 60% of them are As...don't you already know you have good grades?
  11. I had the same experience. Everyone needs to find a method that works for them. But, IMHO, at some point in 2L you need to find some efficiencies because there are just too many readings to read every single page (on top of mooting, research classes, applying for jobs, etc.) And, frankly, a lot of what you read is not directly relevant to what you need to know. 2L was when I stopped re-inventing the wheel and started using CANs. I was still working hard, but it was manageable, and I still (kind of) had a life. Grades also went up from 1L. I don't know if that because of the process I followed (above), or because I just got better at law school studying. It was probably a bit of both.
  12. https://www.lsac.org/choosing-law-school/find-law-school/canadian-law-schools/university-manitoba There is a lot of information on this board re. Manitoba admissions. Take a look around online (and here) and you'll find the information you're looking for.
  13. I was an average student; I had one C in law school, the rest of my grades varied between a few As and lots of Bs. Here is the system that I developed that made law school manageable and relatively successful: 1. Find the best CANs possible; 2-3 versions per class, if possible. 2. Save the best set as your "class notes". The best versions are often structured and well organized. (E.g., every case is broken into facts, decision, reasoning, and dissenting opinions, or something like that.) 3. Read your "class notes" before class to try to get a sense of the important information that the professor is trying to convey. (The important information might be more than"facts and ratio", though these are almost always important; the important information might be fundamental principles of law, dissenting opinions, certain passages from the case, facts, policy implications, etc.) If you can't make sense of the information, look at the other CANs for help but take all your notes in your class notes. 4. SKIM the cases/readings you have been given to make sure you can find the important information and understand it IN CONTEXT; highlight and tab the cases, and make notes on your thoughts/questions about the cases in your class notes. This is also your chance to see if the course material has changed or if there is a new case you have to read. If there is something new, you should read the whole thing (unless a summary is available somewhere), and include it in your class notes. Look at the other CANs if you have having difficulty or there is something new; the other CANs might have covered that issue. (But take all your notes in your class notes.) 5. Go to class, and make notes in your class notes on what the professor says about the information; ask your questions and give your thoughts for feedback. Try to resolve any issues you have with the material in class and make notes on the resolution. By the end of the semester, you'll have all of your distilled class notes in one place that you don't have to consolidate or throw together at a later date (e.g., when exam are looming). 6. Form a small study group (3-4 ppl); try to meet semi-regularly and go over your class notes together. Or meet up regularly closer to exams to review the entire course. I like the latter better. 7. DO PRACTICE EXAMS in the weeks leading up to finals. Review answers with your group. If you can get your hands on exams answers where ppl got As, do it and review them as a group. Use your class notes to help you resolve difficulties. Go to the professor if something is still outstanding. Finally, adjust as needed for a course. Starting out, I would advise reading more cases. Some courses are paper/research courses so this method is largely irrelevant and you'll need to be an independent legal researcher, which is another whole skill set that you'll learn. Some courses will benefit from you actually reading every case and dissent. For some courses, all you really need to know are the facts and ratios. You'll figure that out as you go along. Good luck!
  14. Yes. A new administrative person was hired on probation. Their work was fine. But no one really liked working with this person because of their personality. So when it came time to make a decision at the end the probation period, they were let go in accordance with their contract. (Someone else was hired for the position instead, and is still with the company.) I really don't think it's unprofessional to let someone go in accordance with their contract when their continued employment would be detrimental to the company because no one likes working with them. EDIT: I realize you may have been asking about articling students/lawyers in law firm environment rather than employment at companies more generally; if your question is about law firms specifically, then the answer is still "yes"; I've also seen it happen in a law firm. This person was very smart, nearly top of the class, had a "prestigious" clerkship lined up, worked hard, did good work BUT no one could stand working with them. I think it was the right decision for the firm. This person landed well; they just didn't "fit" with that particular firm.
×
×
  • Create New...