WTF. No laptops in Criminal class. The former is taught by burned out female NYC law firm gal (6ish, not as pretty as Torts prof 7) intent on her mission to toughen us up, via handwritten notes. Criminal indeed.

Ouch. Hopefully she doesn't pair that with a strict attendance policy.

All night researching motion for stupid judge only to find out we have not a shred of law on our side + all day editing stupid law review papers written by idiots apparently sans blueblook = didn't see this in a major motion picture prior to entering law school; wish I had. Life sucks at the moment. And I'm hardly a week into the semester. Ick.

Re: Bluebook

I have seen approximately one hundred different ways to cite things IRL and no one seems to give a damn. Will the FORMATS OF YOUR CITES ever matter when we are all lawyerin' ? Just wondering.

Re: Doing things (that don't get used) (where the law isn't on your side)

This happens all the damn time. I spent like 2 days writing a 9 page response to a summary judgment (and the law wasn't on our side at all) and it was pretty creative and possibly effective, imo, and the hearing is supposed to be tomorrow. Now I see all these terrible settlement offers and the hearing has been postponed....sigh.

What actually does matter to you? Not briefs, not cites, not anything. While it is true thst cites are never going to win a case, reading a brief that is well-written and cited accurately is much easier to the Judge and allows them to concentrate on the substance of what you write. And, yes, Judges actually get briefs and read them. Good lawyers write them, at least in cases that are worth more than $2. And the mindsight of things not mattering is just a bad mindsight to have and usually indicative of poor or lazy lawyering.

Regarding when situations where the law is not on your side, usually you can emphasize the standard of review. For instance, I've filed lawsuits against multiple parties where there was no way we would ever win, but we just wanted to force a settlement (the cost of litigation alone forces them to settle), and they all immediately file a motion to dismiss. Here, you argue any possible fact that you may have and emphasize repeatedly that the caselaw frowns upon dismissing cases so early in the litigation. Often times the Judge will be like, "well, there's not much here, but we'll see where it goes with discovery," which gives you the chance to settle since discovery is expensive. Just one example.

I 2nd this, writing Prof said nearly same thing.

Ahh the fairness and beauty of the American legal system.

I'd rather not post my school publicly, but it's not a top tier2. However, it's not awful either.

Yeah, I'm really worried about giving up my rank at my current school. I decided NOT to do Chicago ED. I found out my class rank, and I am top 5 % as expected. As long as I stay within the top 10 % after 2nd semester, I have a great shot at all of the T6. I will be applying GULC EA, cause it's a school I'm interested in (interested in practicing in DC), and... well... what do I have to lose by applying? It's not like my numbers will get better for regular decision or anything.

That's pretty good news if I decide to transfer. I think I'd only transfer to Chicago or higher. Columbia would be a good target if I do decide to transfer. It's not like my grades don't matter. I still would have finished (assuming, and this is a big assumption, a repeat performance) top 5 % and that has to count for something, even at another school's OCI.

The social aspect is a concern, but I don't think I'd let it be more than a tiebreaker in my decision. I've come to two schools now with 0 people I know (both undergrad and LS), and I make friends quickly.

I don't expect any T14 schools would offer $$ on a transfer. I would hope my current school would offer to bump my scholly, but if they don't I'm looking at incurring 40-50k more debt TOTAL by moving to a top 6. That makes it a closer decision IMO.

i got an A, so my grade can't go higher. I am going to meet with him tomorrow and try to clarify what I was doing last week.

1. The point is, lawyers range from age 25 to 101 and lots of people learned different stuff. Obviously you need to be in the ballpark (like put the correct numbers in and stuff), but I don't see why it matters if you underline the f*cking comma or not.

2. The brief thing was a specific beef I had with defense lawyers intentionally billing hours by writing useless 25 page briefs. You have managed to take it completely out of context like a good little lawyer though.

Schools just don't have much motivation to do this (offer you more to stick around). It's worth asking for of course, no reason not to, but it doesn't sound like this usually works out.

It still seems like you would do well to incur the debt and get the prestigious top-tier degree so that your job prospects are much less risky, but I think your decision not to do the Chicago ED thing was a good one.

We had like 5-10 people transfer to T14s from my school last year. That indicates to me that the $$ is not openly flowing.

My scholarship isn't even halfway. That's what makes this tough. One of my roommates is top 5 % as well, and he's basically going to school for free, so he isn't even considering going anywhere.

Yeah just to clarify I wasn't talking about the social aspect as much as far as transfering. I mean yeah that's part of what I meant, but I actually meant connections wise. Like so much of grad school/law school is networking and connections among your peers. It's just going to be hard for you to break into that base when everyone's already done that. Also law people can be real dicks and not let you in just to be dicks.

Also, when you say you didn't know anyone going into undergrad or law... no one did. It's a different atmosphere. It's like going to a party where everyone already knows each other and are pretty good friends. Most people get pretty tight with a lot of their law school class because they've all been through the hell together.

8:00am Property joins Crim law in the NO LAPTOPS party. Oddly both of these Profs look in their late-20s.

Old school Con Law Prof says no textbook, we'll print the cases and bring them to class.

I run soooo good.

Wait, what does "not a top tier 2" mean? Like, give me a number range on the US News. 80-100?

Makes sense to me; those in the late-20s know the type of ****ing around everyone is doing on their laptops. I played so much online poker during law school classes it's ridiculous. I wouldn't trust anybody to actually be paying attention. Then again, I also wouldn't care.

I'd care, because if the normal people are only paying 1/2 attention while messing around online, then you spend the entire semester listening to your own voice or conversing with the same 5 gunners.

70-90

Finally some grades post. I've got three...A, A, B+. Two more to come. Obviously happy with my start.

Ship that man. That's awesome. Congrats.

Thank you. My current GPA would be just underneath the cutoff for what the top 5% was here last year, but we'll see what happens with these last two. I at least gave myself a shot at top grades in both of those, I think. That B+ I got was honestly nice, because that was the one test I really thought I ****ed up (B+ is the median here).

This last prof who I had for both of the remaining two classes has a reputation for getting his grades in last, so the sweat for the rest of my report card may be a little while.

2+2ers doin guud learnin this year

LKJ your next grade is going to be an A and you'll pwn face

Karak, I know exactly which law school you attend so the weird evasiveness now is a little weird. Especially since the switch from 80-100 to 70-90 narrows it down pretty freaking far.

some people know. im more concerned about google searches and other things with stuff connected to my SN. im not really that overly paranoid, just being careful is all. we get these emails and articles every day about facebook and myspce and crap and how employers google and yeah i realize it's a lot of scare tactics, but i figure it cant hurt to be a little careful is all.

Nobody has trainwrecked any of us and most of us knew what schools the rest of us went to back when Eyedea was running this thread. Hugs, not trainwrecks.

I've got a good feeling. Having taken five tests, I've come out feeling really solid about four out of five. The one I got a B+ on, I felt immeasurably worse about. I'm not greedy, I'll be really happy to nab two A-'s to close the fall semester out, but I do think another A is possible. Another two A's would be pretty damn surprising but isn't impossible.

I bet I'll be waiting until at least Monday to find out though.

good luck on the sweat LKJ.

Karak, iirc, you said you'd only consider transferring if it was to Columbia or better, which is basically like the top 5 schools (although you did say you were applying to GULC which is around 10 or worse I think). Anyways, I'm just wondering why you wouldn't consider moving up to like a 15th-20th ranked school, or even a 30th, given that this would still be a big jump from a 70-90 (I hope I'm not coming off condescending or like I'm trying to knock your school). Can you explain this?

And big congrats on the grades, well done.