Heard a fantastic conversation between some fellow 1L's in the common area today.

"Are you gonna ask any questions at the Torts review session?"

"I don't know. I mean, if you think about it, you really shouldn't ask a question unless you think the answer will help you more than it'll help everyone else. Cause then what's the point if you can't even get ahead? I'll just ask the prof in private if I have any good questions."

Something tells me it's going to be a long, long, long life for people who could actually bring themselves to say that out loud.

i was the only person in my 1L class who skipped our civ pro review session

i slept through it

everyone made fun of me

ugh, not looking forward to this kind of crap...is it really that pervasive?

not where i am, no.

like honestly you have to beat people's jobs out of them. i pointed out to one of my 3L friends that he was using an umbrella today from the V5 firm he's working at next year (was just making fun of him, not being a douche) and he was embarrassed that he even had that... didnt think about it when he grabbed it in the morning. obv that's silly to be embarrassed about, but that's sort of the culture here.

At my school people were very willing to share notes, outlines, handouts. I never had time to attend review sessions but was offered recordings of them when that was allowed.

I hated people in my 1L class.

I even got kicked out of con law for starting a fight. True story

Yeah, pretty much this. The girls were, for the most part, pretty bitchy and the guys were, for the most part, douchebags who thought they were all going to come out the TTTTT I went to making 6 figures. Of course, there were plenty of cool people of both genders as well but the bitches and the douchey guys are the ones who stick out the most to me and made me dislike the class as a whole.

But I didn't manage to get kicked out of con law.

That was really an anomaly... almost everybody I know shares notes, joins study groups, etc. But there are people like that out there...

There are definitely people out there like that. It seems like people are really quick to pull the trigger on limited information if it has the ability to **** other people over. Three quick stories to illuminate what I'm saying.

#1
1L year in legal writing our teacher gave us an outline of our first memo on a handout. My friend lost his copy or didn't go to class on the day they were handed out. A few days before the paper was due, he was kind of frantic because he didn't know what all sections were supposed to be in the paper. A fellow student made a copy of the handout and gave it to him. He posted on her fb wall, "Thanks for the help, you saved my life." At which point a third student turns them in for cheating based solely on the fb post. They both had to go meet with the teacher, which of course was a big scary deal 1L year, but the whole thing was dropped because nothing wrong was done.

#2
For some reason, a group of people decided that a friend of mine took a test for his gf, and went the administration about it. Not even sure why they thought this, because she was in the final and he wasn't, and he hadn't even had the class at that point. Regardless, it gave the couple another thing to worry about during finals, which ultimately lead to nothing, because no wrong was done.

#3
Girl A went and talked to the professor before her Civ Pro final. Girl B, for God only knows what reason, decides that the professor told Girl A exactly what is going to be on the test. She then convinces other people that this completely fictional version of events that she made up were the actual facts and convince them as a group to go to the administration and complain because this is unfair to the rest of the class. Nothing happens because she essentially made the whole thing up.

I'm not saying everyone is like this, just that there will definitely be people at your school willing to slit your throat to get themselves a millimeter ahead. and my school isn't even that good FWIW.

Also, other than my close friends, I have not found most people willing to exchange class notes or outlines on classes they are currently in. However, most people are willing to trade outline/notes for a class they previously had in exchange for a class they are currently taking. This is how I get most of my **** now, because any time anyone mentions an outline for any class I'll take it (or trade) just for it's possible use later as a trading chip.

Yeah we don't get that at my 2TT. People are reticent to let some people [me] into their study groups but don't actively collude against us.

jesus christ.

the extent of people being douchebags at my school is bitching about pie eating contests, which is more than tolerable compared to this bull****.

Wow those three examples are awesome. Kind of related: I've never joined a studygroup because they aren't helpful to me but I was sitting next to a studygroup and they were discussing and voting on studygroup bylaws. Lawlschool.

There was a study group my 1L year that tested people who wanted to join. Like, an actual test on substantive law.

(none of them made Law Review)

You've just got to take it all in stride. There's an insane amount of annoying people in any given law school.

People think that being competitive will make that much of a difference. It doesn't. You're going to perform the same and there will always be people that do better/worse any given semester.

i think the whole cut-throat competitiveness stories are mostly myth. most people at my school were generally helpful.

Yeah, I really like the people at my school. These stories sound very foreign to anything I've experienced.

This came over the wire today concerning whether to clinic or take my preferred classes.

My approach was to take classes that I was interested in - if you are interested in IP, taking an IP class will be more attractive to an IP firm than clinic work (I think). Nothing you do in law school - clinic, classes, etc. - will provide you with any usable skills in practice.

Anyone care to dispute it?

i agree that nothing i did in law school has helped me in practice but i don't think law school can be expected to prepare anyone for the type of work that i do. you're bound to learn some useful stuff throughout law school for litigation-type work but beyond that it's really a stretch.

i guess exposure to terminology/lingo is helpful. for example, had i not taken bankrupcy or secured transaction, i wouldn't know what it means to "perfect an interest" or what a "pre-petition" claim or whatever is. that stuff certainly helps.

i doubt many employers will give a **** about the classes u took, even small firms. only way i can see it happening is if a guy who only took corporate crap wants to work at some woman's domestic violence non-profit.

I disagree. I participated in a prosecution clinic and a public defender clinic. I did everything you can think of. I interviewed clients/victims, I attended depositions, there were days that I handled an arraignment docket by myself, I wrote a bunch of motions, I wrote and submitted an appeal, and I participated in four trials on the defense side.

I think it helped prepare me for the real world...

clinics are a whole different universe. i was only talking about lectures. sorry if i wasn't clear.

I highly recommend people take clinics. As far as regular classes go, I 100% agree with "take what you like." You'll enjoy it more (duh) and you'll probably do better it in. My GPA in classes I like is well over half a point above the one for classes I dislike.

Also, I don't think sharing outlines does much (most of the value in an outline comes from making it yourself) but if any 1Ls want my outlines I'm happy to share. Just PM me if you want my outlines for any of the following:

Property (sorry, does not include RAP)
Contracts
Torts

+1
I will generally not hire anyone who hasn't taken a litigation clinic most boutiques outside of NY CHI & LA won't .

Yea I have generally liked my clinic experience, it has been useful in teaching some real world experience, but more than anything just in getting some courtroom reps in. I think of it as the Malcolm Gladwell 10,000 hours rule, and now I'm a little closer to the excellence that will come with my 10,000 hours of courtroom experience.

I was scheduled for my first trial today in our Juvenile Defense Clinic. Had previously had a nolle prosequi and have a withholding set for Monday. This was going to be the first matter to go all the way to trial of anyone in the clinic. Been a nervous wreck all week, but it has helped me to prepare, prepare, prepare. The only negative is it has been a detriment to studying for the Con Law final I have tomorrow morning.

We appear before the judge and he starts by reading off the wrong charge (prosecutor handed him the wrong petition), we get that fixed and I say we are set for trial and restitution hearing, and that I have a suppression motion before the court. He asks the prosecutor, she basically says it wasn't timely (true, but entirely the fault of my supervising coordinator who just set on my final draft for a week, made no changes, then had me submit it a week later). She doesn't object to timeliness, just asks for an extension to have greater time to prepare the cop. The court allows it, and we are moved back to January, meaning like 7 months from arraignment to trial. Coordinator says she had met with the cop, and it's likely that she didn't like what he had to say (it was a clear Siebert violation with no curative measures, which is compounded by the fact she is ****ing 12 and had no parent present) so perhaps she will be more willing to deal, as she currently is asking us to plead to the charges. She tried to bluff me by increasing the recommendations if we were to bring the motion, but apparently she didn't want to get into that today, because I sure as **** was going to mention how it is fundamentally unfair that the recommendations increased simply because my client asserted their constitutional rights to go to trial.

Overall, I think it was good because it was a replacement judge, and the real judge has more familiarity with the case and will be back for the next court date, plus if we get to sentencing we can plead for leniency as she has been under court supervision for 7 months with no violations of court orders. It was kind of crushing though because I was soooooooooo ready to roll this morning, I didn't get to, and now I have to go study for Con Law for the next 20 hours straight.

Also, random poll:

On a written Miranda waiver, with questions such as "Do you understand that you have the right to remain silent?" Do you feel like the only acceptable answers are yes or no? If it is standard police procedure to have the person sign their name, do you think that is an unresponsive answer and bad procedure?