Hello, readers.
You might have noticed that this blog has been less and less active over the past few months. This is not because I no longer enjoy blogging, or because something terrible has happened in my life (thankfully).
Instead, it has been a combination of factors. One of them is simply that I have been very, very busy. Finals, Moot Court, and a research project are all hitting at the same time, leaving me with a full schedule. While I do still have the time to write, I am finding that after a 10+ hour day of hard work, I am less inclined to sit and brainstorm, draft, lightly edit, and post entries.
Secondly, I am not really sure what I want to do with this blog. I sort of enjoy detailing my law school life, but I am always so hesitant to blog about things that are interesting due to privacy concerns. I had a great time at my summer internship, but most of it went unpublished. Same thing with a lot of my school life. Sure, if you have nothing to hide, why worry? Well, it isn't always that simple. First of all, while between my Professional Responsibility class and my previous career in a medical field I have a very good understanding of confidentiality rules, I also always want to err on the side of caution. Secondly, I would never want this blog to hurt someone else. Maybe a professor says something interesting in class, such as "Personal service by publication strikes me as wrong." Then, 10 years later, when he or she runs for some office, a news pundit does a Google search, pulls that quote, and now someone who I looked up to is trying to explain why he or she "Teaches against service of process." Finally, there is simply some stuff, that while entertaining, I prefer to enjoy only with a specific circle.
So, for the time being, I am taking a formal break from posting. I wanted to let anyone who checks here know that I am still alive, and this blog isn't "dead" or "abandoned." If you DO happen to read this, feel free to leave a comment with any questions, or perhaps let me know what you might like to see in the future.
See you soon!
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Federal Circuit
Recently I had the chance to go to Washington D.C. to watch oral arguments on a few ongoing patents cases. This was an awesome experience. First of all, it is always fun to get to take a little trip. D.C. proper is a 40 minute train ride, followed by a few quick metro stops, for a total travel cost of about $10. Therefore, it isn't really that big of a deal to get down there from time to time, but of course it just usually seems to get preempted by something easier and cheaper in Baltimore.
Either way, it was really great to get a chance to see an oral argument in person. Sure, it is possible to watch quite a few oral arguments on the internet, but something can be said for being there in person. It is much easier to get swept up in the excitement, and in a very good way. And of course something can be said for the "atmosphere."
What wasn't so nice was dealing with some of my fellow spectators. The security was very pleasant, sending us through without much hassle. Once inside, however, I could not believe how rude some people were. The "no phones" rule has been bent slightly, and phones are now allowed inside, but must be turned off while court is in session. Amazingly, several other spectators simply refused to do this. I have no idea what was so important that they could not miss the call, but could watch an argument. It seems to me like if something else that important is going on, you can just attend to that and read the transcript later.
Otherwise, watching top notch lawyers go back and forth with sharp judges is a thing of beauty. It is sort of a cross between chess and a boxing match. On one hand you want to go in strong, but you also have to always be dodging and looking for counters. Also, my background knowledge of patents is surely much stronger than the average law students, having taking a patents class and my work with Moot Court, but still a lot of it went straight over my head.
All in all, it was a really good time. Also, for any fellow law students, or any American who wants to watch our country in action, I would highly recommend going. Look up the number for the clerk of the court, give them a call, and find out when the next round of arguments are going to be. Public transit makes most courts easily accessible on a budget. Just remember to wear professional dress.
Either way, it was really great to get a chance to see an oral argument in person. Sure, it is possible to watch quite a few oral arguments on the internet, but something can be said for being there in person. It is much easier to get swept up in the excitement, and in a very good way. And of course something can be said for the "atmosphere."
What wasn't so nice was dealing with some of my fellow spectators. The security was very pleasant, sending us through without much hassle. Once inside, however, I could not believe how rude some people were. The "no phones" rule has been bent slightly, and phones are now allowed inside, but must be turned off while court is in session. Amazingly, several other spectators simply refused to do this. I have no idea what was so important that they could not miss the call, but could watch an argument. It seems to me like if something else that important is going on, you can just attend to that and read the transcript later.
Otherwise, watching top notch lawyers go back and forth with sharp judges is a thing of beauty. It is sort of a cross between chess and a boxing match. On one hand you want to go in strong, but you also have to always be dodging and looking for counters. Also, my background knowledge of patents is surely much stronger than the average law students, having taking a patents class and my work with Moot Court, but still a lot of it went straight over my head.
All in all, it was a really good time. Also, for any fellow law students, or any American who wants to watch our country in action, I would highly recommend going. Look up the number for the clerk of the court, give them a call, and find out when the next round of arguments are going to be. Public transit makes most courts easily accessible on a budget. Just remember to wear professional dress.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Moot Court
Sorry for the lack of recent updates. I have been very, very busy and to top it all off my computer is currently in the shop. This means that not only do I have less time, but when I do have free time it doesn't involve internet access.
The biggest news to report, however, is the start of Moot Court proper. The problem was released two weeks ago. The fact pattern is utterly absurd, which is a good thing. If I am going to have to live and breathe this thing for the next three months it might as well be interesting.
You know, as much as everyone says it, it is true. You can never be truly ready for something like this. Despite my best efforts to stay on top of my work and keep everything under control, the first week was utter madness.
First of all, one of the two issues in the problem is one that we have not gotten close to covering in class. Therefore, neither myself nor Moot Court Teammate (MCT) had any idea of how to approach it. The first week, very minimal work got done.
Then we met with our coach. He asked us what we thought of the problem, and we did the best we could to say somewhat intelligent things. He nodded polietly, then pointed out problems with each of our approaches. Law students are generally the people who always have an answer ready, and it is very tough to sit in an office and not have ANY of the answers ready. On the flip side, learning from a master is an unforgettable experience. Without even trying, he seems to know pretty much everything there is to know about appeallate practice, patents, and legal writing.
Anyways, after that browbeating, it was back to work. Since then, MCT and I have begun to read up on the problem and the current case law. It seems to be moving along, but it also continues to seem like there is more than we could ever handle in front of us. And the due date continues to approach.
So, as always, it is both exciting and terrifying at the same time.
The biggest news to report, however, is the start of Moot Court proper. The problem was released two weeks ago. The fact pattern is utterly absurd, which is a good thing. If I am going to have to live and breathe this thing for the next three months it might as well be interesting.
You know, as much as everyone says it, it is true. You can never be truly ready for something like this. Despite my best efforts to stay on top of my work and keep everything under control, the first week was utter madness.
First of all, one of the two issues in the problem is one that we have not gotten close to covering in class. Therefore, neither myself nor Moot Court Teammate (MCT) had any idea of how to approach it. The first week, very minimal work got done.
Then we met with our coach. He asked us what we thought of the problem, and we did the best we could to say somewhat intelligent things. He nodded polietly, then pointed out problems with each of our approaches. Law students are generally the people who always have an answer ready, and it is very tough to sit in an office and not have ANY of the answers ready. On the flip side, learning from a master is an unforgettable experience. Without even trying, he seems to know pretty much everything there is to know about appeallate practice, patents, and legal writing.
Anyways, after that browbeating, it was back to work. Since then, MCT and I have begun to read up on the problem and the current case law. It seems to be moving along, but it also continues to seem like there is more than we could ever handle in front of us. And the due date continues to approach.
So, as always, it is both exciting and terrifying at the same time.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Mid-Semester Doldrums
Law School is a marathon, not a sprint. I can't even begin to fathom how many times I have said this to fellow students, parents, incoming 1Ls... Everyone comes out the door super intense, briefing every case assigned, looking up extra cases, reading up on procedural issues that aren't relevant to the course.
Then, at the beginning of October, we tend to see midterms. Everyone pulls it together to learn enough material to do well on their exams. Socializing gets put on hold for a little longer in order to save your grades.
But what about now? In my experience, this is the time when people start to drift off. Midterms are done. Finals are still far enough in the distance not to worry. That magic "Thanksgiving Break" deadline for outlining hasn't hit yet.
On top of that, football is heating up, baseball playoffs are going on, and hockey season begins. College teams are in full swing. People take advantage of the last of the warm weather. The social distractions begin to mount.
And even inside the law school, now tends to be when internships get busy to make up for lost time during midterms, and the next round of applications goes out for jobs and internships next semester. It is time to pick classes for next semester. Moot court tryouts are starting soon.
With all these non-academic distractions, what is a student to do? I guess get up early, go to the library, and keep your nose to the grindstone. I feel like these times are the ones that separate the good students from the great. It is easy to sit and study all day when everyone else at school is too. But perhaps what is more important is how you are able to manage your time when everyone around you is goofing off. Something can be said, in my opinion, for the steady success as opposed to the flashes of brilliance.
Here's to another few months of cases, highlighters, and coffee, my fellow stalwarts!
Then, at the beginning of October, we tend to see midterms. Everyone pulls it together to learn enough material to do well on their exams. Socializing gets put on hold for a little longer in order to save your grades.
But what about now? In my experience, this is the time when people start to drift off. Midterms are done. Finals are still far enough in the distance not to worry. That magic "Thanksgiving Break" deadline for outlining hasn't hit yet.
On top of that, football is heating up, baseball playoffs are going on, and hockey season begins. College teams are in full swing. People take advantage of the last of the warm weather. The social distractions begin to mount.
And even inside the law school, now tends to be when internships get busy to make up for lost time during midterms, and the next round of applications goes out for jobs and internships next semester. It is time to pick classes for next semester. Moot court tryouts are starting soon.
With all these non-academic distractions, what is a student to do? I guess get up early, go to the library, and keep your nose to the grindstone. I feel like these times are the ones that separate the good students from the great. It is easy to sit and study all day when everyone else at school is too. But perhaps what is more important is how you are able to manage your time when everyone around you is goofing off. Something can be said, in my opinion, for the steady success as opposed to the flashes of brilliance.
Here's to another few months of cases, highlighters, and coffee, my fellow stalwarts!
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Law Zombies?
The ABA sends me regular emails with headlines (plus I follow them on Twitter) and while a lot of the articles are doom and gloom about the job markets, every now and then something catches my eye.
This one, about Yale Law's admissions process, gives a few interesting tips for law applicants. While I have some critical thoughts about both Yale's undergraduate and law admissions process, I think it is good to know that they are looking for more than just a simple resume with all the right key-words.
My favorite two are the second two, the trivial obstacles and the childhood arguer. The "trivial hardships essay" is also well covered in Ann Levine's Law School Admissions Game
book (find my review here). Both make the point that bemoaning an obstacle that either is common or less serious makes you seem like either you are lazy or a whiner. However, the definitions vary. In high school, I was told that writing about the death of a loved one probably wasn't a good idea, since a lot of people lose important friends and family members growing up. Interestingly, this Yale Law admissions dean lists "divorce" as a significant obstacle. I find this an odd choice, but perhaps I am being insensitive. It just strikes me as one of those setbacks, such as moving, that is heartbreaking and incredibly difficult to manage, but also one that isn't unique for growing Americans.
I also loved the "I love to argue" one. I can't tell you how many times people I meet in law school say, "Ever since I was young people told me I should be a lawyer because I love to argue!" To be fair, my best friend told me I should be a lawyer in 5th grade. But I don't think the fact that I felt like staging a protest in my English class about discriminatory Polish jokes makes me fit to be a lawyer OR for law school. What makes me fit for law school is hard work, prior academic success, drive, and a wide variety of balanced interests. In my opinion, the people who simply "love to argue" don't do well in law school. You need to be able to listen to others, think about their position, learn the ins and outs of their position, and then construct a valid counter-argument. Simply going back and forth does nothing. Also, you need to be able to work well with others. We have small group discussions at least once a week in class, and often with people you don't know. I think a lot of law school involves actually being completely silent and listening. You very rarely open your mouth.
My biggest complaints with Yale Undergrad and Yale Law's application process is that so much of it is either secret or simply different from the rest of the country, seemingly just because "We are Yale, and we can make you do it, because you need us, and we don't need you." Having said that, I think it is awesome that Yale looks deep into applications, and doesn't (at least seemingly) reduce people to LSAT scores and undergrad GPAs. This is a cool article for applicants.
This one, about Yale Law's admissions process, gives a few interesting tips for law applicants. While I have some critical thoughts about both Yale's undergraduate and law admissions process, I think it is good to know that they are looking for more than just a simple resume with all the right key-words.
My favorite two are the second two, the trivial obstacles and the childhood arguer. The "trivial hardships essay" is also well covered in Ann Levine's Law School Admissions Game
book (find my review here). Both make the point that bemoaning an obstacle that either is common or less serious makes you seem like either you are lazy or a whiner. However, the definitions vary. In high school, I was told that writing about the death of a loved one probably wasn't a good idea, since a lot of people lose important friends and family members growing up. Interestingly, this Yale Law admissions dean lists "divorce" as a significant obstacle. I find this an odd choice, but perhaps I am being insensitive. It just strikes me as one of those setbacks, such as moving, that is heartbreaking and incredibly difficult to manage, but also one that isn't unique for growing Americans.I also loved the "I love to argue" one. I can't tell you how many times people I meet in law school say, "Ever since I was young people told me I should be a lawyer because I love to argue!" To be fair, my best friend told me I should be a lawyer in 5th grade. But I don't think the fact that I felt like staging a protest in my English class about discriminatory Polish jokes makes me fit to be a lawyer OR for law school. What makes me fit for law school is hard work, prior academic success, drive, and a wide variety of balanced interests. In my opinion, the people who simply "love to argue" don't do well in law school. You need to be able to listen to others, think about their position, learn the ins and outs of their position, and then construct a valid counter-argument. Simply going back and forth does nothing. Also, you need to be able to work well with others. We have small group discussions at least once a week in class, and often with people you don't know. I think a lot of law school involves actually being completely silent and listening. You very rarely open your mouth.
My biggest complaints with Yale Undergrad and Yale Law's application process is that so much of it is either secret or simply different from the rest of the country, seemingly just because "We are Yale, and we can make you do it, because you need us, and we don't need you." Having said that, I think it is awesome that Yale looks deep into applications, and doesn't (at least seemingly) reduce people to LSAT scores and undergrad GPAs. This is a cool article for applicants.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
10 Things I Have Learned About Legal Interviews
Having now been on a few legal interviews, I think I am completely qualified to give a full amount of feedback and tips.
Here are 10 things you should know about legal interviews:
1) They aren't all that different from regular job interviews.
I actually had to do MORE for two job interviews prior to attending law school. The biggest difference is that those involved tests and practical demonstrations, while legal interviews are conversations. Also, those involved multiple interviewers, and so far my legal interviews have all been one on one.
2) A legal interviewer knows A LOT about you before you walk into the room.
Legal interviewers already have a resume and a transcript, and they probably have a writing sample and cover letter as well. This means they have up to 4 pieces of paper before they meet you. In addition, law school transcripts say a lot more than an undergrad one, since the course and curricula are pretty similar across schools. There are only two law schools in Maryland as it is, so chances are your interviewer took the same course from the same professor. And in the writing sample the interviewer has an example of work product, not just grades.
3) A legal interview can easily be over before you open your mouth.
Piggy-backing on the last one, while your paperwork might get you in the door, that might be all it gets you. The legal community is huge on etiquette. Showing up late means you probably aren't getting the job. Dressing inappropriately also means you probably aren't getting the position. I've heard anecdotes about women getting points against them for expensive designer purses, and guys losing out for missing a spot while shaving that morning. The optimist says this all goes to attention to detail, the pessimist says the market is bad enough to support sometimes arbitrary distinctions.
4) The legal interviewer may know NOTHING about you.
I know, number 2 says the opposite! Some legal interviewers are too busy to read your resume. They may have not read your writing sample. They may have not read your transcript. You need to be prepared to work this into the interview. If you have a great internship listed, but the interviewer doesn't ask you about it or read your resume, you need to let them know.
5) You aren't going to be asked about grades.
I haven't had any "Big Law" interviews yet, but I haven't been asked about grades at any of my interviews. I haven't been asked about the good ones, the bad ones, or the average ones. I would assume that if you are interviewing at a Big Law type firm that only takes top 10%, your grades are already qualified enough anyways.
6) Be prepared to talk.
I've found legal interviewers to have far less questions than traditional job interviews. They tend to ask very broad, open ended questions. You need to be able to not only keep up your end of the conversation, but keep it moving forward. I have been asked simply, "Tell me about yourself" and felt totally lost.
7) Be prepared to shut your mouth.
Legal interviewers are lawyers. They already did law school. They now have jobs, and are successful. You are a student who NEEDS their acceptance. If you are in the middle of your awesome story about the time you saved the day for your last boss, and the interviewer makes a sound, you need to shut your mouth. This sounds obvious, but sometimes you get so caught up in trying to share everything about yourself, it can be hard to stop.
8) Have copies of all your paperwork, AND A BUSINESS CARD.
The first thing they ask for is your card. Its a terrible way to start off an interview. Print one on your computer if you have to. Also, some of them may not have copies of your resume or transcript available, so have at least two clean copies of each. Its great to be able to hand them one if they need one, and its good to have your own copy to reference, just in case.
9) You need to do research.
At a bare minimum, you had better at least google the firm you are interviewing for. I would suggest, at a minimum, reading up on the type of work they do, any major cases or victories, and schools they attended (if the firm is small enough). First of all, its great to let them know you are interested, and not just looking for ANY job. Second, its great to have talking points or common ground to discuss. And finally, everyone likes their ego stroked at least a little, and knowing about someone's work is a great start.
10) Have a question for the interviewer.
I was told to do this for work interviews after graduating from my undergrad university. And none of those interviewers seemed to really care. However, all of my legal interviewers have asked if I had any questions, and taken the time to answer. I got the idea that they really wanted me to ask something, and weren't just asking as a formality.
Well there you have it. If anyone has any good sites with more info, or wants to share their own stories, feel free to leave a comment.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Moot Court Update
I feel like all I ever write about anymore is Moot Court...
My coach/advisor/master of all things legal and written hailed the team to his office for a review of the practice brief. It started off well enough, with the comment "I was surprised, I didn't think you guys would be able to write at all."
Moving on from that, he explained that this is because you don't get very many opportunities to practice and perfect good legal writing in law school. And this is entirely true. As Coach pointed out, even when you do have writing assignments, they are always framed in the panic that is exams, classes, internships, and life. Therefore, you often don't get a chance to do that really deep, high level, word by word editing that you would with a work assignment. Also, the first few assignments are overwhelmed by learning a new system for citations, analysis, style, even pagination, that make it difficult to really refine your skills.
So, low expectations, well exceeded. Not so much an insult as a statement of fact.
However, he then proceeded to utterly destroy our beautiful little brief. In some major, major ways. Things like point headings, completely missing the standard of review, and a failing to apply the legal test we painstakingly described.
Two major points in our defense: First of all, this was a closed universe problem, and we simply didn't have access to cases that supported certain legal elements that were lacking in the brief. You can't discuss legal presumptions if none of the cases you have to cite to do either. Secondly, our coach is an awesome writer. Although his resume includes time at nationally prestigious firms and work on Supreme Court cases, I really had no idea just how good he was at appellate writing. I was blown away as he slowly and calmly pointed out the narrowest distinctions in the technical aspects while weaving in subtle but beautiful style points.
I am really nerding out right now, but it is somewhat inspirational to get to sit and learn from a master. I have been carrying around a brief he wrote while in practice, treating it like an idol. Seriously, I checked my bag every five minutes to make sure it was ok, but ended up leaving my jacket on the train.
My coach/advisor/master of all things legal and written hailed the team to his office for a review of the practice brief. It started off well enough, with the comment "I was surprised, I didn't think you guys would be able to write at all."
Moving on from that, he explained that this is because you don't get very many opportunities to practice and perfect good legal writing in law school. And this is entirely true. As Coach pointed out, even when you do have writing assignments, they are always framed in the panic that is exams, classes, internships, and life. Therefore, you often don't get a chance to do that really deep, high level, word by word editing that you would with a work assignment. Also, the first few assignments are overwhelmed by learning a new system for citations, analysis, style, even pagination, that make it difficult to really refine your skills.
So, low expectations, well exceeded. Not so much an insult as a statement of fact.
However, he then proceeded to utterly destroy our beautiful little brief. In some major, major ways. Things like point headings, completely missing the standard of review, and a failing to apply the legal test we painstakingly described.
Two major points in our defense: First of all, this was a closed universe problem, and we simply didn't have access to cases that supported certain legal elements that were lacking in the brief. You can't discuss legal presumptions if none of the cases you have to cite to do either. Secondly, our coach is an awesome writer. Although his resume includes time at nationally prestigious firms and work on Supreme Court cases, I really had no idea just how good he was at appellate writing. I was blown away as he slowly and calmly pointed out the narrowest distinctions in the technical aspects while weaving in subtle but beautiful style points.
I am really nerding out right now, but it is somewhat inspirational to get to sit and learn from a master. I have been carrying around a brief he wrote while in practice, treating it like an idol. Seriously, I checked my bag every five minutes to make sure it was ok, but ended up leaving my jacket on the train.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Be Gone, You!
Well, the practice brief is finally done. It was a ton of work, I haven't even thought about totaling up the hours invested in it. We sent it off a few hours before the final deadline, and so far all the interested parties seem to have received it, and are more or less satisfied.
Actually, we will be scheduling an appointment with the team coach shortly. He will be sure to let us know how well we did (or didn't) do.
Speaking of writing, I have an interview for an unpaid internship coming up shortly. It is a research assistant type position. I am pretty excited about the possibility of the topic, it is really an area that I think I could see myself doing some serious work in the future. The real point of this story, though, is that it required my creating a writing sample.
Writing samples are just what they sound like, a sample of your writing! The idea is that, as has been discussed here ad inifitum, legal writing is a different beast from other types. Therefore, prospective employers like to get an idea that you know how to do it before they hire you. This is especially true for a lot of internships, where you will primarily be tasked with looking up an obscure legal topic, and then trying to convey the whole law in a few pages to a busy partner who doesn't have the time to really learn it themselves.
My first year of law school, I did five writing assignments. The first was a closed memo for my first year writing course. This, unfortunately, would never work. While my legal analysis was actually pretty decent, the paper itself was a bit of a mess. Half of this is my fault for really doing awful, but a lot of it was simply because 1Ls don't know any better.
The second was an open memo for the same class. This one has potential as a writing sample, except I never got a graded copy back from my professor, since we handed it in at the end of the semester.
The other major paper was a lengthy appellate brief I did for the second half of my first year writing course. This one was out because of the same half and half rule from earlier. On the one hand, I could have done a bit better of a job with the second element. On the other hand, I don't think even the professor fully understood the second element or how we were supposed to approach it in light of the assignment.
So that leaves two other possibilities, my Moot Court brief and my law review write-on. Well, the law review one, while not bad, was never scored. So basically, that left Moot Court brief. This was from the competition to get on a time during the winter last year. The good part about this is 1) it was some pretty tight legal writing, 2) it was the ideal 6 pages and 3) it was already pretty heavily edited by yours truly. So I decided to put it in blue book format (yeah, we used a modified style guide for the competition) and send it off.
No lie, I spent a solid 8 hours cleaning up the six pages. It wasn't all bad, I have just really grown as a writer from last year. I found so many improvements to make, and I am proud of the final output. But when potential jobs are on the line, wow, do you look at everything a little more closely. I suppose this is good, it means that whenever I am actually in practice, I have a very deep place I can go to get the best product out there. But when it is a Friday and you really just want to have some fun, it is not fun at all.
Actually, we will be scheduling an appointment with the team coach shortly. He will be sure to let us know how well we did (or didn't) do.
Speaking of writing, I have an interview for an unpaid internship coming up shortly. It is a research assistant type position. I am pretty excited about the possibility of the topic, it is really an area that I think I could see myself doing some serious work in the future. The real point of this story, though, is that it required my creating a writing sample.
Writing samples are just what they sound like, a sample of your writing! The idea is that, as has been discussed here ad inifitum, legal writing is a different beast from other types. Therefore, prospective employers like to get an idea that you know how to do it before they hire you. This is especially true for a lot of internships, where you will primarily be tasked with looking up an obscure legal topic, and then trying to convey the whole law in a few pages to a busy partner who doesn't have the time to really learn it themselves.
My first year of law school, I did five writing assignments. The first was a closed memo for my first year writing course. This, unfortunately, would never work. While my legal analysis was actually pretty decent, the paper itself was a bit of a mess. Half of this is my fault for really doing awful, but a lot of it was simply because 1Ls don't know any better.
The second was an open memo for the same class. This one has potential as a writing sample, except I never got a graded copy back from my professor, since we handed it in at the end of the semester.
The other major paper was a lengthy appellate brief I did for the second half of my first year writing course. This one was out because of the same half and half rule from earlier. On the one hand, I could have done a bit better of a job with the second element. On the other hand, I don't think even the professor fully understood the second element or how we were supposed to approach it in light of the assignment.
So that leaves two other possibilities, my Moot Court brief and my law review write-on. Well, the law review one, while not bad, was never scored. So basically, that left Moot Court brief. This was from the competition to get on a time during the winter last year. The good part about this is 1) it was some pretty tight legal writing, 2) it was the ideal 6 pages and 3) it was already pretty heavily edited by yours truly. So I decided to put it in blue book format (yeah, we used a modified style guide for the competition) and send it off.
No lie, I spent a solid 8 hours cleaning up the six pages. It wasn't all bad, I have just really grown as a writer from last year. I found so many improvements to make, and I am proud of the final output. But when potential jobs are on the line, wow, do you look at everything a little more closely. I suppose this is good, it means that whenever I am actually in practice, I have a very deep place I can go to get the best product out there. But when it is a Friday and you really just want to have some fun, it is not fun at all.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Moot Court - Practice Brief Continued
Whoa... this thing is killer. The good news? Almost done. Hours and hours of work, but nonetheless, its almost complete!
It is, of course, one of those things that feels awesome when it comes together!
In other news, I blogged a little while ago about being on a focus group for the new UB website. Well, today the school sent around this, if anyone is interested.
Finally, I have applied for a research position which I am pretty excited about, but apparently there was enough interest to warrant an interview... So wish me luck!
It is, of course, one of those things that feels awesome when it comes together!
In other news, I blogged a little while ago about being on a focus group for the new UB website. Well, today the school sent around this, if anyone is interested.
Finally, I have applied for a research position which I am pretty excited about, but apparently there was enough interest to warrant an interview... So wish me luck!
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Moot Court - Practice Brief
Why the lack of updates, you ask? It's the Moot Court practice brief. My life has been utterly and completely consumed by this.
Those of you who have followed this blog may have heard me rant and rave about legal writing, and how it is a completely different beast. Those of you who are either in law school, or have previously attended, know exactly what I am talking about. Those of you who are in neither category, let me just sum it up by saying legal writing is the slowest, most deliberate, and careful writing you will ever do. I know, I know, everyone always says what they are doing is the worst. This is not the case. I will concede practical tests to nursing programs, I will concede exams to medical school, but legal writing is tough.
That doesn't mean it can't be completely exhilarating when you put something together. When the arguments start coming together in your head, when you begin to see a brief or memo take form, it is awesome.
Writing a memo with someone else is whole 'nother story. First of all, everyone has a "writing process." Mine involves procrastinating, so having a partner actually helps. I absolutely cannot be unprepared when someone is counting on me. So that is good. Plus, the research is easier, as you both read the cases, and even if I miss something, chances are MCP (that's Moot Court Teammate) will catch it. And when you sit down and start looking at the problem, you get to bounce ideas off each other.
For example, ours is a 4th Amendment issue, that is, search and seizure. We both read the cases, and the problem. I thought we should take the approach of arguing how the suspect's actions justified a more thorough search. She thought we should take the approach of arguing the government's strong interest. It turns out, we need to do both.
So that is all great, but writing with someone else? That is difficult. We came up with a decent outline, then sat next to each other, and said "Ok, what should the next sentence be?" We each dictated one, then worked out which was best. "Ok, next sentence." We each dictated one, then combined them. Needless to say, we worked for about 7 hours, and wrote 4 pages. And I thought it was pretty productive.
Now tomorrow, we have to write the last 4. Then we get to edit.
Side note: With Moot Court this week, for the first time in my life do I understand what other people mean when they say loved ones complain about them never having time. So far in my life I have always been able to balance the two, but Moot has recently made this near impossible. So to my loved ones, all I can say is sorry, and thank you for your patience. I'll be back soon.
Those of you who have followed this blog may have heard me rant and rave about legal writing, and how it is a completely different beast. Those of you who are either in law school, or have previously attended, know exactly what I am talking about. Those of you who are in neither category, let me just sum it up by saying legal writing is the slowest, most deliberate, and careful writing you will ever do. I know, I know, everyone always says what they are doing is the worst. This is not the case. I will concede practical tests to nursing programs, I will concede exams to medical school, but legal writing is tough.
That doesn't mean it can't be completely exhilarating when you put something together. When the arguments start coming together in your head, when you begin to see a brief or memo take form, it is awesome.
Writing a memo with someone else is whole 'nother story. First of all, everyone has a "writing process." Mine involves procrastinating, so having a partner actually helps. I absolutely cannot be unprepared when someone is counting on me. So that is good. Plus, the research is easier, as you both read the cases, and even if I miss something, chances are MCP (that's Moot Court Teammate) will catch it. And when you sit down and start looking at the problem, you get to bounce ideas off each other.
For example, ours is a 4th Amendment issue, that is, search and seizure. We both read the cases, and the problem. I thought we should take the approach of arguing how the suspect's actions justified a more thorough search. She thought we should take the approach of arguing the government's strong interest. It turns out, we need to do both.
So that is all great, but writing with someone else? That is difficult. We came up with a decent outline, then sat next to each other, and said "Ok, what should the next sentence be?" We each dictated one, then worked out which was best. "Ok, next sentence." We each dictated one, then combined them. Needless to say, we worked for about 7 hours, and wrote 4 pages. And I thought it was pretty productive.
Now tomorrow, we have to write the last 4. Then we get to edit.
Side note: With Moot Court this week, for the first time in my life do I understand what other people mean when they say loved ones complain about them never having time. So far in my life I have always been able to balance the two, but Moot has recently made this near impossible. So to my loved ones, all I can say is sorry, and thank you for your patience. I'll be back soon.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Moot Court - Practice Problem
Today is an exciting day, the day the Practice Problem for Moot Court was released. Our school requires students to complete a practice brief prior to the actual competition.
While at first this sounds like one of the worst ideas since fanny packs, it actually has some practicals implications. Sure, myself and my partner will be responsible for two 30- page briefs, plus a full oral argument, so why would we want to take on ANOTHER extra assignment that offers no additional credit?
Well, first of all, the practice brief is a closed problem, meaning no research outside of the cited cases. This, right away, makes the entire process easier and smoother. No need to spend the first month looking up and reading cases, the first week of which are completely useless. Nope, all the cases are presented, just read and digest. This also means that there is no worrying about making sure all the authority is good. So right there, major help.
The second is the page limit. The practice brief is a paltry 8 pages. Including a statement of facts. And only one position must be presented.
Overall, I don't think the practice brief is really designed to have us improve our legal writing skills, instead the focus seems to be on developing a system for working together as a team. Which is a much more manageable task indeed.
And with that, Moot Court has officially begun! Keep reading for more
While at first this sounds like one of the worst ideas since fanny packs, it actually has some practicals implications. Sure, myself and my partner will be responsible for two 30- page briefs, plus a full oral argument, so why would we want to take on ANOTHER extra assignment that offers no additional credit?
Well, first of all, the practice brief is a closed problem, meaning no research outside of the cited cases. This, right away, makes the entire process easier and smoother. No need to spend the first month looking up and reading cases, the first week of which are completely useless. Nope, all the cases are presented, just read and digest. This also means that there is no worrying about making sure all the authority is good. So right there, major help.
The second is the page limit. The practice brief is a paltry 8 pages. Including a statement of facts. And only one position must be presented.
Overall, I don't think the practice brief is really designed to have us improve our legal writing skills, instead the focus seems to be on developing a system for working together as a team. Which is a much more manageable task indeed.
And with that, Moot Court has officially begun! Keep reading for more
First Week of Classes Review
Constitutional Law II - Oh Con Law, how you continue to excite me with your insane decisions and twisted logic. Actually, this class is so far a lot better than Con Law I. I think Con Law II is strictly First Ammendment, or at least most of the semester is. This class is interestingly enough taught by the Dean, who taught this course for years before becoming a Dean. He takes an awesomely practical approach. Also, this class is two credits, and therefore meets twice a week for 50 minutes each time, so that makes it much easier.
Sales and Leases - This class is bar tested, so I thought it would be a good idea to take it. It is basically the Maryland Commercial Code. The reading is only one or two pages per night, but we also do one or two problems, which can take 45 minutes each during class. It is a step-by-step analysis. Very exhausting, but so far I feel like I am learning a ton in this class.
Civil Procedure II - Civ Pro II is actually Civ Pro I everywhere else in the country, but for some reason UB does them backwards. I wasn't entirely smitten with my Civ Pro I professor's teaching style, but at the same time I found her exam entirely fair and reasonable, so I took her again. She is somehow more enthusiastic about Civ Pro II, so that is good.
Professional Responsibility - Required of all law students... I signed up for it this semester because the professor is awesome. This class actually has some surprisingly practical implications.
Patents, Trademarks, and Technology - Required for my participation in IP Moot Court. We have actually covered surprsingly little material so far, but I am really excited to be finally taking courses that I selected purely from an intellectual cuiriousity standpoint.
All in all, not a bad looking semester!
Sales and Leases - This class is bar tested, so I thought it would be a good idea to take it. It is basically the Maryland Commercial Code. The reading is only one or two pages per night, but we also do one or two problems, which can take 45 minutes each during class. It is a step-by-step analysis. Very exhausting, but so far I feel like I am learning a ton in this class.
Civil Procedure II - Civ Pro II is actually Civ Pro I everywhere else in the country, but for some reason UB does them backwards. I wasn't entirely smitten with my Civ Pro I professor's teaching style, but at the same time I found her exam entirely fair and reasonable, so I took her again. She is somehow more enthusiastic about Civ Pro II, so that is good.
Professional Responsibility - Required of all law students... I signed up for it this semester because the professor is awesome. This class actually has some surprisingly practical implications.
Patents, Trademarks, and Technology - Required for my participation in IP Moot Court. We have actually covered surprsingly little material so far, but I am really excited to be finally taking courses that I selected purely from an intellectual cuiriousity standpoint.
All in all, not a bad looking semester!
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
UB Newsy Stuff
The new school year has of course brought the University of Baltimore back into my life in a big way. Of course, it always is there, but during the summer I find myself going to campus only occassionally, and therefore, falling out of the gossip, if you will.
Before classes even started, I stopped by the new bookstore, and checked it out. I mentioned it briefly during this post, and for the most part, the analysis still stands. It is new and clean, but also increasingly less student friendly.
Then I assisted during new student orientation, which was really fun and rewarding.
Within the first week of classes, our school celebrated the groundbreaking of the new law school building. Of course, yours truly, while paying for its construction, will never see the inside of it unless I decide to take a tour after graduation. Nonetheless, the event was attended by the local Baltimore and Maryland dignitiaries. It has created a bit of a buzz around campus. The current buidling, as I have written before, is practical, but a bit dingy and dour. It has a very old, institutional feel. Faculty offices are spread around 4 floors, the classrooms are all completely indistinguishable, the library is seriously outdated.
And to top it all off, the building is kind of hidden amongst other UB buildings. Even people who have lived and worked in the Baltimore area have no idea where the law school is located. A new building will hopefully give UB a little more status around the city, especially since we quietly are a major force in the area.
A second really cool UB news item was my chance to participate in a focus group session for the new website! Our current website is functional, but the new design looks much better. I had some detailed feedback to offer, and it will be interesting to see if any of my ideas get implemented.
I have never been in a focus group before, although I had some idea of what they entailed. While generally given a negative public review (this movie seems like it was focus tested down to blandness, those new ads seem overly focus tested) for anything that is generic, being on the other side was new. They showed us some proposed designs, and compared them to the current version. We filled out a survey, which I am sure was decent, but then there was simply a roundtable discussion of the versions.
While school and life in general prepares us so much for getting critiqued, doing it is a completely different experience. It can be hard to simply say, "This new design is useless to me," more so when you know the designer is sitting in the room with you. At the same time, it was kind of cool to feel like I was seeing something that the rest of the UB community won't see for weeks!
As UB's blogging hasn't gotten up and running yet, continue to look here for weekly posts.
Before classes even started, I stopped by the new bookstore, and checked it out. I mentioned it briefly during this post, and for the most part, the analysis still stands. It is new and clean, but also increasingly less student friendly.
Then I assisted during new student orientation, which was really fun and rewarding.
Within the first week of classes, our school celebrated the groundbreaking of the new law school building. Of course, yours truly, while paying for its construction, will never see the inside of it unless I decide to take a tour after graduation. Nonetheless, the event was attended by the local Baltimore and Maryland dignitiaries. It has created a bit of a buzz around campus. The current buidling, as I have written before, is practical, but a bit dingy and dour. It has a very old, institutional feel. Faculty offices are spread around 4 floors, the classrooms are all completely indistinguishable, the library is seriously outdated.
And to top it all off, the building is kind of hidden amongst other UB buildings. Even people who have lived and worked in the Baltimore area have no idea where the law school is located. A new building will hopefully give UB a little more status around the city, especially since we quietly are a major force in the area.
A second really cool UB news item was my chance to participate in a focus group session for the new website! Our current website is functional, but the new design looks much better. I had some detailed feedback to offer, and it will be interesting to see if any of my ideas get implemented.
I have never been in a focus group before, although I had some idea of what they entailed. While generally given a negative public review (this movie seems like it was focus tested down to blandness, those new ads seem overly focus tested) for anything that is generic, being on the other side was new. They showed us some proposed designs, and compared them to the current version. We filled out a survey, which I am sure was decent, but then there was simply a roundtable discussion of the versions.
While school and life in general prepares us so much for getting critiqued, doing it is a completely different experience. It can be hard to simply say, "This new design is useless to me," more so when you know the designer is sitting in the room with you. At the same time, it was kind of cool to feel like I was seeing something that the rest of the UB community won't see for weeks!
As UB's blogging hasn't gotten up and running yet, continue to look here for weekly posts.
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Moot Court
2L also means participation in Moot Court for myself. As a member of the IP team, I am both excited and nervous about this opportunity.
The excitement comes from the chance to get my name out there in an inter-school competition, in front of current practitioners, and be able to show my skills. As someone who was highly involved with competitive sports growing up, I sometimes miss the adrenaline rush of really getting in there and destroying your opponent. Oral arguments do a great job, however, of providing that kind of outlet. There is something amazing about the feeling you get when you hear a question coming, and you not only know how to answer it, but to bring it back to your argument and your theme, and man, does it just feel great.
Otherwise, I am also excited that I will get to really do some in-depth work in a narrow area of the law, and to top it all off, one that I am very, very, interested in. If nothing else, I will be able to learn it inside and out. And I will get to practice my brief writing skills in a big way, since we are required to write two briefs of 30 pages each, and we are a two person team.
And yet I am very nervous. It is going to be a lot of work. During orientation/training, they provided a suggested schedule. It involved 8 hours per day, everyday, for over a month. I have no idea how I can possibly fit that into my schedule. I don't know if I have 8 hours per day that aren't already scheduled for class...
And I am a little nervous about pulling my weight. I never want to be the weak link of a team, but when the team is only two, and your teammate is on law review, scored higher in the try out competition, gets better grades than you, and has landed better internships than you, it gets tough.
Luckily, its still early. We haven't even done the practice brief at this point. Yeah, the required practice brief, in case the regular one isn't enough work already. Either way, I am pretty excited, so look for more coverage of this in the coming months.
The excitement comes from the chance to get my name out there in an inter-school competition, in front of current practitioners, and be able to show my skills. As someone who was highly involved with competitive sports growing up, I sometimes miss the adrenaline rush of really getting in there and destroying your opponent. Oral arguments do a great job, however, of providing that kind of outlet. There is something amazing about the feeling you get when you hear a question coming, and you not only know how to answer it, but to bring it back to your argument and your theme, and man, does it just feel great.
Otherwise, I am also excited that I will get to really do some in-depth work in a narrow area of the law, and to top it all off, one that I am very, very, interested in. If nothing else, I will be able to learn it inside and out. And I will get to practice my brief writing skills in a big way, since we are required to write two briefs of 30 pages each, and we are a two person team.
And yet I am very nervous. It is going to be a lot of work. During orientation/training, they provided a suggested schedule. It involved 8 hours per day, everyday, for over a month. I have no idea how I can possibly fit that into my schedule. I don't know if I have 8 hours per day that aren't already scheduled for class...
And I am a little nervous about pulling my weight. I never want to be the weak link of a team, but when the team is only two, and your teammate is on law review, scored higher in the try out competition, gets better grades than you, and has landed better internships than you, it gets tough.
Luckily, its still early. We haven't even done the practice brief at this point. Yeah, the required practice brief, in case the regular one isn't enough work already. Either way, I am pretty excited, so look for more coverage of this in the coming months.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Review of Law School Expert Podcast
The Law School Expert Podcast by Ann Levine
Ann Levine has appeared on this blog before when I reviewed her absolutely phenomenal guidebook "The Law School Admissions Game." I found it to be almost without fault, and far and away the single most helpful resource for getting into law school that I have ever encountered.
That glowing praise aside, I have also mentioned Ms. Levine and LawSchoolExpert.com at other times. The site is basically a portal for her services as an admissions consultant for law school applicants, but it does contain a highly useful blog and links to her podcast.
The blog is a good resource, but not the type of thing I would write a full review for. The podcast, on the other hand, deserves some consideration.
Podcasts that aim to provide a service can be wonderful, but they tend to suffer from a common problem: They are either put out by one person, and suffer from narrow minded, one size fits all opinions, or they cull information from a variety of resources, but are unable to help the listener sort the good from the bad.
The LawSchoolExpert podcast deftly avoids this by combining the expertise of host Ann Levine with the real-world stories of 3-4 guests on each show. Ms. Levine's expertise is well documented on her website, but additionally has been noted in her excellent book as providing an insider guide to the law school admission process. The guests, on the other hand, complement this nicely with anecdotal stories of their own experiences, including what worked and what didn't. The listener gets the best of both worlds!
Part of the reason it works so well is the way Levine handles the podcast. I have no idea how she selects her guests, but they usually represent a nice cross section of the audience the topic is aimed at. For example, in her podcast on applications for "non-traditional" students (i.e. those with significant prior careers) she managed to find some who had been in completely different fields, some with strong credentials, some with weaker credentials, and even a variety of different ages and genders. The rest comes from her expert wrangling of these personalities during the podcast, as Levine makes sure to ask each questions to bring out the most useful information. Finally, she caps it off with a strong editorial of expert opinion, making sure to point out anytime a guests experience is a rare exception, so listeners can use the information correctly.
The podcast covers a variety of topics, again, generally focused on law school admissions, current or former students will find little useful information. The podcast publishes very irregularly, but that is part of the beauty. Rather than forcing out a show every week, episodes are published in half hour blocks about important topics, and it is easy to locate past shows that relate directly to your own query. I would recommend listening to all of them, but searching by title and topic is an option as well. They can be located in iTunes, or directly from her site here. They are hosted by BlogTalkRadio, which apparently allows listeners to call in live, however I have never known this to happen.
Ann Levine has appeared on this blog before when I reviewed her absolutely phenomenal guidebook "The Law School Admissions Game
." I found it to be almost without fault, and far and away the single most helpful resource for getting into law school that I have ever encountered.That glowing praise aside, I have also mentioned Ms. Levine and LawSchoolExpert.com at other times. The site is basically a portal for her services as an admissions consultant for law school applicants, but it does contain a highly useful blog and links to her podcast.
The blog is a good resource, but not the type of thing I would write a full review for. The podcast, on the other hand, deserves some consideration.
Podcasts that aim to provide a service can be wonderful, but they tend to suffer from a common problem: They are either put out by one person, and suffer from narrow minded, one size fits all opinions, or they cull information from a variety of resources, but are unable to help the listener sort the good from the bad.
The LawSchoolExpert podcast deftly avoids this by combining the expertise of host Ann Levine with the real-world stories of 3-4 guests on each show. Ms. Levine's expertise is well documented on her website, but additionally has been noted in her excellent book as providing an insider guide to the law school admission process. The guests, on the other hand, complement this nicely with anecdotal stories of their own experiences, including what worked and what didn't. The listener gets the best of both worlds!
Part of the reason it works so well is the way Levine handles the podcast. I have no idea how she selects her guests, but they usually represent a nice cross section of the audience the topic is aimed at. For example, in her podcast on applications for "non-traditional" students (i.e. those with significant prior careers) she managed to find some who had been in completely different fields, some with strong credentials, some with weaker credentials, and even a variety of different ages and genders. The rest comes from her expert wrangling of these personalities during the podcast, as Levine makes sure to ask each questions to bring out the most useful information. Finally, she caps it off with a strong editorial of expert opinion, making sure to point out anytime a guests experience is a rare exception, so listeners can use the information correctly.
The podcast covers a variety of topics, again, generally focused on law school admissions, current or former students will find little useful information. The podcast publishes very irregularly, but that is part of the beauty. Rather than forcing out a show every week, episodes are published in half hour blocks about important topics, and it is easy to locate past shows that relate directly to your own query. I would recommend listening to all of them, but searching by title and topic is an option as well. They can be located in iTunes, or directly from her site here. They are hosted by BlogTalkRadio, which apparently allows listeners to call in live, however I have never known this to happen.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Orientation Is Much More Fun When You Are A 2L
Last week I had the opportunity to assist with the 1L orientation at school. It was a really nice experience for me, and additionally I would like to think that I helped some 1Ls feel more comfortable with the experience.
We started giving a nice campus tour, which I really enjoyed. (I was an professional tour guide in undergrad, and it remains one of my favorite job experiences). I also tried to make it a point to show them not just buildings, but the places they would need to know. Where offices were, good places to study, places to print, etc.
Then we got to herd them all across busy Maryland Avenue into the library, the only room big enough to fit all the new students. That intersection is particulary tough for pedestrians, but by the middle of the first month of school, you just dive across uncaringly. It is funny to watch the 1Ls wait for the walk signal and then fearfully dart across.
Here is where orientation as a 2L is much better. While they all sat and listened to the Dean (actually, a pretty engaging presentation, and he updated it from last year!), and then got a solid hour of "Honor Code Hypos," I got to relax and catch up with my fellow volunteers about their summers. It is amazing how nice it is to NOT be stuck sitting in a crowded auditorium for hours on end. I did make it a point to listen to the Chief Justice's speech before he administered the honor code oath.
Really, the best part of the day was lunch, where I sat with a group of students and gave them as much info as I could about law school. I tried to answer as many questions as possible, but they didn't really have many, so I just talked about mistakes I made my first year. "Get to class at least 15 minutes early the first week so you can sit in a chair." That kind of stuff. Study guides actually do help, but are really expensive. These kids seemed to have it pretty well together, they seemed most nervous about actually attending class. "Can you skip?" No. "Do the Professors skip?" No. "What do you call the professors? Dr?" No, Professor Last Name is a good, safe, pattern.
According to the Dean, they are the best credentialled class ever, which sounds about right. I got to say, Good Luck to you all, and I will reiterate what I said to my group at lunch, if you ever need any help, just ask.
We started giving a nice campus tour, which I really enjoyed. (I was an professional tour guide in undergrad, and it remains one of my favorite job experiences). I also tried to make it a point to show them not just buildings, but the places they would need to know. Where offices were, good places to study, places to print, etc.
Then we got to herd them all across busy Maryland Avenue into the library, the only room big enough to fit all the new students. That intersection is particulary tough for pedestrians, but by the middle of the first month of school, you just dive across uncaringly. It is funny to watch the 1Ls wait for the walk signal and then fearfully dart across.
Here is where orientation as a 2L is much better. While they all sat and listened to the Dean (actually, a pretty engaging presentation, and he updated it from last year!), and then got a solid hour of "Honor Code Hypos," I got to relax and catch up with my fellow volunteers about their summers. It is amazing how nice it is to NOT be stuck sitting in a crowded auditorium for hours on end. I did make it a point to listen to the Chief Justice's speech before he administered the honor code oath.
Really, the best part of the day was lunch, where I sat with a group of students and gave them as much info as I could about law school. I tried to answer as many questions as possible, but they didn't really have many, so I just talked about mistakes I made my first year. "Get to class at least 15 minutes early the first week so you can sit in a chair." That kind of stuff. Study guides actually do help, but are really expensive. These kids seemed to have it pretty well together, they seemed most nervous about actually attending class. "Can you skip?" No. "Do the Professors skip?" No. "What do you call the professors? Dr?" No, Professor Last Name is a good, safe, pattern.
According to the Dean, they are the best credentialled class ever, which sounds about right. I got to say, Good Luck to you all, and I will reiterate what I said to my group at lunch, if you ever need any help, just ask.
Monday, August 23, 2010
FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL!
And I am actually pretty excited! Wish me luck, and good luck to all the new 1Ls!
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
The End of an Era
Well, it is official, my first legal experience is over! That's right, my summer judicial internship ended this week. I thought I would take some time to reflect on the experience.
First of all, it was completely amazing, and exceeded every expectation. I went into it sort of on a lark, simply not knowing what I was looking for midway through my first semester when it became time to apply. I just signed up, filled out the necessary forms, and submitted a resume.
At District Court, there are no written opinions, and most of the issues presented are more or less "he said, she said" factual debates. Two people were in a car accident, and they have differing opinions of how it happened. I would estimate upwards of 70% of cases were pro se. So unfortunately, there wasn't a whole lot of vigorously debated pieces of evidence, closely contested procedural issues, or lengthy, moving, closing statements.
At the same time, there was a lot of "lawyering" going on. What do you do when your star witness shows up visibly drunk for court? How about when your client's own hospital records note that he was too drunk to control his own bladder, but you need to prove that the bartender violently (and negligently) pushed him out the door? At times like these, I got to see some lawyers put on a real show. A great example comes from one case, when the plaintiff had been caught in several lies during cross. She was becoming combative with both defense counsel and the judge. Rather than attempt to address these statements on re-direct, counsel simply rested, and during closing, calmly explained how it was clearly apparent that his witness was untrained, and therefore highly credible. It was effective. And no, they don't teach you that in law school. In law school, you ask for a recess of two weeks, write a memo, and prepare a detailed brief doted with case-law and statutes.
Another great piece of lawyering often came out of bail reviews, during which the public defender had seconds to interview a client and demonstrate their community ties, lack of flight risk, and lack of threat to public safety. On the other side, the state's attorney had only a paragraph statement of probable cause written by an arresting officer to base an argument for a strong and fair bail. Watching these lawyers work is a true thing of beauty. On each side is someone who passed on the opportunity for a huge salary to work instead for the public. The state is only one who can prosecute crimes in order to keep us all safe. And for many, the public defender is the only one protecting the accused's rights. This truly is what our government and society are based on. And worse, these people do this tirelessly, day in and day out. They are never noticed either, unless they mess up and a blogger picks up on it.
So I got to watch some lawyering during my internship, but the other hugely important benefit was the amount of networking. First of all, I am so incredibly lucky to have been placed with a judge who made it a point to introduce me to every single other judge, attorney, or clerk who came through his chambers. He would look the most high powered lawyer straight in the eye, and introduce me with a fancy sounding title.
And with that networking, I think the best networking out there will come from the personal relationship I was able to develop with My Judge. We were able to speak about legal matters as well as personal ones, and he took some serious time to mentor me on both a professional and personal level. We discussed study skills one minute, then discussed facebook, then terrible dates we had been on. I am fairly confident that I will be able to call on him as both a reference and source of advice in the future.
With my internship concluded, I will now sit and update my resume, get ready for school, and spend some time relaxing. But a huge part of me will really miss getting up early a few days a week to make sure my suit was looking right and head to the courthouse.
First of all, it was completely amazing, and exceeded every expectation. I went into it sort of on a lark, simply not knowing what I was looking for midway through my first semester when it became time to apply. I just signed up, filled out the necessary forms, and submitted a resume.
At District Court, there are no written opinions, and most of the issues presented are more or less "he said, she said" factual debates. Two people were in a car accident, and they have differing opinions of how it happened. I would estimate upwards of 70% of cases were pro se. So unfortunately, there wasn't a whole lot of vigorously debated pieces of evidence, closely contested procedural issues, or lengthy, moving, closing statements.
At the same time, there was a lot of "lawyering" going on. What do you do when your star witness shows up visibly drunk for court? How about when your client's own hospital records note that he was too drunk to control his own bladder, but you need to prove that the bartender violently (and negligently) pushed him out the door? At times like these, I got to see some lawyers put on a real show. A great example comes from one case, when the plaintiff had been caught in several lies during cross. She was becoming combative with both defense counsel and the judge. Rather than attempt to address these statements on re-direct, counsel simply rested, and during closing, calmly explained how it was clearly apparent that his witness was untrained, and therefore highly credible. It was effective. And no, they don't teach you that in law school. In law school, you ask for a recess of two weeks, write a memo, and prepare a detailed brief doted with case-law and statutes.
Another great piece of lawyering often came out of bail reviews, during which the public defender had seconds to interview a client and demonstrate their community ties, lack of flight risk, and lack of threat to public safety. On the other side, the state's attorney had only a paragraph statement of probable cause written by an arresting officer to base an argument for a strong and fair bail. Watching these lawyers work is a true thing of beauty. On each side is someone who passed on the opportunity for a huge salary to work instead for the public. The state is only one who can prosecute crimes in order to keep us all safe. And for many, the public defender is the only one protecting the accused's rights. This truly is what our government and society are based on. And worse, these people do this tirelessly, day in and day out. They are never noticed either, unless they mess up and a blogger picks up on it.
So I got to watch some lawyering during my internship, but the other hugely important benefit was the amount of networking. First of all, I am so incredibly lucky to have been placed with a judge who made it a point to introduce me to every single other judge, attorney, or clerk who came through his chambers. He would look the most high powered lawyer straight in the eye, and introduce me with a fancy sounding title.
And with that networking, I think the best networking out there will come from the personal relationship I was able to develop with My Judge. We were able to speak about legal matters as well as personal ones, and he took some serious time to mentor me on both a professional and personal level. We discussed study skills one minute, then discussed facebook, then terrible dates we had been on. I am fairly confident that I will be able to call on him as both a reference and source of advice in the future.
With my internship concluded, I will now sit and update my resume, get ready for school, and spend some time relaxing. But a huge part of me will really miss getting up early a few days a week to make sure my suit was looking right and head to the courthouse.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
A New Semester is Upon Us
Well, it is the first week of August, and therefore the first class assignments for UB Law have come out. Last year, while I was excited to get to work on my new career, the first assignments were lost on me. I have mentioned this several times previously here, but trying to read for law school before you have attended law school is a doomed undertaking.
Although I read the cases, took notes, and even tried to come up with a "brief" format, the first few class sessions were spent mostly writing word for word what the professor said, and simply replacing my prior, useless, notes.
This year, however, I am confident I will be able to get something out of the first assignments. Of course, the irony is that I have only minimal assignments in two of my classes, and no assignments in my three other classes!
First assignments also mean textbook assignments, so I spent this morning on Amazon. So far, three classes are completely taken care of for a little over $100. This is awesome.
What is not so awesome, is that my school, like an increasing number of colleges and universities, no longer has a school bookstore. Instead, we have a Barnes and Noble on campus. They have already declared that textbooks will not be available until a few days before class starts. They also have set aside only limited time to actually stop by and purchase your text books. Also, all the prices have gone up.
As for textbooks, the price increase is sort of a part of life anymore, and honestly, I don't mind buying heavily damaged or marked books online, as long as they have all the pages, so it doesn't really effect me. What kills me is that the UB mesh basketball shorts that used to be $15 are now $25. Hoodies are $65. Plain T-Shirts, $25. Come on, really? And the other awful thing about B&N college bookstores is that they don't have any retail books or prep books. If you are a large book chain, why not have a nice selection of leisure reading at least? Nope, just 25 or so that they are pushing. Why not carry a ton of supplement and prep materials? Nope, although there was a section of SAT prep books. Why, at a law campus, would one need a college admissions prep book? How about some Examples and Explanations?
Any new UBers, or simply first year law students, I have available the following texts, which I would let go cheap, as in under anything you would find online. I have Property (Dukeminier), Criminal Law (if you have Rochvarg), Contracts (Ayers and Speidel), Torts (Farnsworth and Grady), and Con Law (Barnett). Comment here and I will get in touch with you.
Although I read the cases, took notes, and even tried to come up with a "brief" format, the first few class sessions were spent mostly writing word for word what the professor said, and simply replacing my prior, useless, notes.
This year, however, I am confident I will be able to get something out of the first assignments. Of course, the irony is that I have only minimal assignments in two of my classes, and no assignments in my three other classes!
First assignments also mean textbook assignments, so I spent this morning on Amazon. So far, three classes are completely taken care of for a little over $100. This is awesome.
What is not so awesome, is that my school, like an increasing number of colleges and universities, no longer has a school bookstore. Instead, we have a Barnes and Noble on campus. They have already declared that textbooks will not be available until a few days before class starts. They also have set aside only limited time to actually stop by and purchase your text books. Also, all the prices have gone up.
As for textbooks, the price increase is sort of a part of life anymore, and honestly, I don't mind buying heavily damaged or marked books online, as long as they have all the pages, so it doesn't really effect me. What kills me is that the UB mesh basketball shorts that used to be $15 are now $25. Hoodies are $65. Plain T-Shirts, $25. Come on, really? And the other awful thing about B&N college bookstores is that they don't have any retail books or prep books. If you are a large book chain, why not have a nice selection of leisure reading at least? Nope, just 25 or so that they are pushing. Why not carry a ton of supplement and prep materials? Nope, although there was a section of SAT prep books. Why, at a law campus, would one need a college admissions prep book? How about some Examples and Explanations?
Any new UBers, or simply first year law students, I have available the following texts, which I would let go cheap, as in under anything you would find online. I have Property (Dukeminier), Criminal Law (if you have Rochvarg), Contracts (Ayers and Speidel), Torts (Farnsworth and Grady), and Con Law (Barnett). Comment here and I will get in touch with you.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Summer Reading
Recently, as My Judge has decided to take weeks off for his personal vacations, I have found myself with some blessedly free time. I have used this time to catch up on life tasks (using loan money for important bills such as rent and food) and do some light, fun reading.
First of all, I'll start with the good: A Civil Action
by Jonathan Harr. This is also a movie staring John Travolta and the father from 3rd Rock from the Sun. My Civ Pro teacher showed us clips during football season when she was too lazy to prep for class. The book, however, is a decent read for someone getting ready to start their first year of law school. It is light on legal principles, but heavy on the personal destruction of a lawyer. The beginning is laboriously slow and poorly written, but after 75 pages it picks up nicely and moves well to the finish. Anyone with an interest in litigation or torts might want to peruse this. This is a true story, and a solid piece of American legal history, something I think you should be able to talk about, or at least recognize.
Next, the Just Okay: May It Please the Court
, edited by Peter Irons and Stephanie Guitton. This book purports to contain 23 live recordings of the oral arguments of landmark Supreme Court cases. I was really, really excited by this book when I saw it on the used bookshelves. Instead, what you get is 5 pages of background introduction to the case, 2 pages of heavily edited transcript (with interruptions from the "Narrator" explaining what each argument means) and then a heavily edited 2 page decision. For an American, this book is invaluable, as it gives the arguments and reasoning behind cases such as Roe v. Wade, that everyone mentions but few really understand. For someone about to enter law school, this book has some value in being a primer for Con Law, and giving easy to digest opinions to practice reading. For someone with even a semester of law school behind them, this book is worthless. The arguments are edited so heavily that you don't get to see them develop, the Narrator just tells you, "Here, Justice Marshall asks about the limit of executive privilege." Then you read "Marshall: But sir, don't you think that extends the limit of executive privilege? Counsel: No, Your Honor, I would argue that it simply defines the outer limit." Well, thank goodness we got to hear it in their own words! The edited decisions are the same, they might as well just be summarized by the editors, since the chopped sentences full of ellipses don't give any flavor of the actual judicial process.
And finally, the terrible: The Tenth Justice
by Brad Meltzer. Quite possibly one of the worst books I have ever read. Staring a Supreme Court Clerk, the book starts off awesomely. The opening chapters discuss the clerk's role in shaping Supreme Court decisions by drafting the opinions, and assisting in review of certiori requests. The author discusses the power held by recent law school grads in careful phrasing to influence the way law is made for the entire country. Unfortunately, this lasts for about 100 pages, then it just turns into a crazy spy thriller type, with the Supreme Court becoming only the setting. While this isn't in itself bad, most John Grisham books do the same thing and I generally enjoy them, the problem is that this book does it terribly. One minute, the main character is a nerdy law school grad, the next minute he daringly fights off a trained assassin with a fire extinguisher. The assassin is a great character too, at first he is a sort of weaselly nerd who gets winded running a few blocks, later he kidnaps three characters and a federal marshall! Also, there is some great whodunnit intrigue that I was pretty genuinely mystified by, until the end when there was a "its all just a dream!" type explanation offered. Not recommended for anyone, unless you are on one of those committees that gives awards to awful literature, in which case you might check this one out.
One thing that happens when you inform your parents and other close, adult relatives (like your girlfriend's parents) is that people start buying you books that they think are related to law school. Having already read most of John Grisham's catalog, I have been fortunately spared that road. But others come through, and being a law student, and therefore capable of reading for 8+ hours straight, I have read most of them.
First of all, I'll start with the good: A Civil Action by Jonathan Harr. This is also a movie staring John Travolta and the father from 3rd Rock from the Sun. My Civ Pro teacher showed us clips during football season when she was too lazy to prep for class. The book, however, is a decent read for someone getting ready to start their first year of law school. It is light on legal principles, but heavy on the personal destruction of a lawyer. The beginning is laboriously slow and poorly written, but after 75 pages it picks up nicely and moves well to the finish. Anyone with an interest in litigation or torts might want to peruse this. This is a true story, and a solid piece of American legal history, something I think you should be able to talk about, or at least recognize.Next, the Just Okay: May It Please the Court, edited by Peter Irons and Stephanie Guitton. This book purports to contain 23 live recordings of the oral arguments of landmark Supreme Court cases. I was really, really excited by this book when I saw it on the used bookshelves. Instead, what you get is 5 pages of background introduction to the case, 2 pages of heavily edited transcript (with interruptions from the "Narrator" explaining what each argument means) and then a heavily edited 2 page decision. For an American, this book is invaluable, as it gives the arguments and reasoning behind cases such as Roe v. Wade, that everyone mentions but few really understand. For someone about to enter law school, this book has some value in being a primer for Con Law, and giving easy to digest opinions to practice reading. For someone with even a semester of law school behind them, this book is worthless. The arguments are edited so heavily that you don't get to see them develop, the Narrator just tells you, "Here, Justice Marshall asks about the limit of executive privilege." Then you read "Marshall: But sir, don't you think that extends the limit of executive privilege? Counsel: No, Your Honor, I would argue that it simply defines the outer limit." Well, thank goodness we got to hear it in their own words! The edited decisions are the same, they might as well just be summarized by the editors, since the chopped sentences full of ellipses don't give any flavor of the actual judicial process.And finally, the terrible: The Tenth Justice by Brad Meltzer. Quite possibly one of the worst books I have ever read. Staring a Supreme Court Clerk, the book starts off awesomely. The opening chapters discuss the clerk's role in shaping Supreme Court decisions by drafting the opinions, and assisting in review of certiori requests. The author discusses the power held by recent law school grads in careful phrasing to influence the way law is made for the entire country. Unfortunately, this lasts for about 100 pages, then it just turns into a crazy spy thriller type, with the Supreme Court becoming only the setting. While this isn't in itself bad, most John Grisham books do the same thing and I generally enjoy them, the problem is that this book does it terribly. One minute, the main character is a nerdy law school grad, the next minute he daringly fights off a trained assassin with a fire extinguisher. The assassin is a great character too, at first he is a sort of weaselly nerd who gets winded running a few blocks, later he kidnaps three characters and a federal marshall! Also, there is some great whodunnit intrigue that I was pretty genuinely mystified by, until the end when there was a "its all just a dream!" type explanation offered. Not recommended for anyone, unless you are on one of those committees that gives awards to awful literature, in which case you might check this one out.Thursday, July 15, 2010
10 Questions for Law Students (now with answers!)
Reading through my old posts, on July 11, 2009, I did a post called "10 Questions for Law Students" where I posted open questions to current law students. Although that post in particular received no comments, I was able to discover some answers on my own. Now that I have completed my first year of law school, I can answer all of those questions I had, for the benefit of you, the soon to be 1L.
Question 1: I only am scheduled for about 10-15 hours of class, as of now. I am wondering how accurate this is.
I originally guessed that it didn't matter, you spent about 40 hours per week at the school, regardless. For a 1L, this is both true and not true. Your scheduled class time is your class time. That's it. However, you will have small group TA sessions (at UB they are Law Scholar Sessions) probably once a week per class. I really recommend these when you first start out, especially since the TAs tend to share outlines, which as a 1L you don't know how to write. UB also had "orientation" every Tuesday during lunch for the entire first semester, but they always served pizza. In addition, there are some law school social or academic functions to go to, you will probably want to go to the "study tips" session, the "writing an exam" session, and pick a special interest law group to attend (you know, animal rights, international, IP, environmental).
So while on one hand, yes, what you see on your schedule is what you get, on the other hand, there are always other things coming up. But as a 1L you also will probably study at home, from the hours of 10PM - 2AM, a lot.
Question 2: Additionally, in college I was told to expect about 2 hours of work outside of class for each hour spent at class. Therefore 15 credit hours per week was assumed to have about 30 hours of work per week outside of class. Is there a commonly accepted ratio for law school?
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Two hours a week of work outside of class! As a 1L (or at least a first semester 1L) you will probably spend at least 4 hours a night reading and prepping for the next day. The big difference between undergrad and law school is that in law school, you can't slack off until the week before finals. You will quite literally spend 4 hours per day every day reading.
Question 3: And as a follow up, I found that I spent about 10 hours per week outside of class doing school work, the rest of the time I spent socializing, playing sports, Halo and Smash Bros, or doing volunteer and extra curricula. Plus I was employed all through college. How much free time can I expect?
First semester, almost none. Seriously, see family and friends now, go out and party, play videogames, because it gets really hard to balance your time once school starts. The good news is it is mostly because you haven't learned these skills yet. One thing I highly, highly recommend is finding the campus gym and going at least twice a week. I never did this first semester, and second semester, when I started going again, I felt so much better. Also, you can socialize, but no more all afternoon gaming sessions, or all night movie/pizza/beer binges, instead, you will learn to meet a few friends for dinner or lunch, because you know you have to go back and hit the books later.
Question 4: I have been told law school is uber competitive and there is no such thing as a study group since no one wants to help anyone get ahead. Is this true?
Yes and no. Yes, the law school grade curve literally puts people in rank, 1-70, in each class. Yes, there are some people who will not send you notes if you miss a class. Having said that, no one is deliberately sabotaging anyone else by sending bad notes, and I have found some really great study groups that have immensely improved my scores.
Question 5: Do professors really call on you at random all the time, or just on days when they don't have a full lecture planned?
Ok, I have written about this a few times, it isn't that bad. Also, each professor has a style. Some call on one or two people per class, and they have to know the entire case. Some professors call on 15-20 per class and just ask one or two questions. Some use shuffled cards, some use random numbers, some go alphabetical. You will get used to it, and survive it. However, expect to get called on, I have never had a professor go an entire class without calling on someone.
Question 6: My college roommate is now in medical school, and he reports that he is almost encouraged NOT to go to class but to instead download the notes and audio recording. Is this the case in law school?
No, in fact ABA rules allow only 5 absences per class. You will quickly discover, and be reminded during orientation, that there is a direct correlation between missed classes and lower grades.
Question 7: My other college roommate told me, "Law school is no different than college except you have to read every night." Fair assumption?
Sort of, except you are getting older, and therefore you have more and more "life" distractions. You can't hide away in the dorm and spend mom and dad's money. You can't plead youthful ignorance to missed deadlines. You have to start thinking about career choices, and really seriously consider this as the first step of becoming a lawyer. But you will also find that it is still "school."
Question 8: Take notes via laptop or pen and paper? (I'm leaning heavily towards pen and paper, besides, how do you not get distracted by Twitter/Facebook/Instant Messanger?)
I wrote about this for my school here, but I will just give the quick and dirty: Pen and paper for class notes, laptop for re-typed notes, outlines, and papers. Only email while in class.
Question 9: At every open house or accepted student's day I attended, or every blog I read by law students or admissions experts, incoming students always ask "What can I do to prepare?" and current students or experts always say, "Relax, enjoy life, spend time with friends and family, do fun reading, see a movie, sleep." Anyone else want to add an opinion?
Yes, do these things. Do not prepare. If anything, maybe brush up on structure of government type things. My summer 1L reading list post has some more on this, but seriously, relax.
Question 10: I am not sure what kind of law I would like to practice, or how I will ultimately use my law degree. Is this going to put me behind? Should I pick something that sounds good and go for it, or should I just wait and see if anything catches my eye? (I ask because I know that pretty much as soon as I start school I also need to be thinking about a summer job or internship, and start defining my career.)
Well, two things. On one hand, don't worry too much about this, because you don't really know what different types of legal practice really mean until you really get into school and the whole legal community. Secondly, really, especially first semester, your grades are very, very important. Focus on grades above all else, and you will be amazed how many doors will open for you. Beginning of second semester you will have time to evaluate your options, try to have as many as possible by getting good grades.
Question 1: I only am scheduled for about 10-15 hours of class, as of now. I am wondering how accurate this is.
I originally guessed that it didn't matter, you spent about 40 hours per week at the school, regardless. For a 1L, this is both true and not true. Your scheduled class time is your class time. That's it. However, you will have small group TA sessions (at UB they are Law Scholar Sessions) probably once a week per class. I really recommend these when you first start out, especially since the TAs tend to share outlines, which as a 1L you don't know how to write. UB also had "orientation" every Tuesday during lunch for the entire first semester, but they always served pizza. In addition, there are some law school social or academic functions to go to, you will probably want to go to the "study tips" session, the "writing an exam" session, and pick a special interest law group to attend (you know, animal rights, international, IP, environmental).
So while on one hand, yes, what you see on your schedule is what you get, on the other hand, there are always other things coming up. But as a 1L you also will probably study at home, from the hours of 10PM - 2AM, a lot.
Question 2: Additionally, in college I was told to expect about 2 hours of work outside of class for each hour spent at class. Therefore 15 credit hours per week was assumed to have about 30 hours of work per week outside of class. Is there a commonly accepted ratio for law school?
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Two hours a week of work outside of class! As a 1L (or at least a first semester 1L) you will probably spend at least 4 hours a night reading and prepping for the next day. The big difference between undergrad and law school is that in law school, you can't slack off until the week before finals. You will quite literally spend 4 hours per day every day reading.
Question 3: And as a follow up, I found that I spent about 10 hours per week outside of class doing school work, the rest of the time I spent socializing, playing sports, Halo and Smash Bros, or doing volunteer and extra curricula. Plus I was employed all through college. How much free time can I expect?
First semester, almost none. Seriously, see family and friends now, go out and party, play videogames, because it gets really hard to balance your time once school starts. The good news is it is mostly because you haven't learned these skills yet. One thing I highly, highly recommend is finding the campus gym and going at least twice a week. I never did this first semester, and second semester, when I started going again, I felt so much better. Also, you can socialize, but no more all afternoon gaming sessions, or all night movie/pizza/beer binges, instead, you will learn to meet a few friends for dinner or lunch, because you know you have to go back and hit the books later.
Question 4: I have been told law school is uber competitive and there is no such thing as a study group since no one wants to help anyone get ahead. Is this true?
Yes and no. Yes, the law school grade curve literally puts people in rank, 1-70, in each class. Yes, there are some people who will not send you notes if you miss a class. Having said that, no one is deliberately sabotaging anyone else by sending bad notes, and I have found some really great study groups that have immensely improved my scores.
Question 5: Do professors really call on you at random all the time, or just on days when they don't have a full lecture planned?
Ok, I have written about this a few times, it isn't that bad. Also, each professor has a style. Some call on one or two people per class, and they have to know the entire case. Some professors call on 15-20 per class and just ask one or two questions. Some use shuffled cards, some use random numbers, some go alphabetical. You will get used to it, and survive it. However, expect to get called on, I have never had a professor go an entire class without calling on someone.
Question 6: My college roommate is now in medical school, and he reports that he is almost encouraged NOT to go to class but to instead download the notes and audio recording. Is this the case in law school?
No, in fact ABA rules allow only 5 absences per class. You will quickly discover, and be reminded during orientation, that there is a direct correlation between missed classes and lower grades.
Question 7: My other college roommate told me, "Law school is no different than college except you have to read every night." Fair assumption?
Sort of, except you are getting older, and therefore you have more and more "life" distractions. You can't hide away in the dorm and spend mom and dad's money. You can't plead youthful ignorance to missed deadlines. You have to start thinking about career choices, and really seriously consider this as the first step of becoming a lawyer. But you will also find that it is still "school."
Question 8: Take notes via laptop or pen and paper? (I'm leaning heavily towards pen and paper, besides, how do you not get distracted by Twitter/Facebook/Instant Messanger?)
I wrote about this for my school here, but I will just give the quick and dirty: Pen and paper for class notes, laptop for re-typed notes, outlines, and papers. Only email while in class.
Question 9: At every open house or accepted student's day I attended, or every blog I read by law students or admissions experts, incoming students always ask "What can I do to prepare?" and current students or experts always say, "Relax, enjoy life, spend time with friends and family, do fun reading, see a movie, sleep." Anyone else want to add an opinion?
Yes, do these things. Do not prepare. If anything, maybe brush up on structure of government type things. My summer 1L reading list post has some more on this, but seriously, relax.
Question 10: I am not sure what kind of law I would like to practice, or how I will ultimately use my law degree. Is this going to put me behind? Should I pick something that sounds good and go for it, or should I just wait and see if anything catches my eye? (I ask because I know that pretty much as soon as I start school I also need to be thinking about a summer job or internship, and start defining my career.)
Well, two things. On one hand, don't worry too much about this, because you don't really know what different types of legal practice really mean until you really get into school and the whole legal community. Secondly, really, especially first semester, your grades are very, very important. Focus on grades above all else, and you will be amazed how many doors will open for you. Beginning of second semester you will have time to evaluate your options, try to have as many as possible by getting good grades.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Help?
To all readers who are currently in law school, as well as those who may have attended fairly recently, I am soliciting comments. I was thinking about putting together a series of posts about law school exams, including how to prepare, what to expect, and so on. Sort of a "What to Expect When You're Expecting (to Fail Your Torts Final)." I am looking for tips that are general, such as outline/ study group advice, and things that are more specific, such as "In Torts, just go ahead and throw out any possible answers that might exist, no matter how remote, but in K, you probably want to stick to the most likely UCC sections."
I'm thinking of focusing on the typical first year/bar tested type courses... K, Con Law, Civ Pro, Torts, Property. The idea is to write these now while I have some free time, and run them around exam time for all those lucky first years, and when I don't necessarily have time to sit and write original posts...
If you feel like sharing, comments, or email. I'll give credit...
I'm thinking of focusing on the typical first year/bar tested type courses... K, Con Law, Civ Pro, Torts, Property. The idea is to write these now while I have some free time, and run them around exam time for all those lucky first years, and when I don't necessarily have time to sit and write original posts...
If you feel like sharing, comments, or email. I'll give credit...
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Internship Update
Well, as noted before I have been doing some research and planning work for my internship. This week is the deadline of the first draft, and naturally as an over-eager-over-achiever 1L I pulled an all nighter making sure this was the best collection of possibly related materials My Judge has ever seen.
Then I went to email it, and realized that the PDF file is about 25MB, and my school's email server only sends up to 20MB...
Additionally, I already know My Judge's laptop only has the memory to open 3 of his wedding pictures before requiring a restart. I also know that I need to hire his photographer when I get married (after meeting the girl of my dreams, graduating law school, and making tons of money, so, sometime around 2054).
"But Judge, I swear, it is a beautiful pdf, with bookmarks! and a table of contents! and annotations explaining what each document is so you don't have to read it yourself but can act like you have when someone on the panel talks about it!"
In other news, it is supposed to be 103 today in Baltimore. I'll let you know what that feels like in a suit.
Then I went to email it, and realized that the PDF file is about 25MB, and my school's email server only sends up to 20MB...
Additionally, I already know My Judge's laptop only has the memory to open 3 of his wedding pictures before requiring a restart. I also know that I need to hire his photographer when I get married (after meeting the girl of my dreams, graduating law school, and making tons of money, so, sometime around 2054).
"But Judge, I swear, it is a beautiful pdf, with bookmarks! and a table of contents! and annotations explaining what each document is so you don't have to read it yourself but can act like you have when someone on the panel talks about it!"
In other news, it is supposed to be 103 today in Baltimore. I'll let you know what that feels like in a suit.
Monday, June 21, 2010
My "F" Story: Part 2, The Effects
If you haven't read Part 1, the story about how I almost received an F, please check it out now.
Now, Part 2, is the symptoms of a law student with a failing grade.
1 - It started with that awful "world is spinning, I feel faint, why can't I get enough air"feeling that is probably best categorized as shock. I think that is the best way to describe it.
2 - Unfortunately, the feeling of shock has only just hit when the second symptom sets in. Almost as soon as I saw the grade, I started thinking of ways to hide it. Maybe this is denial, but I think it has more to do with shame. I really didn't want anyone to know about it, more than I didn't want to admit it to myself. Actually, the odd thing is, I think I accepted it almost immediately.
3 - The "Happy Face" then comes into play, at least if you are in a situation like mine where you can't escape other people. And of course, Murphy's Law sets in. First of all, I am actually home with my parents. I go home once or twice a year, for one or two days at a time. What are the odds? Then, of course, my mom calls me down for dinner, and law school comes up during dinner. Then, to top it all off, my dad decides he wants to sit on the back porch and have a cigar with me after dinner (which I wasn't about to turn down) and of course the conversation turns straight to "What might you do with your career? Where do you want to go from here?"
4 - The next step, at least for me, was a feeling of extreme failure. It really stung that I might actually have failed a class, and what made it worse, was I really tried. I put in a ton of effort, took my studies seriously, and felt proud about them. I started thinking that, although it sounds coy, I was a failure.
5 - About this time I was arriving back in Baltimore, and I did get into the "I need to fight this!" kick. I counted out my papers, saw that I did well, knew there must be a mistake. I did my research, got my facts together, gathered evidence. Then I started emailing and calling people who I thought could help me. This actually was a really good step. Unfortunately it all happened Friday afternoon, and none of the people I called or emailed were in their offices.
6 - This is when it got really bad. I stopped being able to sleep, at all. When I did drift off for a few moments, I kept waking up to nightmares. I was wearing my best suit. I walk into a an office. I sit down, smile, look confident. "So, I have reviewed your resume, but I have to ask you, what about this F you received in ITA?" I try to explain... the curve... tough teacher... learned a lot... poor program... "Ok, but how is that different from any other day in court? You can do perfectly passable work, but if opposing counsel does better, and moves the curve up, you lose." Then I wake up.
7 - Along this time, another really surreal thing kept happening. I kept trying to make plans for my future. Well, I can always go back into Psych Rehab. Maybe I will just become a full time bartender. I suppose I could try and transfer, but where can I transfer too?
8 - The worst part was, I couldn't shake these feelings. When I went to my internship Monday morning, My Judge asked me a few times how my weekend was. He is an awesome guy and will actually remember things I have told him the week before, but asked a few times. I didn't want to say anything though, imagine how disappointed he would be in me.
9 - On lunch break I get the call from Academic Support, it looks like there is an error and I passed. I hang up the phone and cry.
10 - On getting back to court, My Judge wants to know where I got lunch. I tell him Burger King. He wants to know who I "was with" at lunch. I tell him no one, but I found out I didn't fail. He admonishes me for not telling him in the morning. He then proceeds to spend 45 minutes counseling me on success, hard work, and what is really important.
Now, Part 2, is the symptoms of a law student with a failing grade.
1 - It started with that awful "world is spinning, I feel faint, why can't I get enough air"feeling that is probably best categorized as shock. I think that is the best way to describe it.
2 - Unfortunately, the feeling of shock has only just hit when the second symptom sets in. Almost as soon as I saw the grade, I started thinking of ways to hide it. Maybe this is denial, but I think it has more to do with shame. I really didn't want anyone to know about it, more than I didn't want to admit it to myself. Actually, the odd thing is, I think I accepted it almost immediately.
3 - The "Happy Face" then comes into play, at least if you are in a situation like mine where you can't escape other people. And of course, Murphy's Law sets in. First of all, I am actually home with my parents. I go home once or twice a year, for one or two days at a time. What are the odds? Then, of course, my mom calls me down for dinner, and law school comes up during dinner. Then, to top it all off, my dad decides he wants to sit on the back porch and have a cigar with me after dinner (which I wasn't about to turn down) and of course the conversation turns straight to "What might you do with your career? Where do you want to go from here?"
4 - The next step, at least for me, was a feeling of extreme failure. It really stung that I might actually have failed a class, and what made it worse, was I really tried. I put in a ton of effort, took my studies seriously, and felt proud about them. I started thinking that, although it sounds coy, I was a failure.
5 - About this time I was arriving back in Baltimore, and I did get into the "I need to fight this!" kick. I counted out my papers, saw that I did well, knew there must be a mistake. I did my research, got my facts together, gathered evidence. Then I started emailing and calling people who I thought could help me. This actually was a really good step. Unfortunately it all happened Friday afternoon, and none of the people I called or emailed were in their offices.
6 - This is when it got really bad. I stopped being able to sleep, at all. When I did drift off for a few moments, I kept waking up to nightmares. I was wearing my best suit. I walk into a an office. I sit down, smile, look confident. "So, I have reviewed your resume, but I have to ask you, what about this F you received in ITA?" I try to explain... the curve... tough teacher... learned a lot... poor program... "Ok, but how is that different from any other day in court? You can do perfectly passable work, but if opposing counsel does better, and moves the curve up, you lose." Then I wake up.
7 - Along this time, another really surreal thing kept happening. I kept trying to make plans for my future. Well, I can always go back into Psych Rehab. Maybe I will just become a full time bartender. I suppose I could try and transfer, but where can I transfer too?
8 - The worst part was, I couldn't shake these feelings. When I went to my internship Monday morning, My Judge asked me a few times how my weekend was. He is an awesome guy and will actually remember things I have told him the week before, but asked a few times. I didn't want to say anything though, imagine how disappointed he would be in me.
9 - On lunch break I get the call from Academic Support, it looks like there is an error and I passed. I hang up the phone and cry.
10 - On getting back to court, My Judge wants to know where I got lunch. I tell him Burger King. He wants to know who I "was with" at lunch. I tell him no one, but I found out I didn't fail. He admonishes me for not telling him in the morning. He then proceeds to spend 45 minutes counseling me on success, hard work, and what is really important.
"If there is one thing I have learned in my professional career, it is that with hard work ultimately you can find success, even in spite of your own best efforts to the contrary."
11 - That Friday, I receive an official grade change letter from UB. The rest of my grades go up as well. On the next Monday, My Judge asks me about it, I tell him. He introduces me to the Head Administrative Judge, the Governor's wife, and an Assistant State's Attorney with 30 years experience as having "first year grades that would make us all jealous." Probably hyperbole, but they don't know that!
I don't know how this sounds to the rest of you. About right? Did I over react? Under react? Post 3 is going to be a philosophical discussion of grades and their inflated importance, but in the meantime, does anyone want to share their own stories?
Friday, June 18, 2010
My "F" Story: Part 1, The Story
Be warned, this one is going to be a little wordy...
We all know law school is competitive, and grades are not just letters, but bloody student gladiatorial events. This post is about them. And what happens when they go bad.
I received my first semester grades, and they weren't good, but weren't horrific either. They did, immediately, close a ton of doors for me. In fact, they slammed shut in my face. I met with someone in career development, and she reviewed my resume, and gave me a serious talk and plan on how to improve. Two things stood out: Decide why you are here, and pick up your grades.
Second semester I worked a lot harder, and took school a lot more seriously. I really treated it like a 9-5 (or 7-3), joined study groups, and got back in the gym. This was an amazing experience, which I blogged for UB about. For finals, I studied religiously with one particular study partner, whom I call "Law School Buddy." We worked through hypos, did practice problems, and generally encouraged each other. I was feeling really really good about myself when finals actually got underway.
I took my finals, and felt confident that I did better, but of course it is law school, you never can truly feel great about a final. School ended, I started my internship, and took a brief vacation to my parents house. While there one night, on a whim I decided to check my grades. My overall semester GPA was a 1.3.
What
The
$#%^
When my heart started beating again, I wincingly opened the detailed report. I had two courses with grades, one read "F." Then my mom yelled for dinner. I closed the browser and headed downstairs, trying to put it out of my mind, since I had nothing except for a change of clothes and my computer with me.
On arriving back in Baltimore, I went through my paperwork. The class I had the F in was my Introduction to Advocacy class, where you write briefs, do research reports, and complete oral arguments. I had all my work, so I tallied up my grades, and was clearly passing. I went on Facebook, contacted Moot Court Teammate (a good friend, so I can generally trust her to be honest about things like grades).
Me: Hey
Moot Court Teammate: Hey, I saw your message, what's up?
Me: Not much, how is summer?
MCT: Good, did you survive the ITA B.S.?
Me: Uh, what do you mean?
MCT: The curve screwed a lot of people over.
Me: Like, over 20 points lower?
MCT: Yeah, pretty much.
Me: I have to go throw up.
MCT: I saw Classmate in court today.
Oh crap, I thought, this is really happening. ITA at UB is a terrible, terrible program. The idea behind it is awful, and the implementation is ever worse, but that is beside the point. I read the handbook, and of course ITA isn't listed (all the first year required courses have different penalties for failing). I email my professor, and randomly the Director of Academic Support. Email to professor is professional, email to DoAS is professional, but I also mention my shock, horror, and sense of doom.
Well, DoAS kicked major behind on this, and got back to me the next day. She informed me that I had not handed in my final paper. You know, the 30 PAGE BRIEF WORTH 40% of the final grade. This shocked me. I stood in line for (no joke) an hour and fifteen minutes to hand that sucker in, have my name checked off a list, my student ID verified, and make sure my brief was correctly packaged for anonymous grading. I told DoAS that I had it in my hand, with an official UB grade sheet. DoAS called my professor, who verified my grade.
Needless to say, my only emotion was elation. But this is just the story, the facts, the what happened. Enjoy it for what it is, because in my next post or two, I am going to try to do some hard, honest writing about grades, and how they really make you feel. I am generally a pretty unflappable guy, I famously directed traffic at an amusement park accident while the "certified nurse" had a panic attack. But let me tell you... an F in law school... man...
We all know law school is competitive, and grades are not just letters, but bloody student gladiatorial events. This post is about them. And what happens when they go bad.
I received my first semester grades, and they weren't good, but weren't horrific either. They did, immediately, close a ton of doors for me. In fact, they slammed shut in my face. I met with someone in career development, and she reviewed my resume, and gave me a serious talk and plan on how to improve. Two things stood out: Decide why you are here, and pick up your grades.
Second semester I worked a lot harder, and took school a lot more seriously. I really treated it like a 9-5 (or 7-3), joined study groups, and got back in the gym. This was an amazing experience, which I blogged for UB about. For finals, I studied religiously with one particular study partner, whom I call "Law School Buddy." We worked through hypos, did practice problems, and generally encouraged each other. I was feeling really really good about myself when finals actually got underway.
I took my finals, and felt confident that I did better, but of course it is law school, you never can truly feel great about a final. School ended, I started my internship, and took a brief vacation to my parents house. While there one night, on a whim I decided to check my grades. My overall semester GPA was a 1.3.
What
The
$#%^
When my heart started beating again, I wincingly opened the detailed report. I had two courses with grades, one read "F." Then my mom yelled for dinner. I closed the browser and headed downstairs, trying to put it out of my mind, since I had nothing except for a change of clothes and my computer with me.
On arriving back in Baltimore, I went through my paperwork. The class I had the F in was my Introduction to Advocacy class, where you write briefs, do research reports, and complete oral arguments. I had all my work, so I tallied up my grades, and was clearly passing. I went on Facebook, contacted Moot Court Teammate (a good friend, so I can generally trust her to be honest about things like grades).
Me: Hey
Moot Court Teammate: Hey, I saw your message, what's up?
Me: Not much, how is summer?
MCT: Good, did you survive the ITA B.S.?
Me: Uh, what do you mean?
MCT: The curve screwed a lot of people over.
Me: Like, over 20 points lower?
MCT: Yeah, pretty much.
Me: I have to go throw up.
MCT: I saw Classmate in court today.
Oh crap, I thought, this is really happening. ITA at UB is a terrible, terrible program. The idea behind it is awful, and the implementation is ever worse, but that is beside the point. I read the handbook, and of course ITA isn't listed (all the first year required courses have different penalties for failing). I email my professor, and randomly the Director of Academic Support. Email to professor is professional, email to DoAS is professional, but I also mention my shock, horror, and sense of doom.
Well, DoAS kicked major behind on this, and got back to me the next day. She informed me that I had not handed in my final paper. You know, the 30 PAGE BRIEF WORTH 40% of the final grade. This shocked me. I stood in line for (no joke) an hour and fifteen minutes to hand that sucker in, have my name checked off a list, my student ID verified, and make sure my brief was correctly packaged for anonymous grading. I told DoAS that I had it in my hand, with an official UB grade sheet. DoAS called my professor, who verified my grade.
Needless to say, my only emotion was elation. But this is just the story, the facts, the what happened. Enjoy it for what it is, because in my next post or two, I am going to try to do some hard, honest writing about grades, and how they really make you feel. I am generally a pretty unflappable guy, I famously directed traffic at an amusement park accident while the "certified nurse" had a panic attack. But let me tell you... an F in law school... man...
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Politicians Behaving Awesomely
I must confess, that despite my law school habits, I generally am not a huge fan of current politics. I say informed, and am able to articulate my own opinions, and vote accordingly, but I personally like to keep a low profile in this area.
Maryland politics, my adoptive home, are slowly unraveling themselves to me, which is nice, but I still don't know all the players and arenas. So at my internship this week, something really struck me. A gentleman brought suit against the State, alleging negligence on the part of the police and other administrative agencies. I am not going to go very far into detail, but it was not a police brutality case, it was more along the lines of the police lawfully taking property into custody, but then either stealing it, allowing it to be stolen, or simply losing it. At least, that is what this man's complaint alleges.
Well, the value of the property was pretty high, but still small claims court. And this man is not well versed in the law, however defense counsel for the State quite obviously is. So as his case is called, a stately dressed woman heads up to the trial table, but doesn't introduce herself as record, as per usual. My Judge goes through the opening, and it turns out that due to the vast amount of witnesses, the case needs to be specially set.
After the case, sitting in My Judge's chambers, we are discussing the case (mostly because defense counsel mentioned through proffer that she does not believe Res Ipsa Loquitur applies. My Judge asked me my opinion, and I told him I thought it was a tough argument and gave my reasons, and to which he replied "Nice work" which I am still feeling good about.
But more importantly, he explained that the woman assisting the plaintiff is a city council woman. She apparently entered herself in writing as a interested party, stating that this is one of her constituents, and since it is important to him, it is important to her. And therefore, she spent a half day in court today, and will be spending another half day when the case is reset.
That really struck me. First of all, she is a city council woman GOING UP AGAINST THE STATE, including the MAYOR'S OFFICE and THE CHIEF OF POLICE. There is no way she is making friends by doing this. Bad politics? Sure sounds like it. But at the same time, isn't that why we vote for people? To represent our rights, against others as necessary, whether or not other people like it? The point of a democratic government is to be able to have officials tied to their constituents, not their other government cronies.
And I am sure this may be a bit of a publicity stunt. I am sure this council woman will remind people of this come election season. Even with that, it was authentic. She spent from 1-5 in the courtroom today, and will spend at least that long again. And she was doing real, useful help for this man, who is going up against the powerful state.
A refreshing look at politics.
Maryland politics, my adoptive home, are slowly unraveling themselves to me, which is nice, but I still don't know all the players and arenas. So at my internship this week, something really struck me. A gentleman brought suit against the State, alleging negligence on the part of the police and other administrative agencies. I am not going to go very far into detail, but it was not a police brutality case, it was more along the lines of the police lawfully taking property into custody, but then either stealing it, allowing it to be stolen, or simply losing it. At least, that is what this man's complaint alleges.
Well, the value of the property was pretty high, but still small claims court. And this man is not well versed in the law, however defense counsel for the State quite obviously is. So as his case is called, a stately dressed woman heads up to the trial table, but doesn't introduce herself as record, as per usual. My Judge goes through the opening, and it turns out that due to the vast amount of witnesses, the case needs to be specially set.
After the case, sitting in My Judge's chambers, we are discussing the case (mostly because defense counsel mentioned through proffer that she does not believe Res Ipsa Loquitur applies. My Judge asked me my opinion, and I told him I thought it was a tough argument and gave my reasons, and to which he replied "Nice work" which I am still feeling good about.
But more importantly, he explained that the woman assisting the plaintiff is a city council woman. She apparently entered herself in writing as a interested party, stating that this is one of her constituents, and since it is important to him, it is important to her. And therefore, she spent a half day in court today, and will be spending another half day when the case is reset.
That really struck me. First of all, she is a city council woman GOING UP AGAINST THE STATE, including the MAYOR'S OFFICE and THE CHIEF OF POLICE. There is no way she is making friends by doing this. Bad politics? Sure sounds like it. But at the same time, isn't that why we vote for people? To represent our rights, against others as necessary, whether or not other people like it? The point of a democratic government is to be able to have officials tied to their constituents, not their other government cronies.
And I am sure this may be a bit of a publicity stunt. I am sure this council woman will remind people of this come election season. Even with that, it was authentic. She spent from 1-5 in the courtroom today, and will spend at least that long again. And she was doing real, useful help for this man, who is going up against the powerful state.
A refreshing look at politics.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
You Can't Make This Stuff Up
(You Can't Make This Stuff Up is a series of articles detailing the "human" side of my legal experience. These will be stories that have a strong personal element, be it funny, touching, or just plain bizarre. You can read more of them by using the label "YCMTSU")
For the law journal write on, the lead case dealt primarily with Fourth Amendment issues, including the police's ability to obtain a DNA sample from anyone taken into police custody. It was a Maryland case, and the UB write on rules state that you can cite to any case that the lead case cites.
One of the cases cited by the lead case involved the seizure of illegal drugs during an arrest. The police indicated that an informant had told them the suspect kept the drugs "between his cheeks," clearly indicating his backside. The police followed the suspect and the informant to an abandoned car wash, where an illegal transaction occurred. While effectuating the arrest, an officer seized evidence from, well, "between the suspect's cheeks." Later, the suspect argued that these were "not in plain sight" and therefore, required a warrant.
While I am not fully versed in the relative merits of this argument, the discussion never got very deep. On direct examination, the lead detective in the case testified that the baggie the drugs were contained in was visible to the naked eye due to the suspect wearing his pants very low. This alone is comedy gold, now you know why your mother always tells you to pick up your pants! Not only is it classy dressing, but it also can protect you from warrant-less search and seizure.
The key laugh out loud moment, however, came in the last paragraph of the opinion, in which the judge noted, "Perhaps if he didn't want these private areas of his body subjected to police search, he shouldn't have displayed them to the general public."
And that, my friends, is valid Maryland case law.
For the law journal write on, the lead case dealt primarily with Fourth Amendment issues, including the police's ability to obtain a DNA sample from anyone taken into police custody. It was a Maryland case, and the UB write on rules state that you can cite to any case that the lead case cites.
One of the cases cited by the lead case involved the seizure of illegal drugs during an arrest. The police indicated that an informant had told them the suspect kept the drugs "between his cheeks," clearly indicating his backside. The police followed the suspect and the informant to an abandoned car wash, where an illegal transaction occurred. While effectuating the arrest, an officer seized evidence from, well, "between the suspect's cheeks." Later, the suspect argued that these were "not in plain sight" and therefore, required a warrant.
While I am not fully versed in the relative merits of this argument, the discussion never got very deep. On direct examination, the lead detective in the case testified that the baggie the drugs were contained in was visible to the naked eye due to the suspect wearing his pants very low. This alone is comedy gold, now you know why your mother always tells you to pick up your pants! Not only is it classy dressing, but it also can protect you from warrant-less search and seizure.
The key laugh out loud moment, however, came in the last paragraph of the opinion, in which the judge noted, "Perhaps if he didn't want these private areas of his body subjected to police search, he shouldn't have displayed them to the general public."
And that, my friends, is valid Maryland case law.
There is no summary judgment at district court
Who knew? But, after having reviewed the Maryland Rules of Civil Procedure, yes, it is true, there is no summary judgment in district court. See all these useful things I am learning during my internship?
On a more serious note, this does directly relate to my internship. There also are no real written opinions, and very few questions of substantive law at district court. Therefore, while I get to see a lot, and I am actually learning a ton, I don't do much in the way of "work" for My Judge. So far the most important project I have completed successfully updating My Judge's trial manual with the past two years worth of supplements and changes.
Therefore, I was really, really excited when he very seriously told me he had a month long project for me to work on. And it involves LEGAL RESEARCH. So I happily ran to school the very next day, and printed out a few hundred cases, and dug into my undergrad days to find some scholarly journals of a non-legal nature, and began reading.
It is also amazing how much more excited you get about legal work when you aren't having it shoved forcibly down your throat 6 days a week. It's really refreshing.
On a more serious note, this does directly relate to my internship. There also are no real written opinions, and very few questions of substantive law at district court. Therefore, while I get to see a lot, and I am actually learning a ton, I don't do much in the way of "work" for My Judge. So far the most important project I have completed successfully updating My Judge's trial manual with the past two years worth of supplements and changes.
Therefore, I was really, really excited when he very seriously told me he had a month long project for me to work on. And it involves LEGAL RESEARCH. So I happily ran to school the very next day, and printed out a few hundred cases, and dug into my undergrad days to find some scholarly journals of a non-legal nature, and began reading.
It is also amazing how much more excited you get about legal work when you aren't having it shoved forcibly down your throat 6 days a week. It's really refreshing.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
BUY MY STUFF!!!
I am selling some of my used textbooks that I no longer need. I have them listed on Half.com and Ebay, but I would also be more than willing to sell them at a deep discount to a reader of this blog (additionally we can cut out the middle man).
The ones I have are:
Criminal Law by Cook, Malone, Marcus, and Moohr. I have the Sixth Edition. This book isn't very widely used because it has typos, classes generally used the revised 7th edition. However, as my Criminal Law professor pointed out, both books have the same pagination, so they can be used interchangeably. The only real errors are things like incorrect citations and other small errors. My copy is in near perfect condition, the only marks are where I wrote my name on the inside front cover, as well as the pages of one or two reading assignments.
Studies in Contract Law by Ayers and Speidel. 7th Edition. This book is a very common first year K book, I used it both semesters for Contracts I and II. I bought my copy used, and it is in rough shape. It is heavily marked and has some coffee stains. I didn't mark it or cause the coffee stains, the previous owner did, so it goes to show that the book is entirely readable. If you are the type that doesn't mind other people's underlining, you can pick up my copy cheap.
Torts: Cases and Questions by Farnsworth and Grady. Second Edition. My copy is in near perfect condition, I bought it new, used it one semester. Only mark is my name on the inside front cover. Also, the print on the spine is rubbed off a bit.
If you think you are interested, either hit me up in the comments or check out my profile which should provide an attached email address. I can provide pictures and ISBN numbers if you want to make absolutely certain you are getting the right book. I would probably ship them media mail, but if you want I can expedite it.
As stated above, I will provide a deep discount to a reader of this blog, and please don't hesitate to forward to any of your 1L friends.
The ones I have are:
Criminal Law by Cook, Malone, Marcus, and Moohr. I have the Sixth Edition. This book isn't very widely used because it has typos, classes generally used the revised 7th edition. However, as my Criminal Law professor pointed out, both books have the same pagination, so they can be used interchangeably. The only real errors are things like incorrect citations and other small errors. My copy is in near perfect condition, the only marks are where I wrote my name on the inside front cover, as well as the pages of one or two reading assignments.
Studies in Contract Law by Ayers and Speidel. 7th Edition. This book is a very common first year K book, I used it both semesters for Contracts I and II. I bought my copy used, and it is in rough shape. It is heavily marked and has some coffee stains. I didn't mark it or cause the coffee stains, the previous owner did, so it goes to show that the book is entirely readable. If you are the type that doesn't mind other people's underlining, you can pick up my copy cheap.
Torts: Cases and Questions by Farnsworth and Grady. Second Edition. My copy is in near perfect condition, I bought it new, used it one semester. Only mark is my name on the inside front cover. Also, the print on the spine is rubbed off a bit.
If you think you are interested, either hit me up in the comments or check out my profile which should provide an attached email address. I can provide pictures and ISBN numbers if you want to make absolutely certain you are getting the right book. I would probably ship them media mail, but if you want I can expedite it.
As stated above, I will provide a deep discount to a reader of this blog, and please don't hesitate to forward to any of your 1L friends.
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Internship Update
My summer internship is in full swing. I am currently doing two days a week with a district court judge. So far, this has been an amazing experience. Although there is not very much substantive legal work, as there are no real opinions to be drafted, I am so far learning a lot. For some reason, My Judge has seemingly endless time to explain everything he does throughout the day to me, including certain facts that his decisions turn on. Also, he makes it a point to introduce me to tons of lawyers and other judges each time an opportunity presents itself.
It isn't paid, of course, so I have been spending the rest of my time looking for work... but nonetheless I seriously can't say enough about how awesome this opportunity is. And don't worry, there are plenty of great stories associated with it that I will be sharing.
It isn't paid, of course, so I have been spending the rest of my time looking for work... but nonetheless I seriously can't say enough about how awesome this opportunity is. And don't worry, there are plenty of great stories associated with it that I will be sharing.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Law Journal Journal: Part 2
Well, part two is here super fast. I have had some time to do some writing, fortunately. If you remember from Law Journal Journal: Part 1, I spent some time goofing off after finals, started on the write on, then regretted it but discovered I was too heavily invested to quit, then pulled an all nighter to get it ready to go.
It is now about 3:00PM, the day it is due. The deadline is 6:00PM, at the law school library.
Also, please note that each competition packet consists of your casenote (20 pages), the grade release form (1 page) and the official entry form (1 page). You must have seven copies of each for each journal you are trying out for, there are 4 total. You also must do one bluebook editing exercise (4 pages) for each journal you want to try out for, additionally, all the edits must be in red ink. So as you can see, just trying out for one journal requires some 150 copies...
Ok, 3:00PM: Self-imposed deadline hits, I save, email myself a copy, put a copy on my flash drive, get dressed, and head out the door.
3:15PM: I arrive at Rite-Aid, where I purchase an energy drink and red pens. I select a "variety pack" that has one red pen, one blue pen, and one black pen. This is important later.
3:30PM: I arrive at school, having downed the energy drink, and head to the computer lab. I opt to avoid the law library lab, and head instead for the general purpose one.
3:32PM: There are four people in the lab, all working on the casenote. I nod hello, and begin working. Of course, as soon as I pull up my paper, I begin to notice errors, and start editing. Again.
4:00PM: My next self-imposed deadline passes, so I stop what I am doing and hit print. The printer is jammed...I poke around inside the door for a few minutes, but it seems hopeless. Fortunately, there is a second printer in the room, but that one is tied up running off 28 copies for one of my classmates.
4:05PM: Much to my classmates chagrin, my paper somehow squeaks out between copies of hers. I grab it and run.
4:20PM: I find parking near the UPS store.
4:21PM: I discover the UPS store closes early on Sundays.
4:22PM: I discover the MailBoxes Etc. store closes early on Sundays.
4:23PM: I discover the independent printing and shipping store closes early on Sundays.
4:35PM: I arrive, dripping sweat, at the FedEx store. They are open until 8 on Sundays. I purchase envelopes and begin making copies. While the copy machine is running, I start to fill out my bluebook exercises. I have already done 8 of the 10, so I only have to do the remaining 2, and then begin copying them.
4:36PM: I open my new red pen, and notice that it is only 1.5 inches long, and "mini" model.
4:37PM: I complete the next blue book exercise.
4:38PM: The red pen stops writing. I shake it, I hold it between my fingers, I write fast scribbles in my notebook, I suck on it, nothing. I take it apart. Nothing.
4:40PM: I am informed that FedEx only sells blue and black pens.
4:41PM: I arrive at the CVS. The door is locked. The sign says open until 5. An elderly woman with a walker comes up behind me. She begins hitting the door. Apparently she has prescriptions to pick up. The CVS employee comes to the door and gestures that it is closed. I point to the sticker on the window that says open until 5. He runs his finger under his neck in a gesture that many use to mean "You are dead." I wonder if maybe he is talking about the woman yelling about her "blood medications." I attempt to simply force the door open. The police officer tells me to stop.
4:50PM: I stop off at my car. Inside, I frantically look for a red pen (I usually tons of pens in my car) but for some reason my car is really clean on the inside. I remind myself to later see if it was maybe broken into recently.
4:53PM: In pure desperation, as only a law student knows how to, I take the pen apart, and bite the ink cartridge. Sticky, sweet, ink runs all over my mouth. I frantically try to dip the tip of other pens in the ink and write with it, quill style. It doesn't work. I try dragging the broken ink cartridge across the paper. It works, but is mostly messy.
4:55PM: I run back to FedEx, asking everyone along the way if they have a red pen. For some reason, people won't even talk to me.
5:01PM: Back at FedEx, I ask everyone in the store if they have a red pen. The cashier, who I asked for one from before, tells me to leave the other customers alone.
5:02PM: I complete the last editing exercise in black ink.
5:15PM: I make all my copies, and begin stuffing envelopes.
5:16PM: I discover FedEx has the most amazing stapler ever. Seriously, this thing drives right through hundreds of pages with no effort.
5:35PM: I approach the register, and send my packets in, certified mail. I ask the clerk about 15 times if he can make sure it gets postmarked BEFORE 6. He assures me it will.
5:43PM: I hand over $60...
5:44PM: Everything is postmarked, sealed, and will be on its way. I am done.
5:52PM: Sitting in my car, I adjust the rearview mirror that was knocked about during my frantic search for a pen. I discover that I have red ink literally running down my chin, and it is caked into my teeth.
6:13PM: After chewing two entire packs of gum, I call law school buddy. Neither of us form coherent sentences, but the general consensus is "never again."
6:14PM: I drive home, go through two toothbrushes and the last half of my giant bottle of listerene, and still tasting ink, collapse into bed.
It is now about 3:00PM, the day it is due. The deadline is 6:00PM, at the law school library.
Also, please note that each competition packet consists of your casenote (20 pages), the grade release form (1 page) and the official entry form (1 page). You must have seven copies of each for each journal you are trying out for, there are 4 total. You also must do one bluebook editing exercise (4 pages) for each journal you want to try out for, additionally, all the edits must be in red ink. So as you can see, just trying out for one journal requires some 150 copies...
Ok, 3:00PM: Self-imposed deadline hits, I save, email myself a copy, put a copy on my flash drive, get dressed, and head out the door.
3:15PM: I arrive at Rite-Aid, where I purchase an energy drink and red pens. I select a "variety pack" that has one red pen, one blue pen, and one black pen. This is important later.
3:30PM: I arrive at school, having downed the energy drink, and head to the computer lab. I opt to avoid the law library lab, and head instead for the general purpose one.
3:32PM: There are four people in the lab, all working on the casenote. I nod hello, and begin working. Of course, as soon as I pull up my paper, I begin to notice errors, and start editing. Again.
4:00PM: My next self-imposed deadline passes, so I stop what I am doing and hit print. The printer is jammed...I poke around inside the door for a few minutes, but it seems hopeless. Fortunately, there is a second printer in the room, but that one is tied up running off 28 copies for one of my classmates.
4:05PM: Much to my classmates chagrin, my paper somehow squeaks out between copies of hers. I grab it and run.
4:20PM: I find parking near the UPS store.
4:21PM: I discover the UPS store closes early on Sundays.
4:22PM: I discover the MailBoxes Etc. store closes early on Sundays.
4:23PM: I discover the independent printing and shipping store closes early on Sundays.
4:35PM: I arrive, dripping sweat, at the FedEx store. They are open until 8 on Sundays. I purchase envelopes and begin making copies. While the copy machine is running, I start to fill out my bluebook exercises. I have already done 8 of the 10, so I only have to do the remaining 2, and then begin copying them.
4:36PM: I open my new red pen, and notice that it is only 1.5 inches long, and "mini" model.
4:37PM: I complete the next blue book exercise.
4:38PM: The red pen stops writing. I shake it, I hold it between my fingers, I write fast scribbles in my notebook, I suck on it, nothing. I take it apart. Nothing.
4:40PM: I am informed that FedEx only sells blue and black pens.
4:41PM: I arrive at the CVS. The door is locked. The sign says open until 5. An elderly woman with a walker comes up behind me. She begins hitting the door. Apparently she has prescriptions to pick up. The CVS employee comes to the door and gestures that it is closed. I point to the sticker on the window that says open until 5. He runs his finger under his neck in a gesture that many use to mean "You are dead." I wonder if maybe he is talking about the woman yelling about her "blood medications." I attempt to simply force the door open. The police officer tells me to stop.
4:50PM: I stop off at my car. Inside, I frantically look for a red pen (I usually tons of pens in my car) but for some reason my car is really clean on the inside. I remind myself to later see if it was maybe broken into recently.
4:53PM: In pure desperation, as only a law student knows how to, I take the pen apart, and bite the ink cartridge. Sticky, sweet, ink runs all over my mouth. I frantically try to dip the tip of other pens in the ink and write with it, quill style. It doesn't work. I try dragging the broken ink cartridge across the paper. It works, but is mostly messy.
4:55PM: I run back to FedEx, asking everyone along the way if they have a red pen. For some reason, people won't even talk to me.
5:01PM: Back at FedEx, I ask everyone in the store if they have a red pen. The cashier, who I asked for one from before, tells me to leave the other customers alone.
5:02PM: I complete the last editing exercise in black ink.
5:15PM: I make all my copies, and begin stuffing envelopes.
5:16PM: I discover FedEx has the most amazing stapler ever. Seriously, this thing drives right through hundreds of pages with no effort.
5:35PM: I approach the register, and send my packets in, certified mail. I ask the clerk about 15 times if he can make sure it gets postmarked BEFORE 6. He assures me it will.
5:43PM: I hand over $60...
5:44PM: Everything is postmarked, sealed, and will be on its way. I am done.
5:52PM: Sitting in my car, I adjust the rearview mirror that was knocked about during my frantic search for a pen. I discover that I have red ink literally running down my chin, and it is caked into my teeth.
6:13PM: After chewing two entire packs of gum, I call law school buddy. Neither of us form coherent sentences, but the general consensus is "never again."
6:14PM: I drive home, go through two toothbrushes and the last half of my giant bottle of listerene, and still tasting ink, collapse into bed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)