Internship Update

Wow, is my summer internship awesome this summer.

First of all, let me start by saying that last summer's internship was awesome as well, but mostly because the judge I was interning with went out of his way to make sure it was.

This summer, however, is off to a great start.

First of all, I am real intern this summer.  I have a cubicle, a desk, a computer, a phone.  No longer I am sitting on a couch taking notes and generally just paying attention, I now come in and get to my own work assignments.  It is very cool.

What is also cool is how well everyone in the office treats me.  First of all, every attorney, office assistant, paralegal, and legal assistant has already come up and introduced themselves and offered support.  They all seem to appreciate that I am helping out.  Also, they are fairly laid back in office protocols.  Although I am usually the type to show up early, it seems as though I could work 10-6 if I preferred.  Either way, no one seems to be hovering over me and constantly checking up, which is how I often felt at my previous (non-legal) job.

As for the work, so far it has been interesting.  I won't go into details, but so far I have researched the history of a sentencing statute, done research on a particularly narrow Supreme Court exhaustion ruling, and assisted in preparing a file for a re-sentencing hearing.  All of which has tested my legal and professional skills, and which has kept me very busy.

So far, so good with the internship.  I honestly can't wait until next week for more.  I hope at the end of the summer I am still enjoying it this much.

Post 2L Year Retrospective

As we all know, law school is a three year journey harrowing experience.   Having just completed my second year, I thought I would take a little bit of a retrospective introspective on my experience so far.

As a 1L, I was on the one hand eager and excited, but on the other, in way over my head.  Most of the first year is spent hanging on by the skin of your teeth as ever mounting demands of reading pile up.  On top of that, the ever present fear of the cold call, and eventually the dreaded writing assignments, make the 1L year stressful.  Looking back, however, I realize that the 1L year was all about the class experience.  I spent most of my time reading casebooks, taking diligent notes, and preparing for my next class.  In between classes, most of the kibitzing among students revolved around class as well.

As a 2L, again I found myself pressed for time, honestly even more pressed than as a 1L.  The odd difference, however, is that it was rarely with classwork.  As a 2L, I found the demands to be job applications, internships, Moot Court, Journal, volunteer experiences, shadow days, informational interviews, and other activities related to law school, but primarily outside the classroom.  Although I almost always stayed on top of my reading, I wasn't able to do the deep preparation of 1L year.

A good example is in the notes taken from casebook reading.  I took much less 2L year, but was generally always able to fully participate in class discussions.  I suppose this is a great sign, after a year of classes you have a pretty good idea of what to expect from any given professor.  Also, you get much better at reasoning out cases and principles, especially on your feet, and can participate in class without memorizing every case in the casebook.

This definitely leaves way for pursuing the extra activities, such as Moot Court, which more resemble what a lawyer actually does.  By having time for Moot Court, I was able to practice my research and writing while seeing an appellate case through from start to finish, valuable skills for actual legal practice.



Another fun diversion from 1L year to 2L is the courses you take.  1L, the courses are all pre-picked, which means plenty that are outside your personal intellectual curiosity.  However, since the curriculum is the same nationwide, these 1L courses all have plenty of prep books and study aids available.  This year I took mostly bar tested courses, but also was able to take Copyright and IP, both classes I wanted to know more about.

Now to see what 2L summer brings my way...

Don't Call It a Comeback

For anyone who watches, or even merely stumbles across, this blog, I noted several months ago that I was taking a brief hiatus from posting.  At this time, I think I will begin with some light posting of law school related articles.

If you have been patiently waiting, thanks for sticking around.

Taking a Break

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!

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL!

And I am actually pretty excited! Wish me luck, and good luck to all the new 1Ls!