Docreviewsux's warnings-against-law-school thread

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
Docreviewsux
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:13 am

Docreviewsux's warnings-against-law-school thread

Postby Docreviewsux » Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:16 am

http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/articl ... b_stats_c/

See also http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/di ... 0/33/0.pdf

Notice how he disses the garbage michigan and New York dismissals.

Docreviewsux
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:13 am

Re: Widener Fraud Suit Survives MTD

Postby Docreviewsux » Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:19 am

Docreviewsux wrote:http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/article/judge_allows_suit_claiming_widener_law_school_posted_misleading_job_stats_c/

See also http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/di ... 0/33/0.pdf

Notice how he disses the garbage michigan and New York dismissals.


Can you imagine what little gems from law school career services will come out during discovery? I predict we will see something like senior admins telling staffers to make sure the employment rate Is higher or something like that. I also think many career services offices operate like this.

Docreviewsux
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:13 am

More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby Docreviewsux » Tue Apr 02, 2013 5:05 pm


zman
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:31 am

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby zman » Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:48 pm

"It is not the same across all law schools when you look at employment prospects"

lol, what is chereminsky smoking?? Your school will be flooding the market with people who won't find anything.

SportsFan
Posts: 722
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 5:26 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby SportsFan » Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:00 pm

zman wrote:"It is not the same across all law schools when you look at employment prospects"

lol, what is chereminsky smoking?? Your school will be flooding the market with people who won't find anything.

He can smoke whatever he wants since his treatise is saving me in con law. :lol:

zman
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:31 am

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby zman » Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:05 pm

In fact unless your name is stanford in california, you will have grads who will struggle.

User avatar
star fox
Posts: 13778
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:13 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby star fox » Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:43 pm

Sullivan said some law graduates may make only limited job searches. A Thomas Jefferson graduate who sued had turned down a $60,000 law job because she didn't want to make a long drive for training, he said.

"What I find most ironic is that those individuals advertised themselves to law schools as great critical thinkers," Sullivan said of the law-grads-turned-litigants. "Now they say they never considered the possibility that employment might include part-time jobs."


Nice guy.

User avatar
nickb285
Posts: 1500
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:25 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby nickb285 » Tue Apr 02, 2013 8:23 pm

john7234797 wrote:
Sullivan said some law graduates may make only limited job searches. A Thomas Jefferson graduate who sued had turned down a $60,000 law job because she didn't want to make a long drive for training, he said.

"What I find most ironic is that those individuals advertised themselves to law schools as great critical thinkers," Sullivan said of the law-grads-turned-litigants. "Now they say they never considered the possibility that employment might include part-time jobs."


Nice guy.


Yeah, I saw that, that's just the douchiest quote I've ever read. "You're supposed to be able to think, how could you not see through our blatant misrepresentation? Idiot."

Also, fun fact: TJSL non-discounted COA per LST: $257,905. Monthly loan payments on a ten-year term for that amount: approx. $3050, or $36600/year. After taxes, a $60k salary equals about $45k net, or $3750/month. So that great law job the grad didn't want to drive for would have paid him/her a grand total of $700/month, or $8400/year, after taxes and non-IBR loan payments.

Wonder why they're not thrilled?

dba415
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:50 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby dba415 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:37 am

I think a solid majority of people on here are aware of the problems with the job market and are choosing to attend law school in spite of that. Which is why that these types of threads aren't really needed, because if you are on here, chances are you are not changing your mind.

Looking at employment figures, some of them are just disturbing. Whittier College with 18% employment 9 months after graduation. How can they continue to admit students. That law school should be shut down. It's criminal.

071816
Posts: 5511
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:06 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby 071816 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:40 am

FUCK CHEMERINSKY

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby Clearly » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:54 am

"Across the country, the need for legal services among those who cannot pay or have limited ability to pay has never been higher," the bar report said.

So there will be a glut of jobs providing services to those who can't pay you! Oh thank god.
(For the record, I'm all for the impoverished having access to legal experts, but the way this article made it sound like that was an great opportunity for the legal market made me chuckle)

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby rad lulz » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:11 am

chimp wrote:FUCK CHEMERINSKY

dude ought to stick to the con law supplement game and leave the legal employment analysis to people who actually know what they're talking about

071816
Posts: 5511
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:06 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby 071816 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:40 am

rad lulz wrote:
chimp wrote:FUCK CHEMERINSKY

dude ought to stick to the con law supplement game and leave the legal employment analysis to people who actually know what they're talking about

word

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby PDaddy » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:44 am

Docreviewsux wrote:http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-law-grads-20130402,0,1312864.story


So...prospective law students and grads are supposed to get excited because there will be a demand for their services among those who cannot pay, and because there's a long line of graduates from 2007-2013 who will be well ahead of them in line for those jobs that are vacated by retirees?

Well woohoo! :roll:

That does give me an idea, though. If our government can "bail out" Wall Street and auto industry crooks, it can do the same for these law students by creating more debt forgiveness options - even for solo P.I. work - and pay salaries to these graduates. How can our government justify bailing out crooks who did nothing but steal from the middle-class but give the finger to law graduates who were duped by the schools?

Here's another idea: make the law schools pay off all of the loans these students took out to attend their schools. Some of these admins should be walking out of law schools in cuffs, and would be if I had my way. My reasoning is simple. They are engaging in behaviors for which they wouldn't hesitate to expel a student who behaved similarly. Misrepresenting ones accomplishments to the detriment of another who spends money based on said accomplishments is fraud, no?

That's what the law schools say when someone cheats on an exam, omits a criminal infraction, fudges a resume, falsifies a transcript or LOR, etc. so, it's time that they walk that walk! Prison for the administrators and forced restitution from the schools in the form of paying off the student loans with their ill-gotten gains from insane tuition hikes...that would be just.
Last edited by PDaddy on Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby Clearly » Wed Apr 03, 2013 3:47 am

PDaddy wrote:
Docreviewsux wrote:http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-law-grads-20130402,0,1312864.story


So...prospective law students and grads are supposed to get excited because there will be a demand for their services among those who cannot pay, and because there's a long line of graduates from 2007-2013 who will be well ahead of them in line for those jobs that are vacated by retirees?

Well woohoo! :roll:

That does give me an idea, though. If our government can "bail out" Wall Street and auto industry crooks, it can do the same for these law students by creating more debt forgiveness options - even for solo P.I. work - and pay salaries to these graduates. How can our government justify bailing out these crooks who did nothing but steal from the middle-class but give the finger to law graduates who were duped by the schools?

Unfortunately, its possible lawyers are the only group hated more then Wall st.

eric922
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 10:05 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby eric922 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:18 pm

Chereminsky? I just scanned his Wikipedia page and it says he's been in teaching for over 20 years, most of that time at public universities it looks like. Here is why I'm really annoyed. Someone who is making his living off tax-payer dollars really shouldn't be attacking people who are drowning in debt so people like Chereminsky can keep their cushy 6 figure job. Perhaps he could take a pay cut and maybe law students wouldn't have to drown in debt in order to pay for their education.

zman
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:31 am

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby zman » Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:59 pm

eric922 wrote:Chereminsky? I just scanned his Wikipedia page and it says he's been in teaching for over 20 years, most of that time at public universities it looks like. Here is why I'm really annoyed. Someone who is making his living off tax-payer dollars really shouldn't be attacking people who are drowning in debt so people like Chereminsky can keep their cushy 6 figure job. Perhaps he could take a pay cut and maybe law students wouldn't have to drown in debt in order to pay for their education.


actually he was at USC for about 20 years and was an AMAZING teacher. probably the best in the country in his field but now his putting out propaganda about how great law school is and how it's a great investment and all that stuff. He is trying to justify the creation of UCI even though a UC review committee said no but they went with it anyway.

eric922
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 10:05 pm

Re: More on Law School Fraud Suits

Postby eric922 » Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:07 pm

zman wrote:
eric922 wrote:Chereminsky? I just scanned his Wikipedia page and it says he's been in teaching for over 20 years, most of that time at public universities it looks like. Here is why I'm really annoyed. Someone who is making his living off tax-payer dollars really shouldn't be attacking people who are drowning in debt so people like Chereminsky can keep their cushy 6 figure job. Perhaps he could take a pay cut and maybe law students wouldn't have to drown in debt in order to pay for their education.


actually he was at USC for about 20 years and was an AMAZING teacher. probably the best in the country in his field but now his putting out propaganda about how great law school is and how it's a great investment and all that stuff. He is trying to justify the creation of UCI even though a UC review committee said no but they went with it anyway.

I'm sure he was a great teacher. His supplement is talked about a lot so he had to be at the top of his field. It's just his comments that have been mentioned this thread strike me as coming from someone who has spent so long in academia that they don't know or don't care how bad it is for some law students and he is here talking about how great an investment it is. I just feel like the legal education community could use a few more people like Campos who are being honest about the situation as opposed to those trying to justify it.

User avatar
Dream Weave
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:31 pm

Re: Widener Fraud Suit Survives MTD

Postby Dream Weave » Fri Apr 05, 2013 10:11 am

I would love to be the one in charge of that discovery request.

Docreviewsux
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:13 am

The Real Problem With Law Schools

Postby Docreviewsux » Sat Apr 06, 2013 6:03 am


Docreviewsux
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:13 am

More law profs against law school

Postby Docreviewsux » Sat Apr 06, 2013 6:08 am

“The price of legal education has risen as the job market for lawyers has declined. More than two out of every five 2011 graduates did not obtain a full-time long-term job requiring a law degree; the median starting salary of the class, among the less than half of graduates for whom a salary was reported, was $60,000. The problematic economics are captured by this fundamental mismatch: a graduate who earns the median salary cannot afford to make the monthly loan payments on the average debt.”

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/ ... eckdam.pdf

If law profs warn against law school, why still go?

NYstate
Posts: 1566
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:44 am

Re: The Real Problem With Law Schools

Postby NYstate » Sat Apr 06, 2013 7:37 am

These articles never mention the role of the schools in this mess. The decades of lies about employment statistics created the impression that everyone going to law school would find employment at a 6 figure salary. The fraud was enough that lawsuits have been brought against several schools for fraud. The one against NYLS was dismissed because the claims seemed so ridiculous that no rational person would believe them. The highest court in New York vert critically questioned the ethics of the dean and the case has been attempted to be reopened.

This wring impression needs to be corrected.

Also they ignored the role of the availability of federal loans to go to any school in any amount available to any student who gets in. Schools had no incentive to keep tuition low.

Docreviewsux
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:13 am

The Lawyer Bubble on NPR

Postby Docreviewsux » Sat Apr 06, 2013 9:35 am


20141023
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:17 am

Re: More law profs against law school

Postby 20141023 » Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:40 am

.
Last edited by 20141023 on Sat Feb 14, 2015 11:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Docreviewsux
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:13 am

Re: More law profs against law school

Postby Docreviewsux » Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:18 pm

kappycaft1 wrote:
Docreviewsux wrote:“The price of legal education has risen as the job market for lawyers has declined. More than two out of every five 2011 graduates did not obtain a full-time long-term job requiring a law degree; the median starting salary of the class, among the less than half of graduates for whom a salary was reported, was $60,000. The problematic economics are captured by this fundamental mismatch: a graduate who earns the median salary cannot afford to make the monthly loan payments on the average debt.”

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/ ... eckdam.pdf

If law profs warn against law school, why still go?

Because if you attend a decent school, you can still find decent employment...

What really needs to happen is that the bottom 100 law schools get shut down because they are really the ones who are pulling the employment numbers and salaries down.


Do you know what percentage of biglaw associates make partner? It's not very high, and transitioning to another field or another area becomes harder as one gets older.

Indeed, we have many former biglaw associates who used to run doc reviews now on the circuit themselves. They often are trying to start their own practices in the thriving areas of family and DuI law.

We are talking Columbia, Pennsylvania, Northwestern, and Chicago grads here too.

The point is that even the winners are still likely going to wind up losers.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], grandpapy360 and 6 guests