Page 40 of 44

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 1:35 pm
by baal hadad
cpamom wrote:
baal hadad wrote:
cpamom wrote:Being accountant sucks :(

Why on earth would u think being a tax atty is better

:) accounting work is extremely mundane. It is also not intellectually stimulating in any way. I've grown very tired of it.

I haven't grown tired of atty work yet but yabro it's pretty damn mundane

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 1:39 pm
by cpamom
Wayne is bad, got it. I'd better study up than, thanks.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 1:41 pm
by Johann
The only Wayne would be worth it is free and part time while you keep your current job. Then its basically risk free and at the minimum your accounting firm should bump you up and expand your role into the planning side and strategy of things instead of just the numbers.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 1:42 pm
by baal hadad
cpamom wrote:Wayne is bad, got it. I'd better study up than, thanks.

Honestly if you can't go to an elite school for close to nothing it doesn't make sense to go at all

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 1:48 pm
by cpamom
JohannDeMann wrote:The only Wayne would be worth it is free and part time while you keep your current job. Then its basically risk free and at the minimum your accounting firm should bump you up and expand your role into the planning side and strategy of things instead of just the numbers.

I quit my job in June and haven't looked for a new one yet. I got out of public accounting years ago and midsize firms that I worked for are not employing JDs anyways. I wouldn't have much trouble getting a job, but I want to stay home for a little bit longer. Working makes a lot less sence when you have to pay for more than one daycare.
I was thinking Wayne because I'd be able to rely on my family to stay with kids and they offer evening classes, too.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 3:00 pm
by cpamom
Let's assume a different scenario. If I were to become a family lawyer, the pay would be less and the hours may be more manageable. Would Wayne be a reasonable choice? Or still nah?

What would you consider to be too old for law school? 35? 40? 45? Trying to see if waiting a couple of cycles would be a good idea.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 3:02 pm
by bjsesq
cpamom wrote:Let's assume a different scenario. If I were to become a family lawyer, the pay would be less and the hours may be more manageable. Would Wayne be a reasonable choice?

If you have a guaranteed job waiting for you, surewhynot. Family law was some of the shittiest stuff I've ever seen, but some people love it.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 3:05 pm
by cpamom
bjsesq wrote:If you have a guaranteed job waiting for you, surewhynot. Family law was some of the shittiest stuff I've ever seen, but some people love it.


I edited my prior post before I saw a reply. No I don't have a job waiting for me. I do know several family attorneys though. It's definitely not for everyone but it can be interesting.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 3:17 pm
by Dr. Review
cpamom wrote:Let's assume a different scenario. If I were to become a family lawyer, the pay would be less and the hours may be more manageable. Would Wayne be a reasonable choice? Or still nah?

What would you consider to be too old for law school? 35? 40? 45? Trying to see if waiting a couple of cycles would be a good idea.


I don't have a hard and fast rule for age to attend law school. Every situation is different, so if you're up for the shift and it makes financial sense to go (rare) but you are 50, go for it.

As for the family law thing, the pay would very likely be less, but I don't think I would assume that the hours would be any more manageable. Unfortunately, the 40-60k/yr jobs are often just as much work as some of the 160k/yr jobs.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 9:10 am
by timbs4339
I would be a criminal lawyer representing murderers long before I'd be a family lawyer. It's not something for everyone. I'd try and work as a paralegal for one of those lawyers and see whether you still think it's interesting when you are knee deep in it.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 10:35 am
by cpamom
timbs4339 wrote:I would be a criminal lawyer representing murderers long before I'd be a family lawyer. It's not something for everyone. I'd try and work as a paralegal for one of those lawyers and see whether you still think it's interesting when you are knee deep in it.

Unfortunately, I've had quite a bit of exposure to family law and I know I can handle it and would be good at. However, due to lower income potential and my accent, it's not my #1 choice. I feel that people are used to dealing with accents in a business setting and doctors offices but in family law setting it might put me at disadvantage.
I got the general idea, though- Wayne is a poor choice for someone trying to make big bucks in tax law, but it's an acceptable choice for a job on the Main Street. I need to adjust either my choice of schools or expectations.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 10:39 am
by baal hadad
cpamom wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:I would be a criminal lawyer representing murderers long before I'd be a family lawyer. It's not something for everyone. I'd try and work as a paralegal for one of those lawyers and see whether you still think it's interesting when you are knee deep in it.

Unfortunately, I've had quite a bit exposure to family law and I know I can handle it and would be good at. However, due to lower income potential and my accent, it's not my #1 choice. I feel that people are used to dealing with accents in a business setting and doctors offices but in family law setting it might put me at disadvantage.
I got the general idea, though- Wayne is a poor choice for someone trying to make big bucks in tax law, but it's an acceptable choice for a job on the Main Street. I need to adjust either my choice of schools or expectations.

I don't even think Wayne state is an acceptable choice for a job on Main Street considering the school has shitty employment outcomes (go look at LST)

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 12:35 pm
by deadpanic
cpamom wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:I would be a criminal lawyer representing murderers long before I'd be a family lawyer. It's not something for everyone. I'd try and work as a paralegal for one of those lawyers and see whether you still think it's interesting when you are knee deep in it.

Unfortunately, I've had quite a bit of exposure to family law and I know I can handle it and would be good at. However, due to lower income potential and my accent, it's not my #1 choice. I feel that people are used to dealing with accents in a business setting and doctors offices but in family law setting it might put me at disadvantage.
I got the general idea, though- Wayne is a poor choice for someone trying to make big bucks in tax law, but it's an acceptable choice for a job on the Main Street. I need to adjust either my choice of schools or expectations.


What? You think Dusty Lee trying to get custody of his 7 kids is going to care about your accent? How bad is it?

If you think being a CPA is not stimulating intellectually, just wait until you practice family law and coordinate drop off points at the most convenient Burger King.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:40 pm
by cpamom
deadpanic wrote:What? You think Dusty Lee trying to get custody of his 7 kids is going to care about your accent? How bad is it?

If you think being a CPA is not stimulating intellectually, just wait until you practice family law and coordinate drop off points at the most convenient Burger King.

Lol. It's hard for me to assess my own accent, but even though it's rather mild, it's noticeable. There are other obvious problems with family law, such as collectibility of fees.
Based on advise of TLS in general and this thread in particular I decided to retake LSAT in hope to get my PT average (currently 173) and attend a better school. If that does not work I'll find a tax position and work there for couple of years until my family circumstances change and I'd be able to make a better investment of my time and current LSAT score.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:56 pm
by deadpanic
cpamom wrote:
deadpanic wrote:What? You think Dusty Lee trying to get custody of his 7 kids is going to care about your accent? How bad is it?

If you think being a CPA is not stimulating intellectually, just wait until you practice family law and coordinate drop off points at the most convenient Burger King.

Lol. It's hard for me to assess my own accent, but even though it's rather mild, it's noticeable. There are other obvious problems with family law, such as collectibility of fees.
Based on advise of TLS in general and this thread in particular I decided to retake LSAT in hope to get my PT average (currently 173) and attend a better school. If that does not work I'll find a tax position and work there for couple of years until my family circumstances change and I'd be able to make a better investment of my time and current LSAT score.


Good luck! Great decision.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Thu Oct 30, 2014 5:10 pm
by LawGirlAtx
deadpanic wrote: If you think being a CPA is not stimulating intellectually, just wait until you practice family law and coordinate drop off points at the most convenient Burger King.


I seriously think this should be posted in every single thread on this site, if only to keep it real for 0Ls with no legal experience. This isn't The Good Wife, this is to a larger extent babysitting emotionally wounded adults who are pissed because their soon to be ex got the flat screen and jet ski.

With that being said, this is off topic, but with all the practicing attorneys active on this thread maybe you can give me some advice. I'm a 0L with 4 years experience as a Legal Assistant applying this cycle. I complete a vast majority of tasks like petitions, discovery, motions, case management, etc. Basically the only tasks my employer doesn't have me complete are those that I am unable to do because I'm not an attorney. In short, I know what the job entails and I like it. Do you think there is a way I should tactfully address this in my applications? Three of my four LORs are from attorneys I have either worked for or with (4th is from a professor) and they pretty much say that I'll make an excellent attorney, I work well with clients, I got what it takes, yadda yadda. While I think it's important for a third party to speak to my abilities and passion, I need to address it myself too. I just don't know how to do that in a tactful way.

Background that may help:

-28 y/o female URM applicant (Hispanic and Native American)
-unimpressive GPA due to issues during my first year of school (addenda addresses)
-thinking of retaking LSAT, currently sitting at 161
-No desire at Big Law. I've known people who've worked in it. Sounds like firms view employees as chattel that can easily be replaced with younger attorneys for less money.
-Connections in Austin, those connections could possibly help me with positions in Dallas and/or Houston
-Currently work in a firm handling PI/Med Mal/Family/Criminal/Real Estate/Business
-Ideally I'd like to work in energy law, but enjoy everything my firm handles. I'm pretty much open to anything that isn't contracts and pays more than what I make now minus loan repayment

Please let me know how you'd address this situation, and how you'd like to see it addressed if you were on an admissions committee.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2014 8:44 am
by Dr. Review
LawGirlAtx wrote:Please let me know how you'd address this situation, and how you'd like to see it addressed if you were on an admissions committee.


Really not the right thread for this.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2014 9:11 am
by JuTMSY4
LawGirlAtx wrote:Please let me know how you'd address this situation, and how you'd like to see it addressed if you were on an admissions committee.


Include your resume. Retake for money. Enjoy UT

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2014 12:45 pm
by Voyager
baal hadad wrote:
cpamom wrote:
baal hadad wrote:
cpamom wrote:Being accountant sucks :(

Why on earth would u think being a tax atty is better

:) accounting work is extremely mundane. It is also not intellectually stimulating in any way. I've grown very tired of it.

I haven't grown tired of atty work yet but yabro it's pretty damn mundane


Tax work is mundane which is why so few want to go into it. BUt that is actually a HUGE advantage! It means that tax groups have a unique skill set and the firms treat them better. My tax law friends have slightly more humane hours and work environment.

Keep in mind that ALL of big law is simply boring, mundane minutiae. So you might as well optimize on lifestyle. Tax and Employment law seem to be the best bets from what I have gathered.

But I suppose my post is a tad off topic. And while I have a law degree, I let my bar license lapse last year. I have never practiced. So I will exit and let the actual attorneys do their thing.

Good thread, by the way.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2014 12:55 pm
by romothesavior
Add me to the list of alums ready to pounce.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2014 6:54 am
by Dr. Review
romothesavior wrote:Add me to the list of alums ready to pounce.

Done

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2014 2:39 pm
by FloridaLaw
EMORY

WUSTL

RICHMOND

STETSON

ARIZONA

CHICAGO-KENT

SHARE YOUR PROFESSIONAL WISDOM ,...POUNCE!

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2014 2:58 pm
by Dr. Review
Preferred format:
Goal(s): Biglaw, PI, etc.
Regional Ties: Any ties that are substantial enough to sell in an interview, especially if they show up on your resume
School(s): Name of school and total cost to attend (NOT the total scholarship award) after scholarships and cost of living
Other pertinent information: Undergrad loans, GI bill, spouse who covers COA, etc.


Also, a number of your schools are in the OP

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2014 8:02 pm
by romothesavior
FloridaLaw wrote:EMORY

WUSTL

RICHMOND

STETSON

ARIZONA

CHICAGO-KENT

SHARE YOUR PROFESSIONAL WISDOM ,...POUNCE!

No way to say without a hell of a lot more info. Though it sounds like you're from Florida, and I'm assuming based on your list of acceptances that you were something of a reach for WUSTL/Emory. Assuming I'm right about those, then none of the above.

Give us some more information.

Re: ITT: Practicing attorneys tell you your top choice is bad

Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2014 8:05 pm
by scrowell
I went to Santa Clara and am doing well. Loved the school. Hit me with questions bros!