What happens if you amend an application? Forum

[breadsandwich]

Might have a dismissed and sealed rec about something that allegedly happened while a teenager.
An ethics lawyer gave assurance that the rec is so exceedingly minor that it would have no impact on bar admissions.

However, some applications for T6 are being filled out. Those are selective and competitive, unlike the bar where everyone who passes is in.

Afraid that the rec will lose tiebreakers with similarly qualified applicants. Don't want to get squeezed out.

If a sudden realization occurs that dismissed and sealed records should be disclosed to ls, what are the consequences of amending it after admission in 1L or 3L?

Would ls admissions office view it as intentional so as to maximize admission chances, or merely the product of advice (like from a lawyer)?
What sanctions could be imposed? Suspension or expulsion?

Also, is there a permanent notation that the rec was only given as an amendment and not in the initial application?

[rinkrat19]

Why would you not just send it during the application cycle? It would have zero effect on your chances.

[sach1282]

Rinkrat's response is credited. Just send it out in your initial app.

[breadsandwich]

Because credentials aren't a lock for T6. If on the fence, don't want to be squeezed out by something like this, esp. since they have lots of other applicants with blank records. Mine is essentially blank as provided for by home state's statute.

[rinkrat19]

Because credentials aren't a lock for T6. If on the fence, don't want to be squeezed out by something like this, esp. since they have lots of other applicants with blank records. Mine is essentially blank as provided for by home state's statute.

They literally will not give even a partial fuck about something minor and expunged/dismissed on your record. Murderers get into law school. What they do care about about is hiding things.

[danielhay11]

Would ls admissions office view it as intentional so as to maximize admission chances, or merely the product of advice (like from a lawyer)? [\quote]

Ummm. It's pretty clear that you are intentionally hiding your record. Most applications specifically ask for expunged items. I don't think they'll really care who advised you to conceal this if you get caught.

What sanctions could be imposed?

I doubt your school would ever catch you. But if comes up during your bar exam, you'll have spent $200k on a worthless piece of paper all because you tried to hide something that would have zero effect on your application.

[breadsandwich]

Murderers get into Tulane.
This is about T6.
It's difficult to believe a T6 would not seize an opportunity to quickly differentiate between two people with similarly respectable credentials. They have to reject some 170s+. Why give them a reason to when the law says a denial is truthful under oath.

Also, I understand that the Bar might be more entitled to a sealed record. Which is why the question is about law school applications and amending them to make them resemble what will be put on the bar application, after admission has already been offered.

Again, the question is what consequences could come from amending after acceptance rather than in the original application, not whether it should be in the original application.

[sach1282]

If you're not even a 1L and you're already looking for ways to be intentionally deceitful, you should not be going to law school, especially at a respectable institution like Chicago, Columbia, or NYU.

[breadsandwich]

how is it intentionally deceitful if the state's laws permit a denial under oath?

[ahduth]

lol, I love posts like this.

Enjoy C&F.

[vanwinkle]

LSAT time. Which inappropriate question is OP really asking?

A) "Lying by omission isn't really lying, right?"
B) "Lying isn't wrong if I correct it later, right?"
C) "If I 'suddenly remember' this a year later, they can't tell I intentionally left it out, right?"
D) "Even if I get caught, what's the worst that could happen?"
E) All of the above

[vanwinkle]

Moderator Edit.

[JoeMo]

LSAT time. Which inappropriate question is OP really asking?

A) "Lying by omission isn't really lying, right?"
B) "Lying isn't wrong if I correct it later, right?"
C) "If I 'suddenly remember' this a year later, they can't tell I intentionally left it out, right?"
D) "Even if I get caught, what's the worst that could happen?"
E) All of the above

E

[sach1282]

OP just got owned by vanwinkle.

[mrtoren]

OP just got owned by vanwinkle.

I love to see these guys get roasted.

[JoeMo]

So either OP is a flame or they have a lot to hide. Either way, OP should not be going to LS.

[vanwinkle]

OP:

Your thread is now locked. This means that no user can edit the posts in the thread anymore. This is a common occurrence on TLS when someone has been alting or otherwise violating forum rules, and results in that poster being unable to edit their posts out in the offending thread.

Have a nice day.