Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

A forum for those current students who are or may be transferring from one school to another. Post any questions, advice, or other transfer related comments here.
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only available to the creator of each thread. The anonymous posting feature is intended to permit the solicitation of anonymous advice regarding the transfer application process, chances of being accepted, etc. Unacceptable uses include: testing the feature, questions which are clearly fake or hypothetical in nature, harassing other users, etc. Posters should also read and understand the announcements posted at the top of the Transfers forum prior to using the anonymous feature.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
patrickd139
Posts: 2883
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:53 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby patrickd139 » Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:12 am

In at SMU via phone call at ~9:30am.

T2, Top 6%, graded onto lr, TX resident (want to practice in Dallas), applied 7/1 (at the deadline)

CMR
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:58 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby CMR » Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:08 pm

Don't want to get into details, as this will clearly out me to my new classmates, but I've written on at another T1 that I haven't heard back from yet wrt admissions, and am accepted to a T3 where I'll be on a secondary journal b/c transfers can't write on (at least until the third year, presumably). Both are areas to which I have ties, but the latter is a more attractive geographic locale, IE I think I'd be happier starting my career there; however, I would not be unhappy at the former. If - and obviously a big if - I'm accepted to the former, would I be crazy to take the latter? I'm not gunning for big law, obviously.

Still waiting on Wisky.

Bankhead
Posts: 1124
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:50 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby Bankhead » Wed Jul 21, 2010 2:20 pm

How do you find the time, energy, motivation to do all of these write-ons??

CMR
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:58 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby CMR » Wed Jul 21, 2010 2:40 pm

Bankhead wrote:How do you find the time, energy, motivation to do all of these write-ons??


I genuinely enjoy it, a concession that usually causes people to slowly back away speaking in a soft voice and avoiding eye contact. I actually plan to take a couple of the submissions and use them as a skeleton for more thorough comments. It's just a hobby - I have no real illusions of publishing on any grand scale - but it's one that's more productive than what I'd be spending my time doing otherwise, which usually ends with a trip to the campus clinic.

traydeuce
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 4:07 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby traydeuce » Wed Jul 21, 2010 2:44 pm

CMR wrote:
Bankhead wrote:How do you find the time, energy, motivation to do all of these write-ons??


I genuinely enjoy it, a concession that usually causes people to slowly back away speaking in a soft voice and avoiding eye contact. I actually plan to take a couple of the submissions and use them as a skeleton for more thorough comments. It's just a hobby - I have no real illusions of publishing on any grand scale - but it's one that's more productive than what I'd be spending my time doing otherwise, which usually ends with a trip to the campus clinic.


Be careful, there are those who attribute my rejections to adcomm perusal of this very site. Anyway, I enjoy writing write-ons too (and bench memos, and legal writing assignments, etc.), although the Georgetown one I'm doing currently isn't very fun. Primarily because they want it to be so short.

User avatar
ZXCVBNM
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 9:45 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby ZXCVBNM » Wed Jul 21, 2010 2:58 pm

mardimar wrote:
chitown825 wrote:
mardimar wrote:^^ Thanks! I'm shocked and so excited!


Fordham currently?



nope. school in the 40s, suppose I should change it to T50.


wow, you transferred to harvard from a school in the 40's from a part-time program?!

CMR
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:58 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby CMR » Wed Jul 21, 2010 2:59 pm

traydeuce wrote:Be careful, there are those who attribute my rejections to adcomm perusal of this very site. Anyway, I enjoy writing write-ons too (and bench memos, and legal writing assignments, etc.), although the Georgetown one I'm doing currently isn't very fun. Primarily because they want it to be so short.


Yeah, that always sucks, primarily because most packets advise that you take a stance - but if you're going to take a stance, it seems you should be held accountable for discussing the tangential impact your proposition may have on related issues. On the one hand, it's nice because it allows you to narrow your issue without more than cursory concern for whether you're advocating something that would have indirect but significant implications, but I always feel like I'm left with kind of an empirically useless paper.

Regarding adcomms, hello adcomms, I have a girlfriend, I'm faithful to her, and if she saw that comment she would laugh, so please don't hate. If you're lurking, please post, your insight would be helpful, as my dings are piling up a bit here ;)>

User avatar
Thirteen
Posts: 23878
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:53 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby Thirteen » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:00 pm

patrickd139 wrote:In at SMU via phone call at ~9:30am.

T2, Top 6%, graded onto lr, TX resident (want to practice in Dallas), applied 7/1 (at the deadline)


Congrats!!! Are you waiting to hear from any other schools, or will you be at SMU in the fall?

User avatar
bizen boat
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:55 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby bizen boat » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:01 pm

traydeuce wrote:Be careful, there are those who attribute my rejections to adcomm perusal of this very site.


That would be absolutely ridiculous if true. While some of your infamous posts came across as arrogant, I think you're one of the more honest people on here in assessing yourself and others. It's not like you've hid the fact that you've received some tough rejections in order to preserve your ego. Just my .02, not trying to suck up. Next thing you know adcom's are going to start analyzing us based on how we act while drunk in bars.

(before anyone says anything, i know the smart/easy thing to do is simply be more careful about specific identifying factors when being as ass, but it's the principle of the thing that bothers me, not the execution)

t4tot1
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 4:44 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby t4tot1 » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:03 pm

in at smu this morning via phone call

t4 top 7% lr and moot court

traydeuce
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 4:07 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby traydeuce » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:07 pm

My trouble with the Georgetown one is that there are two distinct issues in the case, room enough to comment only on one, and in the case of the more interesting one, the packet is virtually bereft of any supporting material. Leaving you to kind of fly solo on a pretty tough question of con law. The other one, on the other hand, is so well hashed out between the various circuits arguing over the issue in the packet that virtually anything you say is just going to be a repetition of one opinion or another.

CMR
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:58 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby CMR » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:08 pm

bizen boat wrote:
traydeuce wrote:Be careful, there are those who attribute my rejections to adcomm perusal of this very site.


That would be absolutely ridiculous if true. While some of your infamous posts came across as arrogant, I think you're one of the more honest people on here in assessing yourself and others. It's not like you've hid the fact that you've received some tough rejections in order to preserve your ego. Just my .02, not trying to suck up. Next thing you know adcom's are going to start analyzing us based on how we act while drunk in bars.

(before anyone says anything, i know the smart/easy thing to do is simply be more careful about specific identifying factors when being as ass, but it's the principle of the thing that bothers me, not the execution)


I don't think there's any doubt it's at least partially true, and to be honest, I'd think less of the adcomms if they didn't - it's a public forum that they're free to view, and a potential source of context to place particularly difficult admissions decisions in. If, for example, someone put on their application that they were interested in working in public interest, it would be kind of silly for the committee to ignore a thread in which an easily identified poster declared their unwavering intent to do big law.

And let's be honest - most posters here realize this. You don't have to be particularly observant to notice a dramatic decrease in vitriol and infighting in this subindex as compared to the others on TLS :).

CMR
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:58 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby CMR » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:12 pm

traydeuce wrote:My trouble with the Georgetown one is that there are two distinct issues in the case, room enough to comment only on one, and in the case of the more interesting one, the packet is virtually bereft of any supporting material. Leaving you to kind of fly solo on a pretty tough question of con law. The other one, on the other hand, is so well hashed out between the various circuits arguing over the issue in the packet that virtually anything you say is just going to be a repetition of one opinion or another.


My friend at a T6 wrote on last year by picking an uncontested procedural rule that was present in all the cases, and she thought her success was mostly due to the fact that there's no way anyone else focused on that because of the policy issues. I can't even remember what it was it sounded so boring, but it's a thought.

traydeuce
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 4:07 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby traydeuce » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:17 pm

CMR wrote:
traydeuce wrote:My trouble with the Georgetown one is that there are two distinct issues in the case, room enough to comment only on one, and in the case of the more interesting one, the packet is virtually bereft of any supporting material. Leaving you to kind of fly solo on a pretty tough question of con law. The other one, on the other hand, is so well hashed out between the various circuits arguing over the issue in the packet that virtually anything you say is just going to be a repetition of one opinion or another.


My friend at a T6 wrote on last year by picking an uncontested procedural rule that was present in all the cases, and she thought her success was mostly due to the fact that there's no way anyone else focused on that because of the policy issues. I can't even remember what it was it sounded so boring, but it's a thought.


I like procedural rules. The situation is similar here; issue one is pretty overshadowed by issue two - it's way less important, comes up much less often, in the context of claims that are either impossible to prove or have all been won long ago, but it's fun and technical. Unfortunately, the packet makers, while including a case or two on the issue, gave it pretty short shrift.

CMR
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:58 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby CMR » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:20 pm

traydeuce wrote:I like procedural rules. The situation is similar here; issue one is pretty overshadowed by issue two - it's way less important, comes up much less often, in the context of claims that are either impossible to prove or have all been won long ago, but it's fun and technical. Unfortunately, the packet makers, while including a case or two on the issue, gave it pretty short shrift.


I advise writing a scathing critique based entirely on the canon of expressio unius and the query "but where do we draw the line?"

traydeuce
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 4:07 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby traydeuce » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:22 pm

CMR wrote:
traydeuce wrote:I like procedural rules. The situation is similar here; issue one is pretty overshadowed by issue two - it's way less important, comes up much less often, in the context of claims that are either impossible to prove or have all been won long ago, but it's fun and technical. Unfortunately, the packet makers, while including a case or two on the issue, gave it pretty short shrift.


I advise writing a scathing critique based entirely on the canon of expressio unius and the query "but where do we draw the line?"


Huge expressio unius fan here. I should write a comment one day called Expressio Unius: Its Uses and Misuses.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby vanwinkle » Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:26 pm

traydeuce wrote:Huge expressio unius fan here. I should write a comment one day called Expressio Unius: Its Uses and Misuses.

--ImageRemoved--

phoenixsoars
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:25 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby phoenixsoars » Wed Jul 21, 2010 6:43 pm

.
Last edited by phoenixsoars on Wed Jul 04, 2012 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
apper123
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby apper123 » Wed Jul 21, 2010 8:57 pm

phoenixsoars wrote:For the benefit of those who might be curious about numbers for transfers:
T25, #2 in section
GPA: 4.13

Harvard: In
Stanford: In
Yale: Out


sick grats man really well done

D.Wilde
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 11:03 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby D.Wilde » Wed Jul 21, 2010 10:07 pm

phoenixsoars wrote:For the benefit of those who might be curious about numbers for transfers:
T25, #2 in section
GPA: 4.13

Harvard: In
Stanford: In
Yale: Out


Congrats!!! So... on which coast will you be living come September?

clk32
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:22 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby clk32 » Thu Jul 22, 2010 8:13 am

In at Columbia! applied 6/8 accepted 7/20!! I put my deposit down today!

haribo77
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 10:31 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby haribo77 » Thu Jul 22, 2010 2:30 pm

out at uga. slitting wrists now

User avatar
thexfactor
Posts: 1277
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:40 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby thexfactor » Thu Jul 22, 2010 2:31 pm

il join you.... out ucla...
how can this be? i cant get ANYTHING... T50 10%

haribo77 wrote:out at uga. slitting wrists now

stinger35
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby stinger35 » Thu Jul 22, 2010 2:54 pm

Out at UCLA via email.

(I never sent my letter of good standing because I got into Berkeley about the same day i applied to UCLA)

User avatar
thexfactor
Posts: 1277
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:40 am

Re: Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread

Postby thexfactor » Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 pm

how is this possible. get into UCB and out at UCLA and GULC?

WTF??

stinger35 wrote:Out at UCLA via email.

(I never sent my letter of good standing because I got into Berkeley about the same day i applied to UCLA)




Return to “Transfers”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.