Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
JimmyMcGill
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:30 pm

Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby JimmyMcGill » Sat May 06, 2017 4:07 pm

Good afternoon,

Thought I'd share a little unsolicited and brutally honest story/advice for those of you still in the suit factory and maybe some of you out of it. It's a little long winded and poorly written/edited but I don't really care. Just my thoughts on tap. I've titled it, "The Law is Bullshit and Law School is its Factory--Disjunctive Advice for Real Future Lawyers"

[Yes, I'm a real lawyer (they're everywhere so don't be too surprised sweetheart). No I'm not giving you my real name. Yes the story is true (and frankly don't care if you don't believe it). No I won't tell you where I went to law school.] Just some friendly and honest unsolicited advice where unsolicited advice is shared. Maybe if you actually read to the heart of my vulgarity then you'll see that I actually love the law. Just not for the reasons most idealists claim.



Law School is Bullshit-If you like law school then you'll hate being a lawyer.

My Story
I want to tell you a story about bullshit. Law school is bullshit. I want to tell you what law school really is, and how I've completely bullshitted my way through it, why I chose to, and what it's really taught me.

Let me first say that I do not condone what I've done, nor do I have any animosity towards the professors or the institution specifically. Most of the professors are good people, albeit 99% are terrible at teaching. But in their defense, nobody taught them the pedagogy of bullshit. Not that there is one since I had maybe two professors who somehow made (some) sense out of the law. I still don't know how they knew how to pull off teaching something that is virtually unteachable. The law makes about as much sense as an orgy at a church. Not that it's hard, it's just nonsensical and cumulative. I believe that most of my professors were happy because they have a well paying job that will virtually be guaranteed until they croke, all the while interacting with type A personalities who have to basically learn the material on their own. Hell, I'd become a law professor myself but my "grades" definitely wouldn't allow it. Oh well, I guess I'll just be stuck kicking some more ass in the courtroom.

A Note For The Academic
Let me get this straight for all of you academics: There is nothing academic about the law. Nothing. The law is an insurmountable pile of feces collected from every human being dignified with the title of "Judge" or "Legislator". Nothing more, nothing less. The law is the linguistic and logical excrement of every know it all who is given the ability to practice law or elected to make laws (often both). So please, do us real lawyers a favor and quit making it out to be something it isn't--it is not an academic discipline.

What kind of "academic discipline" actually requires you to be an expert in understanding bullshit? And what kind of "academic expertise" can be enough for someone to graduate when they know almost nothing about the bullshit they were required to know? I think you know the answer young padawan. I'm here to explain just how much bullshit law school requires you to "understand" and why discovering early that it was bullshit was what made me a good lawyer. (As a side note--The legal academics who write these law school casebooks, I believe, have the most overinflated sense of self worth that I think they actually believe their own convoluted nonsense.)

Law School is Bullshit
Law school is not hard. Law school is time consuming and cumulative. It's equivalent to going into grade school and learning six years in two (I know, the number analogy is off but you get the point). Meaning that the material isn't hard, it's the amount of bullshit they make you learn in one semester that makes it hard. But I chose not to make it hard, or at least not to learn the material until maybe a week before finals after the first semester of my 1L year. And even after the first month of my first semester I probably only read about 50% of the assigned readings.

As you can tell, I was heading for lazy-town. No I didn't go to a top 50 law school (*gasp*) but neither did the majority of lawyers walking this green earth. To the top 50 schoolers who somehow think your school makes a difference, maybe you had better bullshit professors but the only thing you have up on me is a better understanding of that useless bullshit in that pointless Tribal Law class you had. At least my law school experience gave me a reality check and the luxury of clarity. I realized what education is and what it isn't. I can learn that law coming out of any class you got an A in at your prestigious law school with simple access to WestLaw, and even have a better understanding of it than you. That's not being cocky, that's just being real. I don't care how great your criminal procedure professor was at Yale, I guarantee you I (as a now practicing lawyer in the field) know more about it than you. The law school you went to doesn't make the bullshit any harder, nor does it make it any different. Your willingness to learn it and tell yourself, "Hey! I'm starting to understand this bullshit!", is what makes all the difference.

Quit Caring About Bullshit
I'm going to explain why I stopped caring so quickly, why I realized it didn't matter, and why I chose to be the Jimmy McGill of my law school. No, I'm not proud of it but I'm also not ashamed of it. I'm mostly indifferent. I don't feel any guilt or any remorse. "Ethics" in the law is a program of indoctrination that tries to convince the weak minded that any ethical violation (i.e.-lying about something trivial on a law school application could mean no bar acceptance or disbarment) is somehow reflective of societal moral norms. Well, it's not. It's not ethical to punish someone so severely that they go into debt for thousands of dollars, aligned now with no employment on any level for the time spent slaving to regurgitate bullshit, all the while convincing them their "ethical" transgression is somehow comparable to a kiddie diddler sexually exploiting a 12 year old child. (Ethical=Not ruining a good person's life who, at worst, made a mistake, or was petrified of your arbitrary punishments.)

Uh...What the fuck is this bullshit?
Shortly after beginning law school I realized that nobody had a clue what they were learning. They didn't know how procedure bullshit interacted with case bullshit or how statutory bullshit interacted with procedural bullshit. Not even the slightest clue. Yet we were expected to be tested on it in four months. Well this isn't a good start for anyone...or so it seems.

About halfway through my first semester I started going through a divorce. Pretty catastrophic-sleeping on friend's floor in seedy part of town, two kids, no money, had to watch kids more than my ex, slept on floor with kids...you get the point. I started slacking off on the bullshit readings and once the end of my first semester hit I thought I was screwed. But then again, so did everyone. I still felt I had a good grasp on most of the bullshit so I was fairly confident in the outcome. Took my first exams and had a realization--there is no way anyone could answer everything on that exam. In actuality, that isn't even the point of it. It's supposed to be so convoluted that you can't. Starting to see the bullshit yet?

Every exam tests you on your ability to vomit up as much legalese and rules that you don't even know if your analysis is correct (well, neither does the court if I'm being honest). Not one student thought they did well and not one student thought they fully applied the bullshit correctly. (Pop Quiz: How is this a reflection of your comprehension? You guessed it!--It's not.) It's actually a reflection of your lack of comprehension, hence the curve. If I was taking a graduate level course in embryology and misapplied the stages of embryonic development, I wouldn't get "some" points for just stating the stages of development. I would get no points because I didn't know how the stages applied. That's because embryology is a real academic discipline. And real academic disciplines expect you to know how to apply the knowledge you're taught in the field you study. Well future legal scholar, not in law school!

In law school you will get some points for knowing which rule applies but fewer points for not applying them correctly. That's because "maybe there's an argument to be made". How is this an academic discipline? How can you be tested on something and pass without even comprehending how the knowledge applies to the field you're studying? That's because it's convoluted and that convolution comes from legal precedent, and legal precedent is latin for "bullshit".

Legal precedent is just one decision from a few judges for all to abide by. So when that judge may be in "full retard" mode, while using his-*cough*-logic to create what he calls a rule, you are expected to see that as a faction worthy of study and reasoning, and it is somehow deserving as a faction of "legal scholarship". Wrong, it's a platter of bullshit is what it is.

-The Bullshit Platter-
Your platter of bullshit and confusion comes with
*Arbitrary "legal" elements and/or factors derived from:
-A fine dispute over the theft of a redneck's goat

Doesn't that sound appetizing?

If you're a legal "scholar", I'm sure you'll say that Judge Full Retard (not to be confused with Judge Learned Hand...yes he was a real judge, and a famous one) was trying to give a rule regarding theft in general. Well good sir, I'd say that if it was car theft, and not goat theft, Judge Full Retard may have some different bullshit rule for theft. Plain and simple: Goat theft is not the same as car theft--therefore the law is convoluted bullshit, and in no way scholarly.

So, as you can see, the "rule of law" is the rule of someone who decided this is how to fix this specific problem because this guy is the best at it. And most of the time it doesn't even produce the legal result the Judge set out to do. Uh, I'll take bullshit for 200.

Checking Out
Now, after my first semester I decided to go into "wow, this is not scholarly" mode. My second semester proceeded as follows--showed up for classes most of the time, paid little to no attention, took notes but didn't understand them when I did, never read before class unless it was a "rolling boulder" type of situation, and did all of my legal writing papers the night before they were due (we were expected to prepare them all throughout the semester...e.g. 'the whole point of the class'). Towards the end of my first year, I began studying/cramming around two weeks before my finals. I downloaded bootleg class outlines, made flash cards, basically whatever I could Frankenstein together. Read until I got sick of it then took my finals. Did worse than before but with the same results--I passed. I thought, are you kidding me? This is bullshit right? Rock n' roll and on with the bullshit train!

Full Bullshit
Second year was similar but the shortcuts grew. I began missing class more frequently, didn't EVER read, and my greatest achievement had to be just showing up for class above 50% of the time. Around a week before one of my finals, I realized I knew absolutely nothing about the class other than the days I was supposed to go it. Panic started to set in as I was cramming. I then realized it was a multiple choice exam. I thought to myself, "I'm fucked". I couldn't use the bullshit I just crammed into my noggin since I had to pick the professor's favorite bullshit answer (sounds stupid but often it's true). For about four days I tried to cram as much as I could. But between my kids, my floor sleeping, and my disdain for **arbitrarily** learning bullshit, I had an epiphany--I was going to cheat (another *gasp!*). Yes, I know what you're thinking. How could someone do something so dishonest? Well let me enlighten your mind of empathetic mediocrity.

The Cheat
I realized pretty quickly that I would never practice this type of law, it wasn't on the bar exam, and it was too easy to get away with. I also realized that if the only person I'm hurting is myself, then I'm in for real trouble when Uncle Tony asks me a legal question about environmental property considerations (fucking sarcasm). So with deviance in mind, I just focused on my other exams. But then I realized I had the same concerns in two other courses. Not quite as bad but bad enough that I would need a reminder since it was in essay form. None of my professors monitored us for that three hour bullshit marathon. Not only that--they don't care if you get up to take a piss and they sure as hell don't pay ANY attention to what you're doing. And since these two finals were not open note (very few of mine were even though it seems to be more common at other schools) I typed up all of my bullshit reminders and stored them on my phone. Also, closed note finals don't expect you to apply the rules as well so having a reminder at hand is definitely a leg up. Sat down for both exams, wrote down all of the confusion I had on my hand, and after about an hour I got up and went to the bathroom. Pulled my pants down, took a nice dump, and reminded myself of all the legal bullshit I didn't study for. Passed all my finals and even came out with a few B's. And for you altruists out there who think I screwed someone out of a better grade, you're obviously not very bright. If my C or B screwed someone, they were screwed to begin with. Their B- to my B is not going to get them into "BS & BS Law Firm". You ain't getting As, you ain't getting in.

A Note on Law School Exams
Ironically, when you're analyzing a real legal problem, the last thing you do is haphazardly pull from memory to decide what legal bullshit answers the problem. And rarely do you ever come to this conclusion in three hours. It often takes days to provide a proper analysis for a client. So this is really not a way of measuring your bullshit knowledge. In fact, if this were how you applied your bullshit knowledge as a lawyer, you'd be sued for legal malpractice (and rightfully so). "But your honor! This is how we were taught in law school!" Can't bullshit a bullshitter! Wait...

Round 2
Then came my multiple choice exam. I positioned myself behind a girl I knew paid attention, wore a hat, and angled my eyes catty corner so I could see the patterns of her answers. It was actually tougher than I thought since I didn't realize my vision was actually getting worse. But I pulled it off, changed a few where I thought I actually knew the answer (I stress, a few) and turned it in. Scared shitless that someone saw me or that legal big brother was monitoring my eyes, I waited.

I waited nervously since I hadn't pulled off a hat trick like that since I was in high school. Ended up being my worst grade but I walked away with a C-. Pretty terrible by law school standards but by my sleazy standards it was like getting an A. The following semester I followed suit in another class. Rarely showed up to this one, never took notes, will never see it on the bar, will never practice it, and came out with a C.

Reflections
I thought I would feel bad once I graduated but I didn't feel any different. I didn't feel proud either. But I doubt I would've felt proud even if I was one of those poor saps who stayed late every night studying in the law library to get that "A".

Being a Bullshit Lawyer is Awesome
Once I got out into practice, it was exactly like the lawyer I clerked for told me-- "Law school is bullshit and your grades don't matter. Just get through it. I hated law school and got straight C's. I'm one of the most recognized trial lawyers in the city now, have my own firm, and do well for myself. Your professors are not lawyers. Your professors are law school graduates who don't want to be lawyers."-- I remember him telling me this right before I began. Since I was excited to start law school and finally learn, I thought that it can't be all that bad, and that maybe he just had a bad experience. He laughed when I started bitching but was always encouraging. He said that if I got excited about law school and loved reading restatements, treatises, case law, law review articles, etc., then you'll hate being a lawyer. But if you hate reading all of that bullshit you might actually like being a lawyer. Didn't make since to me until I got into practice. I would now expand on his words of wisdom and say this--If you love reading all that bullshit and you think that it isn't bullshit, you'll hate being a lawyer. But if you hate reading all of that bullshit because you recognized that it's bullshit then you might enjoy being a lawyer.

Why Law School is Good
Law school is good in two ways--you learn the basics necessary to navigate through the law's bullshit, but more importantly, you learn what it doesn't mean to be a lawyer. If you're lucky then you'll figure out on your own what being a lawyer actually is. Being a lawyer is fun. Being in law school is not fun.

Ruling
The truth is, there were way more students like me, they just didn't admit it. Every final I took I saw at least 5-6 people get up to go to the bathroom within the first 15-20 minutes of the final. Did they all have IBS? Or were their minds where mine was once I hit my second year? Just remember, we were all selectively chosen to attend law school due to our ability to see through bullshit. They just don't tell you that what you're there to see through is the bullshit you're learning. And I was no different from you. I just figured it out. Now my life is great, I just don't pretend that what I do is something that it isn't.

Cheers,

Jimmy McGill

User avatar
Mr. Blackacre
Posts: 214
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 11:48 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby Mr. Blackacre » Sat May 06, 2017 4:20 pm

That was painful to read. And you sound like a douche. 10/10 troll though.

User avatar
Capitol_Idea
Posts: 13383
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:54 am

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby Capitol_Idea » Sat May 06, 2017 4:31 pm

I've been using the store brand Jimmy McGill knockoff and it's really all the same stuff

User avatar
mjb447
Posts: 941
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby mjb447 » Sat May 06, 2017 4:41 pm

Is it ironic that anyone with rudimentary bullshit detecting skills isn't going to be taking this screed seriously after a few paragraphs?

JimmyMcGill
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:30 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby JimmyMcGill » Sat May 06, 2017 4:52 pm

Mr. Blackacre wrote:That was painful to read. And you sound like a douche. 10/10 troll though.


Can't please all the suits in the factory. But I'll give you the douche part since I used poo poo and pee pee language. Not that I think of myself that way, I just don't really care what a suit thinks. Don't know what you mean by troll part but I'll take the medal.

JimmyMcGill
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:30 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby JimmyMcGill » Sat May 06, 2017 4:56 pm

mjb447 wrote:Is it ironic that anyone with rudimentary bullshit detecting skills isn't going to be taking this screed seriously after a few paragraphs?


You don't need to be an angry suit. It's all good man. Don't need to get mad at it. I guess it didn't fit the reasonable person standard under Top Law Schools common law, so it must be bullshit. Thinking like a true suit. You'll make an average lawyer.

User avatar
mjb447
Posts: 941
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby mjb447 » Sat May 06, 2017 5:17 pm

JimmyMcGill wrote:
mjb447 wrote:Is it ironic that anyone with rudimentary bullshit detecting skills isn't going to be taking this screed seriously after a few paragraphs?


You don't need to be an angry suit. It's all good man. Don't need to get mad at it. I guess it didn't fit the reasonable person standard under Top Law Schools common law, so it must be bullshit. Thinking like a true suit. You'll make an average lawyer.

Yeah, yeah, you've got it all figured out and are definitely one kewl dood. Keep the hot takes coming.

User avatar
Capitol_Idea
Posts: 13383
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:54 am

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby Capitol_Idea » Sat May 06, 2017 5:22 pm

Wait

This thread is titled as being from "The Real Jimmy McGill"

But in the OP you say you're not giving us your real name

Which is it, OP? The people demand to know.

JimmyMcGill
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:30 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby JimmyMcGill » Sat May 06, 2017 5:29 pm

mjb447 wrote:
JimmyMcGill wrote:
mjb447 wrote:Is it ironic that anyone with rudimentary bullshit detecting skills isn't going to be taking this screed seriously after a few paragraphs?


You don't need to be an angry suit. It's all good man. Don't need to get mad at it. I guess it didn't fit the reasonable person standard under Top Law Schools common law, so it must be bullshit. Thinking like a true suit. You'll make an average lawyer.

Yeah, yeah, you've got it all figured out and are definitely one kewl dood. Keep the hot takes coming.


Thanks, suit. Appreciate the sarcasm. I'm known to indulge myself from time to time. Never said I had it all figured out, just the bullshit part. But maybe you didn't read past the first two paragraphs. No need to be an angry internet suit either. There are some laughs along with something I learned. Keep the mediocre attacks coming.

JimmyMcGill
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:30 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby JimmyMcGill » Sat May 06, 2017 5:31 pm

Capitol_Idea wrote:Wait

This thread is titled as being from "The Real Jimmy McGill"

But in the OP you say you're not giving us your real name

Which is it, OP? The people demand to know.


I don't know what OP means but I think I get it. Silly suit, hyperbole is for smart people!

lapolicia
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 1:23 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby lapolicia » Sat May 06, 2017 6:06 pm

Damn it, I thought this would be a Better Call Saul discussion thread.

dabigchina
Posts: 1067
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:22 am

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby dabigchina » Sat May 06, 2017 6:08 pm

Is the TL;DR that law school sucks?

User avatar
Capitol_Idea
Posts: 13383
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:54 am

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby Capitol_Idea » Sat May 06, 2017 6:09 pm

I take the insult "suit" very personally

I'll have you know what I'm wearing can best be described as a sort of pelt

User avatar
Capitol_Idea
Posts: 13383
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:54 am

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby Capitol_Idea » Sat May 06, 2017 6:17 pm

dabigchina wrote:Is the TL;DR that law school sucks?

I think it's to highlight that unaddressed mental illness is a serious problem in our industry. There are real people like this out there.

User avatar
UVA2B
Posts: 1466
Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 10:48 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby UVA2B » Sat May 06, 2017 6:32 pm

I find it a bit odd that you really think all law students are just mindless drones who believe law school is real legal practice. I think it's pretty easy to pick out that law school will be nothing like the legal practice. There is nothing really groundbreaking or revelatory about that. This isn't the matrix and we all aren't blissfully taking the blue pill.

IExistedOnceBefore
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 8:23 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby IExistedOnceBefore » Sat May 06, 2017 6:33 pm

All I got out of this is that you couldn't even cheat well. Cmon a C when you're copying an A's answers?

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 26341
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sat May 06, 2017 7:18 pm

Next up on Top Law Schools News: water is wet. More at 11.

JimmyMcGill
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:30 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby JimmyMcGill » Sat May 06, 2017 7:32 pm

UVA2B wrote:I find it a bit odd that you really think all law students are just mindless drones who believe law school is real legal practice. I think it's pretty easy to pick out that law school will be nothing like the legal practice. There is nothing really groundbreaking or revelatory about that. This isn't the matrix and we all aren't blissfully taking the blue pill.


Never said that they are drones, nor did I imply it. Clearly you are a troll, as my esteemed colleague introduced me to by saying I fit that definition. The message was more nuanced than your matrix "A or B" logical fallacy. I will say that the matrix analogy is clever but boring considering the underlying message. Well done.

JimmyMcGill
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:30 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby JimmyMcGill » Sat May 06, 2017 7:34 pm

IExistedOnceBefore wrote:All I got out of this is that you couldn't even cheat well. Cmon a C when you're copying an A's answers?


It would be interesting to hear your cheating strategy. Don't know if you caught eyesight qualifier but I'll take it that you and I are both in the same category.

JimmyMcGill
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 3:30 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby JimmyMcGill » Sat May 06, 2017 7:40 pm

Capitol_Idea wrote:I take the insult "suit" very personally

I'll have you know what I'm wearing can best be described as a sort of pelt


Well I think you're wearing it very well but I'll refrain from any further nomenclature that disrupts your tender emotional equilibrium. My friend wants to know what type of law you are want to practice? Thoughts?

User avatar
Capitol_Idea
Posts: 13383
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:54 am

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby Capitol_Idea » Sat May 06, 2017 8:09 pm

JimmyMcGill wrote:
Capitol_Idea wrote:I take the insult "suit" very personally

I'll have you know what I'm wearing can best be described as a sort of pelt


Well I think you're wearing it very well but I'll refrain from any further nomenclature that disrupts your tender emotional equilibrium. My friend wants to know what type of law you are want to practice? Thoughts?

I work plaintiff-side on Internet Law

We got a "Tortious Interference of a Forum" a-brewin' and I can smell the money already

User avatar
encore1101
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:13 am

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby encore1101 » Sat May 06, 2017 8:14 pm

I actually worked with (against) the real(er?) BCS in a case: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/the- ... all-saul-1

cavalier1138
Posts: 3218
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby cavalier1138 » Sat May 06, 2017 9:27 pm

I mean, since the "real" Jimmy McGill is an inveterate liar and con-artist... kudos to you for staying in character?

User avatar
UVA2B
Posts: 1466
Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 10:48 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby UVA2B » Sat May 06, 2017 9:41 pm

Come back when you have something remotely interesting to say. I'll wait for my "suit" insult until then.

User avatar
jchiles
Posts: 832
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: Advice from The Real Jimmy McGill

Postby jchiles » Sat May 06, 2017 9:56 pm

Are you Billy Walsh?




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests