St. John's video interview

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
052220151
Posts: 2421
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:58 am

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby 052220151 » Fri Jan 24, 2014 3:09 pm

Yanky91 wrote:
reasonable_man wrote:
Yanky91 wrote:
reasonable_man wrote:First, I'm pretty sure SJU does not have Order of the Coif. Second, 10% of the graduates at SJU do not get jobs in biglaw. Third, you're honestly just wrong. Sorry.

okay replace order of the coif with top 10%. Look at the stats before you spew shit. http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school=stjohns



My friend. I've been practicing law since before you ever thought SJU was a good idea. I'll assume for a minute that you're referring to the 21 kids that "got biglaw" based on the law school transparency chart, in that it claims that 17 students landed jobs of 501 and more and 4 students landed jobs at firms of 251 to 500. First and foremost, 21 students placed in high paying firms is pretty miserable. But much like your mistaken assumption that one can be "order of the coif" - which does not exist at SJU, you are similarly mistaken that these "stats" mean that 21 students actually landed jobs at biglaw. A sizable number of those 21 are "staff attorneys" which are not associates, they are discovery monkeys that earn half (and sometimes less than half of what associates earn) and are relegated to electronic document review. Further, a good number of those 21 "winners" landed jobs at firms like Wilson Elser; Lewis Brisbois; Goldberg Segalla; etc. (each of which have more than 500 attorneys but are in no way shape or form really biglaw - they pay less than half of a biglaw salary).

So please, do not worry about my "spewing shit" - I'm not. You just don't know what you're talking about and frankly you sound like a fucking moron defending SJU.

Wow! You're a lawyer? Really? You're a lawyer who cannot defend his statements then. You said that SJU=unemployment. Now you're attacking the type of employment. You are way off here bro. WTF are you talking about!? All I said is that you have a good shot at getting a job if you're the top 10% at SJU. My cousin went there and is of counsel at DLA Piper, and I think he will be made partner soon, and he did not graduate in the top 10%, and every single one of his friends is employed. Listen, I never said the school was great, and I never said that I'm going to go there. I simply said your statement that SJU means you will be unemployed even if you graduate from the top 10% of your class is just wrong. It is a foolish blanket statement, and it is not true. If someone wants to go to SJU why do you have to put them down? Read the topic of the thread, and think about it for a while. Maybe it will sink in that you are way off topic. You're even off topic from your own topic. Just stop. You're making lawyers look bad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG7LjVCj50Y


I can't tell if you suffer from a severely delusional confirmation bias, don't realize you are setting fire to strawmen, or are trolling.

Yanky91
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:04 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby Yanky91 » Fri Jan 24, 2014 4:03 pm

I can't tell if you suffer from a severely delusional confirmation bias, don't realize you are setting fire to strawmen, or are trolling.[/quote]

A) I am attacking exactly what he said. That is not a straw man. I am not misrepresenting what he said, or attacking a similar position. I took his quote and simply said it is wrong, and explained why. Go read the posts and think about it. B) severely delusional confirmation bias? I don't know what you mean by this . C) The troll is the person who goes off topic to incite others. You and your friend, in this case, are the trolls who hijacked this thread.

User avatar
reasonable_man
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby reasonable_man » Fri Jan 24, 2014 4:29 pm

Yanky91 wrote:I can't tell if you suffer from a severely delusional confirmation bias, don't realize you are setting fire to strawmen, or are trolling.


A) I am attacking exactly what he said. That is not a straw man. I am not misrepresenting what he said, or attacking a similar position. I took his quote and simply said it is wrong, and explained why. Go read the posts and think about it. B) severely delusional confirmation bias? I don't know what you mean by this . C) The troll is the person who goes off topic to incite others. You and your friend, in this case, are the trolls who hijacked this thread.[/quote]


Funny - not a single of counsel from SJU law listed on DLA's website. Was he order of the coif too?
Last edited by reasonable_man on Fri Jan 24, 2014 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
052220151
Posts: 2421
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:58 am

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby 052220151 » Fri Jan 24, 2014 4:31 pm

Yanky91 wrote:I can't tell if you suffer from a severely delusional confirmation bias, don't realize you are setting fire to strawmen, or are trolling.


A) I am attacking exactly what he said. That is not a straw man. I am not misrepresenting what he said, or attacking a similar position. I took his quote and simply said it is wrong, and explained why. Go read the posts and think about it. B) severely delusional confirmation bias? I don't know what you mean by this . C) The troll is the person who goes off topic to incite others. You and your friend, in this case, are the trolls who hijacked this thread.[/quote]

Confirmation bias is your disregard of cogent evidence and acceptance of selected positive evidence (my cousin werks at DLA Piper GAIZ!!).

Yanky91
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:04 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby Yanky91 » Fri Jan 24, 2014 4:40 pm

deputydog wrote:
Yanky91 wrote:I can't tell if you suffer from a severely delusional confirmation bias, don't realize you are setting fire to strawmen, or are trolling.


A) I am attacking exactly what he said. That is not a straw man. I am not misrepresenting what he said, or attacking a similar position. I took his quote and simply said it is wrong, and explained why. Go read the posts and think about it. B) severely delusional confirmation bias? I don't know what you mean by this . C) The troll is the person who goes off topic to incite others. You and your friend, in this case, are the trolls who hijacked this thread.


Confirmation bias is your disregard of cogent evidence and acceptance of selected positive evidence (my cousin werks at DLA Piper GAIZ!!).[/quote]

What cogent evidence is there for his statement? Please tell me. That "selected positive evidence" goes against his assertion that is the only reason I brought it up.

User avatar
reasonable_man
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby reasonable_man » Fri Jan 24, 2014 4:50 pm

Yanky91 wrote:
deputydog wrote:
Yanky91 wrote:I can't tell if you suffer from a severely delusional confirmation bias, don't realize you are setting fire to strawmen, or are trolling.


A) I am attacking exactly what he said. That is not a straw man. I am not misrepresenting what he said, or attacking a similar position. I took his quote and simply said it is wrong, and explained why. Go read the posts and think about it. B) severely delusional confirmation bias? I don't know what you mean by this . C) The troll is the person who goes off topic to incite others. You and your friend, in this case, are the trolls who hijacked this thread.


Confirmation bias is your disregard of cogent evidence and acceptance of selected positive evidence (my cousin werks at DLA Piper GAIZ!!).


What cogent evidence is there for his statement? Please tell me. That "selected positive evidence" goes against his assertion that is the only reason I brought it up.[/quote]


You really don't buy that of that 10% that you're touting, most if not all of those jobs are Wilson Elser (and similar firms) and/or contract/staff attorney positions and that the real number of true big law associate positions is much smaller. In 2014 you really still believe that law school employment stats aren't gamed to no end by the schools?

Yanky91
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:04 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby Yanky91 » Fri Jan 24, 2014 5:21 pm

reasonable_man wrote:
Yanky91 wrote:I can't tell if you suffer from a severely delusional confirmation bias, don't realize you are setting fire to strawmen, or are trolling.


A) I am attacking exactly what he said. That is not a straw man. I am not misrepresenting what he said, or attacking a similar position. I took his quote and simply said it is wrong, and explained why. Go read the posts and think about it. B) severely delusional confirmation bias? I don't know what you mean by this . C) The troll is the person who goes off topic to incite others. You and your friend, in this case, are the trolls who hijacked this thread.



Funny - not a single of counsel from SJU law listed on DLA's website. Was he order of the coif too?[/quote]

He's on the website as an associate. It hasn't been updated I guess, and grow up please. It's hard to believe you're a lawyer.

User avatar
reasonable_man
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby reasonable_man » Fri Jan 24, 2014 5:24 pm

Yanky91 wrote:
reasonable_man wrote:
Yanky91 wrote:I can't tell if you suffer from a severely delusional confirmation bias, don't realize you are setting fire to strawmen, or are trolling.


A) I am attacking exactly what he said. That is not a straw man. I am not misrepresenting what he said, or attacking a similar position. I took his quote and simply said it is wrong, and explained why. Go read the posts and think about it. B) severely delusional confirmation bias? I don't know what you mean by this . C) The troll is the person who goes off topic to incite others. You and your friend, in this case, are the trolls who hijacked this thread.



Funny - not a single of counsel from SJU law listed on DLA's website. Was he order of the coif too?


He's on the website as an associate. It hasn't been updated I guess, and grow up please. It's hard to believe you're a lawyer.[/quote]

You know that "of counsel" is the position you get when you're getting passed over for partner; right?

Yanky91
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:04 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby Yanky91 » Fri Jan 24, 2014 5:28 pm

reasonable_man wrote:
Yanky91 wrote:
deputydog wrote:
Yanky91 wrote:I can't tell if you suffer from a severely delusional confirmation bias, don't realize you are setting fire to strawmen, or are trolling.




You really don't buy that of that 10% that you're touting, most if not all of those jobs are Wilson Elser (and similar firms) and/or contract/staff attorney positions and that the real number of true big law associate positions is much smaller. In 2014 you really still believe that law school employment stats aren't gamed to no end by the schools?


What are you talking about? You're really going way off track now. Just stop.

User avatar
reasonable_man
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby reasonable_man » Fri Jan 24, 2014 5:32 pm

I'm way off track? Not really pal. I know that you may think you know the way law firms work.. But in most firms, being made of counsel is the alternative to being made partner, not the precursor. Sorry. Just the way it is.

Is there anything else you'd like to be wrong about today?

Yanky91
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:04 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby Yanky91 » Fri Jan 24, 2014 5:35 pm

reasonable_man wrote:I'm way off track? Not really pal. I know that you may think you know the way law firms work.. But in most firms, being made of counsel is the alternative to being made partner, not the precursor. Sorry. Just the way it is.

Is there anything else you'd like to be wrong about today?


?
Please stop posting. This has just become very sad.

User avatar
reasonable_man
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby reasonable_man » Fri Jan 24, 2014 5:43 pm

Yanky91 wrote:
reasonable_man wrote:I'm way off track? Not really pal. I know that you may think you know the way law firms work.. But in most firms, being made of counsel is the alternative to being made partner, not the precursor. Sorry. Just the way it is.

Is there anything else you'd like to be wrong about today?


?
Please stop posting. This has just become very sad.


Nope. I'm good.

User avatar
beach_terror
Posts: 7249
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:01 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby beach_terror » Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:05 pm

Another practicing attorney here. I also fought with reasonable_man when I was deciding to attend my T2 (although I had a different username then) and said all the same things you are all saying. At least 50% of my class (2013) is unemployed in a less saturated legal market than NYC. People are THRILLED to be interviewing for shitty ID jobs that pay 45k - which provide virtually no upward mobility. It worked out for me in the end, but I could very easily be one of those trying to service 170k of debt on a 45k salary. I'm not going to sit here and tell you I deserved my job and I got what was coming to me - it was about 80% luck and 20% hard work to end up employed (and I was in the top 15% of my class and worked four different legal jobs from 2L-3L).

Even now, I'm paying roughly 45k of my take home salary just to get my loans under control (I was generating about 1k/mo in interest alone at graduation). I make 115k a year and I still stress about budgeting and saving.

If you end up going, make a Google calendar reminder to come back to this thread when you're hurdling toward graduation without a job (which is, statistically speaking, the most likely outcome). I sincerely hope it works out for ok for whoever attends, but the reality of how fucked you can be truly doesn't set in until your third year. If you do go, be sure to work at a place that may be able to hire you every semester from 2L onward.

ETA I understand it's annoying to have people coming in and shit on a choice you're proud to be making. In reality, we're just trying to be helpful. It's really difficult to understand the state of the legal market and your chance at a meaningful job when you're on the outside looking in. Law school is a jading experience for almost everyone involved.

Chriz
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:33 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby Chriz » Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:13 pm

beach_terror wrote:Another practicing attorney here. I also fought with reasonable_man when I was deciding to attend my T2 (although I had a different username then) and said all the same things you are all saying. At least 50% of my class (2013) is unemployed in a less saturated legal market than NYC. People are THRILLED to be interviewing for shitty ID jobs that pay 45k - which provide virtually no upward mobility. It worked out for me in the end, but I could very easily be one of those trying to service 170k of debt on a 45k salary. I'm not going to sit here and tell you I deserved my job and I got what was coming to me - it was about 80% luck and 20% hard work to end up employed (and I was in the top 15% of my class and worked four different legal jobs from 2L-3L).

Even now, I'm paying roughly 45k of my take home salary just to get my loans under control (I was generating about 1k/mo in interest alone at graduation). I make 115k a year and I still stress about budgeting and saving.

If you end up going, make a Google calendar reminder to come back to this thread when you're hurdling toward graduation without a job (which is, statistically speaking, the most likely outcome). I sincerely hope it works out for ok for whoever attends, but the reality of how fucked you can be truly doesn't set in until your third year. If you do go, be sure to work at a place that may be able to hire you every semester from 2L onward.

ETA I understand it's annoying to have people coming in and shit on a choice you're proud to be making. In reality, we're just trying to be helpful. It's really difficult to understand the state of the legal market and your chance at a meaningful job when you're on the outside looking in. Law school is a jading experience for almost everyone involved.


I'd just stop trolling. He already sees through your lies. You are all just trying to keep people from going to law school because you want all the high paying jobs for yourselves!

Yanky91
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:04 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby Yanky91 » Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:30 pm

beach_terror wrote:Another practicing attorney here. I also fought with reasonable_man when I was deciding to attend my T2 (although I had a different username then) and said all the same things you are all saying. At least 50% of my class (2013) is unemployed in a less saturated legal market than NYC. People are THRILLED to be interviewing for shitty ID jobs that pay 45k - which provide virtually no upward mobility. It worked out for me in the end, but I could very easily be one of those trying to service 170k of debt on a 45k salary. I'm not going to sit here and tell you I deserved my job and I got what was coming to me - it was about 80% luck and 20% hard work to end up employed (and I was in the top 15% of my class and worked four different legal jobs from 2L-3L).

Even now, I'm paying roughly 45k of my take home salary just to get my loans under control (I was generating about 1k/mo in interest alone at graduation). I make 115k a year and I still stress about budgeting and saving.

If you end up going, make a Google calendar reminder to come back to this thread when you're hurdling toward graduation without a job (which is, statistically speaking, the most likely outcome). I sincerely hope it works out for ok for whoever attends, but the reality of how fucked you can be truly doesn't set in until your third year. If you do go, be sure to work at a place that may be able to hire you every semester from 2L onward.

ETA I understand it's annoying to have people coming in and shit on a choice you're proud to be making. In reality, we're just trying to be helpful. It's really difficult to understand the state of the legal market and your chance at a meaningful job when you're on the outside looking in. Law school is a jading experience for almost everyone involved.


If this was directed at me, I agree with almost everything you said. However, I think that if someone's only shot at becoming a lawyer is going to SJU, then who are we to shit on their dreams? The school is not as bad as everyone makes it out to be, and if you just want to be a lawyer (especially if you have a job lined up for when you graduate) then you should go to your top choice, even if it is SJU. There is no reason to say shit like "God help you" and "top 10% from SJU just means you will be unemployed with a certificate that reads summa cum laude". The reality is, if you graduate in the top 10% from SJU it is actually likely that you get a job as a lawyer. The school is not that shitty.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22846
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:46 pm

If someone really does already have a job where they just need a JD, any JD, to advance, sure, St John's is great. Any school in that context is great (presuming that nothing is going to change during the 3-4 years of law school). Most people who come here for advice aren't in that situation, which is why people respond the way they do.

No one wants to shit on anyone's dreams, but going after dreams has its costs. If I'd dreamed of being a pro golfer, for instance, I hope someone would have told me early on that since I have terrible hand-eye coordination (due to eyesight issues), it would be a waste of time and money for me to put my everything into that particular dream. If you have the money and time and don't mind losing either of those things to pursue your dream, go for it. Again, most people here don't. $250K in federal loans is a LOT of debt, and it doesn't really seem real until you've incurred it. (Before that it just sounds like monopoly money.)

Also, reasonable_man and beach_terror are practicing attorneys who don't have to come here to talk about what the legal market for TT, TTT, and TTTT grads in New York is like, so it's a shame to see people who don't have that experience shitting on them for doing so. Willful ignorance isn't pretty.

User avatar
reasonable_man
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby reasonable_man » Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:43 pm

Chriz wrote:
beach_terror wrote:Another practicing attorney here. I also fought with reasonable_man when I was deciding to attend my T2 (although I had a different username then) and said all the same things you are all saying. At least 50% of my class (2013) is unemployed in a less saturated legal market than NYC. People are THRILLED to be interviewing for shitty ID jobs that pay 45k - which provide virtually no upward mobility. It worked out for me in the end, but I could very easily be one of those trying to service 170k of debt on a 45k salary. I'm not going to sit here and tell you I deserved my job and I got what was coming to me - it was about 80% luck and 20% hard work to end up employed (and I was in the top 15% of my class and worked four different legal jobs from 2L-3L).

Even now, I'm paying roughly 45k of my take home salary just to get my loans under control (I was generating about 1k/mo in interest alone at graduation). I make 115k a year and I still stress about budgeting and saving.

If you end up going, make a Google calendar reminder to come back to this thread when you're hurdling toward graduation without a job (which is, statistically speaking, the most likely outcome). I sincerely hope it works out for ok for whoever attends, but the reality of how fucked you can be truly doesn't set in until your third year. If you do go, be sure to work at a place that may be able to hire you every semester from 2L onward.

ETA I understand it's annoying to have people coming in and shit on a choice you're proud to be making. In reality, we're just trying to be helpful. It's really difficult to understand the state of the legal market and your chance at a meaningful job when you're on the outside looking in. Law school is a jading experience for almost everyone involved.


I'd just stop trolling. He already sees through your lies. You are all just trying to keep people from going to law school because you want all the high paying jobs for yourselves!



My friend. We have those jobs already and no one in law school or approaching law school is going to take them away from us. I have dozens of cases under my belt, argued in every appellate court in the NYC area and have gone toe to toe with biglaw partners. Believe me - we are not concerned about you taking our jobs.

Between my wife and I, we clear well over 200K and guess what - paying down the loans still sucks. I cannot imagine doing it on half or a third of my salary - which is exactly what half of my law school graduating class of 2008 is still trying to do. In a graduating class from a school like SJU, if 5% are earning true biglaw salaries another 5% land in good small to mid-sized firms. The vast majority are earning 40 to 55k in awful sweatshop-law firms. Those sort of places offer no upward mobility and are long-term dead ends. And then there are the poor bastards that have no job at all - and that number is growing each year. And guess what, once you're out 1 year or more without a real job, no one, even the sweatshops will touch you. This is reality.

User avatar
reasonable_man
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby reasonable_man » Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:48 pm

Yanky91 wrote:
beach_terror wrote:Another practicing attorney here. I also fought with reasonable_man when I was deciding to attend my T2 (although I had a different username then) and said all the same things you are all saying. At least 50% of my class (2013) is unemployed in a less saturated legal market than NYC. People are THRILLED to be interviewing for shitty ID jobs that pay 45k - which provide virtually no upward mobility. It worked out for me in the end, but I could very easily be one of those trying to service 170k of debt on a 45k salary. I'm not going to sit here and tell you I deserved my job and I got what was coming to me - it was about 80% luck and 20% hard work to end up employed (and I was in the top 15% of my class and worked four different legal jobs from 2L-3L).

Even now, I'm paying roughly 45k of my take home salary just to get my loans under control (I was generating about 1k/mo in interest alone at graduation). I make 115k a year and I still stress about budgeting and saving.

If you end up going, make a Google calendar reminder to come back to this thread when you're hurdling toward graduation without a job (which is, statistically speaking, the most likely outcome). I sincerely hope it works out for ok for whoever attends, but the reality of how fucked you can be truly doesn't set in until your third year. If you do go, be sure to work at a place that may be able to hire you every semester from 2L onward.

ETA I understand it's annoying to have people coming in and shit on a choice you're proud to be making. In reality, we're just trying to be helpful. It's really difficult to understand the state of the legal market and your chance at a meaningful job when you're on the outside looking in. Law school is a jading experience for almost everyone involved.


If this was directed at me, I agree with almost everything you said. However, I think that if someone's only shot at becoming a lawyer is going to SJU, then who are we to shit on their dreams? The school is not as bad as everyone makes it out to be, and if you just want to be a lawyer (especially if you have a job lined up for when you graduate) then you should go to your top choice, even if it is SJU. There is no reason to say shit like "God help you" and "top 10% from SJU just means you will be unemployed with a certificate that reads summa cum laude". The reality is, if you graduate in the top 10% from SJU it is actually likely that you get a job as a lawyer. The school is not that shitty.


Please tell me that the job you have lined up is not at DLA Piper with your cousin? I do hope that that is not what you are banking on.

Yanky91
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:04 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby Yanky91 » Sat Jan 25, 2014 6:58 pm

reasonable_man wrote:
Yanky91 wrote:
beach_terror wrote:Another practicing attorney here. I also fought with reasonable_man when I was deciding to attend my T2 (although I had a different username then) and said all the same things you are all saying. At least 50% of my class (2013) is unemployed in a less saturated legal market than NYC. People are THRILLED to be interviewing for shitty ID jobs that pay 45k - which provide virtually no upward mobility. It worked out for me in the end, but I could very easily be one of those trying to service 170k of debt on a 45k salary. I'm not going to sit here and tell you I deserved my job and I got what was coming to me - it was about 80% luck and 20% hard work to end up employed (and I was in the top 15% of my class and worked four different legal jobs from 2L-3L).

Even now, I'm paying roughly 45k of my take home salary just to get my loans under control (I was generating about 1k/mo in interest alone at graduation). I make 115k a year and I still stress about budgeting and saving.

If you end up going, make a Google calendar reminder to come back to this thread when you're hurdling toward graduation without a job (which is, statistically speaking, the most likely outcome). I sincerely hope it works out for ok for whoever attends, but the reality of how fucked you can be truly doesn't set in until your third year. If you do go, be sure to work at a place that may be able to hire you every semester from 2L onward.

ETA I understand it's annoying to have people coming in and shit on a choice you're proud to be making. In reality, we're just trying to be helpful. It's really difficult to understand the state of the legal market and your chance at a meaningful job when you're on the outside looking in. Law school is a jading experience for almost everyone involved.


If this was directed at me, I agree with almost everything you said. However, I think that if someone's only shot at becoming a lawyer is going to SJU, then who are we to shit on their dreams? The school is not as bad as everyone makes it out to be, and if you just want to be a lawyer (especially if you have a job lined up for when you graduate) then you should go to your top choice, even if it is SJU. There is no reason to say shit like "God help you" and "top 10% from SJU just means you will be unemployed with a certificate that reads summa cum laude". The reality is, if you graduate in the top 10% from SJU it is actually likely that you get a job as a lawyer. The school is not that shitty.


Please tell me that the job you have lined up is not at DLA Piper with your cousin? I do hope that that is not what you are banking on.


? I am not referring to myself. Re-read the post. My top school is not SJU. I just came on here to answer a question, and to explain why your original post was inaccurate.

User avatar
goldeneye
Posts: 792
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:25 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby goldeneye » Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:12 pm

Reading this entire thread makes my head hurt.

It isn't about crushing people's dreams to be a lawyer. It's about making sure they don't deal with financial ruin once they graduate. Going to St. John's gives you more than a 75% chance at financial ruin and that's conservative.

Yanky91
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:04 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby Yanky91 » Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:34 pm

goldeneye wrote:Reading this entire thread makes my head hurt.

It isn't about crushing people's dreams to be a lawyer. It's about making sure they don't deal with financial ruin once they graduate. Going to St. John's gives you more than a 75% chance at financial ruin and that's conservative.


What you're saying is true, and it would make sense if the topic of this thread was whether or not sticker at SJU is a wise choice. But the topic was about SJU acceptances and video interviews. Save the SJU employment statistics, and cost figures, for the thread that asks. If someone's best shot at becoming a lawyer is SJU, and they did not ask your opinion on whether or not they should go, then why give it? To protect this anonymous poster from financial ruin? What do you care? What do I care? That's not even what they asked.

I didn't say "crushing". I said "shitting on".

User avatar
LyricsToLitigation
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 6:42 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby LyricsToLitigation » Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:40 pm

goldeneye wrote:Reading this entire thread makes my head hurt.

It isn't about crushing people's dreams to be a lawyer. It's about making sure they don't deal with financial ruin once they graduate. Going to St. John's gives you more than a 75% chance at financial ruin and that's conservative.


^^^^^^ this times a million ^^^^^^
if this is your best shot as a lawyer... maybe you should find another profession? OR take the 3 months off however u have to do it (i moved in with a friend and ate(currently still eating) ramen - to study for the lsat non stop. went from a 154 to 170-175 in practice to a 166 on test day. RETAKE if schools this rank and lower are your only shot. PLEASE!!!!

User avatar
reasonable_man
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby reasonable_man » Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:55 am

So let me see if I can follow the logic here. If someone wants to go to law school that means that they have to go to law school, even if that decision requires a quarter of a million dollar investment and little to no hope that the investment will pay off? Lets assume that 10% of SJU grads earn spots at a biglaw firm (which is not reality - and does not happen), but lets pretend for a minute that there is some truth to this "statistic" and 10% of SJU grads earn a spot in biglaw.

First, what happens to the other 90% of the graduates?

Second, do you think that it is remotely likely that someone who is trying to scrape their way into SJU by attending some ridiculous prep course and/or being forced to "interview" is going to be anywhere near the top 10% of the class?

Third, will you at least concede that at least 40 to 50 % of students that attend SJU will be jobless at graduation and that the 40% employed in non-biglaw are mostly working in PI / ID mills for 40 to 55k per year (trying to service tremendous loans)?

What you don't get is that I have no horse in this race. I'm good brother. I earn a nice living in a really good firm. I'd love for that to be the reality for all law grads. But its not and I've seen up close how ugly it can be for those that do not get lucky. And believe me, while I worked like an animal to get where I am, I'm not vein enough to think that luck did not play a substantial role in my getting to where I am today. So the real question is: Why are you trying to defend SJU? What horse do you have in the race? Is this all to help you feel better about choosing another similarly low ranked school?

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

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby rad lulz » Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:58 am

k
Last edited by rad lulz on Thu Sep 08, 2016 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

kris4842
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:04 pm

Re: St. John's video interview

Postby kris4842 » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:56 am

Back to the original post topic and enough with giving out your opinions. Thank you for your advice but some of us have our own reasons for going to St Johns so please stay out of this forum. Again no one is asking your opinion about this school. So has anyone else received an interview and has anyone heard back?




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Zoe107 and 4 guests