U Chicago 2010

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
Jericwithers
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Jericwithers » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:57 pm

So, just the 1 call today for Giant?

User avatar
Dignan
Posts: 1110
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 5:52 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Dignan » Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:13 pm

As of today, I am finally under review. I've been complete since 12/8.

User avatar
opus127
Posts: 196
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:04 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby opus127 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:17 pm

JollyGreenGiant wrote::D :D :D :D :D

TLS was right. My pessimism was wrong. I've never been happier to be wrong.


Wow!! Congrats!

(Oh, how I wish I'd get a call, too!)

jocelyne
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:15 am

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby jocelyne » Tue Feb 09, 2010 7:22 pm

rejected via email. my cycle is finished. BU it is!

User avatar
Jericwithers
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Jericwithers » Tue Feb 09, 2010 7:23 pm

jocelyne wrote:rejected via email. my cycle is finished. BU it is!


Sorry to hear. When did the email arrive, and were you part of the 2/4 crowd?

acecrusher06
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:27 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby acecrusher06 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 7:57 pm

hmm this is very confusing. they take all day...to send out reject emails?

User avatar
rockchalk86
Posts: 528
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:16 am

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby rockchalk86 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:00 pm

acecrusher06 wrote:hmm this is very confusing. they take all day...to send out reject emails?


One acceptance and one rejection (at least on TLS). Seems very odd.

acecrusher06
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:27 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby acecrusher06 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:01 pm

i wonder what this means for the rest of the 2/4 crowd. WL?

User avatar
TheWire
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby TheWire » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:03 pm

This is so frUsTraTinG

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:06 pm

maudlinstreet wrote:
JollyGreenGiant wrote::D :D :D :D :D

TLS was right. My pessimism was wrong. I've never been happier to be wrong.

congrats dude!


+a lot. I hate to say that I told you so, but I did. :D

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:09 pm

booboo wrote:
managamy wrote:Apropos of nothing: my avatar is in the new SI Swimsuit Issue. Go check her out.


Sorry, Jelena wins.

http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/wp-conten ... vic_81.jpg


No, but thanks for removing yourself from the competition.

Actually, my avatar is going to be taking a class at Harvard :D , although not HLS :| . Not that it matters in my decision, though, of course. :wink:

User avatar
tomhobbes
Posts: 455
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 9:20 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby tomhobbes » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:35 pm

If only I could have gone to Harvard during the Natalie Portman days...

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Kretzy » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:50 pm

tomhobbes wrote:If only I could have gone to Harvard during the Natalie Portman days...


Seriously. I'd go (temporarily) straight for Natalie in a heartbeat.

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:53 pm

I think that Harvard is always going to lead the pack in terms of major celebrity chicks. USC is always going to lead the pack in terms of vapid Hollywood chicks.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby crackberry » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:57 pm

managamy wrote:I think that Harvard is always going to lead the pack in terms of major celebrity chicks. USC is always going to lead the pack in terms of vapid Hollywood chicks.

Stanford has Reese Witherspoon (in real life) and Jennifer Connolly.

Also, I would marry Natalie Portman today, given the chance. And I don't want to get married for a while.

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:00 pm

crackberry wrote:
managamy wrote:I think that Harvard is always going to lead the pack in terms of major celebrity chicks. USC is always going to lead the pack in terms of vapid Hollywood chicks.

Stanford has Reese Witherspoon (in real life) and Jennifer Connolly.

Also, I would marry Natalie Portman today, given the chance. And I don't want to get married for a while.


Not a Reese fan; she's too American and un-exotic to me compared with Catherine Zeta-Jones or Eva Mendes, for example. But still it's pretty creditable for Stanford.

I don't want to get married--ever--but I would seriously reconsider if my tar or a few other foreign ladies were an option. :wink:

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Kretzy » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:09 pm

managamy wrote:
Not a Reese fan; she's too American and un-exotic to me compared with Catherine Zeta-Jones or Eva Mendes, for example. But still it's pretty creditable for Stanford.

I don't want to get married--ever--but I would seriously reconsider if my tar or a few other foreign ladies were an option. :wink:


I'd kind of like to...

Maybe Ryan will come available sometime in the future. And, you know, the laws'll change.

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:12 pm

Kretzy wrote:
managamy wrote:
Not a Reese fan; she's too American and un-exotic to me compared with Catherine Zeta-Jones or Eva Mendes, for example. But still it's pretty creditable for Stanford.

I don't want to get married--ever--but I would seriously reconsider if my tar or a few other foreign ladies were an option. :wink:


I'd kind of like to...

Maybe Ryan will come available sometime in the future. And, you know, the laws'll change.


Although heterosexual (and Catholic), I strongly hope that they do. Marriage should be available to everyone who wants it.

User avatar
booboo
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:39 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby booboo » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:15 pm

managamy wrote:
Kretzy wrote:
managamy wrote:
Not a Reese fan; she's too American and un-exotic to me compared with Catherine Zeta-Jones or Eva Mendes, for example. But still it's pretty creditable for Stanford.

I don't want to get married--ever--but I would seriously reconsider if my tar or a few other foreign ladies were an option. :wink:


I'd kind of like to...

Maybe Ryan will come available sometime in the future. And, you know, the laws'll change.


Although heterosexual (and Catholic), I strongly hope that they do. Marriage should be available to everyone who wants it.


As painful as it will be for Kretzy to be in such an institution...

User avatar
booboo
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:39 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby booboo » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:16 pm

managamy wrote:
booboo wrote:
managamy wrote:Apropos of nothing: my avatar is in the new SI Swimsuit Issue. Go check her out.


Sorry, Jelena wins.

http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/wp-conten ... vic_81.jpg


No, but thanks for removing yourself from the competition.

Actually, my avatar is going to be taking a class at Harvard :D , although not HLS :| . Not that it matters in my decision, though, of course. :wink:


I missed/am out of a competition?

Anyone where Jelena isn't considered a treasure isn't one I want to be in.

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Kretzy » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:17 pm

booboo wrote:
managamy wrote:
Kretzy wrote:
managamy wrote:
Not a Reese fan; she's too American and un-exotic to me compared with Catherine Zeta-Jones or Eva Mendes, for example. But still it's pretty creditable for Stanford.

I don't want to get married--ever--but I would seriously reconsider if my tar or a few other foreign ladies were an option. :wink:


I'd kind of like to...

Maybe Ryan will come available sometime in the future. And, you know, the laws'll change.


Although heterosexual (and Catholic), I strongly hope that they do. Marriage should be available to everyone who wants it.


As painful as it will be for Kretzy to be in such an institution...


I'd like to hate married life as much as the next guy :)

And much appreciated, M. My grandma, a 78 year old devout Catholic, says the same.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby crackberry » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:19 pm

Kretzy wrote:
managamy wrote:
Not a Reese fan; she's too American and un-exotic to me compared with Catherine Zeta-Jones or Eva Mendes, for example. But still it's pretty creditable for Stanford.

I don't want to get married--ever--but I would seriously reconsider if my tar or a few other foreign ladies were an option. :wink:


I'd kind of like to...

Maybe Ryan will come available sometime in the future. And, you know, the laws'll change.

Next time it gets voted on in California it'll be legal. Only reason Prop 8 passed in 2008 was that Obama was on the ballot and many of the (liberal but very anti-gay) minorities who usually stay at home on election day came out to vote. That's a gross oversimplification, but one that does a decent job of explaining Prop 8's otherwise seemingly unlikely passage.

User avatar
booboo
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:39 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby booboo » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:21 pm

crackberry wrote:
Kretzy wrote:
managamy wrote:
Not a Reese fan; she's too American and un-exotic to me compared with Catherine Zeta-Jones or Eva Mendes, for example. But still it's pretty creditable for Stanford.

I don't want to get married--ever--but I would seriously reconsider if my tar or a few other foreign ladies were an option. :wink:


I'd kind of like to...

Maybe Ryan will come available sometime in the future. And, you know, the laws'll change.

Next time it gets voted on in California it'll be legal. Only reason Prop 8 passed in 2008 was that Obama was on the ballot and many of the (liberal but very anti-gay) minorities who usually stay at home on election day came out to vote. That's a gross oversimplification, but one that does a decent job of explaining Prop 8's otherwise seemingly unlikely passage.


And then we have the debacle of the State Senate of NY...

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Kretzy » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:21 pm

crackberry wrote:
Kretzy wrote:
managamy wrote:
Not a Reese fan; she's too American and un-exotic to me compared with Catherine Zeta-Jones or Eva Mendes, for example. But still it's pretty creditable for Stanford.

I don't want to get married--ever--but I would seriously reconsider if my tar or a few other foreign ladies were an option. :wink:


I'd kind of like to...

Maybe Ryan will come available sometime in the future. And, you know, the laws'll change.

Next time it gets voted on in California it'll be legal. Only reason Prop 8 passed in 2008 was that Obama was on the ballot and many of the (liberal but very anti-gay) minorities who usually stay at home on election day came out to vote. That's a gross oversimplification, but one that does a decent job of explaining Prop 8's otherwise seemingly unlikely passage.


All 3 major candidates for Governor in Rhode Island today came together to announce they'd sign a marriage equality bill, another big step. Good to see the progress, sad to see the remaining bigotry (esp. living in Colorado Springs...damn will it feel good to head to a real city).

/rant.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby crackberry » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:23 pm

Kretzy wrote:damn will it feel good to head to a real city).

/rant.

Eh, neither Palo Alto nor New Haven qualify as "real" cities, though you'd be hard pressed to find many rancid anti-gay people in the former (or in the Bay Area in general).




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Christinabruin, hwwong, Kimmysradscreenname and 5 guests