Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
acdisagod
Posts: 431
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:46 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby acdisagod » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:09 pm

I think suing an institution full of the greatest legal minds in the country with no evidence is both a constructive use of time and an excellent use of our tax dollars.

Once again, how can someone below median have a case. They are by definition a poor applicant. Even if it was descrimination all the school has to say is that she is below the median.

User avatar
SaintClarence27
Posts: 700
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:48 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby SaintClarence27 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:14 pm

.
Last edited by SaintClarence27 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
SaintClarence27
Posts: 700
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:48 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby SaintClarence27 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:20 pm

.
Last edited by SaintClarence27 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

acdisagod
Posts: 431
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:46 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby acdisagod » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:23 pm

What determinations are there to make? This is how any argument would go
Sibley: It was discrimination
Georgetown: Sibley's gpa was well below the median and her LSAT was average at best. We reject plenty of candidates with Sibley's numbers. Furthermore, her application stunk of entitlement and douchiness.
Sibley:But it was discrimination

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby Unitas » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:25 pm

SaintClarence27 wrote:
Unitas wrote:Based on that alone I wouldn't want to be in classes with her. Sexual harassment is the same as discrimination, so I bet she throws that around too.


Wow. Just... wow. Based on this quote, I don't think I'd want to be in classes with you.


How so? She throws around something on an internet message bored based on little to nothing about a law school discriminating on a day when the school rejects hundreds of people. She then acts like who cares, they have to prove they didn't, then said well I'm going to go home and yell at my mother and boyfriend - who won't understand. Does any of that really seem rational to you?

User avatar
calicocat
Posts: 1099
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 1:29 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby calicocat » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:30 pm

acdisagod wrote:What determinations are there to make? This is how any argument would go
Sibley: It was discrimination
Georgetown: Sibley's gpa was well below the median and her LSAT was average at best. We reject plenty of candidates with Sibley's numbers. Furthermore, her application stunk of entitlement and douchiness.
Sibley:But it was discrimination

This is funny :lol:

User avatar
Shellbelle
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 12:36 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby Shellbelle » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:31 pm

sibley wrote:Please don't turn this into some sort of huge argument... I'm just curious about something.

If any current applicants have stories about mental disability causing trouble for them getting into a law school (eg. getting an email asking them to submit proof that their disability is under control at an auto-admit school), etc. Could you please message me?

Thanks.



maybe we should all just leave it alone...she said it was a "mental" disability on another topic. She's clearly got some bigger issues that Georgetown. Just a thought...

User avatar
calicocat
Posts: 1099
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 1:29 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby calicocat » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:34 pm

itt we discover that Georgetown takes a holistic approach

User avatar
SaintClarence27
Posts: 700
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:48 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby SaintClarence27 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:38 pm

.
Last edited by SaintClarence27 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
DeSilentio2728
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:38 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby DeSilentio2728 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:41 pm

DeSilentio2728 wrote:
adameus wrote:
blackmamba76 wrote:LMAO!!! But seriously, I agree with you. You got all these idiots trying to get into law school and they are already dismissing a case based on what they see on the surface, isn't that the reason why they subject us to those nerve wrecking logic games, so you can look beyond what's on the surface? Please, Sibley do your research and sue the pants of them if you can make a case. They tell you all these crap about how the admission process is beyond numbers but they use things in your application against you that should count as softs!...Here I come Ph.D Economics program, Yale, Harvard, Stanford, BC, Brown, Michigan.....


I really don't think anyone is commenting on the merits of the legal case, I think what they are commenting on is the over-reaction of sibley.


If you believe that this is simply someone overreacting to some negative news then why do you feel as though you even need to comment, as your responding in such a way would only serve to belittle the person even more during this difficult time?


This may/may not be a simple knee jerk reaction to some tragic news. After a few days have passed I am sure that Sibley will take another look at the situation and determine the appropriate course of action (whether that be to file suit or not). For now, however, this thread has become destructive to a fellow tls member during a difficult time, and those who have resorted to name calling, etc... should be ashamed of themselves, and I, for one, hope that karma comes back and kicks them in the ass.

User avatar
SaintClarence27
Posts: 700
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:48 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby SaintClarence27 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:43 pm

.
Last edited by SaintClarence27 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
SaintClarence27
Posts: 700
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:48 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby SaintClarence27 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:46 pm

.
Last edited by SaintClarence27 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby Unitas » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:47 pm

SaintClarence27 wrote:
Unitas wrote:
SaintClarence27 wrote:
Unitas wrote:Based on that alone I wouldn't want to be in classes with her. Sexual harassment is the same as discrimination, so I bet she throws that around too.


Wow. Just... wow. Based on this quote, I don't think I'd want to be in classes with you.


How so? She throws around something on an internet message bored based on little to nothing about a law school discriminating on a day when the school rejects hundreds of people. She then acts like who cares, they have to prove they didn't, then said well I'm going to go home and yell at my mother and boyfriend - who won't understand. Does any of that really seem rational to you?


Fine, then comment on her ACTUAL actions rather than throwing around accusations that she'd make false sexual harassment claims. Seriously, that's pretty low. She made the comment about yelling PRIOR to all this, by the way, and it seemed facetious to me.


sibley wrote:thanks! hoping for special preferred =) ...taking it as a good sign that I haven't gotten a rejection email yet.


sibley wrote:dinged at gtown. planning on going the lawyer route and suing up the yingyang for discrimination as everyone else with my numbers was either in or waitlisted.


This was after she was just hoping to be waitlisted..... Sorry, but irrational now is likely to be irrational later.

I hope she was just kidding around, but unlikely... Suing up the yingyang? Come on...

User avatar
adameus
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 2:07 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby adameus » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:50 pm

DeSilentio2728 wrote:
DeSilentio2728 wrote:
adameus wrote:
blackmamba76 wrote:LMAO!!! But seriously, I agree with you. You got all these idiots trying to get into law school and they are already dismissing a case based on what they see on the surface, isn't that the reason why they subject us to those nerve wrecking logic games, so you can look beyond what's on the surface? Please, Sibley do your research and sue the pants of them if you can make a case. They tell you all these crap about how the admission process is beyond numbers but they use things in your application against you that should count as softs!...Here I come Ph.D Economics program, Yale, Harvard, Stanford, BC, Brown, Michigan.....


I really don't think anyone is commenting on the merits of the legal case, I think what they are commenting on is the over-reaction of sibley.


If you believe that this is simply someone overreacting to some negative news then why do you feel as though you even need to comment, as your responding in such a way would only serve to belittle the person even more during this difficult time?


This may/may not be a simple knee jerk reaction to some tragic news. After a few days have passed I am sure that Sibley will take another look at the situation and determine the appropriate course of action (whether that be to file suit or not). For now, however, this thread has become destructive to a fellow tls member during a difficult time, and those who have resorted to name calling, etc... should be ashamed of themselves, and I, for one, hope that karma comes back and kicks them in the ass.


I wish the best of luck to Sibley in all of her other applications. We all get a bit emotional when we recieve a rejection. Hopefully she recovers from this well and goes on to a succesful career in law.

User avatar
SaintClarence27
Posts: 700
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:48 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby SaintClarence27 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:54 pm

.
Last edited by SaintClarence27 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Xizenta
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:53 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby Xizenta » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:01 pm

sibley wrote:
swheat wrote:
sibley wrote:I plan on using my copy of modern constitutional law for at least one class... and then I plan on using the supplement, which I expect to be on reserve, at the library. and if it's not there I'ma sue.


How do you know which casebook your conlaw prof will use? This year pretty much all of the Hastings conlaw profs are using the Stone casebook, so that students can save money by not buying a different one for Conlaw 2.

I assume you are talking about the Chemerinsky supplement. That is really popular so even if it is on reserve, it might be in use more often than not. You might want to just fork over the money for that one, although it does cost around $50. Everybody says it is the most useful 1L supplement.


No... I'm debt averse. I fully plan on researching textbooks prior to picking a school... in conjunction with which courses I plan on taking as electives as well, of course.




Quote from Hastings thread, Feb 02, 09

"Fully Expecting" a supplement on reserve at the library, else she would sue. There had better be enough copies for every student enrolled at hastings too, otherwise it's just not fair. And there is no way she would spend 50 dollars to buy it for herself, because unlike the rest of us silly bastards, she happens to be debt averse.

I read that shit two months ago, looked at that avatar of a little girl on a huge chair, and thought to myself.... this person is retarded, please avoid reading all future posts when this avatar shows up in the corner of your eye. I failed.

User avatar
DeSilentio2728
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:38 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby DeSilentio2728 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:04 pm

If you believe that this is simply someone overreacting to some negative news then why do you feel as though you even need to comment, as your responding in such a way would only serve to belittle the person even more during this difficult time?


This may/may not be a simple knee jerk reaction to some tragic news. After a few days have passed I am sure that Sibley will take another look at the situation and determine the appropriate course of action (whether that be to file suit or not). For now, however, this thread has become destructive to a fellow tls member during a difficult time, and those who have resorted to name calling, etc... should be ashamed of themselves, and I, for one, hope that karma comes back and kicks them in the ass.[/quote]

I wish the best of luck to Sibley in all of her other applications. We all get a bit emotional when we recieve a rejection. Hopefully she recovers from this well and goes on to a succesful career in law.[/quote]

We all get a bit defensive, aggressive, and adversarial in these forums (I certainly have) but we also have to put the conversations into perspective.

The debate on whether or not law schools blatantly discriminate against applicants with regard to mental health issues is a good debate to have, however. I highly doubt that G-Town does this, but I know with exact certainty that some of the lesser ranked law schools do, as I have written correspondences to this fact (will not disclose). I believe that with regard to the lesser ranked schools, this may be a factor of less qualified people working in the admissions office who do not understand or are put off by the simplest of mental health issues (University of Miami I am speaking about you).

User avatar
beef wellington
Posts: 882
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:05 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby beef wellington » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:08 pm

Sorry to everyone who got dinged today.

User avatar
DeSilentio2728
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:38 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby DeSilentio2728 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:11 pm

Xizenta wrote:
sibley wrote:
swheat wrote:
sibley wrote:I plan on using my copy of modern constitutional law for at least one class... and then I plan on using the supplement, which I expect to be on reserve, at the library. and if it's not there I'ma sue.


How do you know which casebook your conlaw prof will use? This year pretty much all of the Hastings conlaw profs are using the Stone casebook, so that students can save money by not buying a different one for Conlaw 2.

I assume you are talking about the Chemerinsky supplement. That is really popular so even if it is on reserve, it might be in use more often than not. You might want to just fork over the money for that one, although it does cost around $50. Everybody says it is the most useful 1L supplement.


No... I'm debt averse. I fully plan on researching textbooks prior to picking a school... in conjunction with which courses I plan on taking as electives as well, of course.




Quote from Hastings thread, Feb 02, 09

"Fully Expecting" a supplement on reserve at the library, else she would sue. There had better be enough copies for every student enrolled at hastings too, otherwise it's just not fair. And there is no way she would spend 50 dollars to buy it for herself, because unlike the rest of us silly bastards, she happens to be debt averse.

I read that shit two months ago, looked at that avatar of a little girl on a huge chair, and thought to myself.... this person is retarded, please avoid reading all future posts when this avatar shows up in the corner of your eye. I failed.


Are you really doing reconnaissance work to continue putting down a person? You sir are an exceptional dumbass.
Last edited by DeSilentio2728 on Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
SaintClarence27
Posts: 700
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:48 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby SaintClarence27 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:11 pm

.
Last edited by SaintClarence27 on Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby D. H2Oman » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:16 pm

SaintClarence27 wrote:
DeSilentio2728 wrote:The debate on whether or not law schools blatantly discriminate against applicants with regard to mental health issues is a good debate to have, however. I highly doubt that G-Town does this, but I know with exact certainty that some of the lesser ranked law schools do, as I have written correspondences to this fact (will not disclose). I believe that with regard to the lesser ranked schools, this may be a factor of less qualified people working in the admissions office who do not understand or are put off by the simplest of mental health issues (University of Miami I am speaking about you).


This I agree with. I also think that it's a little presumptuous of people to assume that they know all of the details and that there's no way discrimination could have been involved.


It's not dude. Come on.

User avatar
Kim617
Posts: 784
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:36 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby Kim617 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:18 pm

So sorry to change the subject, but a couple of pages back someone asked about ASW. It was absolutely amazing. I had the chance to talk to dean cornblatt for a couple of minutes, and he was there the whole time. Everyone went above and beyond to be helpful. I wanted to see an actual room in gewirz so a current 1L called her friend and he showed us his room in a minute's notice. The financial aid info was so helpful and the visit definitely solidified my decision.

User avatar
unknownscholar
Posts: 258
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:22 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby unknownscholar » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:22 pm

Shellbelle wrote:
sibley wrote:Please don't turn this into some sort of huge argument... I'm just curious about something.

If any current applicants have stories about mental disability causing trouble for them getting into a law school (eg. getting an email asking them to submit proof that their disability is under control at an auto-admit school), etc. Could you please message me?

Thanks.



maybe we should all just leave it alone...she said it was a "mental" disability on another topic. She's clearly got some bigger issues that Georgetown. Just a thought...


I was just thinking that her cause may be the very reason we've witnessed this. But if it is, it does call into question the "good fit" that she would, presumably, want/need to justify, while GULC would presumably want/need to establish that disabled students have a fair shot at a seat. Someone on the other thread said something to the effect that it has to be established that the disability is under control? Seems like a reasonable expectation.

DeSilentio2728 wrote:This may/may not be a simple knee jerk reaction to some tragic news. After a few days have passed I am sure that Sibley will take another look at the situation and determine the appropriate course of action (whether that be to file suit or not). For now, however, this thread has become destructive to a fellow tls member during a difficult time, and those who have resorted to name calling, etc... should be ashamed of themselves, and I, for one, hope that karma comes back and kicks them in the ass.


One could argue that berating some for berating others is just as bad.

fwiw, rejection is bad no matter how it comes, and never easy to take. but I have a feeling this whole discussion would have taken a higher trajectory if it hadn't started with an inflammatory and unreasonable claim on gulc. And the unreasonable nature of the claim stems from the lack of context with which we were presented.

Also, just curious, has there been a ruling that UM has under qualified admissions staff who do not understand or are put off by the simplest of mental health rules? the TLS community could benefit from this information (a link maybe?) I am presuming you know this (not being facetious here), because otherwise your claim might be considered defamatory, and may not be helping your case for sibley.

I'll be the first to say all this is definitely outside my realm of understanding, but I'm just trying to provide some context as to why I'm not more sympathetic about this. I'm more perplexed than anything else.

User avatar
DeSilentio2728
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:38 pm

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby DeSilentio2728 » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:23 pm

D. H2Oman wrote:
SaintClarence27 wrote:
DeSilentio2728 wrote:The debate on whether or not law schools blatantly discriminate against applicants with regard to mental health issues is a good debate to have, however. I highly doubt that G-Town does this, but I know with exact certainty that some of the lesser ranked law schools do, as I have written correspondences to this fact (will not disclose). I believe that with regard to the lesser ranked schools, this may be a factor of less qualified people working in the admissions office who do not understand or are put off by the simplest of mental health issues (University of Miami I am speaking about you).


This I agree with. I also think that it's a little presumptuous of people to assume that they know all of the details and that there's no way discrimination could have been involved.


It's not dude. Come on.


With what knowledge do you come in here making that very uninformed statement? Your assumptions having never been in a similar situation?

I have the evidence to make a substantial claim with regard to this issue, and thus, I believe that I have sufficient reason to speak on this topic? I fail to see what you offer here except for conjecture?

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: Georgetown 2013/ (2014)

Postby D. H2Oman » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:29 pm

DeSilentio2728 wrote:
D. H2Oman wrote:
SaintClarence27 wrote:
DeSilentio2728 wrote:The debate on whether or not law schools blatantly discriminate against applicants with regard to mental health issues is a good debate to have, however. I highly doubt that G-Town does this, but I know with exact certainty that some of the lesser ranked law schools do, as I have written correspondences to this fact (will not disclose). I believe that with regard to the lesser ranked schools, this may be a factor of less qualified people working in the admissions office who do not understand or are put off by the simplest of mental health issues (University of Miami I am speaking about you).


This I agree with. I also think that it's a little presumptuous of people to assume that they know all of the details and that there's no way discrimination could have been involved.


It's not dude. Come on.


With what knowledge do you come in here making that very uninformed statement? Your assumptions having never been in a similar situation?

I have the evidence to make a substantial claim with regard to this issue, and thus, I believe that I have sufficient reason to speak on this topic? I fail to see what you offer here except for conjecture?



To be fair, I am straight up trolling.

A 170 3.3 being rejected from GULC REEEEEEKS of injustice. Fight the good fight Sibley!




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cloture, Lawl_Schoolz, lawnerd87, spookyg_g_ghost and 26 guests