Law Review vs Mock Trial/Moot Court Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hi everyone. Rising Berkeley 2L here. Wanted to get some insight as I make decisions that may affect my chances at OCIP in a few months.

I have heard that if you make moot court/mock trial, then making law review is not as big a deal. In fact I have heard some go so far as to say "as long as you have one or the other you will be fine as far as prestigious EC's go"

I recently made the mock trial team and am very happy about that as I want to be a trial lawyer. Law review really doesn't interest me - at all. The only reason I would do it is to have it on my resume for OCIP. I am fine with jumping through that hoop, but then I will have to deal with being on a journal that doesn't interest me for two years when I would much rather be spending that time working with my trial team.

So my question is: is it enough that I am on the trial team? Will firms care that I did not also do law review?

Thanks!

[stab master arson]

Will firms care that I did not also do law review?

Yes. /thread

The poll above is roughly similar to a poll inquiring whether the Earth is flat. People can have opinions, but there is really an objective, widely known truth to the matter.

Perhaps, but you haven't expressed it.

[Veyron]

Will firms care that I did not also do law review?

Yes. /thread

The poll above is roughly similar to a poll inquiring whether the Earth is flat. People can have opinions, but there is really an objective, widely known truth to the matter.

Perhaps, but you haven't expressed it.

If you've got to ask. . . .

[stab master arson]

Will firms care that I did not also do law review?

Yes. /thread

The poll above is roughly similar to a poll inquiring whether the Earth is flat. People can have opinions, but there is really an objective, widely known truth to the matter.

Perhaps, but you haven't expressed it.

If you've got to ask. . . .

I wasn't asking anything.

[stab master arson]

Perhaps, but you haven't expressed it.

Are you suggesting that I didn't provide sufficient reasoning, or that my conclusion is wrong? If the former, your post suffers from the same infirmity. If the latter, well, I am not going to waste my time arguing with you.

Most definitely, and probably. Being smug is one thing; being smug and wrong is a whole other thing.

Glad you don't plan on wasting time arguing with me, as I have no intention of wasting (more) time listening to you.

[Veyron]

Perhaps, but you haven't expressed it.

Are you suggesting that I didn't provide sufficient reasoning, or that my conclusion is wrong? If the former, your post suffers from the same infirmity. If the latter, well, I am not going to waste my time arguing with you.

Most definitely, and probably. Being smug is one thing; being smug and wrong is a whole other thing.

Glad you don't plan on wasting time arguing with me, as I have no intention of wasting (more) time listening to you.

*Attends a TTT*

*Ignores advice given by a T-10 --> COA clerk*

*Turns down law review*

*???*

*Profit!!! lives in dumpster*

[stab master arson]

*Doesn't give a fuck what some TLS gremlin has to say and exits forum. Goes on to live long, fulfilling life.*

[Veyron]

*Doesn't give a fuck what some TLS gremlin has to say and exits forum. Goes on to live long, fulfilling life.*

*Gives you dime*

*Tells you to call your mother*

[Anonymous User]

OP here.

Point well-taken. Thanks everyone.

[2LLLL]

From what I've seen, trial team is FAR superior to moot court in terms of resume points, but both pale in comparison to law review. Not only is LR pretty universally accepted as THE moneyshot resume credential going into 2L OCI, but also think about it from the interviewer's perspective. You're positing that trial team can be equivalent to LR, but what really matters is how the interviewer ranks them. If your interviewer went to your school, and is very familiar with the selectiveness, difficulty, and time commitment that trial team entails, then MAYBE your interviewer will excuse the lack of LR. If neither of those conditions are present, however, then you'll be left to explain it in the interview and it will sound like you are making excuses. On the other hand, everyone knows what LR is, what you have to do to get on LR, and how much time you have to invest into LR. Furthermore, your interviewer, as someone who him/herself got a firm job, is more likely than average to have been on LR or another journal. Interviewers look for candidates who resemble the interviewer--therefore, LR or a journal is much more likely to help you in an interview than trial team.

Also, challenging G.T.L. Rev. is definitely NOT TCR, the guy is definitely the most knowledgeable and accomplished poster on this forum and its not even close.

LR sucks but you may as well just do it- you really don't want to be looking back 6 months from now wondering if things would have been different if you had done the write-on.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the elaborate and thoughtful response, 2LLL