1L, 4.05 GPA, T30 School, looking to transfer Forum

[traydeuce]

Gee, I thought that transfers doing well was proof that UGPA = lolz. At least at my school, it's the high LSAT splitters who dominated the top 5%. I'm #1 with a 174/2.72.

[lawbound1524]

Gee, I thought that transfers doing well was proof that UGPA = lolz. At least at my school, it's the high LSAT splitters who dominated the top 5%. I'm #1 with a 174/2.72.

I know someone here with a 4.0 GPA from undergrad, and her first semester GPA was 3.2. She cried on the spot when she got it. I almost laughed. Is that bad?

[apper123]

Gee, I thought that transfers doing well was proof that UGPA = lolz. At least at my school, it's the high LSAT splitters who dominated the top 5%. I'm #1 with a 174/2.72.

they have a scholarship program here that kids with the tip top best #s get into... they get a base guaranteed scholarship + a large bonus scholarship on top that requires top 1/3 of the class to maintain

according to my friends in the program, 50% of the people in it (i think there's 12-15 total) lost their scholarships after 1L last year (note: this is unconfirmed, but according to what those in it have told me)

[traydeuce]

Gee, I thought that transfers doing well was proof that UGPA = lolz. At least at my school, it's the high LSAT splitters who dominated the top 5%. I'm #1 with a 174/2.72.

they have a scholarship program here that kids with the tip top best #s get into... they get a base guaranteed scholarship + a large bonus scholarship on top that requires top 1/3 of the class to maintain

according to my friends in the program, 50% of the people in it (i think there's 12-15 total) lost their scholarships after 1L last year (note: this is unconfirmed, but according to what those in it have told me)

I mean, they probably had merely solid LSATs and really high grades. 166/3.9 types of people. At a t30 school, LSATs in the 170s are pretty rare and the ones that are there have crappy uGPAs. I don't know, maybe my own experience distorts my view of things, but going to a school where the median LSAT was a 164 or so, on exam days I felt like Jason Giambi on steroids playing in a little league game. The last test I took was a multiple choice test, and at one point when I was on question 40, I looked over at the guy next to me, reasonably smart guy, just below top 10%, and he's on question 12. The test before that, I woke up when it was 35 minutes underway, got there 50 minutes late, and still finished before everyone else. The one before that, I wrote about 15 double-spaced pages of pretty terrific essays, left with an hour to spare, bought a few rolls at the local bakery, and came back and ate them in the exam room. And the first exam I was late to 40 minutes and maybe got an A-, but only because I'm bad at answering nutty questions. The professor gives us a factless fact pattern - it's property and all we know is that a dry cleaning plant and high-rise are moving into town, nothing as to what the zoning code says currently, nor what kind of fumes/noises the plant may emit - and asks us (a) could we stop them from coming, (b) if they do come, could we get an injunction, and (c) discuss generally the benefits and drawbacks of different kinds of land use planning? Basically I was like, well, there are 8 different possible permutations of nuisance-y behavior given the facts, multiplied by 3 different standards for unreasonableness that we learned, 24 answers, and I have no idea as to the benefits and drawbacks of zoning because we spent one day on it, read nothing about it, so all I know is what various idiot classmates said, e.g. "well once a time I lived in a city with mixed-use zoning and I thought it was really nice that I could walk my dog to the yoga studio and get a bite to eat and get laid and take my walk of shame back home all in one effing block."

[Lawl Shcool]

I mean, they probably had merely solid LSATs and really high grades. 166/3.9 types of people. At a t30 school, LSATs in the 170s are pretty rare and the ones that are there have crappy uGPAs. I don't know, maybe my own experience distorts my view of things, but going to a school where the median LSAT was a 164 or so, on exam days I felt like Jason Giambi on steroids playing in a little league game. The last test I took was a multiple choice test, and at one point when I was on question 40, I looked over at the guy next to me, reasonably smart guy, just below top 10%, and he's on question 12. The test before that, I woke up when it was 35 minutes underway, got there 50 minutes late, and still finished before everyone else. The one before that, I wrote about 15 double-spaced pages of pretty terrific essays, left with an hour to spare, bought a few rolls at the local bakery, and came back and ate them in the exam room. And the first exam I was late to 40 minutes and maybe got an A-, but only because I'm bad at answering nutty questions. The professor gives us a factless fact pattern - it's property and all we know is that a dry cleaning plant and high-rise are moving into town, nothing as to what the zoning code says currently, nor what kind of fumes/noises the plant may emit - and asks us (a) could we stop them from coming, (b) if they do come, could we get an injunction, and (c) discuss generally the benefits and drawbacks of different kinds of land use planning? Basically I was like, well, there are 8 different possible permutations of nuisance-y behavior given the facts, multiplied by 3 different standards for unreasonableness that we learned, 24 answers, and I have no idea as to the benefits and drawbacks of zoning because we spent one day on it, read nothing about it, so all I know is what various idiot classmates said, e.g. "well once a time I lived in a city with mixed-use zoning and I thought it was really nice that I could walk my dog to the yoga studio and get a bite to eat and get laid and take my walk of shame back home all in one effing block."

Out of curiosity, did you arrive late/leave early for any exams last semester?

I finished all of my exams last semester with a few minutes to spare, but today was typing until the very last second.

[apper123]

The people who leave exams significantly early doing well is certainly an anomaly. All the highest scoring students I know work to the very last second. (I literally turn my exam in at the buzzer every time. Even after it is printed, I sit there and comb it for any procedural errors and to make sure every page printed correctly and is numbered correctly... I don't always have time for this though.)

There is simply no incentive to leave early. None. It's too important of an exam. I would meticulously check everything over and over, and I would edit my essays for grammar, sentence structure and whatever else to make them look as nice as possible.

The poster above may be brilliant enough, (his flippant analysis of his fellow students is a little off-putting, to be honest), but even if he is, it's quite a gamble to take.

Showing up to exams late is obviously not smart, but, again, the poster up there got away from it. I made a joke last week (any poker players here?) that I should pull a Phil Hellmuth and show up an hour into the exam (he shows up an hour late to pretty much every tournament he plays) while being carried on a chariot with herald trumpets playing. (See, e.g., http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vh3mqih ... re=related; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCheRZez ... re=related).

[traydeuce]

^^

Yeah, I'm super-offputting. But about last semester, let's see... crim law I walked out with an hour to go and got the best grade in the class. Torts was a 3-day take-home that I put off till the last day, got the second best grade in the class. Contracts I finished with half an hour early and took multiple breaks listening to, of all things, Silkk The Shocker. Tied for the best grade in the class. Civ Pro I took the whole time on, but half of the class didn't even finish that test. And I think 20 minutes I spent rambling on the extra-credit question. I don't know, maybe we got easy exams, but it always seems to me that most of the questions don't demand incredibly lengthy answers. I think a lot of people waste their time looking for counterarguments that aren't there, or getting too nitpicky with structure (you really don't need a conclusion, nor do I bother with stating the rule half the time, or the issue).

[apper123]

^^

Yeah, I'm super-offputting. But about last semester, let's see... crim law I walked out with an hour to go and got the best grade in the class. Torts was a 3-day take-home that I put off till the last day, got the second best grade in the class. Contracts I finished with half an hour early and took multiple breaks listening to, of all things, Silkk The Shocker. Tied for the best grade in the class. Civ Pro I took the whole time on, but half of the class didn't even finish that test. And I think 20 minutes I spent rambling on the extra-credit question. I don't know, maybe we got easy exams, but it always seems to me that most of the questions don't demand incredibly lengthy answers. I think a lot of people waste their time looking for counterarguments that aren't there, or getting too nitpicky with structure (you really don't need a conclusion, nor do I bother with stating the rule half the time, or the issue).

I'm really happy for how well you did on all your exams. However, none of that is relevant in the slightest bit to my comment about your comments about your classmates being off-putting.

I was referring to phrases like "idiot classmates," and the fact that your response to that was to cite how much smarter you are than your classmates kind of furthers my point. Just because your classmates do not excel on law exams or do not have the pure brilliance, genius or efficiency of thinking you clearly and certainly possess does not make them "idiots."

[270910]

^^

Yeah, I'm super-offputting. But about last semester, let's see... crim law I walked out with an hour to go and got the best grade in the class. Torts was a 3-day take-home that I put off till the last day, got the second best grade in the class. Contracts I finished with half an hour early and took multiple breaks listening to, of all things, Silkk The Shocker. Tied for the best grade in the class. Civ Pro I took the whole time on, but half of the class didn't even finish that test. And I think 20 minutes I spent rambling on the extra-credit question. I don't know, maybe we got easy exams, but it always seems to me that most of the questions don't demand incredibly lengthy answers. I think a lot of people waste their time looking for counterarguments that aren't there, or getting too nitpicky with structure (you really don't need a conclusion, nor do I bother with stating the rule half the time, or the issue).

You my friend are the poster child of the law student who gets good grades and doesn't know why.

In the last page or two, I've cobbled together that you answer questions without using counterarguments, stating the rule, or mentioning the issue. You then leave your exams early and collect your great grades, which you get because your LSAT is high.

...OK.

See, I don't doubt it for a second - I know people like you. But your self awareness of this process is clearly dwarfed by your proficiency at it (nothing wrong with that!).

[seespotrun]

^^

Yeah, I'm super-offputting. But about last semester, let's see... crim law I walked out with an hour to go and got the best grade in the class. Torts was a 3-day take-home that I put off till the last day, got the second best grade in the class. Contracts I finished with half an hour early and took multiple breaks listening to, of all things, Silkk The Shocker. Tied for the best grade in the class. Civ Pro I took the whole time on, but half of the class didn't even finish that test. And I think 20 minutes I spent rambling on the extra-credit question. I don't know, maybe we got easy exams, but it always seems to me that most of the questions don't demand incredibly lengthy answers. I think a lot of people waste their time looking for counterarguments that aren't there, or getting too nitpicky with structure (you really don't need a conclusion, nor do I bother with stating the rule half the time, or the issue).

FLAME.

And if you're not a flame, you are going to be the brightest BigLaw associate to never make partner. And if you make partner, you are going to be the best lawyer ever. High-fucking-five.

[stinger35]

I mean, if this trey dude isn't joking about this shit, I really dont know what to say.

As far as UGPA/LSAT, I am #1 (at least after first semester, who knows now) at a decent T2 and didn't give a fuck in UG (2. and simply have trouble with stuff like logic games (158 lsat). For what its worth.

[HelplessinAZ]

How big of a factor does UG gpa play when applying to HLS as a transfer?

[TheBigMediocre]

How big of a factor does UG gpa play when applying to HLS as a transfer?

They say something along the lines of "transfer admits would have been strong candidates for admission if they had applied as a first-year student." Oh, really? Right.

It's probably runs the same as soft factors for law school applications. It might help you slightly, but overall who gives a shit.

[2009 Prospective]

The one before that, I wrote about 15 double-spaced pages of pretty terrific essays, left with an hour to spare, bought a few rolls at the local bakery, and came back and ate them in the exam room.

Haha I'm pretty sure this isn't serious but if it is, what a freakin douchebag.

[Bankhead]

The one before that, I wrote about 15 double-spaced pages of pretty terrific essays, left with an hour to spare, bought a few rolls at the local bakery, and came back and ate them in the exam room.

Haha I'm pretty sure this isn't serious but if it is, what a freakin douchebag.

I had a friend who did stuff like this, actually. He was really confident first semester, but ended up at the bottom of the class. Except he wouldn't write 15 pages. He would scribble down a few incoherent paragraphs, and he thought this was sufficient.

[presh]

.

[baby lawyer]

Interesting that someone that "intelligent" would allow themselves to be outed on a public internet forum and continue in douchebaggery. Lacking in social skills can very much hurt you in the long run.

[Always Credited]

I was referring to phrases like "idiot classmates," and the fact that your response to that was to cite how much smarter you are than your classmates kind of furthers my point. Just because your classmates do not excel on law exams or do not have the pure brilliance, genius or efficiency of thinking you clearly and certainly possess does not make them "idiots."

FLAME.

And if you're not a flame, you are going to be the brightest BigLaw associate to never make partner. And if you make partner, you are going to be the best lawyer ever. High-fucking-five.

I go to school with "treydeuce" (not that we don't all know who he is in real life by now), and it's not a flame.

He really is that arrogant. He did get a 4.0 first semester. He did come in late or leave during at least three exams.

He is very smart, if not as smart as he thinks he is. He'll probably be able to transfer to one of the top six unless he tanked this semester. But he is also the only student applying to transfer that I haven't heard even one person say, "We'll/I'll miss you next year." Apper, your read of his attitude based on the post is accurate. Honestly I would rather do well and have friends than be number one in the class and have none, but everyone has different priorities.

This is his facebook status from when he got into GULC: "If you were Leonardo DiCaprio would you settle for the 14th hottest supermodel in the world? Aw hell no you wouldn't." That is pretty indicative of what he is like in RL.

And just to stick up for our class in general, there are other people here that are very good at understanding the law and taking law school exams. Just because they don't go around bragging about it doesn't mean they don't exist. Many of the students that he is mocking are good at other areas that will matter in legal practice. The fact that they didn't ace all their exams doesn't mean that they are "idiots."

Quoted, 'cause this is awesome.

[ToTransferOrNot]

Stealth e-mail to the T6 adcoms + ATL is in order imo.

[Always Credited]

Stealth e-mail to the T6 adcoms + ATL is in order imo.

[apper123]

I was referring to phrases like "idiot classmates," and the fact that your response to that was to cite how much smarter you are than your classmates kind of furthers my point. Just because your classmates do not excel on law exams or do not have the pure brilliance, genius or efficiency of thinking you clearly and certainly possess does not make them "idiots."

FLAME.

And if you're not a flame, you are going to be the brightest BigLaw associate to never make partner. And if you make partner, you are going to be the best lawyer ever. High-fucking-five.

I go to school with "treydeuce" (not that we don't all know who he is in real life by now), and it's not a flame.

He really is that arrogant. He did get a 4.0 first semester. He did come in late or leave during at least three exams.

He is very smart, if not as smart as he thinks he is. He'll probably be able to transfer to one of the top six unless he tanked this semester. But he is also the only student applying to transfer that I haven't heard even one person say, "We'll/I'll miss you next year." Apper, your read of his attitude based on the post is accurate. Honestly I would rather do well and have friends than be number one in the class and have none, but everyone has different priorities.

This is his facebook status from when he got into GULC: "If you were Leonardo DiCaprio would you settle for the 14th hottest supermodel in the world? Aw hell no you wouldn't." That is pretty indicative of what he is like in RL.

And just to stick up for our class in general, there are other people here that are very good at understanding the law and taking law school exams. Just because they don't go around bragging about it doesn't mean they don't exist. Many of the students that he is mocking are good at other areas that will matter in legal practice. The fact that they didn't ace all their exams doesn't mean that they are "idiots."

Wow. So he is real. I'm sorry to have to go to school with someone like that.

[helfer snooterbagon]

bought a few rolls at the local bakery

I get a chuckle every time I read this. If someone asked me where to find the "local bakery" near our school, I would have no idea where to send them.

[luthersloan]

I also go to school with Trayduce, and I am sorry to say that he is one of the worst people I have ever had the displeasure of knowing.

[TheBigMediocre]

I hope people are kidding about e-mailing adcoms + ATL. Why counter douchebaggery with complete vileness?

[d34d9823]

His attitude doesn't really bother me. I don't think it's really arrogance if you actually have the ability to back it up. I think equating knowing you're good with arrogance is a product of our "everyone is equally sparkly" educational system. It's the people who think they're hot stuff when they're not that irritate me.