Official 2010 Transfer Cycle Results Thread Forum

[patrickd139]

In at SMU via phone call at ~9:30am.

T2, Top 6%, graded onto lr, TX resident (want to practice in Dallas), applied 7/1 (at the deadline)

[CMR]

Don't want to get into details, as this will clearly out me to my new classmates, but I've written on at another T1 that I haven't heard back from yet wrt admissions, and am accepted to a T3 where I'll be on a secondary journal b/c transfers can't write on (at least until the third year, presumably). Both are areas to which I have ties, but the latter is a more attractive geographic locale, IE I think I'd be happier starting my career there; however, I would not be unhappy at the former. If - and obviously a big if - I'm accepted to the former, would I be crazy to take the latter? I'm not gunning for big law, obviously.

Still waiting on Wisky.

[Bankhead]

How do you find the time, energy, motivation to do all of these write-ons??

[CMR]

How do you find the time, energy, motivation to do all of these write-ons??

I genuinely enjoy it, a concession that usually causes people to slowly back away speaking in a soft voice and avoiding eye contact. I actually plan to take a couple of the submissions and use them as a skeleton for more thorough comments. It's just a hobby - I have no real illusions of publishing on any grand scale - but it's one that's more productive than what I'd be spending my time doing otherwise, which usually ends with a trip to the campus clinic.

[traydeuce]

How do you find the time, energy, motivation to do all of these write-ons??

I genuinely enjoy it, a concession that usually causes people to slowly back away speaking in a soft voice and avoiding eye contact. I actually plan to take a couple of the submissions and use them as a skeleton for more thorough comments. It's just a hobby - I have no real illusions of publishing on any grand scale - but it's one that's more productive than what I'd be spending my time doing otherwise, which usually ends with a trip to the campus clinic.

Be careful, there are those who attribute my rejections to adcomm perusal of this very site. Anyway, I enjoy writing write-ons too (and bench memos, and legal writing assignments, etc.), although the Georgetown one I'm doing currently isn't very fun. Primarily because they want it to be so short.

[ZXCVBNM]

^^ Thanks! I'm shocked and so excited!

Fordham currently?

nope. school in the 40s, suppose I should change it to T50.

wow, you transferred to harvard from a school in the 40's from a part-time program?!

[CMR]

Be careful, there are those who attribute my rejections to adcomm perusal of this very site. Anyway, I enjoy writing write-ons too (and bench memos, and legal writing assignments, etc.), although the Georgetown one I'm doing currently isn't very fun. Primarily because they want it to be so short.

Yeah, that always sucks, primarily because most packets advise that you take a stance - but if you're going to take a stance, it seems you should be held accountable for discussing the tangential impact your proposition may have on related issues. On the one hand, it's nice because it allows you to narrow your issue without more than cursory concern for whether you're advocating something that would have indirect but significant implications, but I always feel like I'm left with kind of an empirically useless paper.

Regarding adcomms, hello adcomms, I have a girlfriend, I'm faithful to her, and if she saw that comment she would laugh, so please don't hate. If you're lurking, please post, your insight would be helpful, as my dings are piling up a bit here >

[Thirteen]

In at SMU via phone call at ~9:30am.

T2, Top 6%, graded onto lr, TX resident (want to practice in Dallas), applied 7/1 (at the deadline)

Congrats!!! Are you waiting to hear from any other schools, or will you be at SMU in the fall?

[bizen boat]

Be careful, there are those who attribute my rejections to adcomm perusal of this very site.

That would be absolutely ridiculous if true. While some of your infamous posts came across as arrogant, I think you're one of the more honest people on here in assessing yourself and others. It's not like you've hid the fact that you've received some tough rejections in order to preserve your ego. Just my .02, not trying to suck up. Next thing you know adcom's are going to start analyzing us based on how we act while drunk in bars.

(before anyone says anything, i know the smart/easy thing to do is simply be more careful about specific identifying factors when being as ass, but it's the principle of the thing that bothers me, not the execution)

[t4tot1]

in at smu this morning via phone call

t4 top 7% lr and moot court

[traydeuce]

My trouble with the Georgetown one is that there are two distinct issues in the case, room enough to comment only on one, and in the case of the more interesting one, the packet is virtually bereft of any supporting material. Leaving you to kind of fly solo on a pretty tough question of con law. The other one, on the other hand, is so well hashed out between the various circuits arguing over the issue in the packet that virtually anything you say is just going to be a repetition of one opinion or another.

[CMR]

Be careful, there are those who attribute my rejections to adcomm perusal of this very site.

That would be absolutely ridiculous if true. While some of your infamous posts came across as arrogant, I think you're one of the more honest people on here in assessing yourself and others. It's not like you've hid the fact that you've received some tough rejections in order to preserve your ego. Just my .02, not trying to suck up. Next thing you know adcom's are going to start analyzing us based on how we act while drunk in bars.

(before anyone says anything, i know the smart/easy thing to do is simply be more careful about specific identifying factors when being as ass, but it's the principle of the thing that bothers me, not the execution)

I don't think there's any doubt it's at least partially true, and to be honest, I'd think less of the adcomms if they didn't - it's a public forum that they're free to view, and a potential source of context to place particularly difficult admissions decisions in. If, for example, someone put on their application that they were interested in working in public interest, it would be kind of silly for the committee to ignore a thread in which an easily identified poster declared their unwavering intent to do big law.

And let's be honest - most posters here realize this. You don't have to be particularly observant to notice a dramatic decrease in vitriol and infighting in this subindex as compared to the others on TLS .

[CMR]

My trouble with the Georgetown one is that there are two distinct issues in the case, room enough to comment only on one, and in the case of the more interesting one, the packet is virtually bereft of any supporting material. Leaving you to kind of fly solo on a pretty tough question of con law. The other one, on the other hand, is so well hashed out between the various circuits arguing over the issue in the packet that virtually anything you say is just going to be a repetition of one opinion or another.

My friend at a T6 wrote on last year by picking an uncontested procedural rule that was present in all the cases, and she thought her success was mostly due to the fact that there's no way anyone else focused on that because of the policy issues. I can't even remember what it was it sounded so boring, but it's a thought.

[traydeuce]

My trouble with the Georgetown one is that there are two distinct issues in the case, room enough to comment only on one, and in the case of the more interesting one, the packet is virtually bereft of any supporting material. Leaving you to kind of fly solo on a pretty tough question of con law. The other one, on the other hand, is so well hashed out between the various circuits arguing over the issue in the packet that virtually anything you say is just going to be a repetition of one opinion or another.

My friend at a T6 wrote on last year by picking an uncontested procedural rule that was present in all the cases, and she thought her success was mostly due to the fact that there's no way anyone else focused on that because of the policy issues. I can't even remember what it was it sounded so boring, but it's a thought.

I like procedural rules. The situation is similar here; issue one is pretty overshadowed by issue two - it's way less important, comes up much less often, in the context of claims that are either impossible to prove or have all been won long ago, but it's fun and technical. Unfortunately, the packet makers, while including a case or two on the issue, gave it pretty short shrift.

[CMR]

I like procedural rules. The situation is similar here; issue one is pretty overshadowed by issue two - it's way less important, comes up much less often, in the context of claims that are either impossible to prove or have all been won long ago, but it's fun and technical. Unfortunately, the packet makers, while including a case or two on the issue, gave it pretty short shrift.

I advise writing a scathing critique based entirely on the canon of expressio unius and the query "but where do we draw the line?"

[traydeuce]

I like procedural rules. The situation is similar here; issue one is pretty overshadowed by issue two - it's way less important, comes up much less often, in the context of claims that are either impossible to prove or have all been won long ago, but it's fun and technical. Unfortunately, the packet makers, while including a case or two on the issue, gave it pretty short shrift.

I advise writing a scathing critique based entirely on the canon of expressio unius and the query "but where do we draw the line?"

Huge expressio unius fan here. I should write a comment one day called Expressio Unius: Its Uses and Misuses.

[vanwinkle]

Huge expressio unius fan here. I should write a comment one day called Expressio Unius: Its Uses and Misuses.

--ImageRemoved--

[phoenixsoars]

.

[apper123]

For the benefit of those who might be curious about numbers for transfers:
T25, #2 in section
GPA: 4.13

Harvard: In
Stanford: In
Yale: Out

sick grats man really well done

[D.Wilde]

For the benefit of those who might be curious about numbers for transfers:
T25, #2 in section
GPA: 4.13

Harvard: In
Stanford: In
Yale: Out

Congrats!!! So... on which coast will you be living come September?

[clk32]

In at Columbia! applied 6/8 accepted 7/20!! I put my deposit down today!

[haribo77]

out at uga. slitting wrists now

[thexfactor]

il join you.... out ucla...
how can this be? i cant get ANYTHING... T50 10%

out at uga. slitting wrists now

[stinger35]

Out at UCLA via email.

(I never sent my letter of good standing because I got into Berkeley about the same day i applied to UCLA)

[thexfactor]

how is this possible. get into UCB and out at UCLA and GULC?

WTF??

Out at UCLA via email.

(I never sent my letter of good standing because I got into Berkeley about the same day i applied to UCLA)