Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=145462
That author is such an arrogant jerk. He just did this to get back at the "kid." If he really wanted to help him, he would have gotten him some kind of entry level position at his company or with one of his bazillion attorney friends' firms.helfer snooterbagon wrote:http://abovethelaw.com/2011/01/inside-s ... s#comments
I think this article is going to hurt, not help his chances.
Given the job market, he has problems (real and big--really fucking big) proving damages. For NED he'll have to prove duty, breach, cause, along with damages. For IIED, I doubt he can meet the reckless and outrageous standard (torts is two-years stale in my head).BaronDetroit wrote:Certainly, what this unemployed new lawyer should do is launch a lawsuit against this website and author arising out of emotional injury and lost income caused by seeing his employment chances severely damaged as a result of unprofessional and distasteful articles posted by the defendant author.
Chicago Kent is not a top ranked school.random5483 wrote:Well I know the legal market is bad, but when an Editor-in-Chief from a top ranked school fails to get a job it is very scary. Well scary till I realize that the job market is bad, but not bad enough to warrant an unemployed Editor-in-Chief unless his resume has major issues or he sucks at interviewing.
credited.dresden doll wrote:Chicago Kent is not a top ranked school.random5483 wrote:Well I know the legal market is bad, but when an Editor-in-Chief from a top ranked school fails to get a job it is very scary. Well scary till I realize that the job market is bad, but not bad enough to warrant an unemployed Editor-in-Chief unless his resume has major issues or he sucks at interviewing.
dresden doll wrote:Chicago Kent is not a top ranked school.random5483 wrote:Well I know the legal market is bad, but when an Editor-in-Chief from a top ranked school fails to get a job it is very scary. Well scary till I realize that the job market is bad, but not bad enough to warrant an unemployed Editor-in-Chief unless his resume has major issues or he sucks at interviewing.
+1. I find it very annoying when people still view law school as high school or undergrad where "working hard" or joining a billion clubs should automatically make you an appealing candidate. I would look for two things as a hiring partner: 1. Great Grades; 2. Social Skills.Aqualibrium wrote:All it takes to be on law review at most schools with a write on is to be median or above. At that point, managing board positions are just a matter of how well you drone/how much of a glutton for punishment you are.
Honors cut off is 25% according to NALP, and, according to LinkiedIn, the guy didn't graduate with honors. This guy could very well be top 30 40 50% at Kent. Show me someone who thinks top 30-50% at Kent is getting a major firm job (and by that I mean pays 80-160k), and I'll show you afooldreamer.
ATL comments have a link to his blog, which is fairly entertaining and also contains his resume. Looks like he has a 3.39 GPA. Maybe someone can figure out where that is on their curve.Aqualibrium wrote:All it takes to be on law review at most schools with a write on is to be median or above. At that point, managing board positions are just a matter of how well you drone/how much of a glutton for punishment you are.
Honors cut off is 25% according to NALP, and, according to LinkiedIn, the guy didn't graduate with honors. This guy could very well be top 30 40 50% at Kent. Show me someone who thinks top 30-50% at Kent is getting a major firm job (and by that I mean pays 80-160k), and I'll show you afooldreamer.
dresden doll wrote: Chicago Kent is not a top ranked school.
NALP says that the top 33% cut off for the graduating class of 2009 was 3.403 and median was 3.274. So he's above median, not top 1/3. Again, absent a few extenuating circumstances (legit connections, URM), no one at Kent is getting major firm work with those grades.Woozy wrote: ATL comments have a link to his blog, which is fairly entertaining and also contains his resume. Looks like he has a 3.39 GPA. Maybe someone can figure out where that is on their curve.
/cyberstalk
No grade dive necessary. As I explained above, it's quite possible for a student to have median grades and be EIC or whatever of law review.Lawquacious wrote:dresden doll wrote: Chicago Kent is not a top ranked school.
No, but it's not really a TTT or TTTT either.. I suspect it is rare for a former EIC at Kent to have a job after graduation. In fact, I imagine quite a few of them land good jobs. Top 10% at most law schools that I am aware of (baring maybe some of the TTTT or unranked schools), tend to do pretty well with employment, although obviously not necessarily a 160k BigLaw position. I think even that is often not out of the question for the very top graders at the schools that tend to be looked down on though.
In this case, toward the bottom of the article it was stated the guy ended up not having top grades, which makes me think maybe he had a personal crisis or something where his grades took a total dive. Maybe not, but if that is the case it would help explain a situation that otherwise does strike me as surprising.
BaronDetroit wrote:Nobody has told me why this theory is not viable: Go to any ABA accredited law school and become a lawyer arising out of the juris doctorate. Simplify the way in which lawyers make money. Become very ignorant and simply find clients who want to obtain large quantities of money. Find these claimants and launch lawsuit after lawsuit knowing that clients nor judges care what your school was or grades were. Its not easy- nothing is. But until a new lawyer fails at this theory I see no reason to ever apply for any jobs.
BaronDetroit wrote:Nobody has told me why this theory is not viable: Go to any ABA accredited law school and become a lawyer arising out of the juris doctorate. Simplify the way in which lawyers make money. Become very ignorant and simply find clients who want to obtain large quantities of money. Find these claimants and launch lawsuit after lawsuit knowing that clients nor judges care what your school was or grades were. Its not easy- nothing is. But until a new lawyer fails at this theory I see no reason to ever apply for any jobs.
Are you on drugs?BaronDetroit wrote:Nobody has told me why this theory is not viable: Go to any ABA accredited law school and become a lawyer arising out of the juris doctorate. Simplify the way in which lawyers make money. Become very ignorant and simply find clients who want to obtain large quantities of money. Find these claimants and launch lawsuit after lawsuit knowing that clients nor judges care what your school was or grades were. Its not easy- nothing is. But until a new lawyer fails at this theory I see no reason to ever apply for any jobs.
FRCP 11(c)BaronDetroit wrote:Nobody has told me why this theory is not viable: Go to any ABA accredited law school and become a lawyer arising out of the juris doctorate. Simplify the way in which lawyers make money. Become very ignorant and simply find clients who want to obtain large quantities of money. Find these claimants and launch lawsuit after lawsuit knowing that clients nor judges care what your school was or grades were. Its not easy- nothing is. But until a new lawyer fails at this theory I see no reason to ever apply for any jobs.
"Hey, we have a claim that may or may not be legally actionable, should we hire a well respected established plaintiff's attorney to fight our case?"BaronDetroit wrote:Nobody has told me why this theory is not viable: Go to any ABA accredited law school and become a lawyer arising out of the juris doctorate. Simplify the way in which lawyers make money. Become very ignorant and simply find clients who want to obtain large quantities of money. Find these claimants and launch lawsuit after lawsuit knowing that clients nor judges care what your school was or grades were. Its not easy- nothing is. But until a new lawyer fails at this theory I see no reason to ever apply for any jobs.
Aqualibrium wrote:NALP says that the top 33% cut off for the graduating class of 2009 was 3.403 and median was 3.274. So he's above median, not top 1/3. Again, absent a few extenuating circumstances (legit connections, URM), no one at Kent is getting major firm work with those grades.Woozy wrote: ATL comments have a link to his blog, which is fairly entertaining and also contains his resume. Looks like he has a 3.39 GPA. Maybe someone can figure out where that is on their curve.
/cyberstalk
delBarco wrote:"Hey, we have a claim that may or may not be legally actionable, should we hire a well respected established plaintiff's attorney to fight our case?"BaronDetroit wrote:Nobody has told me why this theory is not viable: Go to any ABA accredited law school and become a lawyer arising out of the juris doctorate. Simplify the way in which lawyers make money. Become very ignorant and simply find clients who want to obtain large quantities of money. Find these claimants and launch lawsuit after lawsuit knowing that clients nor judges care what your school was or grades were. Its not easy- nothing is. But until a new lawyer fails at this theory I see no reason to ever apply for any jobs.
"No honey, let's risk losing our potential million dollar claim on some kid straight out of law school who simply has no idea how to operate the practical side of a lawsuit, will probably commit several cases of malpractice without us knowing, and could easily get our case thrown out of court for a technicality that he doesn't even understand"
Brilliant.
Sounds bulletproof to me.BaronDetroit wrote:You bring customer oriented service customized to the particuliar needs of the client. Some lawyers treat clients as if they are trash. Certainly, another key is to launch lawsuits and not be afraid to bring actions that a more experienced lawyer would dismiss as non viable. The thrill and aggressiveness to ensure your client gets richly compensated is the lynchpin of my theory.