Top Law Schools

http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/PubArt ... ion+to+Bar

The long and the short of it is, we're the first class that has this requirement...50 hours as a prerequisite for admission.

I think a 50 hour requirement is a great idea. However, it's supposed to be 50 hours over three years. To change the game at this stage, when summer plans are set, and some people have planned a very busy 3L is not really right. Even a prorated system: 15 hours for Class of 2013, 30 hours for Class of 2014 would be much fairer than this.

Ugh.

Why can't you do 50 hours over Spring Break or Summer?

Just need one more of these threads in the Legal Employment forum and we are set.

See:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 0&t=184059

and

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 5&t=184041

Fair enough. But this is the most appropriate forum for the discussion. It is on topic and highly relevant for many current law school students.

nymario wrote:Fair enough. But this is the most appropriate forum for the discussion. It is on topic and highly relevant for many current law school students.

Agreed. Also, since we're not a fan of having 0Ls post indiscriminately here, I'm going to keep one within and one without the student forums.

More on topic, fuck this. I can work it in, but it's going to radically alter my spring break or winter plans.

I asked this in the lounge thread. How would this affect someone who's a DA or PD in a different state and wants to lateral in 2-4 years after starting in a different state? Can a DA do pro bono work that won't create a conflict of interest?

I'd be very interested in knowing if clinic work counts. UVA doesn't let us count that towards our little pro bono medal, but if NYC does, I'd be happy to do it.

conn09 wrote:I asked this in the lounge thread. How would this affect someone who's a DA or PD in a different state and wants to lateral in 2-4 years after starting in a different state? Can a DA do pro bono work that won't create a conflict of interest?

I can't remember exactly how the ethics rules treat brief advice clinics, but I've volunteered at brief advice clinics along side judges, ADAs, DAs, and public defenders. Also, poor people face civil legal matters where they need free legal help...

This is garbage.

Are you guys kidding me? You can't find a way to spend 1-2 hours a week next year doing some volunteer student group work? That is weak as hell.

I actually find it mind-boggling that anyone could graduate law school without having done 50 hours worth of something that would count as pro bono.

It says the 50 hours must be done within the state of NY. I'm interested to find out how that will work for new graduates from schools in other states. Wonder if firms will let SAs get some of it out of the way during 2L summer.

Edit: NM, I didn't read far enough. Looks like they will make exceptions.

dixiecupdrinking wrote:Are you guys kidding me? You can't find a way to spend 1-2 hours a week next year doing some volunteer student group work? That is weak as hell.

I actually find it mind-boggling that anyone could graduate law school without having done 50 hours worth of something that would count as pro bono.

It wouldn't be a problem if graduates didn't have to compete with the stampede of lawyers already begging to work for free.

TTTLS wrote:

dixiecupdrinking wrote:Are you guys kidding me? You can't find a way to spend 1-2 hours a week next year doing some volunteer student group work? That is weak as hell.

I actually find it mind-boggling that anyone could graduate law school without having done 50 hours worth of something that would count as pro bono.

It wouldn't be a problem if graduates didn't have to compete with the stampede of lawyers already begging to work for free.

I guarantee you there is a student group on your campus that will have ample opportunities for you to knock out this requirement. If not, then intern. It is just so goddamn easy.

As to the "need to be in New York" issue:

He told reporters that a "little flexibility" will be built into the Appellate Division rules to allow applicants to demonstrate that they could not fulfill the pro bono requirement in New York, but had done so in their home states or native countries.

Mountains out of molehills.

All of this griping about "fitting it in" ignores the fact that it is morally wrong to force people to give up their labor for free. NY's behavior is disgusting.

Also, plenty of lawyers out there working for free already.

Veyron wrote:All of this griping about "fitting it in" ignores the fact that it is morally wrong to force people to give up their labor for free. NY's behavior is disgusting.

Also, plenty of lawyers out there working for free already.

It's not morally wrong to condition entrance to a specific professional organization on volunteering a relatively tiny amount of time. This isn't slavery. Licensing organizations can and do require people to jump through far more onerous hoops. We can disagree about this, I guess, but no one is "ignoring" some great obvious immorality here. I can see an objection to springing the requirement without notice on current law students, I suppose, but that objection is based so much on principle and so little on reality as to be almost meaningless; I dare you to show me a single person for whom this pro bono requirement would have changed their mind about going to law school or practicing in New York.

I guess it's probably apparent by now but I think this requirement is a good idea and a minimal imposition on law students.

I'm still confused how this is good for people in need of legal aid. Instead requiring all experience lawyers to do a minimum number of pro bono hours each year, they are requiring inexperience law students to do pro bono work while in school.

Also, doing the time as a few hours per week is worse for clients as they will not get a enough dedicated time on their matter within the time frame they need.

The requirement is doable, and while I understand the possible moral objection to forced pro bono, I disagree with the objection itself. However, how is this good for the clients. How is this good for the PI groups what will have to deal with and mentor a crap load of students who (1) don't care about PI and (2) only want to do the bare minimum and leave without caring about outcome.

CyLaw wrote:I'm still confused how this is good for people in need of legal aid. Instead requiring all experience lawyers to do a minimum number of pro bono hours each year, they are requiring inexperience law students to do pro bono work while in school.

Also, doing the time as a few hours per week is worse for clients as they will not get a enough dedicated time on their matter within the time frame they need.

The requirement is doable, and while I understand the possible moral objection to forced pro bono, I disagree with the objection itself. However, how is this good for the clients. How is this good for the PI groups what will have to deal with and mentor a crap load of students who (1) don't care about PI and (2) only want to do the bare minimum and leave without caring about outcome.

Volunteering would not require an internship like experience at a law office.

This could work with brief advice clinics. Many PI groups host brief advice clinics (evenings or weekends) for legal services they generally don't provide or don't have the resources to provide to poor people (consumer law clinics, immigration law clinics, pro se divorce clinics, drivers license reinstate clinics, criminal record expungement clinics, etc.). They sort volunteer lawyers into groups based on expertise and they often need volunteers to conduct intakes for the clients before handing the clients off to lawyers.

PI groups don't need the students to care, they just need intake volunteers. Law students are better at intakes than people with no legal experience, as law students have a general sense of what type of questions to ask clients.

Moreover, as the article notes, I think Judge Lippman thinks student will more actively volunteer once they've experienced what's it's like to volunteer.