Northwestern 1L/2L/3L/Grads Taking Questions and Challenges Forum

[Samara]

It was suggested to me that I consider completing the Tax LLM program concurrently with the JD program because of my career interests. However, it looks like even if I do the six-semester plan I have to pay extra. (One semester's worth of tuition? I'm a little unclear.) One the one hand, what's a few thousand more. On the other hand, I don't want to waste $30k-$40k and the time and stress.

Would this be a dumb idea? How useful is the Tax LLM? Would it boost my chances at OCI? It looks like you don't take the LLM courses until 3L, but I could include my enrollment on my resume, no?

I would go ahead and apply to the program. There are a handful of classes that you can take as a 2L that would be beneficial even if you do not decide to go the tax route. Specifically, I would take the following classes during your 2L year: (1) Tax Ethics (meets the Ethics requirement and the grade distribution is generous); (2) Corporate Tax; (3) Partnership Tax; and (4) various tax electives that interest you.

If you decide to go the JD/LLM route, you have already knocked out a handful of classes. If you do not decide to go the JD/LLM route, you have taken classes that I would advise any law student interest in corporate/deal work.

This sounds like a good plan. I did want to at least take a couple tax classes, so if I can "try out" the LLM program next year, all the better. I'll have to figure out how far you can go before getting stuck with the bill.

I'm PMing you some specific questions. Thanks!

[Eugenie Danglars]

Did anyone go to the FedSoc's thing on bullying? I'm wondering how it went down.

[rinkrat19]

Did anyone go to the FedSoc's thing on bullying? I'm wondering how it went down.

Nope, I went to the Rosenthal IP thing. She was not a terribly riveting speaker, but the lunch was good.

[terriers]

Did anyone go to the FedSoc's thing on bullying? I'm wondering how it went down.

The guy's presentation itself was okay and mildly informative (1L here who knows nothing about Con Law), but he embarrassed himself in the Q&A.

One of his big points was that a school shouldn't be allowed to go after a student if their off-campus actions (i.e. cyber-bullying) lead to on-campus problems because the school would be violating students' 1st Amendment rights. It should be up to parents/community/police to deal with this behavior. So I asked him, if the parents don't want to step in, the community isn't involved, and the police can't step in if there isn't a hate crime, do we just have to let this behavior go?

His response was to say that we should direct resources into some kind of organization that would have "authority to deal with this type of situation." So I asked if this organization would be violating students' 1st Amendment rights if they stepped in just as the school would? And his basic response was, "I don't know."

"I don't know" was actually his response to most of the hypos and theoretical questions that were asked which was disappointing. I was wondering at the beginning why they didn't make it a debate like last time and by the end, I figured it was because this guy would have been eviscerated if he had competent opposition. Another 1L in my section was starting to get into him by the end and the constant refrain was basically, "I don't know, but bullying is really regrettable and we should try to stop it as long as no authority figures actually get involved."

I've been to two of these events (mainly for food) and in both cases, the guys speaking for the FedSoc have been thoroughly disappointing, do they ever get anybody who's a little more convincing?

[cubswin]

Did anyone go to the FedSoc's thing on bullying? I'm wondering how it went down.

The guy's presentation itself was okay and mildly informative (1L here who knows nothing about Con Law), but he embarrassed himself in the Q&A.

One of his big points was that a school shouldn't be allowed to go after a student if their off-campus actions (i.e. cyber-bullying) lead to on-campus problems because the school would be violating students' 1st Amendment rights. It should be up to parents/community/police to deal with this behavior. So I asked him, if the parents don't want to step in, the community isn't involved, and the police can't step in if there isn't a hate crime, do we just have to let this behavior go?

His response was to say that we should direct resources into some kind of organization that would have "authority to deal with this type of situation." So I asked if this organization would be violating students' 1st Amendment rights if they stepped in just as the school would? And his basic response was, "I don't know."

"I don't know" was actually his response to most of the hypos and theoretical questions that were asked which was disappointing. I was wondering at the beginning why they didn't make it a debate like last time and by the end, I figured it was because this guy would have been eviscerated if he had competent opposition. Another 1L in my section was starting to get into him by the end and the constant refrain was basically, "I don't know, but bullying is really regrettable and we should try to stop it as long as no authority figures actually get involved."

I've been to two of these events (mainly for food) and in both cases, the guys speaking for the FedSoc have been thoroughly disappointing, do they ever get anybody who's a little more convincing?

They're usually not too convincing, but neither are they as outrageous as a lot of people expect. But FedSoc usually has good food, so you're doing it right.

[Eugenie Danglars]

Did anyone go to the FedSoc's thing on bullying? I'm wondering how it went down.

I've been to two of these events (mainly for food) and in both cases, the guys speaking for the FedSoc have been thoroughly disappointing, do they ever get anybody who's a little more convincing?

Their positions tend to be a little extreme, imo, so they often have some room for holes to get poked in them. And FedSoc always tries to find a debate partner, but sometimes student orgs won't help them out, sometimes because they don't want to legitimize the FedSoc speaker's position.

[IAFG]

Unfair to single out FedSoc. Most speakers aren't very convincing.

[rayiner]

Unfair to single out FedSoc. Most speakers aren't very convincing.

And most people in legal academia have pretty stupid ideas anyway.

[rinkrat19]

It's that time again!

To take CivPro II 1L spring or not to take, that is the question. I'm getting conflicting advice from students and professors all over the place.

Pros:
Interesting professsor. Redish is far and away my favorite this term
Useful if externing w/ judge 1L summer, something I am definitely interested in
Essential for clerking (could still take it 2L yr for that)
Pre-req/foundational for a lot of litigation classes
Redish is useful as a contact, even if you aren't one of the pets chosen to TA/research for him

Cons:
Hard class, tight curve (could negatively affect über-important 1L grades.)
Competing against 2Ls & 3Ls (I guess this is true in most electives)
Have to commit before I get CivPro I grade back.


I would definitely take something less strenuous as my 2nd elective if I took CivPro II, like Employment Law or Environmental Law or something.

Any other DEFINITELY TAKE/DO NOT TAKE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD recommendations? Just glancing at course titles, things like Evidence, Employment Law, Environmental Law, Labor Law, International Law, Fed Tax, Family Law, Intellectual Property, International Law, State & Local Gov't all look tolerable-to-interesting. (My vaguely-defined interests are all over the map.)

[bdubs]

It's that time again!

To take CivPro II 1L spring or not to take, that is the question. I'm getting conflicting advice from students and professors all over the place.

I got a lot of advice not to take that class as a 1L and I'm glad that I did. Try to take an uncurved class that you find interesting, unless it's taught by a notoriously bad professor (Haddock for Law and Econ is a good example).

You've got 2 full years to take Civ Pro II, Evidence, Fed Jur, etc... no need to do that now.

[bjsesq]

It's that time again!

To take CivPro II 1L spring or not to take, that is the question. I'm getting conflicting advice from students and professors all over the place.

I got a lot of advice not to take that class as a 1L and I'm glad that I did. Try to take an uncurved class that you find interesting, unless it's taught by a notoriously bad professor (Haddock for Law and Econ is a good example).

You've got 2 full years to take Civ Pro II, Evidence, Fed Jur, etc... no need to do that now.

Agreed. I made the mistake of taking evidence, a subject I really like, with a fuckbag prof my 1L year and I still regret it.

[homestyle28]

It's that time again!

To take CivPro II 1L spring or not to take, that is the question. I'm getting conflicting advice from students and professors all over the place.

I got a lot of advice not to take that class as a 1L and I'm glad that I did. Try to take an uncurved class that you find interesting, unless it's taught by a notoriously bad professor (Haddock for Law and Econ is a good example).

You've got 2 full years to take Civ Pro II, Evidence, Fed Jur, etc... no need to do that now.

Agreed. I made the mistake of taking evidence, a subject I really like, with a fuckbag prof my 1L year and I still regret it.

On the flipside, if you can take Evidence with Koehler uncurved, it's an enjoyable experience.

[rinkrat19]

I'm particularly interested in externing with a judge 1L summer. (I want to go back home to Portland, smallest legal market in the universe, so my options are limited.) Any input on how essential/non-essential CivPro would be for that?

I've also been told that Redish is helpful for getting the externships, since he'll call judges for his students.

[Icculus]

I'm particularly interested in externing with a judge 1L summer. (I want to go back home to Portland, smallest legal market in the universe, so my options are limited.) Any input on how essential/non-essential CivPro would be for that?

I've also been told that Redish is helpful for getting the externships, since he'll call judges for his students.

I took Civ Pro II spring of 1L year after being told not to. I loved the class, Redish is great, and it was probbaly my favorite class of second semester. That said, the biggest regret I have is not waiting and taking it this year and taking an uncurved class instead. As someone earlier said, you have two more years to take it and fedJur, etc..., I would wait. And again, this is coming from someone who loved the class.

[rinkrat19]

I'm particularly interested in externing with a judge 1L summer. (I want to go back home to Portland, smallest legal market in the universe, so my options are limited.) Any input on how essential/non-essential CivPro would be for that?

I've also been told that Redish is helpful for getting the externships, since he'll call judges for his students.

I took Civ Pro II spring of 1L year after being told not to. I loved the class, Redish is great, and it was probbaly my favorite class of second semester. That said, the biggest regret I have is not waiting and taking it this year and taking an uncurved class instead. As someone earlier said, you have two more years to take it and fedJur, etc..., I would wait. And again, this is coming from someone who loved the class.

Well damn, guys, I was hoping you'd tell me it really wasn't THAT hard.

Hokay, thanks for the input. Reevaluating!

[09042014]

It's that time again!

To take CivPro II 1L spring or not to take, that is the question. I'm getting conflicting advice from students and professors all over the place.

I got a lot of advice not to take that class as a 1L and I'm glad that I did. Try to take an uncurved class that you find interesting, unless it's taught by a notoriously bad professor (Haddock for Law and Econ is a good example).

You've got 2 full years to take Civ Pro II, Evidence, Fed Jur, etc... no need to do that now.

Agreed. I made the mistake of taking evidence, a subject I really like, with a fuckbag prof my 1L year and I still regret it.

On the flipside, if you can take Evidence with Koehler uncurved, it's an enjoyable experience.

Eh not really. Bro doesn't give Gentleman's A-'s.

[Icculus]

I'm particularly interested in externing with a judge 1L summer. (I want to go back home to Portland, smallest legal market in the universe, so my options are limited.) Any input on how essential/non-essential CivPro would be for that?

I've also been told that Redish is helpful for getting the externships, since he'll call judges for his students.

I took Civ Pro II spring of 1L year after being told not to. I loved the class, Redish is great, and it was probbaly my favorite class of second semester. That said, the biggest regret I have is not waiting and taking it this year and taking an uncurved class instead. As someone earlier said, you have two more years to take it and fedJur, etc..., I would wait. And again, this is coming from someone who loved the class.

Well damn, guys, I was hoping you'd tell me it really wasn't THAT hard.

Hokay, thanks for the input. Reevaluating!

The problem is that it's not that hard, much like CivPro I the material is not rocket science and so everyone understands it well, especially since the class tends to self select people that did well, therefore the curve is super tight and it is difficult to differntiate yourself from others. I highly recommend taking it 2L year, espcially of you want to clerk, but I don't think it will make a huge difference in getting an externship this summer. What will help with the externship is applying EARLY, as in before grades come out for fall semester. You should be applying in early December.

[Icculus]

I'm particularly interested in externing with a judge 1L summer. (I want to go back home to Portland, smallest legal market in the universe, so my options are limited.) Any input on how essential/non-essential CivPro would be for that?

I've also been told that Redish is helpful for getting the externships, since he'll call judges for his students.

I took Civ Pro II spring of 1L year after being told not to. I loved the class, Redish is great, and it was probbaly my favorite class of second semester. That said, the biggest regret I have is not waiting and taking it this year and taking an uncurved class instead. As someone earlier said, you have two more years to take it and fedJur, etc..., I would wait. And again, this is coming from someone who loved the class.

Well damn, guys, I was hoping you'd tell me it really wasn't THAT hard.

Hokay, thanks for the input. Reevaluating!

Instead of CirPro II take employment discrimnation. My friend took it second semester last year, loved it, and did really well (it usually only as 20-30 students). I am taking it now and love it, plus Provenzano is just amazing overall.

[09042014]

I'm particularly interested in externing with a judge 1L summer. (I want to go back home to Portland, smallest legal market in the universe, so my options are limited.) Any input on how essential/non-essential CivPro would be for that?

I've also been told that Redish is helpful for getting the externships, since he'll call judges for his students.

It's a hard class. I know a dood who got A+ in Civ Pro 1 with REdish and a B+ in II.

I also kinda doubt Redish will call judges for summer externships, and summer externships aren't particularly hard get. And they won't care even a little that you didn't take Civ Pro II. Most 1L's don't get to take electives. All the people you are competing with haven't taken it either.

[Samara]

While we're on the topic, any thoughts on State and Local Government or Estates and Trusts?

[Icculus]

I'm particularly interested in externing with a judge 1L summer. (I want to go back home to Portland, smallest legal market in the universe, so my options are limited.) Any input on how essential/non-essential CivPro would be for that?

I've also been told that Redish is helpful for getting the externships, since he'll call judges for his students.

It's a hard class. I know a dood who got A+ in Civ Pro 1 with REdish and a B+ in II.

I also kinda doubt Redish will call judges for summer externships, and summer externships aren't particularly hard get. And they won't care even a little that you didn't take Civ Pro II. Most 1L's don't get to take electives. All the people you are competing with haven't taken it either.

+1.

[homestyle28]

On the flipside, if you can take Evidence with Koehler uncurved, it's an enjoyable experience.

Eh not really. Bro doesn't give Gentleman's A-'s.

Really? Maybe I had my 1L game on in that class more than I thought...well the 1ls I know who were in the class did well, so ymmv.

[IAFG]

On the flipside, if you can take Evidence with Koehler uncurved, it's an enjoyable experience.

Eh not really. Bro doesn't give Gentleman's A-'s.

Really? Maybe I had my 1L game on in that class more than I thought...well the 1ls I know who were in the class did well, so ymmv.

If I based my opinion on the grades I hear about, I would assume NU curved 1L to a 3.7.

[homestyle28]

On the flipside, if you can take Evidence with Koehler uncurved, it's an enjoyable experience.

Eh not really. Bro doesn't give Gentleman's A-'s.

Really? Maybe I had my 1L game on in that class more than I thought...well the 1ls I know who were in the class did well, so ymmv.

If I based my opinion on the grades I hear about, I would assume NU curved 1L to a 3.7.

That low? You must have humble friends

[09042014]

On the flipside, if you can take Evidence with Koehler uncurved, it's an enjoyable experience.

Eh not really. Bro doesn't give Gentleman's A-'s.

Really? Maybe I had my 1L game on in that class more than I thought...well the 1ls I know who were in the class did well, so ymmv.

Test was fairly easy IMO, wasn't really an issue spotter, I'm guessing his psuedo curve was kind of a shit show.