2L Charlotte law taking questions Forum

[Aberzombie1892]

theres already a t-14 and two t1 in NC. Throw in a bunch of t3s. I hate schools like this. Its the reason lawyers can't get jobs. Theres no need for more law schools in NC, especially with the collapse of the charlotte market.

But then you get retarded schools like this and elon. Go pick another profession. Or stop sucking at the lsat.

This is what happens. 90% of people at charlotte don't get real jobs. Corporate a holes get rich, and the 10% of charlotte people that do get jobs take them from people that actually deserve them.

Someone who graduates from <insert "retarded" school> and someone who graduates from <insert non-"retarded" school> who both pass the Bar are both LAWYERS! Get off your high horse! Your argument makes no logical sense. "It's the reason lawyers can't get jobs." What lawyers can't get jobs? I graduated from Elon as part of the inaugural class and secured a job outside of NC as a LAWYER at a midsize firm. If you’re concerned with there being more lawyers, but say these schools are inadequate, then we (an Elon/Charlotte grad and a grad from another NC school) shouldn’t be competing for the same jobs, much less actually getting those jobs.

"This is what happens. 90% of people at charlotte don't get real jobs. Corporate a holes get rich, and the 10% of charlotte people that do get jobs take them from people that actually deserve them."

What makes you more entitled to a job than someone who graduated from Elon or Charlotte? I went to Elon because, no, I couldn’t get in to UNC or Duke, but I worked hard in college and had a great GPA, knew I wanted to be a lawyer and I was going to do whatever it took to become one. Just because someone doesn’t score a 165+ on the LSAT doesn’t mean they are incapable of logical reasoning or that they will not make meaningful contributions to the legal profession. Employers choose who they want to hire. Why do you feel so threatened by competition?

i agree. Just because you can't do well enough on the LSAT does NOT mean you could not be a great lawyer. However, there are TOO MANY lawyers - someone can double check this, but I believe the common stat is 30k new law jobs last year and 45k new lawyers?

Therefore, there should be some kind of cutoff for lawschool, so every one who gets a degree can get a job. Hmm, what kind of cut off coudl we use. Something thats the same for everyone.

Different schools and gpas are hard to compare.

Hmmm if only we could think of some kind of standardized measure or test to arbitrarily cut people out. Then there wouldn't be a glut in the market.

Suggestions?

Limit the class size of all law schools to 200. Then allow each law school to accept another 100 in transfers after the first year.

This would effectively destroy shitty schools because all of their top students would transfer out to better schools - thus, even if they only had 10% reporting salaries, it would still be shitty. On the other hand, all law school graduates would now have meaningful employment.

I would also suggest doing away with ranking students and moving all law schools to the same curve (of course it won't be exactly the same, but all schools should have a similar median).

That way, legal hiring would be more straightforward - and employers would have to develop systems of comparing the exact same GPA system across schools (and decide when a higher gpa at a lower ranked school is worth more than a lower gpa is at a higher ranked school)

[romothesavior]

The fact that I didn't go to a top tier law school does not diminish the fact that I am a lawyer and does not mean you are more qualified for a particular job than I am.

Maybe not, but you are not addressing the point broseph. The point is that you overcame the odds. You are probably one of the most fortunate tier 3/4 students in the country. It really is undeniable that a person at a school like Elon or Charlotte is going to be at a HUGE disadvantage when it comes to searching for a job. That's really all that people are saying. No one is disparaging you or saying that you are an inferior lawyer. We're just saying that you are the exception and not the rule, and quite honestly, it is disingenuous to present yourself as the norm from schools like these.

[OrdinarilySkilled]

i agree. Just because you can't do well enough on the LSAT does NOT mean you could not be a great lawyer. However, there are TOO MANY lawyers - someone can double check this, but I believe the common stat is 30k new law jobs last year and 45k new lawyers?

Therefore, there should be some kind of cutoff for lawschool, so every one who gets a degree can get a job. Hmm, what kind of cut off coudl we use. Something thats the same for everyone.

Different schools and gpas are hard to compare.

Hmmm if only we could think of some kind of standardized measure or test to arbitrarily cut people out. Then there wouldn't be a glut in the market.

Suggestions?

Forcing schools to accurately report job statistics and ending guaranteed govt. non-dischargeable loans to everyone with a pulse. The free market will take care of it. No need for protectionism.

This is obv a good call that I agree with, but can people stop with the nondischargeable bs... student loan debt can be easier to deal with than other debt because of income based repayment, declaring bankruptcy is no effing joke that will screw you for 10+ years, and it (student loan debt) actually is dishargeable in extreme circumstances (which is usually the only time bankruptcy should be considered anyway).

[r6_philly]

I am obviously no expert and I haven't seen any sort of study, but I can't imagine that having an entire generation of Americans saddled with enormous educational debt could possibly be a good thing. Even if the government is getting the money back in the long run, I would imagine it will likely be devastating on the long-term economy. Graduates (and not just law grads) are struggling to find jobs, and their debts will will suck away a lot of their expendable income and make it difficult to buy a home, a car, etc.

Just my $.02 though, I'd be interested in seeing something on the long-term impact of it.

Education is long time investment. So maybe they are out of a job for 5 years or more. But they are now people with graduate degrees (I know from a TTT but that's ahead of what, 80% of people in this country? more, less?). When the economy shifts and create new jobs, they will be more competitive than people without degrees. I can see TTT grads entering the welfare ranks. If we have to choose to spend the interest/maintenance cost on $120-150k but the end result is they are more employable in the long run, one can argue the case.

The trouble with our country today is largely due to shortsightedness. People are going to work 30+ years, and the loans can't be discharged. To the person, that spread to $5000 a year + interest costs. To the government, they will get it back... I have to believe someone with a TTT JD is going to be able to earn $10k more than without it. Remember, these people with TTT degrees also lack the grads/credentials/opportunities, that's why they went to TTT in the first place.

[r6_philly]

This is obv a good call that I agree with, but can people stop with the nondischargeable bs... student loan debt can be easier to deal with than other debt because of income based repayment, declaring bankruptcy is no effing joke that will screw you for 10+ years, and it (student loan debt) actually is dishargeable in extreme circumstances (which is usually the only time bankruptcy should be considered anyway).

That is an urban legend about bankruptcy. People don't emerge from bankruptcy well because most a) lack income potential and b) don't change their habits.

You can be credit worthy after chapter 7 in as little as 24 months and can gain excellent credit rating (750+ score) in 5 years, if you 1)get credit cards 2)get a mortgage 3)buy cars/installment loans 4)pay every bill on time.

This is fact, not speculation.

[romothesavior]

When the economy shifts and create new jobs, they will be more competitive than people without degrees.

A bold claim to assume the economy will shift and create a bunch of new jobs. I think it is especially bold to imply that the market can absorb the shit ton of people with graduate and law degrees, not to mention pay them well enough to allow them to pay off their loans.

[r6_philly]

When the economy shifts and create new jobs, they will be more competitive than people without degrees.

A bold claim to assume the economy will shift and create a bunch of new jobs. I think it is especially bold to imply that the market can absorb the shit ton of people with graduate and law degrees, not to mention pay them well enough to allow them to pay off their loans.

You mean you don't believe the economy will shift and create new jobs in the next 30 years? How is economic growth in the next 3 decades a bold claim? If you don't believe that our economy will continue to grow and expand, better start packing and move overseas to emerging markets.

[OrdinarilySkilled]

This is obv a good call that I agree with, but can people stop with the nondischargeable bs... student loan debt can be easier to deal with than other debt because of income based repayment, declaring bankruptcy is no effing joke that will screw you for 10+ years, and it (student loan debt) actually is dishargeable in extreme circumstances (which is usually the only time bankruptcy should be considered anyway).

That is an urban legend about bankruptcy. People don't emerge from bankruptcy well because most a) lack income potential and b) don't change their habits.

You can be credit worthy after chapter 7 in as little as 24 months and can gain excellent credit rating (750+ score) in 5 years, if you 1)get credit cards 2)get a mortgage 3)buy cars/installment loans 4)pay every bill on time.

This is fact, not speculation.

The difference between can/will is important. This is the other extreme that is probably less prevelant than the other (at least based on my experience). Either way it is a good point but I'm not sure it justifies implying 200k debt isn't that bad if it is "dischargeable".

[romothesavior]

When the economy shifts and create new jobs, they will be more competitive than people without degrees.

A bold claim to assume the economy will shift and create a bunch of new jobs. I think it is especially bold to imply that the market can absorb the shit ton of people with graduate and law degrees, not to mention pay them well enough to allow them to pay off their loans.

You mean you don't believe the economy will shift and create new jobs in the next 30 years? How is economic growth in the next 3 decades a bold claim? If you don't believe that our economy will continue to grow and expand, better start packing and move overseas to emerging markets.

I do think it will grow obviously, but not at a rapid enough pace to absorb the ever-increasing number of debt-saddled college and grad school graduates. I think a LOT of people will be left out in the cold, especially in law, and that will create serious economic problems for our country down the road. But like I said, I'm not an expert, so I'm just going off of what I read and what little I understand about global economics.

[Nicholasnickynic]

1. The fact that I didn't go to a top tier law school does not diminish the fact that I am a lawyer and
2. does not mean you are more qualified for a particular job than I am.
3.There are other factors that go into someone's ability to perform as an attorney beyond those that can be quantified through testing,
4.one being the ability to respond to an argument without resorting to sarcasm and belittlement.

1. Yes it does
2. Yes, as a 1L, I am
3. Nope
4. What's sarcasm?

[romothesavior]

1. The fact that I didn't go to a top tier law school does not diminish the fact that I am a lawyer and
2. does not mean you are more qualified for a particular job than I am.
3.There are other factors that go into someone's ability to perform as an attorney beyond those that can be quantified through testing,
4.one being the ability to respond to an argument without resorting to sarcasm and belittlement.

1. Yes it does
2. Yes, as a 1L, I am
3. Nope
4. What's sarcasm?

That's a little unnecessary brah. The dude has a midlaw job, which you and I will both probably be willing to give up a hand for in 2 years.

I still disagree with elonlawgrad about the viability of attending a T4 school, but he is a lawyer. Not sure how that's debatable.

[r6_philly]

I do think it will grow obviously, but not at a rapid enough pace to absorb the ever-increasing number of debt-saddled college and grad school graduates. I think a LOT of people will be left out in the cold, especially in law, and that will create serious economic problems for our country down the road. But like I said, I'm not an expert, so I'm just going off of what I read and what little I understand about global economics.

I didn't imply they will get law jobs. I just implied that they will get better job than they would have without the JD. So maybe without it those people would make $25-30k with their below median college degrees. Maybe with a TTT JD they can make $40-$50 doing whatever, which would fulfill the expectation of the department of ED. Maybe won't fulfill the TTT grad's expectations, but that's besides the point.

[elonlawgrad]

The fact that I didn't go to a top tier law school does not diminish the fact that I am a lawyer and does not mean you are more qualified for a particular job than I am.

Maybe not, but you are not addressing the point broseph. The point is that you overcame the odds. You are probably one of the most fortunate tier 3/4 students in the country. It really is undeniable that a person at a school like Elon or Charlotte is going to be at a HUGE disadvantage when it comes to searching for a job. That's really all that people are saying. No one is disparaging you or saying that you are an inferior lawyer. We're just saying that you are the exception and not the rule, and quite honestly, it is disingenuous to present yourself as the norm from schools like these.

Fair enough; but I'm certainly not trying to be disingenuous by saying what I've said. I agree with the fact that we (graduates from Elon or Charlotte) are at a disadvantage. I went to Elon, aware of the fact that it is outrageously expensive, there was no alumni network (although, I did consider the fact that Elon graduates did/do exist even if there weren't law graduates yet), it would be difficult to find work after, but not impossible, and knowing that our founding dean also founded Campbell Law I had peace of mind regarding accreditation (even though that is not at issue at this point in the thread).

Someone before said the LSAT is basically an IQ test...I would say the same for the SAT, the scores of which got some of my fellow law classmates into Harvard, Yale, Duke, Wake, etc. So , my point is, it is wrong for anyone to suggest that Elon (I don't know about other TTT) Law students are undeserving of gainful legal employment just because they didn't go to a top tier law school.

[r6_philly]

1. The fact that I didn't go to a top tier law school does not diminish the fact that I am a lawyer and
2. does not mean you are more qualified for a particular job than I am.
3.There are other factors that go into someone's ability to perform as an attorney beyond those that can be quantified through testing,
4.one being the ability to respond to an argument without resorting to sarcasm and belittlement.

1. Yes it does
2. Yes, as a 1L, I am
3. Nope
4. What's sarcasm?

1. No it does not. You are a lawyer
2. No it shouldn't. But it gives people the impression that it does.
3. Yes there are, however since it's hard to quantify, people will just screen by quantitative measures such as scores, grades, and rankings.
4. Entitlement and elitism generally (not always) only piss off people who don't feel it. The problem is, it is generally accepted by people who hold the power.

[Grizz]

Suggestions?

Forcing schools to accurately report job statistics and ending guaranteed govt. non-dischargeable loans to everyone with a pulse. The free market will take care of it. No need for protectionism.

This is obv a good call that I agree with, but can people stop with the nondischargeable bs... student loan debt can be easier to deal with than other debt because of income based repayment, declaring bankruptcy is no effing joke that will screw you for 10+ years, and it (student loan debt) actually is dishargeable in extreme circumstances (which is usually the only time bankruptcy should be considered anyway).

It's basically impossible to get it discharged in this way.

[elonlawgrad]

1. The fact that I didn't go to a top tier law school does not diminish the fact that I am a lawyer and
2. does not mean you are more qualified for a particular job than I am.
3.There are other factors that go into someone's ability to perform as an attorney beyond those that can be quantified through testing,
4.one being the ability to respond to an argument without resorting to sarcasm and belittlement.

1. Yes it does
2. Yes, as a 1L, I am
3. Nope
4. What's sarcasm?

That's a little unnecessary brah. The dude has a midlaw job, which you and I will both probably be willing to give up a hand for in 2 years.

I still disagree with elonlawgrad about the viability of attending a T4 school, but he is a lawyer. Not sure how that's debatable.

Yes, I am a lawyer (and a female btw). I passed the same Bar as everyone else in my state. I never aspired to be a lawyer in a big firm. I'm not even going to respond to NickNarcissit's #2, because that is ridiculous! 3. Yes. I'm not denying the fact that you need legal and analytical skills; but that's not all. You might have the legal skills to be a good lawyer, but that doesn't mean anything if people (employers and clients) cannot stand to deal with you.

[elonlawgrad]

1. The fact that I didn't go to a top tier law school does not diminish the fact that I am a lawyer and
2. does not mean you are more qualified for a particular job than I am.
3.There are other factors that go into someone's ability to perform as an attorney beyond those that can be quantified through testing,
4.one being the ability to respond to an argument without resorting to sarcasm and belittlement.

1. Yes it does
2. Yes, as a 1L, I am
3. Nope
4. What's sarcasm?

1. No it does not. You are a lawyer
2. No it shouldn't. But it gives people the impression that it does.
3. Yes there are, however since it's hard to quantify, people will just screen by quantitative measures such as scores, grades, and rankings.
4. Entitlement and elitism generally (not always) only piss off people who don't feel it. The problem is, it is generally accepted by people who hold the power.

2. I agree, it gives the appearance of such. That is something I have overcome. Being as I had to work hard to get through law school and study for the Bar, I am not afraid of an obstacle.

4. (directed to Nicky-whatever) you, I assume, are intelligent enough to figure out what I mean.

[OrdinarilySkilled]

1. The fact that I didn't go to a top tier law school does not diminish the fact that I am a lawyer and
2. does not mean you are more qualified for a particular job than I am.
3.There are other factors that go into someone's ability to perform as an attorney beyond those that can be quantified through testing,
4.one being the ability to respond to an argument without resorting to sarcasm and belittlement.

1. Yes it does
2. Yes, as a 1L, I am
3. Nope
4. What's sarcasm?

Apparently nobody knows...

[Grizz]

When the economy shifts and create new jobs, they will be more competitive than people without degrees.

A bold claim to assume the economy will shift and create a bunch of new jobs. I think it is especially bold to imply that the market can absorb the shit ton of people with graduate and law degrees, not to mention pay them well enough to allow them to pay off their loans.

This.

[Nicholasnickynic]

1. The fact that I didn't go to a top tier law school does not diminish the fact that I am a lawyer and
2. does not mean you are more qualified for a particular job than I am.
3.There are other factors that go into someone's ability to perform as an attorney beyond those that can be quantified through testing,
4.one being the ability to respond to an argument without resorting to sarcasm and belittlement.

1. Yes it does
2. Yes, as a 1L, I am
3. Nope
4. What's sarcasm?

Apparently nobody knows...

TITCR

[elonlawgrad]

and Nickynicknack, where did you go to law school, when did you graduate, and what do you do for a living?

[Nicholasnickynic]

Yale/2005/Skadden

[elonlawgrad]

I asked what you do for a living...not where do you work? Impressive, yet doubtful seeing as you spend a significant amount of time on this website worrying about TTT law schools.

[beachbum]

Whatever happened to Charlotte Q&A? We made it through all of three questions before abandoning that idea entirely. But an Elon thread might also be a productive use of everyone's time. You know, instead of constantly arguing over stupid shit.

-Beachbum, elitist asshole

[Grizz]

I asked what you do for a living...not where do you work? Impressive, yet doubtful seeing as you spend a significant amount of time on this website worrying about TTT law schools.

He's messing with you.