UC Hastings Students Taking Questions Forum

[kapital98]

Ah gotcha. Anyone know if you can work during 1L? Any exceptions to the rule?

I'm pretty sure there is a rule against this at Hastings. If not, then there is for certain a restriction on the number of hours you can work (20/week?). They will notify you of this during orientation.

You shouldn't be working 1L anyways. You need to focus on your studies. Making an extra $12/hour means almost nothing if you lose 15-30% in class rankings because of being over extended. As a 1L you will have precious little free time. Don't over extend yourself. You've only got one shot to be top 10%.

[Moonlight]

Content Deleted

[DildaMan]

SCU has a smaller margin of error. I hear only the top 5% really get big-law. Most of the ones that didn't make the very top had a hard time find jobs; they eventually got some mid/small firms. They have a lot of patent people so that skews their numbers a bit, but you really need to be at the very top of the class or be attractive as an IP candidate to do well there. They also tend to have a lot of older students with a sizable amount of work experience doing the part time. A lot of the IP firms recruit from SCU so it would not have been a huge difference for me.

Davis is an interesting school. There students have a higher placement rate, and the school is smaller. On the other hand, their home market is Sacramento. I have a few friends who went there that were able to get SF but once again you'd have to be near the top of your class. I think its about the same range for Hastings (Top 10-15%).

Hastings was fine as law-schools go. There are a few professors that are amazing: Diamond, DePorter, Mammen, etc . . . . There are a lot of gunners but they keep to themselves. The large class size works against the students for OCI and employment in general. My only complaint is they're stingy. I know SCU gives incentives for their top performers. If Hastings would have thrown some more money at me I probably would have stayed.

See you hit the spot right on with SCU. My concern was the presence of a lot of patent people which I feared will skew their numbers.

Congrats on your transfer. I assume you're at a T-14 nowadays. Do you have any professors I should avoid?

I ended up at USC. I would avoid Federal Income Tax as your statutory elective. I felt the class was gunner heavy. Other than that I believe your entire 1L is assigned. During 2L I would avoid Martinez, Lefstin, and Levine. I heard Martinez and Lefstin have harsh curves.

Why avoid Levine? I really liked that guy as a person and a prof. But I only took his classes as a very checked out 3L, so, take that as you may.

Several friends said his teaching style was horrible. Usually most students self learn most of the materials a few weeks from finals but they took exception to his teaching efficiency/style.

[a male human]

SCU has a smaller margin of error. I hear only the top 5% really get big-law. Most of the ones that didn't make the very top had a hard time find jobs; they eventually got some mid/small firms. They have a lot of patent people so that skews their numbers a bit, but you really need to be at the very top of the class or be attractive as an IP candidate to do well there. They also tend to have a lot of older students with a sizable amount of work experience doing the part time. A lot of the IP firms recruit from SCU so it would not have been a huge difference for me.

Davis is an interesting school. There students have a higher placement rate, and the school is smaller. On the other hand, their home market is Sacramento. I have a few friends who went there that were able to get SF but once again you'd have to be near the top of your class. I think its about the same range for Hastings (Top 10-15%).

Hastings was fine as law-schools go. There are a few professors that are amazing: Diamond, DePorter, Mammen, etc . . . . There are a lot of gunners but they keep to themselves. The large class size works against the students for OCI and employment in general. My only complaint is they're stingy. I know SCU gives incentives for their top performers. If Hastings would have thrown some more money at me I probably would have stayed.

See you hit the spot right on with SCU. My concern was the presence of a lot of patent people which I feared will skew their numbers.

Congrats on your transfer. I assume you're at a T-14 nowadays. Do you have any professors I should avoid?

I ended up at USC. I would avoid Federal Income Tax as your statutory elective. I felt the class was gunner heavy. Other than that I believe your entire 1L is assigned. During 2L I would avoid Martinez, Lefstin, and Levine. I heard Martinez and Lefstin have harsh curves.

I liked Lefstin actually. Barely any cold calls (depends on volunteer answers most of the time). Nice case discussions, makes it easy to distill rules. IIRC he also did a review at the start of every lecture? I forget.

I would suggest Tax because while it has "gunners," the curve isn't as tight as other classes. It's practical, useful and fun sometimes. Prof. Field is also awesome, hardworking and caring about her students. Probably the best tax prof at Hastings based on stories I heard. On the other hand, if you mess up one issue in environmental law or something, that's like one letter grade down

[DildaMan]

I would suggest Tax because while it has "gunners," the curve isn't as tight as other classes. It's practical, useful and fun sometimes. Prof. Field is also awesome, hardworking and caring about her students. Probably the best tax prof at Hastings based on stories I heard. On the other hand, if you mess up one issue in environmental law or something, that's like one letter grade down

Field is a cool teacher but I don't dig her policy questions on the final. She's a student favorite but the class is heavily stacked. If you want to maximize your GPA (and you should), you probably should take an easier elective. There were two environmental profs, one gives a take home that is extremely painful. The other is Takacs; he is a fun professor but I had him for Torts.

[kapital98]

I would suggest Tax because while it has "gunners," the curve isn't as tight as other classes. It's practical, useful and fun sometimes. Prof. Field is also awesome, hardworking and caring about her students. Probably the best tax prof at Hastings based on stories I heard. On the other hand, if you mess up one issue in environmental law or something, that's like one letter grade down

Field is a cool teacher but I don't dig her policy questions on the final. She's a student favorite but the class is heavily stacked. If you want to maximize your GPA (and you should), you probably should take an easier elective. There were two environmental profs, one gives a take home that is extremely painful. The other is Takacs; he is a fun professor but I had him for Torts.

The most important thing about statutory classes is picking out an easy one. I did immigration and was quite happy. It didn't feel stacked or gunnerish at all. I've always had the impression that gunners flock to tax.

[a male human]

Wouldn't it also depend on your background and specialization goals? If you're trying to be a tax lawyer, I would take FIT no matter what.

I can't speak for the other electives. I took it because I had 0 interest in the other ones offered, and I ended up enjoying FIT. People say it's hard because "they are bad at math" and "that's why I'm in ~l a w s c h o o l~ lol!" (if I hear that "joke" one more time...). It might be the abstract thinking that's involved when they see numbers, but in the end, it is application of statutes that is actually pretty mechanical. It's simple but difficult because of the abstractness and the time spent understanding it all.

Again, I've heard the curve is much tighter in other electives because the material is easier to grasp or something. The curve here will be more spread out. If you don't understand something, talk to Field. The final was straightforward. I even got to write your own statute. If you do the work, you'll get it.

Sure, numbers appear frequently, but the numbers are made for simple calculations like other classes. Hastings is chock full of smart people. If you passed pre-algebra and the SAT, you'll be fine, probably.

It was a very popular class, where it filled up quickly. But the other posters have a point as well. If you're anxious about lacking time or feel like you're gonna be lazy or won't mind being bored (possibly, depending on your preference), take the other classes. I feel like there are definite pros and cons.

Also, FIT was my highest grade during spring semester, though that's not saying much since the other grades were so horrible. If other stat classes are similar to the core classes, I might have also gotten destroyed there.

In any case, new students will have several months to decide on this. I'm [not sure what I was gonna put here]

[Dingo Starr]

I'm...

[kapital98]

See, with me, my statutory class was my highest grade that semester. IMO, it's the reason I got to transfer (my grades were on the borderline). If I had taken tax, or another stacked class, it would have been less likely to achieve a high grade.

However, I didn't have a strong preference. It's not like I was dead set on any of the fields introduced by the statutory courses. I picked the course I thought was easiest.

One more thing: Takac's Environmental course had a hellish grading curve. He's an amazing professor, he even wrote one of my LoR's, but he's a really tough grader when it comes to the statutory course. Be warned.

[Moonlight]

I'm...

You in??

[DildaMan]

It was a very popular class, where it filled up quickly. But the other posters have a point as well. If you're anxious about lacking time or feel like you're gonna be lazy or won't mind being bored (possibly, depending on your preference), take the other classes. I feel like there are definite pros and cons.

Also, FIT was my highest grade during spring semester, though that's not saying much since the other grades were so horrible. If other stat classes are similar to the core classes, I might have also gotten destroyed there.

In any case, new students will have several months to decide on this. I'm [not sure what I was gonna put here]

I had the exact opposite experience. FIT was my lowest grade and probably kept me out of acceptance at my first choice transfer. Even if you want to do tax, I'd caution against taking it during 1L. You can always say you're taking tax classes in your upcoming 2L year. Most of the employers I met with cared little to none about my preferred practice area with the exception of IP.

[ilovesf]

See, with me, my statutory class was my highest grade that semester. IMO, it's the reason I got to transfer (my grades were on the borderline). If I had taken tax, or another stacked class, it would have been less likely to achieve a high grade.

However, I didn't have a strong preference. It's not like I was dead set on any of the fields introduced by the statutory courses. I picked the course I thought was easiest.

One more thing: Takac's Environmental course had a hellish grading curve. He's an amazing professor, he even wrote one of my LoR's, but he's a really tough grader when it comes to the statutory course. Be warned.

1. It's very subjective. I had an excellent 1L GPA and that class was my worst grade.
2. It's not even offered anymore, so whatever.

Just take whatever you want.

[hiima3L]

If it's even offered anymore, I would strongly recommend Legislation and Stat Interpretation as a 1L elective. I loved the class and it's easily the most useful class I took. I had to draw on some of the stuff I learned in that class today at work.

Buuuuuut it had the most absurd excuse for a final. I got an A so I couldn't complain, but it was just plain ludicrous that it counted as a final for a huge 1L class. 33% of it was identifying verbatim quotations from cases we read.

[SFSpartan]

If it's even offered anymore, I would strongly recommend Legislation and Stat Interpretation as a 1L elective. I loved the class and it's easily the most useful class I took. I had to draw on some of the stuff I learned in that class today at work.

Buuuuuut it had the most absurd excuse for a final. I got an A so I couldn't complain, but it was just plain ludicrous that it counted as a final for a huge 1L class. 33% of it was identifying verbatim quotations from cases we read.

My impression was that they got rid of it for a couple years, but brought it back this year. Everyone I've talked to in the class loves it. Wishing I took that instead of IP- Lefstin's curve is going to awful.

[Moonlight]

If it's even offered anymore, I would strongly recommend Legislation and Stat Interpretation as a 1L elective. I loved the class and it's easily the most useful class I took. I had to draw on some of the stuff I learned in that class today at work.

Buuuuuut it had the most absurd excuse for a final. I got an A so I couldn't complain, but it was just plain ludicrous that it counted as a final for a huge 1L class. 33% of it was identifying verbatim quotations from cases we read.

Do you have the recent list of electives offered for first spring term 1L? Because I thought I read that that FIT class is still offered according to the hastings site?

[OneMoreLawHopeful]

If it's even offered anymore, I would strongly recommend Legislation and Stat Interpretation as a 1L elective. I loved the class and it's easily the most useful class I took. I had to draw on some of the stuff I learned in that class today at work.

Buuuuuut it had the most absurd excuse for a final. I got an A so I couldn't complain, but it was just plain ludicrous that it counted as a final for a huge 1L class. 33% of it was identifying verbatim quotations from cases we read.

Do you have the recent list of electives offered for first spring term 1L? Because I thought I read that that FIT class is still offered according to the hastings site?

This semester they are offering FIT, IP, Domestic Violence, Environmental, and Leg/Stat interpretation.

Also, just to throw my $.02, I took tax, loved the class and got an A, and it definitely helped open doors during 2L OCI. Some firms actually had separate interviews just for tax candidates (I recall Orrick and Baker/McKenzie, but there were others), so you could increase your total number of interviews by applying twice (once generally and once "tax only") and a good grade in first year tax definitely opened those doors and provided a viable "back up" in case my main choice had fallen through.

Of course the problem is that I'll never know the counterfactual: if I had the same grade in a different stat class, would I have still gotten the tax screeners? There's just no way to know.

If anything, you're always better off with higher grades, so just take the stat class that interests you most. That way you'll be more motivated/engaged, improving your odds of scoring well on the final. Saying that a class is easy or hard doesn't really say much; most people think torts is easy, and that's why the curve is killer. By contrast, even if tax is objectively "hard" for most people, that doesn't mean it will be hard for you.

[a male human]

Why don't they offer the same classes consistently...? I would have liked to take IP (is it all that statutory, though?). Instead I took it with Feldman for 2L fall and got cranked.

[J-e-L-L-o]

got cranked.

[Cal Trask]

Does anyone have experience with the Domestic Violence statutory elective?

[kapital98]

Does anyone have experience with the Domestic Violence statutory elective?

No, sorry. However, I have a feeling that it is going to be the most depressing 1L course. It will make Crim law look nice by comparison.

[Dingo Starr]

Sounds right up my alley!

[OneMoreLawHopeful]

Why don't they offer the same classes consistently...? I would have liked to take IP (is it all that statutory, though?). Instead I took it with Feldman for 2L fall and got cranked.

Since it's a statutory class, there will definitely be a shift in what gets covered. Trade secrets and state/common law trademark (and/or common law unfair competition) probably can't be covered because it's not statutory. By contrast, federal trademark, the copyright act, and patent laws are all statutory, so those can probably be covered.

However, if anyone is interested in taking IP at Hastings, I would seriously recommend Lefstine's 4-unit class. It covers trademark/patent/copyright/trade secret, and he's a lot of fun to have a class with. Since the 1L class is only 3 units and probably won't cover the common law issues, you might be missing out.

But, yeah, Domestic Violence for 3 units for an entire semester sounds like the most depressing class I have ever heard of...

[eliztudorr]

I was reading on the wiki page for hastings and it described that hastings has a tough/harsh grading system compare to other schools in the area. how exactly is it "tougher"? how does this affect a student's prospect in jobs? thank you.

[OneMoreLawHopeful]

I was reading on the wiki page for hastings and it described that hastings has a tough/harsh grading system compare to other schools in the area. how exactly is it "tougher"? how does this affect a student's prospect in jobs? thank you.

I think this must be in reference to Stanford/Berkeley. Both of those schools use a Pass/Honors grading system, so there's no real "curve" at those places. Employers might "count Hs" but no one is ever ranked in the dreaded "bottom 10%" because there's no real ranking in a P/H system.

By contrast, Hastings is like the other 99% of law schools and has a forced curve. The academic regulations state that no more than 25% of any class can get As, while 12% of every class is required to receive a grade below B-. This isn't unusual for law schools generally, but it is different than Berkeley/Stanford.

As for jobs, the actual letters you get never really matter because outside of HYS employers look at class rank instead of actual grades. Realistically, at Hastings you need to be in the top 15% to have a shot at biglaw (maybe top 30% if you have something else going for you, e.g. you're an URM, or you have an advanced degree + want to do patent law). But exactly which grades get you "top 15%" will vary with your class year, the curve in any one class doesn't matter as much as the actual distribution across classes.

That and Berkeley/Stanford are way more competitive anyway, so it's silly to say that Hastings' grading system is somehow responsible for employment outcomes, as opposed to Berkeley/Stanford just having a generally more prestigious student body (hence why they can get away with P/H grading in the first place).

[Moonlight]

Content Deleted