Is it worthwhile to do an LLM post JD if not practicing
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:08 am
Had to shorten the subject line.
Essentially I have an MBA and just finished a JD in PA but came to Dallas for SMU.
I do not have any intention to practice but figured a corporate law LLM at SMU might be helpful in making connections.
The problem is that I am finding the courses to be all case oriented. VERY little practical knowledge. That essentially makes it like my 1L year all over again and I'm pretty burnt out after just graduating and taking the bar.
I now must decide if it's an advantage to have an SMU LLM if I'm going to be practicing in the financial word (at least that's the aim, it's all about finding a job)
I did just meet after typing this, a 3L who agreed that near all of the courses are casebook, cases, dates etc and not a lot of practical application or teaching the rules. Rather most are trying to think a learning process similar (like I stated above) to 1L.
Any thoughts on this? Thanks
Essentially I have an MBA and just finished a JD in PA but came to Dallas for SMU.
I do not have any intention to practice but figured a corporate law LLM at SMU might be helpful in making connections.
The problem is that I am finding the courses to be all case oriented. VERY little practical knowledge. That essentially makes it like my 1L year all over again and I'm pretty burnt out after just graduating and taking the bar.
I now must decide if it's an advantage to have an SMU LLM if I'm going to be practicing in the financial word (at least that's the aim, it's all about finding a job)
I did just meet after typing this, a 3L who agreed that near all of the courses are casebook, cases, dates etc and not a lot of practical application or teaching the rules. Rather most are trying to think a learning process similar (like I stated above) to 1L.
Any thoughts on this? Thanks