Top Law Schools

.

Develop social skills and don't act like an entitled six year old.

ConLaw2017 wrote:YLS 0L here. Pretty sure that I want to work in appellate litigation after law school. Besides the usual tips (LR, Moot Court, Get Good Grades, Clinic, Clerk), does anyone have any advice on how to make the most of my time there? I'm thinking about doing several off-campus moot courts and working as an extern/intern for DOJ Civil/Conn OSG/USAO to develop the right skills. Is there anything else I should look into?

Develop contingency plans and explore other forms of practice. (appellate is difficult to crack and not nearly as interesting as 0Ls think it is)

Develop relationships with professors. (helps with landing clerkship)

Network with appellate attorneys who are alumni. (learn about their path and what their job looks like; this is related to my first point)

DOJ/USAO rarely staffs interns into appellate practice, but at least try to intern in an office or division/section that does appellate work and try to get assignments. (never be afraid to express interest and let your assigning supervisor know you're interested in appellate assignments; similarly raise appellate interests in the interview)

Also, explore different job types. You can gain much faster exposure to substantive appellate work if you work in a nonprofit or government that routinely litigates cases that get appealed.

Biglaw doesn't typically hire associates directly into appellate group (others can correct me if I'm wrong). Appellate boutiques are even more selective.

.

ConLaw2017 wrote:I have messaged everyone on this thread. I believe it is in everyone's interest to comply.

No, it's in your interest. It doesn't actually matter in the slightest to everyone else because you can't threaten them about editing out material you voluntarily posted on the internet. Stop this.

.

ConLaw2017 wrote:

devilblue wrote:Develop social skills and don't act like an entitled six year old.

What about me or my story has caused you to act this way?

Has caused me to give you practical, much needed advice on how to succeed? You'll need to A. develop social skills and B. not act like an entitled six year old in order to be successful as an appellate lawyer. Those are two among many qualities you'll need. Conveniently enough I know enough about you to know that these are two areas you could use some help in. Sorry for answering your question.

Bookmarked.

Passing out popcorn.

.

ConLaw2017 wrote:I have messaged everyone on this thread. I believe it is in everyone's interest to comply.

(developing social skills)

Checking in for the lulz

quoting for posterity

ConLaw2017 wrote:YLS 0L here. Pretty sure that I want to work in appellate litigation after law school. Besides the usual tips (LR, Moot Court, Get Good Grades, Clinic, Clerk), does anyone have any advice on how to make the most of my time there? I'm thinking about doing several off-campus moot courts and working as an extern/intern for DOJ Civil/Conn OSG/USAO to develop the right skills. Is there anything else I should look into?

ConLaw2017 wrote:I have messaged everyone on this thread. I believe it is in everyone's interest to comply.

Any dont bother pming me, Im not taking them down

.

Did anyone actually get a PM? I want to see if it reads like a Kasowitz cease and desist letter (or like a Kasowitz late-night threatening e-mail).

.

Although OP appears to have some social problems, I think it's shitty to quote someone's posts just for the sake of harassment.

.

rpupkin wrote:Although OP appears to have some social problems, I think it's shitty to quote someone's posts just for the sake of harassment.

I'd agree, if it weren't for things like this:

ConLaw2017 wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:Did anyone actually get a PM? I want to see if it reads like a Kasowitz cease and desist letter (or like a Kasowitz late-night threatening e-mail).

Yeah, it did PM them. Because I know some of the posters and they don't want me to say certain things because it could negatively effect them. I felt it would be prudent to message them privately before turning to something more harsh (which I don't plan on doing on this board now or in the future).

Well, that answers that question. Sounds like a Kasowitz late-night threatening e-mail.

.

ConLaw2017 wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

rpupkin wrote:Although OP appears to have some social problems, I think it's shitty to quote someone's posts just for the sake of harassment.

I'd agree, if it weren't for things like this:

ConLaw2017 wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:Did anyone actually get a PM? I want to see if it reads like a Kasowitz cease and desist letter (or like a Kasowitz late-night threatening e-mail).

Yeah, it did PM them. Because I know some of the posters and they don't want me to say certain things because it could negatively effect them. I felt it would be prudent to message them privately before turning to something more harsh (which I don't plan on doing on this board now or in the future).

Well, that answers that question. Sounds like a Kasowitz late-night threatening e-mail.

Its not a threat its about common courtesy. If you are attempting to maintain a functioning work environment or social relationship with someone, we can all agree that you have no business antagonizing them in their private time when they are trying to seek honest advice about their career.

You directly threatened everyone. Saying to someone it is in their best interest to follow some random internet person's advice is a pretty clear threat to me. Even if there is no way for you to do anything about it.

ConLaw2017 wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

ConLaw2017 wrote:I have messaged everyone on this thread. I believe it is in everyone's interest to comply.

(developing social skills)

Maybe that message was a tad bit brass. But you are not including the context in which it was sent. Yesterday I literally had to convince multiple people that African-Americans are entitled to human dignity. Apparently, this proposition was not self-evident to them. These same people asked me to delete my posts because they felt I was too explicit in my statements. But instead of just stopping, they continued to post and make it seem as if there was no foul play on anyone's part except my own. If you were dealing with someone this irritating, you would not be pleasant with them either.

You didn't have to convince anyone that AAs are entitled to human dignity. You spoke very vaguely about what was happening at your firm and got into a philosophical debate with another user. No one questions whether AAs are entitled to human dignity, they just may not agree with you about what that translates to in a NY biglaw firm.

In thread the only person who asked you to delete stuff was simply making a suggestion for your own benefit based on the amount of information you revealed about yourself. It is possible to find your LinkedIn based on that info. Unless someone PMed you something else, that was the only reason to delete your posts.

.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

ConLaw2017 wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

ConLaw2017 wrote:I have messaged everyone on this thread. I believe it is in everyone's interest to comply.

(developing social skills)

Maybe that message was a tad bit brass. But you are not including the context in which it was sent. Yesterday I literally had to convince multiple people that African-Americans are entitled to human dignity. Apparently, this proposition was not self-evident to them. These same people asked me to delete my posts because they felt I was too explicit in my statements. But instead of just stopping, they continued to post and make it seem as if there was no foul play on anyone's part except my own. If you were dealing with someone this irritating, you would not be pleasant with them either.

You didn't have to convince anyone that AAs are entitled to human dignity. You spoke very vaguely about what was happening at your firm and got into a philosophical debate with another user. No one questions whether AAs are entitled to human dignity, they just may not agree with you about what that translates to in a NY biglaw firm.

In thread the only person who asked you to delete stuff was simply making a suggestion for your own benefit based on the amount of information you revealed about yourself. It is possible to find your LinkedIn based on that info. Unless someone PMed you something else, that was the only reason to delete your posts.

Some of my statements were vague. But, at least five people at some point tried to convince me that I was not entitled to basic human dignity and respect from other people. That's too far by any stretch of the matter.

ConLaw2017 wrote:

fredfred wrote:

ConLaw2017 wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

rpupkin wrote:Although OP appears to have some social problems, I think it's shitty to quote someone's posts just for the sake of harassment.

I'd agree, if it weren't for things like this:

ConLaw2017 wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:Did anyone actually get a PM? I want to see if it reads like a Kasowitz cease and desist letter (or like a Kasowitz late-night threatening e-mail).

Yeah, it did PM them. Because I know some of the posters and they don't want me to say certain things because it could negatively effect them. I felt it would be prudent to message them privately before turning to something more harsh (which I don't plan on doing on this board now or in the future).

Well, that answers that question. Sounds like a Kasowitz late-night threatening e-mail.

Its not a threat its about common courtesy. If you are attempting to maintain a functioning work environment or social relationship with someone, we can all agree that you have no business antagonizing them in their private time when they are trying to seek honest advice about their career.

You directly threatened everyone. Saying to someone it is in their best interest to follow some random internet person's advice is a pretty clear threat to me. Even if there is no way for you to do anything about it.

Well, it was in their best interests. Why would you break labor laws and exploit someone and then stalk them on their internet without thinking that at some point you would have to deal with the consequences of your behavior? I didn't message you, though, so I'm not sure why you are mad.

You are right, you didn't message me. I am curious, can you explain how anyone broke labor laws, exploited someone, and stalked them? And how would there be consequences? The internet police?

I am genuinely curious to the answers to these questions.

ConLaw2017 wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:

rpupkin wrote:Although OP appears to have some social problems, I think it's shitty to quote someone's posts just for the sake of harassment.

I'd agree, if it weren't for things like this:

ConLaw2017 wrote:

cavalier1138 wrote:Did anyone actually get a PM? I want to see if it reads like a Kasowitz cease and desist letter (or like a Kasowitz late-night threatening e-mail).

Yeah, it did PM them. Because I know some of the posters and they don't want me to say certain things because it could negatively effect them. I felt it would be prudent to message them privately before turning to something more harsh (which I don't plan on doing on this board now or in the future).

Well, that answers that question. Sounds like a Kasowitz late-night threatening e-mail.

Its not a threat its about common courtesy. If you are attempting to maintain a functioning work environment or social relationship with someone, we can all agree that you have no business antagonizing them in their private time when they are trying to seek honest advice about their career.

I'm confused how you actually know who anyone is, so here's my honest career advice for you:

Stop posting in this thread and the other thread. Don't engage with anyone further. It is does you no good. Never mention TLS in real life to anyone. It's probably not that hard to figure out who you are. I haven't looked but people claim to have found your Linkedin. The more you post, the more likely you are to hurt your future career. Stop engaging and hope it blows over.