The most important thing to have in order to succeed in law school is self-knowledge. It isn’t important what other people do to study; what’s important is what works for you. Do you know if you are a visual, auditory, writing-oriented or physical processor?
For example, I don’t write outlines. I make flash cards, because I can only take in a bite-sized chunk of knowledge at once, and looking at a whole outline makes my eyes glaze over. For me, flash cards are good. For someone else, an outline might be better. Similarly, audio tapes/MP3s of study subjects do nothing for me. I just don’t learn anything from auditory input unless I’m writing something down. For someone else, the tapes might be very helpful.
So, in sum: know yourself, don’t do something just because “everyone else does it.” It might be fine for them, and a waste of time for you.
Look, if you have not got a job, don’t beat yourself up on it. Look for alternative tyoe stuff, in house legal advise stuff for instance
A classmate of mine who got a job as inhouse counsel at a local government authority, dod much better than I did I think. He got gaurenteed work, a good salary, good perks and managed to meet his wife there even!
When you are the lowest form of life; a junior, well all you do really is legal reserch, drafting (god I hate that!), writing memos and notes, making coffee, (if you are a woman), being eye candy for head of chambers (if you are a woman), taking care of the clients kids, when you senior is in conferance with their mom.
Here in Canada, a fellow named Brian Dickson graduated from law school in the 30s and couldn’t get a law job initially - was selling insurance to keep food on the table, while hunting for a firm that would take him on.
He eventually landed a job, became very successful, and ended up as Chief Justice of Canada.
In the words of Mr. Micawber, “something will turn up.”
Congratulations on finishing! I didn’t take the BarBri class, but I did buy the books (for $400 rather than $2400) from an alumna who had graduated the winter before me (and took the February bar). I also took PMBR.
Don’t stress the exam; it actually is kind of a joke. My common-sense analysis of what happens to a partnership when a partner declares bankruptcy got me a license to practice law in Illinois.
Obviously the reasons why on the following makes it more interesting:
Favorite class/course
Toughest?
Most boring?
Best thing about the experience as a whole?
Worst thing?
Biggest misconception of your own (versus TV, etc.) shattered?
Most surprising thing? (Similar to previous, not necessarily the same)
Area you are personally most capable/talented in/at, and the area you are the least capable/talented in/at? (Seems similar to favorite and least fave, but might not be…you can love something you suck at, watch any talent competition.)
Mentioned earlier, probably Criminal Procedure – a combination of subject matter I am very interested in, and an excellent professor.
Probably the Trial Techniques program I alluded to earlier. Starts Jan 2 and eats half your winter break… 12 hours a day/10 days straight without a day off, working with trial attorneys, judges, and even acting coaches. Worth it though.
Transnational law. Horrible! The subject matter is potentially very interesting and the prof was a recognized authority in the field… it just did. not. work. at. all. I pretty much wished for the sweet relief of death in every class.
The great people I met.
Law school is just one damn thing after another – it never lets up or gives you a break.
Sorry, I forgot to ask this before, but this is one that has been bugging me. When I met a few US law students a few years ago, I was surprised and embarrassed that they were familiar with many English cases, including fairlry recent ones. I say embarrassed since except for those who took US law as an option, we pretty much knew next to nothing about US case law.
Congrats! I graduated a couple weeks ago too. I’m one of the lucky ones – whether my job is still there in January or not, my firm is paying for BarBri
If this is an accurate Canadian conflict of laws outline, then no. We cover that in “Civil Procedure.” A class in Federal Civ Pro is required and always taken in the first year; in New York at least, a class in state civil procedure is recommended but usually taken in the final year (in the hopes some will stick for the Bar). The conflict of law between state and federal government is cover in Constitutional Law, separately, at to
Transnational Law is the law between and among countries - it included topics like treaties (formation, ratification, etc), international governing bodies, Executive foreign affairs power, as well as extraterritorial application of U.S. law. It was a required class at my law school, but that’s unusual.
Civ Pro is boring in the usual way – blah blah blah Rule 11-cakes/blah blah blah CPLR 3212-cakes – Transnational was on a whole 'nother level.
Souls: we check 'em at the door on the first day of orientation, actually.
Hm. There are some classes where English cases come up from time to time (there’s several famous ones in Crim Law, including the Whaleship Sussex cannibals (Regina v. Dudley?), and that guy who burnt down the ship while stealing rum. Also and in property (Hickeringill with the damn duck pond). I can’t think of any relatively recent cases we studied though.
Argh.
a) Whaleship ESSEX
b) The Regina v. Dudley & Stephens were a different lot of cannibals, their ship was called the Mignonette.
c)Still, I can’t believe I know the name of that case, off the top of my head, from 3 years ago. I guess you never forget a good cannibal story.
Wallace Jefferson, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Texas. No offense to the guy, but he has 0% connection with Hofstra, Long Island, New York State, or even the East Coast. Just seemed like a very random choice.
In related oddness Sen. Charles Schumer showed up and also gave a speech. He wasn’t even on the program! Kinda made me wonder if he wanders New York State in search of commencements, crashes them, and then gives speeches which no one will interrupt, cause, you know, Senator.
