|
OK, you all can officially count me among the "don't go to law school crowd." To that 0L that's in the Peace Corps, I was once like you. I had a great career as an engineer and I didn't listen to these guys. Now I'm in the middle of 2L, and I'm an empty husk of a human being. Don't go to law school.
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 16:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 19:08 |
|
|
"Don't go to law school" should apply to everyone who is not patent bar eligible. Not that it's a reason to go if you are, just that if you're not, it's yet ANOTHER reason NOT to go.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 17:55
|
|
|
How is it even possible to live in Boston and not be able to find alcohol?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
For serious, Central is walkable from Harvard and you probably won't even get mugged with a weapon on the way back
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 18:14
|
|
|
Zo posted:What happens when, say, you start at an IP firm as a patent agent, and they want you to get a law degree from a certain school? Would a prestigious firm have enough pull to place a student into whatever school they want? Up to a certain rank only? I am very doubtful that any prestigious firm is going to go out on a limb to help one of their agents get into a top law school, since very few of the top law schools have evening programs. I can guarantee you that no prestigious law firm is going to help an agent get into a top law school and then sit on their hands for three years in the hopes that the agent comes back to them at the end. With that said, there are IP boutiques out there that regularly encourage their patent agents to attend evening law school, and in some cases the firm even foots the bill (contingent upon the agent remaining with the firm for a certain time after graduation, of course). In most cases, these law schools are geographically proximate and have evening programs, giving the student a JD and allowing them to sit for the bar, thus allowing the firm to bill the student out at a full "associate" rate instead of a lower, "agent" rate. Based on regular attendance of their agents at the same schools, these firms may have developed ties to the particular school due to the large number of alumni at the firm. These times might help a borderline candidate get in where he might be denied otherwise. However, you aren't going to get into a T14 based on this sort of relationship, unless you use your "in" at the firm to end up marrying the daughter of a partner who also happens to be on the board of trustees for said T14.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 18:39
|
|
|
.
Stop fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Jan 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 19:28
|
|
|
My agency's business cards are smudgy and printed with poor quality. Despite finding great full-time employment and qualifying for public service loan forgiveness, I would still say overall that going to law school was a bad idea. I bet the guy who printed these doesn't even know what surgeon's cuffs are, let alone have the aesthetic capacity to appreciate mine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 19:41
|
|
|
Colorblind Pilot posted:OK, you all can officially count me among the "don't go to law school crowd." Soothing Vapors, in response to Colorblind Pilot's 'should I go to law school' post, three long years ago posted:now that I have answered your incisive questions I feel I have earned the privilege of giving you unrelated advice: judging by your questions and your reaction to Phil Moscowitz's post, I feel that LSD and TLS are probably more your speed. you can ask questions there until your little heart feels like it will burst and they will swaddle you in love and warmth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 20:52
|
|
|
So if anyone played noted awesome isometric PC RPG Planescape: Torment, they know that the central question of the narrative is "What can change the nature of a man?" This thread and the profession itself should teach you that the answer is "law school." Actually, the thread also reveals the answer given by the game as well: "Regret." Also Stop, I PM'd you - if you're taking Crim Pro, I have a fairly bitchin Capra outline.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
.
Stop fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Jan 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 23:14
|
|
|
Stop posted:Sent you a PM back, but unfortunately I have evidence with him this semester. Dumb. He only taught crim pro here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 23:24
|
|
|
Zo posted:What happens when, say, you start at an IP firm as a patent agent, and they want you to get a law degree from a certain school? Would a prestigious firm have enough pull to place a student into whatever school they want? Up to a certain rank only? FWIW, there are four or five very successful IP people who started as this at my office. Those people all went to law school part time. They have outstanding science chops and PhDs from excellent schools, and the firm didn't care that the law degree came from a small regional school. In fact I'm certain in a couple of those cases it was encouraged so they could stay local and keep working. It's one of the few situations where doing an evening program makes sense and they seem pretty happy now. Should also note that despite working a lot and going to school at the same time, they all still smoked grades. Not sure how much that mattered to the firm though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 00:16
|
|
|
sigmachiev posted:FWIW, there are four or five very successful IP people who started as this at my office. Those people all went to law school part time. They have outstanding science chops and PhDs from excellent schools, and the firm didn't care that the law degree came from a small regional school. In fact I'm certain in a couple of those cases it was encouraged so they could stay local and keep working. It's one of the few situations where doing an evening program makes sense and they seem pretty happy now. Should also note that despite working a lot and going to school at the same time, they all still smoked grades. Not sure how much that mattered to the firm though. As an additional point, I did the evening program at a T2 law school, and about 10 or 12 out of our section of 60-ish were engineers or MS/PhDs in science. I'm not aware of a single one who didn't go on to patent work of some type with firms that were decent and a couple with very prestigious ones. And for the record, I'm aware of a few who weren't high enough to be graduating with honors and still came out fine. There was one guy, but he was a massive asshat who refused to read/prepare for class, was told by a 1L professor that he'd be dropped from any future electives taught by said professor, was fired from a patent examiner position with a local firm during school (or whatever it is you do with a science degree but not JD), was fired from a subsequent non-patent job, and passed the bar by what had to have been a single question (he was bragging about it). But I don't think he really counts in that group.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 00:41
|
|
|
NJ Deac posted:I am very doubtful that any prestigious firm is going to go out on a limb to help one of their agents get into a top law school, since very few of the top law schools have evening programs. I can guarantee you that no prestigious law firm is going to help an agent get into a top law school and then sit on their hands for three years in the hopes that the agent comes back to them at the end. sigmachiev posted:FWIW, there are four or five very successful IP people who started as this at my office. Those people all went to law school part time. They have outstanding science chops and PhDs from excellent schools, and the firm didn't care that the law degree came from a small regional school. In fact I'm certain in a couple of those cases it was encouraged so they could stay local and keep working. It's one of the few situations where doing an evening program makes sense and they seem pretty happy now. Should also note that despite working a lot and going to school at the same time, they all still smoked grades. Not sure how much that mattered to the firm though. As for my situation, I don't have an amazing engineering background or anything, but I'll be looking for a firm which is willing to pick up the tuition for part-time, local law school if possible. I'm doing prosecution work right now but there's not much room for advancement at this firm, so I am just building up some experience for now. Hoping my background in international prosecution gives me an edge in job hunting, since I should know quiet a bit about US/EP/JP/CN/KR prosecution and JP litigation by the time I leave.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 01:05
|
|
|
Stop posted:Sent you a PM back, but unfortunately I have evidence with him this semester. At NYU? I'm in that class.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 01:23
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:So if anyone played noted awesome isometric PC RPG Planescape: Torment, they know that the central question of the narrative is "What can change the nature of a man?" Law school didn't really change me, but more importantly I'm responding to your post because Planescape is a terrible game. I mean, it's just plain bad; the mechanics are clunky, the setting rather bland and uninspiring, the writing dry and long-winded, etc. It also has a "feature" whereby you get tattoos on your character to improve him, which just feels wrong and dirty.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 01:41
|
|
|
Ani posted:(1) there are much better bars than John Harvard's, even in the square. Finding and hiding booze are really the only useful life skills you'll hone* in law school. * Or at least acquire if you really failed at life in undergrad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 01:46
|
|
|
If you can't sneak alcohol past even a patfrisk you are a failure as a lawyer (hint: ziplock bags of scotch)
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 02:26
|
|
|
Zo posted:Thanks, this is what I was thinking of anyway. I had no illusions about a firm magically placing me into a t14 and footing the bill for 3 years. Rather, I was more wondering whether these part-time degrees would be from a half decent local school. Most firms are not going to be super excited to pick up someone and immediately start putting them through school on the firm dime. That said, if you have the right degrees and some pros experience, you might look into what some IP firms call student associate positions - typically you're working and doing night school, and then after you graduate you're basically guaranteed a (first year) associate slot. Finnegan at least used to do this, though they may have changed. Also, if you are an agent and they like you and you can make the finances work, going full time and working summers as an associate can be a decent way to go. Guaranteed summer jobs at firm pay and a near guaranteed post-grad slot is one reason that law school may make sense - a friend did exactly this. Send me a pm and can talk more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 02:38
|
|
|
.
Stop fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Mar 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 03:09
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:If you can't sneak alcohol past even a patfrisk you are a failure as a lawyer (hint: ziplock bags of scotch) Pros use the foldable metal water bottles that everyone gives out for promotions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 04:55
|
|
|
Leveraged my law and accounting degrees into an interview for an in-house contracts role in the oil and gas industry. Maybe this is why LLBs should remain undergrad degrees here in australia? Feel pretty good right now but if I don't get an offer it's back to don't go, no jobs, die alone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 10:44
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:Unnhhhh I just schadenfreuded in my pants unnnnnhhhhh it's so warm and sticky It's not that I didn't find a job -- I'm one of the lucky ones. But boy law school just makes you a cynical, worn-out person.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 17:52
|
|
|
Stop, I just checked the Columbia exam bank and Capra doesn't have any old evidence exams in there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 17:53
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:Unnhhhh I just schadenfreuded in my pants unnnnnhhhhh it's so warm and sticky So that's what Aaron Rodgers is doing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 20:02
|
|
|
New law school applicants should be aware that IBR may disappear in the next 3 years before you are able to sign on. House Republicans are putting forward legislation that "solves" the student loan crisis by doing away with IBR and loan forgiveness. They want to replace it with a cap on interest at 50% of the principal and mandatory 15% wage garnishment. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-04/student-loan-collection-targeted-for-overhaul-in-congress.html quote:Legislation that Wisconsin Republican Representative Tom Petri plans to introduce as soon as this week would require employers to withhold payments from wages in the same way they do taxes. Payments would be capped at 15 percent of borrowers’ income after basic living expenses. quote:In another boon to borrowers, the plan would cap interest owed at 50 percent of a loan’s face value at the time of graduation, giving a break to lower-income borrowers who take longer than the standard 10 years to repay loans. For a student who took out $27,000 in loans, about the national average for a graduate of a four-year program who borrowed, the interest couldn’t exceed $13,500.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 20:54
|
|
|
UnpaidIntern posted:New law school applicants should be aware that IBR may disappear in the next 3 years before you are able to sign on. House Republicans are putting forward legislation that "solves" the student loan crisis by doing away with IBR and loan forgiveness. They want to replace it with a cap on interest at 50% of the principal and mandatory 15% wage garnishment. Well that's going to be fun for those of us that are self-employed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 21:23
|
|
|
UnpaidIntern posted:New law school applicants should be aware that IBR may disappear in the next 3 years before you are able to sign on. House Republicans are putting forward legislation that "solves" the student loan crisis by doing away with IBR and loan forgiveness. They want to replace it with a cap on interest at 50% of the principal and mandatory 15% wage garnishment. That's...actually not horrific. The UK system has flaws, but speaking as a (close enough to) UK resident now, it's unquestionably better than the US'. The interest cap makes this an improvement to everybody but the truly stupid $350K snowflake, as long as it's a lifetime cap and not an 'oops you hit the cap but then paid something so enjoy owing this amount forever' cap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 21:27
|
|
|
.
Not James Buchanan fucked around with this message at 02:56 on May 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 22:34
|
|
|
Interest would be tied to treasury rates, which is far far better than what GradPLUS is at now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
Gembolah posted:What happens to the person with 350k in debt who makes 40k? Even if they get it discharged after 10 years in public service, how do they pay the 150-200k tax bill on all that discharged principal/interest? Loans forgiven for public service are not taxed. The people who do the 25 year forgiveness will talk to an accountant and work out how to classify themselves as "insolvent" in order to lower their tax burden. Under the new proposed system, that person would have 15% of their 40k paycheck garnished for the rest of their life. I suppose the new system will be awesome for undergrads or people not working in low-paying public service positions. It would be interesting to see how society reacts to mandatory government garnishment once they hit the work force.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 23:10
|
|
|
UnpaidIntern posted:It would be interesting to see how society reacts to mandatory government garnishment once they hit the work force.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 23:31
|
|
|
UnpaidIntern posted:Loans forgiven for public service are not taxed. The people who do the 25 year forgiveness will talk to an accountant and work out how to classify themselves as "insolvent" in order to lower their tax burden. Under the new proposed system, that person would have 15% of their 40k paycheck garnished for the rest of their life. That's very slanted. The guy doing 25 year forgiveness is locked into an often much lower paying salary for >50% of his working life, then has a tax bill that's very often not going to be as easy as an accountant fee to resolve (in fact he'll probably have to spend the last 2-3 of those 25 years saving for the tax hit.) The other guy is putting down post-tax, post-necessity (this part is important) income to pay a bill that is suddenly capped much lower than the first guy. It's not possible to definitely say either of them wins every time because the numbers will vary with the size of the loan and what the second person makes. However, the typical $25K UG loanholder will almost always be FAR better off under system #2 due to the maximum amount cap. The typical $100K loanholder will still be better under #2 as long as his max potential earnings in the private sector are six figures. The typical $300K guy will be screwed, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2012 23:34
|
|
|
The 50% interest cap is interesting, any idea how to run the numbers on expected interest payments on a 10 or 25 year payment plan? Assume a flat 6.8% interest rate just to make thing easy. The other big question is if this would apply to private loans, which I'm guessing it wouldn't. And that's going to make the whole thing pretty moot - garnishment will still be capped at 25% of (income - federal poverty line) so it won't matter if your fed loans are capped at 15% when private loan debts just fill in the gap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
So what happens to people who are already enrolled in IBR? Are they told "tough poo poo, get out"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2012 01:31
|
|
|
CraigK posted:So what happens to people who are already enrolled in IBR? Are they told "tough poo poo, get out"? Lets see, a Republican is introducing it; so yes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2012 01:38
|
|
|
Athenry posted:Lets see, a Republican is introducing it; so yes. Yikes. Exactly what I was afraid of. Hope the Democrats stand firm on it not passing. e: of course, anything can happen in the exciting new world of "austerity measures". CraigK fucked around with this message at 01:43 on Dec 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2012 01:40
|
|
|
Yeah, looking it up, Democrats are against it, and Obama touted the success of IBR, so it's going nowhere until there's a Republican Senate and president.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2012 01:51
|
|
|
CraigK posted:Yeah, looking it up, Democrats are against it, and Obama touted the success of IBR, so it's going nowhere until there's a Republican Senate and president. Never underestimate what will get cut in a Grand Bargain. They're talking about Medicare cuts so everything is on the table and something can always sneak in there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2012 02:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 19:08 |
|
|
Well the article does say "The new system would apply only to new loans." but yeah anything can happen. I hope they keep the 10 year forgiveness or I am hosed. Although it would be nice the if the 15% max was taken out of my income thus reducing my taxable income. Right now it counts as taxable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2012 03:18
|
|
