The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
The next suit by Doe I and Doe II
| unholy comical locus | 06/13/07 |
| unhinged whorehouse | 06/13/07 |
| unholy comical locus | 06/13/07 |
| ruby forum candlestick maker | 06/13/07 |
| Marvelous arrogant ladyboy death wish | 06/13/07 |
| unholy comical locus | 06/13/07 |
| Marvelous arrogant ladyboy death wish | 06/13/07 |
| Walnut alpha | 06/13/07 |
| irradiated crackhouse | 06/13/07 |
| Diverse Mauve Spot | 06/13/07 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: June 13th, 2007 1:59 PM Author: unholy comical locus I predict it will be against all posters under RICO because everyone knows that AutoAdmit is really a criminal enterprise that uses intimidation and threats to carry on its business. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=644612&forum_id=2#8250613) |
 |
Date: June 13th, 2007 2:14 PM Author: unhinged whorehouse ...but, the Does can't file a criminal suit. Maybe Nifong can help them out if he isn't disbarred. Isn't one of the said Does from Nifong's state? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=644612&forum_id=2#8250668) |
|
Date: June 13th, 2007 2:15 PM Author: unholy comical locus There can be civil liability though under RICO. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=644612&forum_id=2#8250669) |
|
Date: June 13th, 2007 2:42 PM Author: ruby forum candlestick maker why do I have civil liability under me? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=644612&forum_id=2#8250763) |
|
Date: June 13th, 2007 2:47 PM Author: Marvelous arrogant ladyboy death wish You don't know me! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=644612&forum_id=2#8250787) |
|
Date: June 13th, 2007 4:32 PM Author: unholy comical locus please don't sue me now. I didn't mean anything by it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=644612&forum_id=2#8251187) |
|
Date: June 13th, 2007 4:36 PM Author: Marvelous arrogant ladyboy death wish Your screen name is an attempt to inflict patriarchy through violent sexual imagery. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=644612&forum_id=2#8251194) |
Date: June 13th, 2007 4:45 PM Author: Walnut alpha Subject: best thing on WSJ blog about the suit I work at an AmLaw 200 firm and we interview at Yale every year. It is our a priori assumption that they are all intelligent and will do good work, but we reject many (at the OCI and callback stages) because they are basically jerks / losers. The plaintiff here should have known there was a problem when she only got 4 callbacks out of 16 OCIs. I went to a top 25 law school, was only in the top half of my class, but had a much better callback success rate. I sympathize with what they’ve been through on autoadmit, but I call BS on the “Well it’s just unheard of for a Yalie to do this badly” because the warning signs were there and should have warranted an immediate response. Besides, many of the CT firms still hire into November and so she could have acted quickly to salvage the situation. I think there’s more to why this woman didn’t get hired.
Comment by anon. - June 12, 2007 at 6:31 pm
|
|
Date: June 13th, 2007 4:50 PM Author: irradiated crackhouse The June 13 comment @ 1:30am elaborates a detailed alternative theory...but does it have any grounds in reality? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=644612&forum_id=2#8251240) |
|
Date: June 13th, 2007 4:51 PM Author: Diverse Mauve Spot NIGGERRRR (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=644612&forum_id=2#8251245) |