The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
CLS: ITT you explain why to DROP Fed Courts
Poast new message in this thread
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:28 AM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Explain good reasons to drop Dorf's Fed Courts class.
Tyia. |
 |
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:29 AM Author: heady rigor trailer park Because it is invariably filled with gunner douches? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7360400) |
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:25 AM Author: Razzmatazz twinkling point Because it's a 3L's last chance to take it? Please please please drop it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7360834) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:28 PM Author: Yapping Cracking Goal In Life It's quite pathetic that the Registrar doesn't realize that Fed Courts, unlike some "advanced" corporate law class, is actually required by some jobs after law school (i.e. clerking) and act accordingly. It's also unfortunate that the clerkship office either doesn't realize what's going on or hasn't done anything about the fact that Fed Courts is capped at 65, especially when last year the class was in JG104 and had a huge waiting list; it's even listed on the Courses/Seminars with high demand on the Registration memo, but they decide to have it at the same time as all these other popular classes and put it in a small room.
When the prelim schedule came out in November I emailed the Registrar asking if it really was true that Fed Courts was going to be in 105 and capped at a low number, which they didn't respond to, while in the same week they forwarded that stupid email about all the corporate law classes being offered at the same time. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:13 PM Author: pea-brained big personal credit line idea he suggested " Fed Courts, unlike some 'advanced' corporate law class, is actually required by some jobs after law school (i.e. clerking) and act accordingly."
It's really required? So, if you don't take the class you'll have to turn down the clerkship? |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:53 PM Author: Cruel-hearted magical karate Same here...How far down the list are you (approx?). I'm 15-20 and have high hopes. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362224) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:55 PM Author: Razzmatazz twinkling point I'm 14. I really hope I get in. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362229) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:17 PM Author: Yapping Cracking Goal In Life Why don't you look back at the thread you started back in November about the same topic?
http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=528313&mc=12&forum_id=2#7013385 |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:41 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy ? That thread was asking about Dorf's teaching style. I think that I've started at least 2 threads about the course, but not on this precise topic. I started this thread so that people would post good reasons that other people should drop the class so that I can get in. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362933) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:25 PM Author: Hairraiser legal warrant Seriously, unless you're a 3L with a clerkship lined up, please drop it first thing Monday morning. I'm getting screwed here, and it doesn't even sound like you want to take it. Fucking ridiculous that the registrar put this class in such a small room. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362102) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:31 PM Author: Yapping Cracking Goal In Life I think the 3L with a clerkship lined up criteria is too strong; there are 3Ls who plan to clerk in the future who should be allowed to take the class. The class through, should be limited to 3Ls only and if there's extra spots only then should 2Ls be allowed in. I'm guessing that should solve the major problem brewing here.
Also, how screwed are you, and how much is it your own fault? If you have a clerkship lined up that required you to take Fed Courts, and you didn't put it as your top choice when you saw what room is was going to be offered in, you screwed yourself. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:46 PM Author: Hairraiser legal warrant Sure, "3L with clerkship lined up" is too strong. I agree though that 3Ls should have automatic priority over 2Ls. On the point about not ranking it high enough, I guess I did screw that up because I didn't bother to check if it was in a small room. (Do people ever check that? I've never thought to.) The thing is that I've heard that Monaghan's fed cts is always undersubscribed, so I didn't think there was any danger of being put on the waitlist, particularly as a 3L. But apparently lots of people drop Monaghan's class because he's so intimidating; hopefully Dorf will have the same effect. Otherwise, I'm screwed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362200) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:53 PM Author: Yapping Cracking Goal In Life Not that I've taken Monaghan, but Dorf is not particularly intimidating, if he is at all. And one problem I forsee is that in terms of the number of pages per class the reading load is not heavy at all, so people won't drop because of that.
I'm not sure what can be done at this point regarding a classroom if it's true that Dorf already asked. Perhaps he didn't inform them that Fed Courts is a prereq for a Fed Clerkship. Maybe the Clerkship Office doesn't know about this, so emailing them would be a good step; the last thing the clerkship office wants is to have people who accepted clerkships closed out of Fed Courts--that would be a huge reputation hit for a school that supposedly wants to have more students doing clerkships.
What's strange about the whole thing is that this is probably the first time that CLS has had three Fed Cts sections in one year, yet due to rooms they were put in, the structure of the classes, and the professors teaching, the school hasn't significantly increased the number of students who are able to take it. Monaghan's was in 105 (65 cap), Dorf in 105 (65) cap, and Stone was JG107 (which is about the same size as 105). Assuming 107 is a 65 cap, vs. the one Fed Cts section last year (I think Lee was the only class) and it was in 104 (160-170 cap), there's only a 25-35 person increase in the number of people who can take Fed Cts, and that assumes that 65 people are actually expected to take Monaghan and that 65 people are actually expected to take a year long Fed Courts class where stuff you learned in the fall is tested at the end of the Spring. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:16 PM Author: pea-brained big personal credit line idea he suggested "I'm getting screwed here,"
It's just a class.
If you're a 2L, it looks like this class is in hot demand take it NOW because there's no guarantee you'll be able to take it next year. (Take it even if you're not sure you'll want a clerkship.) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:25 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert I disagree. 2L's should take it now because it's a once in a life opportunity. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362339) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:55 PM Author: Cruel-hearted magical karate How many posters in this thread are waitlisted 3Ls?
It was second on my list, right after a very selective seminar. I really didn't expect to have this problem. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 12:56 PM Author: Razzmatazz twinkling point I'm a 3L. I ranked it either 1 or 2. CLS really dropped the fucking ball on this. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362236) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:29 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy You must have ranked it 2, otherwise no 2Ls would have gotten into the class. Lottery (leaving out LLMs) gives 3Ls their 1st choice before any 2Ls. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362351) |
|
Date: January 9th, 2007 11:07 PM Author: light office LIEEXPOSEDPWNED!!! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7386296) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:00 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Me too. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362250) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:17 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy There are currently 20 2Ls who have picked assigned seats, only 5 of whom are on law review. I think that Dorf should politely ask the other 15 to drop the course. Those on LR are candidates for really good clerkships next year and I'm ok with them wanting it on their transcript for when they get interviews. The others have no excuse.
EDIT: Less than 65 seats are filled, so there could be as many as 25-30 2Ls in the class. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:18 PM Author: pea-brained big personal credit line idea he suggested The 2Ls should definitely stick it out and take the class. It sounds like it's tough to get. 2Ls, take it now lest you can't take it next year. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362308) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:20 PM Author: Razzmatazz twinkling point I know this is flame, but please stop since they may take you seriously. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362312) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:23 PM Author: pea-brained big personal credit line idea he suggested No. I am serious. If this is happening to 3Ls now, it will be happening to at least some of the 2Ls who drop. (2Ls become 3Ls, as you may be aware) They are not guaranteed places next year because of this altruistic gesture. 2Ls, stay strong and keep the class even if you have almost no chance of securing a clerkship. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362329) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:25 PM Author: Hairraiser legal warrant You're an idiot. STFU. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362337) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:21 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Nah, it'll be easy next year. The registrar clearly put it in a smaller class room because they thought that the year long course taught by Stone would decrease the demand for this one. Now that they've been proven wrong, they won't make the same mistake again. Also, from this snaffu they will know to put it as their first choice, and it will also be on the "oversubscribed" list that is distributed during prereg.
Dorf should give them a free pass into the class for next year.
|
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:23 PM Author: Yapping Cracking Goal In Life It was on the "oversubscribed" list this year. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362321) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:40 PM Author: snowy irradiated idiot center There are 30 2Ls registered as of now, if I counted correctly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362391) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:54 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy That could be. I can't figure out a way to see the actual registration list while I'm only on the waitlist. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362438) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 2:00 PM Author: snowy irradiated idiot center Oh I know, I'm actually in the class, so I just thought I'd share. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362468) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 2:02 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy ty
|
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 2:13 PM Author: Irate Antidepressant Drug Cumskin Just got an email from Dorf, asking 2Ls to drop (I'm a 2L, but on the waitlist). He's guaranteeing entry to his class next fall. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362523) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:24 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert 2L's should take the class now because it's a once in a life opportunity. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362336) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:27 PM Author: pea-brained big personal credit line idea he suggested This is correct. If you don't believe us, look at all the trouble the 3Ls are having getting into this class. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362346) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:29 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert In my opinion, Fed Courts is the best course in law school, and Dorf is the best professor at CLS.
If you're a 2L and can do well in the class, a letter from Dorf will be huge in applying for clerkships. Whatever you do, don't drop it. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:31 PM Author: pea-brained big personal credit line idea he suggested "If you're a 2L and can do well in the class, a letter from Dorf will be huge in applying for clerkships. "
That's true. Especially if you're grades are just average now. You can go from low clerkship chances to being a lock in the location of your choice. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:34 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Getting a letter out of Dorf isn't easy. A 2L who didn't have the grades to get onto law review will get eaten alive in this class, and a low grade in Fed Courts will DEFINITELY hurt their chances at a clerkship. A 2L's best bet is to drop now, apply for clerkships next year, and take it next spring. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362367) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:36 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert Nice ploy to get 2L's to drop the class. Too bad it won't work since everyone realizes that if you're lucky enough to get a spot in the class, it's a once in a life opportunity. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362375) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:38 PM Author: snowy irradiated idiot center are you in the class? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362385) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:41 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert No, I'm just having a little fun on xoxo this afternoon. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362396) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:42 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy flame. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362399) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:46 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert Getting a spot in the class is like winning the lottery, and giving up your seat is like donating your winnings to charity. Don't do it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362409) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 1:36 PM Author: pea-brained big personal credit line idea he suggested Nice try. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362378) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 2:14 PM Author: Yapping Cracking Goal In Life Subject: Email from Dorf with special offer "Special Offer for 2Ls willing to drop fed courts
. . . I've been getting a fair number of emails from 3Ls who listed fed courts as their first choice in the lottery but still ended up on the wait list. Because of the size of the room, there's nothing I can do for them, but if you're a current 2L willing to drop the course, I'll guarantee you admission into the very same course that I'm teaching in the fall. . . ." |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 2:18 PM Author: kink-friendly garrison scourge upon the earth Nothing like lying to get in. There's no way a 3L who put it as their first choice would be beat by a 2L. Second choice, yes, but not first.
|
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 2:22 PM Author: Yapping Cracking Goal In Life Well maybe some lied, but I'm sure some people just dont remember and assume they did. But everyone wins with the compromise. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362559) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 2:25 PM Author: kink-friendly garrison scourge upon the earth Until the registrar foolishly puts the fall Fed Courts at the same time as something like Evidence. It wouldn't surprise me. They seem to be oblivious to the fact that there are certain types of courses that shouldn't be scheduled at the same times as others. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362568) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 2:56 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Except all of Shectman's classes are at 6-9PM because he's a "lecturer in law" meaning that he has a real job. Anyone taking evidence as a 3L will probably take that class, and anyone who takes advantage of Dorf's offer won't have to waste a top choice on Fed Courts so they'll really get 2 1st choices next year.
Two 3L-First Choices >> One 2L-First Choice + One 3L-First Choice. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 2:50 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Sweet! Now only ~20 of them need to take him up on this offer to get me a seat!
Seriously...if you're a 2L and you're not on law review, or at least if you had less than a 3.6 as a 1L or less than a 3.7 last semester, you have don't have a great shot at a good clerkship next year and will only hurt your chances if you take the course and get reamed by everyone smarter than you. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:08 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert If you "don't have a great shot at a good clerkship" wouldn't the best way to improve your odds be to get an A- or A in Fed Courts and perhaps get a letter from Dorf?
2L's: Overdrive is calling you out and asking you to take a defeatist mentality. I say take the class and fuck him. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:13 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Being risk adverse =/= assuming a "defeatist mentality."
It's just smarter to take the class as a 3L. Most judges expect it, and since it is offered in the fall you can point out that you're currently enrolled.
"I'm currently enrolled in Fed Courts with Dorf" is a better answer than "I took it last year and got a B."
|
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:31 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert But you're saying that certain 2L's already "don't have a great shot at a good clerkship."
So in their position, the rational thing is to take a greater risk for have the possibility of a bigger payoff. So what if they get a B in Fed Courts (if that even hurts their chances substantially) if they weren't going to get a good clerkship anyway. But an A- or A and a letter could improve their chances by quite a big -- exactly what the 3.4 or 3.5 student needs.
In summary: fuck off. I don't see why any reasonable 2L reading your posts wouldn't be motivated to stay in the class, if only to piss an asshole like you off. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:34 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Any reasonable 2L reading this thread would notice that you're just flaming me and the others who want to get into this class. My points are valid. If there are 2Ls who really think that they will suddenly start getting awesome grades in their fourth semester of law school, while taking one of the hardest classes offered, then they should ignore my posts. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362914) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:44 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert I was flaming you guys, I admit it. But then your claim that "any 2L with less than a 3.6 should drop the class because you won't get a good clerkship and everyone smarter than you" really rubbed me the wrong way.
I just don't think it's true, and I'm 100% serious about that. (1) If it's really true they won't get a good clerkship anyway, then the reasonable thing to do is take the class which is a bigger risk but also a bigger upside; (2) Anyone who is serious and hardworking has the potential to do well in the class. Nothing is preordained, and someone who got a few grades higher than you 1L year isn't necessarily smarter than you. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:52 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy I understand and admit that I'm being a dick. However, you have to admit that Fed Courts is a VERY difficult class and it isn't likely to be your first A+ if you haven't thus far proven yourself a superstar in law school.
I agree that certain people may weigh the odds of getting a high grade and and decide that it's in their best interest to take the risk. But for most of them, that won't be the case. Do you really think that the 15 or so 2Ls who fall into that cateogory are all going to do better than everyone else who is gunning for the same grade/goal and, based on past experience, are more likely to do so?
It is NOT in the best interest of most 2Ls to take the class. Actually, even the 2Ls who are on law review should consider dropping. They already have a good resume, why risk fucking it up with a bad grade in Fed Courts? It would be in their best interest to drop and take it next fall too. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 4:10 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert (1) You don't have to get an A+ for Fed Courts to help your resume. An A- would be solid, and a rather realistic goal.
(2) I'm fine with you arguing that all 2L's shouldn't take the class. I just don't like you specifically singling out all 2L's with less than a 3.6 because "they aren't good enough."
(3) A 2L reading this thread should consider the pros and cons and decide for themselves. From Mr. Dizzle's post, arguably waiting until 3L might be the better choice, but it's their right to take it this year if that's what they want. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 4:19 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy 1. If you're a marginal candidate to begin with, an A- in Fed Courts is not going to push you over the line. An A might, and an A+ probably would. I'm not saying that an A- would hurt, but it's not going to give a 3.5 student a free ticket to an appellate clerkship straight out of law school. It's also unlikely that Dorf will toss an A- student's salad in a letter of recommendation to the extent that he might for a A/A+ student. "He did OK [A-] in my class" << "He is the second coming of Me/Christ/Tribe."
2. I didn't mean to imply that they're "not good enough," but they have no good reason to take it as a 2L and shouldn't fuck over 3Ls with better grades (read: me).
3. Beyond what Dizzle says, I think that many of my arguments for why 2Ls should drop are valid. Your 'it's like winning the fucking lottery!' argument is invalidated by Dorf's offer. In fact, as I pointed out above/below it's actually in their best interest to take him up on the offer because it nets them 2 first round 3L picks next semester.
Obviously my posts reflect the fact that I'm extremely pissed to be waitlisted for what should be a 3L only course. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 4:25 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert Are you clerking next year?
On another note: when is Shechtman going to get his ass in gear and submit our evidence grades? I think I did well, I'm curious to see what I got. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 4:32 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy No, I'm working in litigation for 1-2 years first to maximize my chances at a good clerkship. But I'm absolutely going to clerk.
I think that i was the first to respond to your post after his exam. I think that I did well too, but probably so did everyone. It was so damn easy that I could honestly see getting anywhere from an A+ to a B (shudder).
|
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 4:37 PM Author: Passionate blathering pervert Why are you so sure that taking 1-2 years off maximizes your chances at a good clerkship? I didn't know that was the conventional wisdom.
I agree that the evidence test was easy and that there's no way to predict our grades. But if you think you did really well, wouldn't that preclude a flat B? I don't think Shechtman would give something a B even if the curve was brutal if you only missed 10 or 15 questions out of 100.
In any case, I guess we'll find out soon enough. I bet the grades come out next week. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 4:40 PM Author: amber cerebral gunner Was this like 100 multiple choice questions? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7363170) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 4:45 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Lately it seems to help. It's less that it's conventional wisdom, and more that it's empirically true right now. Also the application process is much less rigid if you're not applying as a 3L, and the pay is better, and it will give me a chance to try another part of the country. I'm working in NYC but plan to clerk in 9th, 7th or DC. Depending on how I feel after living in NYC for 4-5 years, I'll probably also apply to 2d Circuit.
Well, I honestly can't really imagine anything less than an A or maybe an A-, but I'm very scared at how easy the test seemed and I'm concerned that I missed trick questions or something. I'm pessimistic: generally I expect Cs and get As. I really hope the grades come out soon. I don't have any yet. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:16 PM Author: Yapping Cracking Goal In Life "If you "don't have a great shot at a good clerkship" wouldn't the best way to improve your odds be to get an A- or A in Fed Courts and perhaps get a letter from Dorf?"
Haha. Don't you realize from the email that Dorf wants 3Ls to be able to take the class over 2Ls? One good way to not be able to get a letter from Dorf is to stubbornly stay in the class and keep a 3L out. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:18 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy TITCR.
"So, if you're a 2L and there's no really good reason why you need to take fed courts now rather than next fall,please consider dropping to make room for a desperate 3L." = a polite way to say "You better have a damn good reason for staying in the class and fucking a 3L."
|
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:26 PM Author: pea-brained big personal credit line idea he suggested "if you're a 2L and you're not on law review, or at least if you had less than a 3.6 as a 1L or less than a 3.7 last semester, you have don't have a great shot at a good clerkship next year and will only hurt your chances if you take the course and get reamed by everyone smarter than you. "
This is such horseshit. Some people are late bloomers, and are going to be doing better 2L than they did 1L. A few random grades in 1L doesn't make them less smart than some 3Ls not smart enough to list the class as their first choice. Let the 2Ls do what is best for them, and stop patronizing them. What an ass. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:29 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy The second half of the criterion should still hold. If you can't get above a 3.7 in your third semester, you should not take fed courts during your 4th semester and hope to "bloom."
|
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 6:45 PM Author: kink-friendly garrison scourge upon the earth Agreed. Some people are late bloomers, but if you cant take advantage of more generous 2L/3L curves and the ability to pick your classes during third semester, it isn't going to happen. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7364168) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:22 PM Author: pea-brained big personal credit line idea he suggested Whiny little bitches. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362826) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:23 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Dorf's clarification email:
"To be clear, my offer of an automatic place in next fall's class applies to 2Ls currently in the class or currently in the top 25 on the wait list. If you're a 2L with a higher number on the wait list, then dropping the class is unlikely to benefit any 3L. If a mass exodus changes that, I'll consider extending the offer."
Now it's VERY obvious that he wants 3Ls in the class. Extending the offer as deep as 25 on the waitlist is amazingly generous to 2Ls who have no chance of getting off the waitlist and would otherwise have to use their first choice to get it next year (after wasting their first choice on it this semester and failing to get it, much like many of us did last year with Shechtman's evidence class). Every 2L who is not going to be visiting another school / in a dual degree program next year should definitely drop. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:29 PM Author: pea-brained big personal credit line idea he suggested No; it's obvious that he feels obligated after he got so many whiny emails. He doesn't want "whiny bitches" in his class, but feels its his duty to let them in. I wouldn't drop were I a 2L. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362868) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 3:30 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy I actually didn't email him. That is pretty whiney. I'm just venting here. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7362881) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 4:07 PM Author: Contagious navy pit Why would anyone who didn't have a serious chance at a clerkship bother taking the class? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7363023) |
|
Date: January 8th, 2007 8:35 PM Author: wonderful station There were people at Penn with median or below-median grades and not on law review who interviewed with Wachtell during OCI. Lord knows why people do things like that and screw over other people. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7377705) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 7:26 PM Author: Floppy puce pozpig gaping Why are the CLS people so fucking dumb? Did CLS just open its doors and become a law school last week? What other top schools make it damn near impossible to take classes like fed courts and evidence? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7364376) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 7:35 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Evidence is easy to get into. Evidence with Shechtman, who is an amazing professor, is not easy to get into.
There was another fed courts class that was presumably easier to get into, but it was a 2 credit per semester full year course taught by a visiting prof instead of Dorf. Unfortunately, more people waited than can fit in the class.
So they can argue that the classes technically were available. I think the availability of the second class was what made them put Fed Courts in a small room this semester.
That said, the registrar is awful. |
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 7:37 PM Author: Floppy puce pozpig gaping CLS in general is run terribly. I am waiting for the registrar to send another email with class changes, each one conveniently provided in its own attachment. I love the 30 attachment emails. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7364420) |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 4:39 PM Author: Underhanded marvelous sanctuary There actually was a third section of Fed Cts, which had openings, taught by Monaghan in the fall. I dont have much sympathy for 3Ls who waited this long, and didn't rank it #1 or #2 on their list if they needed it. The way registration works, there's no way 3Ls who put it so high didnt get it. (I'm not in the class, and I agree the registration system is stupid, but the whining sucks.) |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 5:18 PM Author: internet-worthy location Agreed. All these 3Ls whining about not getting into Fed Courts have had at least 3-4 opportunities to do so and STILL failed to put it #1 when they had their last shot at it. If it mattered that much to you, you should have put it as your #1 preference in the lottery and you definitely would have gotten it. To come back now and bitch about it to Dorf, the registrar, or 2Ls (and on top of it insult the 2Ls not on law review, as Overdrive_OS2 does) is absolutely infantile. You screwed up. Live with it and don't blame anybody else.
All that said, I'm making best efforts to switch out of the class. But it's hard to find a replacement for a 4 credit course, and I'm miffed about being pressured to do so. And it would be nice if someone like Overdrive_OS2 would at least have the courtesy (or even the common sense) not to insult almost all the 2Ls while asking them to rescue him from his own stupidity. |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 5:33 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy "To come back now and bitch about it to Dorf, the registrar, or 2Ls (and on top of it insult the 2Ls not on law review, as Overdrive_OS2 does) is absolutely infantile. You screwed up. Live with it and don't blame anybody else."
1. This clearly mostly my fault. However, I also blame the registrar for not putting it in a larger class room. I also think that it should have been permission only for 2Ls, or maybe even for everyone.
2. I actually never emailed either Dorf or the Registrar, and haven't directly whined to the 2Ls. Posting here is the extent of my, albeit extensive, bitching. I'm glad someone did whine to Dorf, however, or else I would be totally screwed right now instead of just potentially screwed.
3. As a 2L, you haven't had quite as many opportunities to get fucked by the registrar yet. Last year I didn't even get my first, second, or third choices during Spring Semester. I was registered for 3 credits when the lottery results came in. CLS doesn't offer as many classes in the spring (because USNWR calculates S/F ratio based on Fall only). This fall I used my first choice to get Evidence (as did many 3Ls) and assumed that I wouldn't get Fed Courts with Monahan without using my first choice. I thought that Dorf's class would be in lower demand due to poor course evaluations and the fact that he's new to the class. So yes, I'm being petty and whining a lot. I was wrong and am mostly at fault. But this is my 4th time getting screwed by the lottery, so I reserve the right to bitch about it here.
EDIT:
4. I insulted the 2Ls before Dorf's offer. I didn't actually say that the 2Ls weren't "good enough" for the course, but merely pointed out that most of them didn't have a good reason to take it as a 2L. If anything, I was arguing that no 2L should be in the class, but I was making an exception for those who are already likely to be competitive for appellate clerkships as a 3L. Other posters read more into my comments than I intended. If anyone was insulted by the "smarter than you" line, that was motivated by my frustration and I appologize. Any 2L who drops should absolutely take the class next year, regardless of their grades. |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 5:46 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy I absolutely ranked it #2, right after a seminar with a huge waitlist that I've been wanting to take since I first looked at the curriculum guide. Based on my position, any 3L in the top 20 had it listed second.
|
|
Date: January 6th, 2007 9:25 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Did anyone else buy the book yet and notice that it's misbound? Or is it just my copy? I have 2 copies of the title page through xlvi. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7365129) |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 4:27 PM Author: Rambunctious Demanding Step-uncle's House (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7368990) |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 4:44 PM Author: disrespectful aqua stead cuck I probably will drop it, but I only got two classes through the lottery, so I'm going to wait to make sure I have other stuff that I like that i can get into before i just free-ball with one class. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7369088) |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 5:13 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy Many classes are really easy to add even if you aren't on the waitlist already. Good 2L classes that are open or will be easy to get into include:
Antitrust w/Goldshmid - short waitlist (4) & Harvey will always manage to scare off a few students in the first class. He's a good prof, though, and better for Antitrust than Corps.
Admin w/Strauss - I know nothing about this class other than some people think its important.
Copyright w/Ginsberg - Very good class, prof is not as hard as people say (and one of my favorites).
Corporations w/Coffee - I was actually lectured by no less than 2 partners for not taking Corps with Coffee. A class that you really should take as a 2L. Tons of open spots.
Fed Tax w/Stone - a useful 2L class. Stone may not be as awesome as Raskolnikov, but I'm sure he's good.
Trademarks w/Lehv - A conceptually easy and interesting class with a very short waitlist.
Telecom w/Wu - I can guarantee that at least 17 people will drop after his email explaining his no-laptop policy. He's a great prof, and I've heard the class is more interesting/helpful than one would expect.
Lots of Seminars are open. Look for profs you like and ones that gave out lots of high grades in the past. Some of them basically give no grade lower than an A-.
|
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 6:46 PM Author: Metal cordovan yarmulke casino would you rank these three:
ginsburg corp stone tax antitrust goldschmid |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 7:00 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy 1. Ginsburg Copyright 2. Goldschmid Antitrust 3. Coffee Corps 4. Stone Tax
You mixed up the profs. The first two are amazing professors, and both classes are great. Take whichever fits your interest more (for me it would be copyright). Coffee is probably CLS's biggest name, but I've heard he's not the greatest prof. I don't know anything about Stone, but I liked Tax. Tax will have the least reading. Goldschmid is all over the place, from 20-100 pages with no real consideration of the amount of time you'll spend reading it. I've heard Coffee is a lot of work (isn't the class 5 credits?). Tax never has much reading, but you have to spend time looking at the statute (either before class, or at least before the exam).
|
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 7:22 PM Author: Metal cordovan yarmulke casino yeah, wasn't really paying attention when i was writing... thanks, though. for whatever reason, stone's evals seem much stronger than ginsburg's (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7370409) |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 7:26 PM Author: snowy irradiated idiot center I had Stone for tax last year - I thought he was awesome, personally. Made the material very clear, and it seemed like common sense once he got through with it. Can't compare him to the others (except that I had Goldschmid for Corps and hated it, but I can't blame that entirely on him, and I've heard from everyone that he's way better in Antitrust). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7370433) |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 7:41 PM Author: kink-friendly garrison scourge upon the earth Is the exam straight black letter or is it a bunch of policy crap? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=558315&forum_id=2#7370541) |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 7:47 PM Author: snowy irradiated idiot center <strains memory> I don't think I remember any policy questions.
What I remember is that there are a bunch of questions requiring shorter answers (short paragraph) and a few requiring longer, so it feels substantially different than exams that have one massively long question with a 'discuss all issues' note.
But I'm pretty sure it's all blackletter - just 'what are the tax consequences if....'
It's also completely open book, and the map that comes with the book is super helpful during the exam, although somewhat unweildy if not folded properly. |
|
Date: January 7th, 2007 7:34 PM Author: exciting unholy sex offender really tough guy I may be somewhat unique in how much I like Ginsburg. I think she's a real love/hate prof.
Antitrust or Tax seem to be the best answers. |