Buffs Law

2005-09-11T14:53:00.000-06:00

Later

In case you haven't gathered, I'm kind of out of the personal blog business, at least for now. I think I hit the lull Monkey Man and the CU Blawg have hit--blogging is interesting at first, but ultimately it kind of loses its luster. Kind of like reading someone's diary--at first you're caught up in the fact that you're reading someone's secrets--their true, inner-most thoughts--but after a while it starts to get boring; ultimately, you just don't care what that person thinks about Bush or whatever. Political blogs nauseate me; law school blogs, after reading them for a couple years now, are infinitely better, but tend to relate back to the same themes over and over again. My blog was doing the same--just me bitching about the same 5-7 topics. Well, enough bitching for now. I'm a 3L, I have a lot going on, and the CU Blawg seems to be sufficient for our small little world for now.

And anyway, I need to dedicate all my online efforts to my Fantasy Football team ...

2005-09-02T13:09:00.000-06:00

OCI

I think last year I dropped for every single firm I was eligible for. I'm certainly no top 10%er or top 25%er so that cut out a few; ultimately, though I was a little surprised by how many interviews I got (something like 5-7), considering my grades and lack of law review. A word of warning, though--virtually every firm does OCI with the intention of landing those in the top 25%; those in the top 10% will marvel at what a hot commodity they are. Those just outside that range will pick up a smattering of interviews. Those below the top 40% are pretty much out of luck, though if you go hard after a specialty, or know a lawyer in the firm you might land a few first-round interviews. I know one person in the bottom quarter who got a first-round and call-back to a firm because they went hard after a specialty. So it can be done. But not often.
*

2005-08-21T21:49:00.000-06:00

Even more to argue about

A law school friend at an unnamed Washington, D.C. law school forwarded me these links as follow-up to a twenty minute debate that occurred some 5 years ago: Two spaces or one? (Second link). I'm not sure if this is a law school website or what, but the debate's fascinating and has me questionning everything I know as true in our universe. I'm a two-space guy--I wasn't even aware that there were vigilant one-space advocates out there, fighting the fight against one wasted keystroke per sentence, until my friend started correcting a paper I wrote in college and redlined every single extra space. I dismissed his edits as sheer lunancy, yelled at him and his East Coast boarding school nonsense, and went back to my old ways. Thinking back, I'm not sure where I picked up the idea that two was proper, though I suspect it was freshman year, high school typing.

If you're a 1L and want to seriously mindfuck some of your classmates, e-mail these links to them the night before your first memo/brief is due. 11 p.m. Kinkos insanity will ensue, with people arguing about Bluebook v. ALWD spacing procedures, someone claiming to know someone who talked with a TA and said it was definitely 1 space, and dozens of people running back to the law school in the wee hours of the morning to turn in new copies.

... BTW, 1Ls, it is one space and you will be counted down for it. I'm not kidding.
*

2005-08-19T10:22:00.000-06:00

It's all about positioning

4. Or, more accurately, it's all about getting the experience. A young associate gave me this profound piece of knowledge: because there are so many baby boomer partners at the big firms in Denver, and because the partner-associate ratio in Denver is so skewed (instead of the usual 1-2 or 1-3, it's 1-1 and in some cases 2-1), the odds of any younger associates making partner aren't that great. Basically, the partner gigs are spoken for for the foreseeable future. Not that it's impossible to make partner, but it's just not as easy as it was back in the day. This associate told me that as a result, 3-6 year associates are going to be jumping ship left and right (and I guess currently are), trying to find a place where they can do the work they want to do and rise up through the ranks. So it's essential to get great, practical experience doing the work you want to do early, so that you can prepare for that next job search (do these ever end, by the way?). I've been told there's a stigma against laterals, but I don't see it--I think that's just the good old boys imposing their world-concept on us youngsters. Honestly, I know most of us really can't fathom being a company man or woman for life--in fact, three or more years at one place seems excessive to me. Regardless, what I took from all this is when you get that first gig, you need to immediately assume that you'll have to jump in three years, and take the measures necessary to ensure that you'll be able to jump exactly where you want to.
*

2005-08-16T17:18:00.000-06:00

Top 5 Things I Learned This Summer

Much to my utter dismay, I've learned a little here and there over the course of two summers and one externship. The other day I was chatting with the receptionist who constantly yells at me at my horrible time-keeping, and lo and behold I start waxing on the Art of Keeping Time, a body of knowledge that not so long ago was a complete mystery to me, and is now only a semi-mystery. And there have been other revelations--usually, though, they're not revelations, just little trinkets of knowledge slipping out of nowhere, that I somehow incorporate into what I know "is", instead of what I guess "is." Little shards of the Law & Order image falling away, replaced with a very real picture of the legal life. Monkey Man and I occasionally exchange these tidbits over big burritos, marveling at how wrong we were, or, more rarely, at how right we were. So here's a list, which I'll add to, of the Top Five Things I Learned This Summer.

5. The whole "I hate big corporate law firms" schtick (not unlike the "I hate Starbucks, Microsoft, Wal-Mart etc." schtick) is pretty lame for a number of reasons that I won't go into here. But since day one in law school, you'll hear people tell you that the big firms screw you. Ok, so they make you work a lot. But I never really thought about exactly how they supposedly screw you--especially when they're paying you pretty sick money--until recently, and after doing some research and talking with associates, well, the big boys screw you even more than you could possibly imagine. Say you're fortunate enough to start at one of the monsters, pulling $90,000. Bank. Ka-ching. Loving it, even with the "1800" billables, which is really "2000" billables if you don't want to get horrible assignments and be shown the door in 2 years. Or "2100 or 2200" if you're a Type A who wants to make Partner. (BTW, do some quick math--you're really only making $35-45 per billable max, and much less per hour in the office). But the next year you only go up to $92,500, and the following year $94,000, and after that $96,500 ... you get the picture. So what starts out as the greatest deal in town quickly becomes a rip-off--eight years out you're pulling $110,000, which is still incredible money, sure, but considering your value, considering that you bill $400,000 a year, not so much. And as you go up at small firms, they give you a much bigger piece of the action. So it's not inconceiveable that after ten years, Assoc. 1 at BigFirm has made significantly less than Assoc. 2 at LittleFirm. Anyway, I'm certainly not telling anyone not to go for the big firms or whatever, but understand that they all have structured pay scales for associates, and the nondiscretionary pay increases probably only match inflation, if that. You'll essentially be making the same amount the entire time you're an associate there, unless they throw you huge discretionary bonuses, which I understand isn't common (most have nondiscretionary bonuses if you bill a certain amount).
*

2005-08-14T15:33:00.000-06:00

One week, one day

No books, no finalized class schedule, no parking pass, no nothing. And class in one week. I think I speak for most 3Ls when I say that returning for another full year--capped by the bar--isn't something anyone's looking forward to. I've been in denial up to this point--but time to confront the looming beast.

Law school is law school, and for all the minuses there are huge pluses, such as seeing good friends, having no more than 2-3 hours of class every day (and certainly no more than an hour of reading--those long days of briefing fell by the wayside long ago), and many off-days, breaks, and vacations. It's a great life--except for the school and finals part. I looked forward to seeing a new batch of 1Ls last year, thinking somehow they'd make life more interesting, maybe pull a few quality friends out of the bunch. If nothing else there'd be some new blood here and there. But the 1Ls are so thoroughly segregated--their own distinct classes, study groups, social circles. There's been some blending, but not nearly as much as there was in college, where seniors routinely hung with freshmen (for obvious reasons) and inter-mixing was rampant. But I imagine that'll change this year as the new 2Ls start classes with the new 3Ls, and we'll communally marvel at the scared, over-stressed 1Ls, writing and printing notebooks of case briefs, mining the Nutshells for any advantage, not yet realizing that law school is a game of random half-percentages, and that 50 extra hours for an 85 instead of an 84 just isn't worth it.

Took the MPRE on Friday. Some quick advice for the 1Ls and 2Ls--take it over the summer if possible. Plenty of time to study, and if you fail, there's always Nov., next March, and next July. Assuming I pass, it'll be nice to get that first bar thing out of the way. Second, the Barbri sample questions are clutch. The Barbri questions are significantly harder, and I was always in the 2/3s range in terms of how many questions I got right, but I saw the same things on the MPRE again and again. Pretty common advice, but there's so many stupid nuances to the legal ethics rules that simply reading the summary prep books won't get you there. Like contingent fees aren't allowed for marital issues (such as divorces, alimony, etc.), but they are allowed for collecting alimony when it's gone unpaid. Or the rules on judges and gifts, or judge stock ownership, and other disqualification issues. Sure beats reading the rules themselves, or the huge 100-page Barbri outline.
*

2005-08-08T12:37:00.000-06:00

Pad

Got the tuition bill in the mail a couple days back. I gagged. Tuition has virtually doubled since I started--went from a cool $9,000 or so a year (or was it even less?) to a not-so cool $15,000 this year. I'm sure the 1Ls are a little shocked as well. $6,743.86 per semester last year, $7,500 this time around. No doubt $9,000 next year. And then probably $11,500 and up and up. I'm thinking Getches and Co. estimate the ceiling to be around $22,000-$26,000--still cheaper than DU, and perhaps that extra $5,000 will be enough to get a few people to choose CU over DU. So CU will still be cheaper than DU, with a significantly better ranking, in a "destination" city, with a brand-new law school, right next to a hot city for the 20-30 yr. old demographic. DU will be more expensive, with a significantly worse ranking, in a cool part of that same hot city, with a new law school, and a part-time program. I see things becoming dicey for DU--the big selling point up to now has been the new law school (which I visited for the first time this weekend--it is a complete pad, more so than I had imagined, though the lack of windows and view really make you feel like you're in Planet DU Law. Finals around there must be chaotic.) and the rise in the rankings. Now what's your selling point? No longer will they have the only pad, and the rankings dive last year is no anomaly, thanks to a reconfiguration in U.S. News methodology that prevents shameless gaming (Note how when DU does it I say it's "shameless", and when I yell at Getches and Co. for not doing it, I say it's "playing the game." Hypocrite indeed.) The part-time program is huge--a cash-cow in so many respects--and CU would be remiss not to implement one with all the space in the new law school. But CU's new building will negate DU's only big plus over CU. I would never count those DU folks out, though. They have the $ (debt is a wonderful thing), the advertising saavy, and the desire. CU? Not so much.

2005-08-03T17:20:00.000-06:00

Summertime, and the livin's easy ...

Just some advice for those 2Ls out there with a little time on their hands before school starts. There are two things you can do now to greatly ease your work load this coming semester. First, write a killer cover letter for all the OCI firms. Even if you don't know who exactly is coming, you can bet every big Denver firm will be there, so you can easily hammer out those twenty cover letters (though, if you're not top 50%, I don't know if it's worth your time to apply to the big boys, but hey, you never know).

If you know someone in any of the Denver firms (say, your second cousin's best friend whom you met at a party is an associate at Faegre) say, in your first line, "I was introduced to your firm through XXXX." I got an interview and a job this way. The guy whom I mentioned, who I'd spoken to exactly once on the phone for five minutes, happened to be the boss of the interviewer, and he was scared to death he'd get burned for not interviewing this 'close personal friend of Mr. XXXX.' I never lied about my relationship; I told the interviewer I'd only spoken to him once, but that he was a good friend of so and so who I got along with very well. Got the interview, got the job. I doubt the Mr. XXXX has any idea who I am or that I mentioned him, but he was my gateway, and sir, thank you.

Also, draft a killer resume. Target, target, target. Some firms do specialty work, and unless you got the grades, the only way you'll get an interview is if you go hard after that specialty.

Second, pick a journal topic now. I think by now everyone's gotten their journal e-mail(?), so start thinking about it. Absolute must. Writing your note will be ten times more difficult than you expected and take an incredible, incredible amount of time. Most notes are due in Jan., so people really put it off, but then Dec. rolls around and you're taking finals and trying to sneak in a few ski days and the last thing you want to do is clean up footnote 72, maybe add a parenthetical. You can half-ass your note, and most will, and I certainly did, but your editors will no doubt come back with a "We'll fail you unless you clean this up" and "This is publishable if you overhaul it in these 14 areas." A swift kick in the pants and all the sudden you think that maybe it is publishable, maybe they really will fail me, and you're doing tons more work than you anticipated.

I'll do an OCI follow-up later. Ins and outs, what's expected, who's hot (and who's not), where the best 2Ls in our class went (and why), how to go after the 5-25 lawyer firms (for most the relevant market), how to prepare, how much time it takes, and all the ways to bomb an interview (I'm the foremost expert in this). OCI at CU is a little different, because I'd say only 50-70 students are effectively "in the game" for most firms. The rest are still there, but I think it takes a real swinging-for-the-fences approach to stand a chance. But it has been done and it can be done.
*

2005-08-02T13:06:00.000-06:00

Hank and the Hippies ... Day 2

Apparently good ole CU Law grad Hank Brown is kicking around the hippies up in Boulder. About time. I love his Hickenlooper approach to things so far: If it's stupid and costs money, we're not going to do it. How amazingly obvious. Cutting admin. positions, nixing the spending of state funds on alcohol ... He even had one of the classic Hickenlooper themes: parking. First day on the job he has maintenance pulling his reserved parking sign. No doubt every ass-kissing admin., scared to death they're on the chopping block, will be doing the same sometime this week. I see piles of reserved parking signs in the trashcans outside Kittredge sometime in the near future, and dozens of Highlands Ranch High 18-year-olds rolling up in their new SUVs and parking where old Dean whoever parked.

BTW, I've read two or three stories where it's been mentioned that Brown wants to teach a class. Well, geez, let's see. If I'm Mr. Rational-Thinking Law School Administrator, I immediately give old Hank a call and say "Anytime, Anywhere. We have TAs lined up; we have a secretary who will do all the grunt work (creating assignments, writing a test, grading, and so on). You show up for 50 minutes twice a week and that's it." Of course, the odds of anyone at the law school doing this are nil. Here we have a former grad, a former Congressman, a super-honcho politically who likely knows every millionaire and billionaire lawyer in Colorado (remember that donation problem we have?), a man who could potentially "make" the law school--here we have this guy begging to teach a class, and our guys just won't make it happen.
*

2005-07-30T20:43:00.000-06:00

Beating a dead horse

Perhaps it's for the best that, thanks to a fickle stolen connection, I just lost another long, boring tirade about how easy it is to game U.S. News, how everyone and their mom is doing it, as this article so poignantly details, how this just reminds me of that drop-in-U.S.-News meeting/fiasco Getches and Co. threw last year and Monkey Man's most astute, as-yet unanswered question (the question that in fact no one can answer), how a mere decade ago this law school was in the top 25, and how apathy and a completely nonsensical "moral highground" have undermined all the wonderful, inherent qualities of this school that happens to sit in a mecca and that happens to cost nothing for anybody. The rest of the post was junk, but I especially liked the last line: "I think I speak for most when I say there's no love lost on CU Law. If DU Law was about 40 or so spots higher and half the cost, I'd be buying my hockey student season tickets tomorrow, and not my CU football season tickets."
...
The $8.78 Million Maneuver
By ALEX WELLEN
Published: July 31, 2005
NY Time

Pop quiz: What do the water bills at Stanford have in common with library expenditures at the University of Illinois?

Answer: Everything, if you are a law school looking to increase your U.S. News & World Report ranking.

As part of its methodology, U.S. News factors in how much a law school spends per student. But just how those costs are calculated has become a matter of considerable discussion, both in legal education circles and at the American Bar Association.

Consider library costs at the University of Illinois College of Law in Urbana-Champaign. Like all law schools, Illinois pays a flat rate for unlimited access to LexisNexis and Westlaw's comprehensive online legal databases. Law students troll them for hours, downloading and printing reams of case law. To build user loyalty, the two suppliers charge institutions a total of $75,000 to $100,000 a year, far below per-use rates.

But in what it calls a longstanding practice, Illinois has calculated a fair market value for these online legal resources and submitted that number to U.S. News. For this year's rankings, the school put that figure at $8.78 million, more than 80 times what LexisNexis and Westlaw actually charge. This inflated expense accounted for 28 percent of the law school's total expenditures on students, according to confidential data filed with U.S. News and the bar association and provided to The New York Times by legal educators who are critical of rankings and concerned about the accurate reporting of data.

These student expenditures affect only 1.5 percent of a school's U.S. News ranking, but this is a competition where fractions of a point matter. In this year's survey, the magazine ranked Illinois No. 26 of 179 accredited law schools.

In addition to student expenditures, there are ways that law schools can affect the 11 other "measures of quality" that U.S. News uses in assembling its rankings. When they hire their own new graduates as temps, that pumps up their employment figures; when they admit weaker applicants through backdoor mechanisms, that makes their admissions standards look stronger.

"Insofar as these polls affect student choices, the notion that I'm losing students because of this is insane," says Larry Kramer, dean of Stanford Law. He is considering whether he might include water, garbage removal, electricity, plumbing and property taxes as part of the university's spending per student. Stanford (U.S. News No. 3) is feeling the heat from Yale (No. 1), Harvard (No. 2) and Columbia (No. 4) - schools that report 120, 64 and 83 percent, respectively, more than Stanford in indirect expenditures and overhead for each full-time student, according to the confidential American Bar Association data.

Mr. Kramer chalks up the difference to accounting practices: unlike many schools, Stanford Law does not write the check for its utilities. Instead, the central university receives the law school's tuition, deducts an amount for utilities and hands a portion of the remainder to the school. "Now I have to think about going to the university and saying that I need you to disaggregate the law school from this administrative process to get that money counted for U.S. News," Mr. Kramer says.

Playing with the numbers is part of academia: with a higher ranking, a college stands to gain more prestige, competitive students, gifted faculty and alumni donations. But the problem is magnified in legal education, partly because U.S. News faces no significant competition. Unlike M.B.A. applicants, who can choose from a range of commercial ranking systems with varying emphases and methodologies, U.S. News has maintained a virtual monopoly in the law school realm since it started its annual ranking 16 years ago. In the prelaw community, U.S. News rankings are gospel, so law school deans find themselves under tremendous pressure to adopt polices to improve their standing.

The U.S. News & World Report survey truly dominates our lives in ways you couldn't imagine," Paul L. Caron, a law professor at the University of Cincinnati, said in opening remarks at the "Next Generation of Law School Rankings" symposium this spring in Bloomington, Ind. Attended by 60 professors, deans and students from around the country, the conference was largely devoted to how the survey affects legal education. That is what brought Prof. Cynthia E. Nance from the University of Arkansas School of Law; the charge from her dean, not so unlike that given other attendees: Find out how we get our rankings up. Arkansas dropped slightly this year.Among the various rankings criteria, undergraduate grade point averages (10 percent) and scores from the Law School Admission Test (12.5 percent) play a crucial role. That compromises student diversity, says Jeffrey E. Stake, a co-organizer of the symposium and a law professor at Indiana University, Bloomington.

"Service to the country in Iraq or in the Peace Corps goes out the window," he says. "Starting your own business goes out the window in favor of LSAT's and grades. The question 'Is this person going to be a good lawyer?' is being displaced by 'Is this person going to help our numbers?' "

Critics say law schools are engaged in an LSAT and G.P.A. arms race in which they exploit technicalities in U.S. News's methodology. Admissions people know, for example, that the rankings are calculated using grades and scores of only full-time students.

At the rankings symposium, Prof. Andrew P. Morriss of Case Western Reserve University School of Law in Cleveland and William Henderson, an associate law professor at Indiana and a co-organizer of the symposium, presented a report showing how schools can move up in the rankings by putting first-year students with weaker LSAT's into part-time programs.
Rutgers School of Law, Camden, for example, has been shrinking its full-time program and increasing its part-time division for the last seven years. About 60 first-year students - many with less competitive LSAT's or grades - take one course in the summer to ease their load in the fall. By taking a three-quarters schedule, the students are considered part time. The school has moved up from No. 78 in 2003 to 65 this year.

"There's an educational benefit, a financial benefit and a residual U.S. News benefit," says Rayman Solomon, dean of Rutgers-Camden.

Baylor University School of Law in Waco, Tex., places about 100 students whose LSAT and G.P.A. scores are generally lower into summer and spring programs. In the questionnaire in which U.S. News asks for year-round admissions, Baylor has submitted only its fall figures. This is because, says the associate dean, Leah Jackson, the magazine's published methodology had told readers that the reported data was for the fall entering class. (U.S. News has since fixed the mistake.)

"In an attached addendum, we give them the spring, summer and the aggregate numbers," Ms. Jackson says. "What they do with those numbers is up to them." This year, U.S. News changed Baylor's data to reflect the year-round figures.

Robert J. Morse, director of data research for U.S. News, says: "In my view, Baylor was coming up with a lawyerly version of why they want to give us what we don't want and hope that we don't catch them." Baylor fell two places in the rankings.

Schools without part-time programs have other ways to accept weaker students without sacrificing status. U.S. News collects scores from first-year students only. In its 2006 issue of America's Best Graduate Schools, U.S. News writes: "Taking the less credentialed applicants into the second-year class is also seen by many administrators as a way to avoid putting a school's rank at risk."

At New York University, Columbia and the University of California, Berkeley, for example, the law schools accept a large number of second-year transfer students, some with LSAT scores and undergraduate G.P.A.'s below those accepted in their first year. "Transfer is almost solely on first-year performance," says Edward Tom, director of law admissions at Berkeley.

Professor Stake of Indiana observes: "It works to schools' U.S. News advantage to do this - to close their doors to first-year students, in turn raising the school's LSAT's and grades, and then open their doors to the second-year program to raise revenue."

Professors Morriss and Henderson have urged U.S. News to look beyond first-year full-time programs in compiling its rankings. Mr. Morse of U.S. News says he is considering that change to improve the survey's integrity. U.S. News says it is aware of many of the games schools play. For years, the magazine used median LSAT's to rank law schools, but this year, it began averaging the 25th and 75th percentile scores. "We wanted to go with verifiable data," Mr. Morse says, "and we heard that some schools weren't computing their median accurately."

Why would U.S. News conclude that the 25th and 75th percentiles were more reliable than LSAT medians? Because the American Bar Association publishes percentile data (but not medians), and law schools may be less inclined to manipulate information also being reported to their accrediting agency and being made public.

Each fall, accredited law schools are required by the Department of Education to turn into the bar association an extensive questionnaire detailing school operations. This information is the basis for the association's confidential reports. Shortly thereafter, law schools turn in their U.S. News survey separately, about 90 percent of which mirrors the data requested by the association. Because the information is reported by law schools and a vast majority is not publicly available for crosschecking, U.S. News is unable to verify most of the data before publication.

For at least the last two years, the University of Illinois College of Law included its Westlaw and LexisNexis valuation in both the annual bar association questionnaire and the U.S. News survey.

The practice had been carried over from the previous law school administration, and the bar association approved it then, says Heidi M. Hurd, the law school's dean. Because the association declines to discuss individual schools, its approval of the Illinois practice could not be confirmed. "It was a formula that effectively attempted to get at the relative discount value as it were, which was deemed to be of genuine value to students," Dean Hurd says. "I don't know that when they adopted the practice it was driven by their desire to exploit ambiguities for purposes of rankings."

But earlier this year, she says, the bar association told Illinois that the $8.78 million was not legitimate and needed to be removed, causing Illinois's expenditures per student to drop by more than $12,000. Illinois removed the figure from bar association data but did not tell U.S. News. "We're under an obligation to report to U.S. News precisely what we report to the A.B.A. in the end of November, early December, what happens after that is what happens after that," says Dean Hurd, who will remove the valuation in the next U.S. News submission.

Before carrying out a policy that potentially improves a school's ranking, administrators need to consider whether the change will help students, says Professor Stake of Indiana. While critical of how rankings distort policies, he acknowledges that his own institution plays along. In hiring new graduates for short-term legal research positions, Bloomington has improved its U.S. News employment figures. "The general attempt by the law schools to make sure that their students get jobs is a good thing," he says.

Northwestern University has also hired graduates for short internships. "I don't think it's unethical if you're giving some value to your students," says David Van Zandt, its law dean.
It's not so much gaming the rankings as pressure to play the game, say many deans. "You distort your policies to preserve your ranking, that's the problem," says Mr. Kramer of Stanford. "These rankings are corrosive to the actual education mean because this poll takes the following 12 criteria and now you have to fetishize them."

Prof. Gregory A. Mark, who attended the symposium from Rutgers School of Law, Newark, calls the process a hypocrisy that is "lost on most law schools."

"We are all very well trained at redefining the very letter of the law," he says. "The rules of professional responsibility don't apply to the law school admission process. Maybe they should."

2005-07-25T16:24:00.000-06:00

The early bird catches the worm

CU-Boulder scientists hard at work, as always. It's a fascinating study, if only because it makes you wonder exactly what a stressed-out worm is stressed-out about. Frying on the pavement probably tops the list. I was under the impression worms don't have brains, and though my grasp of science peeked sometime during 9th grade, probably mid-fetal pig dissection, if worms do have brains surely they don't think that much. (An aside: During our fetal pig dissections, one student dared another to eat the umbilical cord. Down the hatch, a trip to the principal's office, a few days suspension, and a story to last a lifetime. I don't remember the kid--not even his name or what he looks like--but I'll remember the great umbilical cord-eating incident until the day I die). I have a feeling there's some sort of Buddhism saying to go along with this, though nothing clever comes to mind.
...
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- How well you respond to stress predicts how long you will live, at least if you are a little worm, U.S. scientists reported on Monday.

Genetically identical worms responded to stress in greatly different ways -- and those with more active stress reactions lived much longer than worms with less active stress proteins, the researchers found. More active stress responses suggest the animal is coping with the stress.
The findings will almost certainly apply to humans in some way, they report in this week's issue of the journal Nature Genetics.

Shane Rea of the University of Colorado at Boulder tested more than 100,000 nematodes known as Caenorhabditis elegans -- a worm favored by scientists because it is easy to work with.

[And so on. Basically, stressed out worms live 3 days, others live 16 days.]
*

2005-07-22T13:25:00.000-06:00

Blinky's Fun Club

So I went to the Barbri office on Evans this afternoon to drop off my deposit. On the bad side, I won't be eating for several days. On a brighter note, who eats? Of course, the guy who gets all our Barbri fees, dues, deposits, and the like eats, and he or she eats well, likely wiping his or her mouth with ten gagillion dollar bills, wondering how beautiful his or her sweet, sweet life is.

If you haven't been to the Barbri office yet, you're in for a treat. It's on Evans, which is slowly becoming the new Colfax. Or at least that's my new theory (after all, Colfax is going to get gutted in about 5-10 years, and there will be luxury highrises from downtown to Aurora). The office itself is in a hacienda-looking office building, likely an original from the 1800s considering its shape. Pancho Villa probably hid out there (BTW, I have no idea who Pancho Villa is. I think I remember him from the old Speedy Gonzales cartoons; or was Speedy Gonzales on Tom & Jerry? Or Loony Tunes? Blinky's Fun Club? Help me here people. Which reminds me, Westword did a feature on Blinky a while back, and he's running a pawn shop or something on Colorado. Some kids threw a brick through his window. He's in debt, super old, and pretty much ready to check out. One sad, sad clown). Anyway, there's Barbri, one PI lawyer, and like four porno distributors in the hacienda. The actual Barbri office reminds of some backward police station in Nowhere, New Mexico--hot, dusty, and completely void of any and all activity. I swear the calendar on the wall was from 1983. The basement is littered with papers; probably applications, and copies of applications, going back forever. I think a hobo might sleep down there, too. There were a couple offices upstairs, suitably worn around the edges. What work goes on in those offices only God himself knows. But I will say the guy who helped me was nice and very helpful. He gladly took my money, handed me a book that probably cost $5 to print, and bid me good day.

There's no way Barbri isn't paying off Kaplan and Princeton Review. Because they'd destroy Barbri in the course of about three hours. I had a feeling Barbri would be a bunch of ragged hippies who somehow didn't LSD themselves to death in the '60s, and who are milking this scam until a "real" company steps in. Like gypsies in the night they'll disappear, fat wallets in hand.
*

2005-07-21T14:43:00.000-06:00

$2 Tuesdays at Lakeside

We went to Elitch's the other day, because it's there, I have time in the evenings, and for me, it was free. BuffsGirl, for whatever inane reason, got the season pass, and thus also went, along with about ten people from Meet-In or whatever it's called. (I've been drafting various purchase agreements the past few days, and as a result I've started throwing in commas left and right in everything I write. I feel like I'm missing something if a sentence happens to be short, concise, and to the point, without any "any and all"-s, "including, but not limited to"-s, and so on). Maybe I should start doing defined terms on the blog: I go to CU (hereinafter referred to as "School" or "Asbestos-lined Dump that I Dread Returning To"). Anyway, we truly had a Motley Crue of eclectics, none of whom seemed to want to be there. There was the 40-year-old Asian dude who was obsessed with each ride's footprint, and whether the space was being used efficiently, and who refused to ride anything that made him go backwards. There were the two ladies with season passes who refused to go on any rides. There was the single girl who refused to go on any rides except for the Spider, which is supremely lame. And then there was the incredibly weird, unshaven guy, who randomly got sick and blamed it on the heat, even though it was 80 degrees, 8 pm., and very pleasant. I'm certain it was either drugs or alcohol, probably both. And finally there was the one normal lady who actually went on some of the rides with us. Indeed, it was incredible that this was an organized "coaster outing," where the selling point was riding in the front seat of as many of the big rides as humanly possible without waiting in line, and somehow everyone who came was totally uninterested in doing anything. This was my first--and definitely my last--Meet-in event. And I think I'll be hitting up Lakeside next time instead.

I'm starting to dread going back to school. Really, law school sucks. Totally and completely. First year was an intense mind-bender, and the thrill of imminent doom, and of being a "law student," carried me through. Second year was up and down--first semester was all about maxing out on the grades and getting a job, and second semester was all about undoing all the good I'd done the previous fall. Third year will be about simply showing up, and worrying about the bar. I'm finding that work is mind-numbing and exhausting--I am a drafter of fine print, and all I do all day is stare at fine print on a computer screen, changing "Company" to "Seller," and maybe scaling back the Reps & Warranties here, and bodying up the indemnification clause there--but it's much better than school. This is real, and the transactions are real, and the parties who sign this might argue about some of the clauses, and my scaling back of warranty on environmental claims could potentially be disastrous. Anyway, it's nice to do something that's not abstract. I'll never forget some of the discussions we'd have in torts: "So really, what is causation?" Necessary, sure, but I don't think I need it any more.

Finally, Barbri. WTF? $1500? And you can't sign up online? They don't even have a .pdf of the application form online? Do you want me to send it via Pony Express? Telegraph? Seriously, take part of my fee and pay a high school kid to build you an online form. Welcome to the modern age.
*

2005-07-17T11:30:00.000-06:00

Journal

I just wanted to elaborate on my comment on CU blawg on journals. We heard I'd made journal late lst July via e-mail. I'm on one of the secondary journals--so, obviously, either the Environmental or Tech journal. I haven't been particularly impressed with the operation of the journal (I think everyone has serious reservations about the efficiency of their own particular journal), and at times I question whether it was worthwhile. Writing the note, especially, was gruesome. I went through 4 edits--then I started thinking it was publishable and really took a crack at it, doing a couple heavy, heavy edits, and of course it was rejected, and now I have a useless thirty page article sitting on my computer. But other than the note I've put in the least amount of work possible, and for that I'm grateful. Both the Evironmental and Tech journals are reasonably well-reputed in the academic community, but outside that, I think all lawyers think all journals are the same. Law reviews are always top-notch if only because the best students get on them; secondary journals are for the rest. That's not to say they're useless--they're important for clerkships, and I think firms realize you pick up some valuable skills working on a journal, but if you're using journal for a line on your resume in the hopes of landing a job, you're probably better off crashing Colo Bar specialty meetings, or networking, or doing something, anything other than sitting in the library doing a cite-check and hoping that a firm knows the Environmental law journal is big, or the Tech journal is an up-and-comer.

The truth of the matter is that virtually everyone accepts an invitation to join a journal, be it law review or one of the others. Everyone goes through this "Is it worth it?" process, but in the end it doesn't matter. The fear of not doing something overcomes the fear of nasty citechecks.
*

2005-07-12T11:23:00.000-06:00

You suspect lawsuits are in the works? One guy taking all the big clients? Thanks to CowboysLaw for the tip. There have to be serious problems if you're the name partner and you flee/get run out. Makes you wonder.
...
Longtime law partners Moye, Giles part ways
By John Accola, Rocky Mountain News
July 12, 2005

The name partners at Denver law firm Moye Giles have parted company, with long-time attorney Ned Giles jumping to a rival practice founded by a group of former colleagues.
Giles, 57, abruptly resigned last month, leaving founding partner John Moye for a small, boutique law practice headed by Teryl Gorrell.

The eight-attorney firm - now called Gorrell Giles - specializes in banking, real estate and business mergers. Gorrell and the firm's four other partners previously worked at Moye Giles, a 38-attorney firm that Ned Giles joined in 1978.

Giles declined Monday to fully explain his exit from the firm that carried his name for more than 20 years.

"Let's just say I left to practice at a very profitable and efficient small firm," he said.

Giles acknowledged his surprise departure may have caused some hard feelings, in part because he left with some of his former firm's biggest business clients.

"In some ways it's kind of like a divorce in terms of the emotions it engenders, but it's easier to get over," said Giles, who joined Gorrell on July 1.

John Moye, a past president of the Colorado Bar Association, could not be reached Monday.

But as early as last week, his firm announced it, too, had undergone a name change - to Moye White.

"We are proud to announce the promotion of . . . Edward D. 'Ted' White to name partner," the firm said on its Web site. Giles, dropped from the law firm's 14-equity member roster, was not mentioned.

"Moye White's primary motivation for promoting a new name partner mirrors the firm's ongoing commitment to create a cohesive workflow and team orientation," said Moye White's Web site.

accolaj@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-892-2666
*

2005-07-11T13:41:00.000-06:00

Bartman

Gary Barnett seems to have it. Steve Bartman certainly has it. It's something bordering on incredible perspective--which we all have at times. But every time I hear Barnett speak, it's all about reflecting on core values, universal principles of bonding and overcoming adversity. Drastic change from the guy who ripped Katie Hnida, deserved or not. Bartman seems the same way. Like a walking buddha. Great article, great insight into one of modern history's greatest goats. Clicke HERE, and here's the full URL: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=bartman
*

2005-07-07T13:41:00.000-06:00

Advice for 1Ls

Bolder brought up a good topic--advice for 1Ls. I've been pining for things to write about recently, and since work doesn't merit more than a passing mention, I've been watching lots of movies, and not posting so much. (For whatever reason, I think I use the word pining ten times a day. Me and every 13-year-old girl study for the PSAT).

It's hard to come up with advice for 1Ls. As a 1L I craved it; I read all the various publications detailing how to brief, how to book brief (with ten or so highlighters), how to outline, how to study for exams, how to read cases, how to write exams, and everything in between. I think the only good thing I took out of all of it was to highlight with 3-4 different highlighters--which I still do to this day, though it's become problematic because the used books look like PCP-induced spinning rainbows, and I don't know what the hell is going on--and to look at an exam for each class as early as possible. And that's about it. My best grades ever were in classes where I focused not on the black letter, but on writing the "perfect" exam. Only with some professors will you actually know what a "perfect" exam will look like. I think I could take ten more Mueller classes and my grades would change by no more than 1-2 points, because I think I have the guy figured out, at least come exam time. And then there are other professors who will punish you for the most trivial stuff, and then trumpet the absurd and irrelevant, to the point where no sane human being could ever know what a "perfect" exam will look like. Undoubtedly, you will get between 82-86 in those classes. I'd say the average student will get probably get between 20-30 82-86s during their law school career. Welcome. It's humbling and ridiculous. And you will get a C or two; perhaps lower. The real champs only escape with a couple extremely low Bs.

I don't think I have any other advice. I think Monkey Man and I are starting to realize the necessity of developing your legal career outside law school, in terms of developing specialties, marketing, networking, and all that jazz. And also realizing that even if you have great grades, get a job at one of the big H Denver firms, you're not set--while the 1st year associate salaries are good (something like $90,000), the mandated pay increases are woefully inadequate. So you start at $90, go to $91.5, to $93, to $94.5, and so on, to the point where 5-6 years out you're only making chump change over the first years. That's still a good chunk of money, but realize that if you're billing out at $200, pull 2000 hours (which might be on the low side, from what I hear, even though it seems most firms require 1800 or 1850), you're doing $400,000 worth of legal work. And the partner-associate ratio at most Denver firms is completely skewed--virtually 1-1, or 1-2--so I don't see many younger associates and current students making partner (I've heard this concern from several 4-6 year associates). It's just not economically feasible. So really, you're getting screwed. Which is one reason so many 3-5 year associates jump ship. And which also means that relying on grades, class rank, and law review is a tricky business, since it really only sets you up for the short term. You'll be back on the market fairly quickly, and though those things will help set you up, I have a feeling they're not worth all that much.
*

2005-07-02T11:07:00.000-06:00

Fourth

Up to the mountains for the weekend, along with 3 million others on the Front Range. Undoubtedly we will all stay at the same hotel, park in the same parking lots, and most definitely eat at the same place every night. Not to mention drive on the same highway, slowly. Maybe I'll drop off some resumes at the Vail-Aspen firms.
*

2005-06-29T22:07:00.000-06:00

I absolutely love it

What kind of blog is it? Why, it's the Firm's blog. And who's in the Firm? A consortium of dead lawyers who associate with the ethereal counterparts of living attorneys and speak to this guy via voices in his head. Honestly, who (besides me) fabricates entire law firms, fabricates lawyers to practice in their fabricated firm, and then has imaginary conversations between those fabricated lawyers in their fabricated firm, and posts them on a blog?

http://britt.newby.net/

http://bulldoglegalservices.blogspot.com/

I peg this guy for (1) A machine gun rampage, or (2) Punditry.
*

2005-06-28T21:47:00.000-06:00

Gilligan's Island?

Why don't the people on the new Gilligan's Island, on TBS, don't look like their characters? Not even close? Am I the only one missing the point of this? It's a low-key Survivor where people dress like idiots. And of course, I'm addicted as all hell. Damn TBS.

In other random TV news, I watched a BBC documentary on promise rings tonight. I guess parents force their kids to wear these things as a weird pledge to abstinence. I think Jessica Simpson had one--and she turned out great, right? Anyway, it's a big thing in Texas, and the BBC show was basically mocking these naive zealots every chance they got. The kids were largely tools; they wouldn't be sleeping with anyone anyway. Apparently kids do it just to pay their parents lip service, which I guess helps the 'rents sleep better at night, considering that they think the apocalypse is coming, terrorists are going to bomb Waco, liberals want to turn everyone gay, and so on. It amazes me what people worry about.
*

2005-06-28T16:29:00.000-06:00

"The Bulls and Bears of Law Teaching"

#1, I can't believe someone did a study on this. #2, this is arguably the most entertaining law review article I've ever read. The last line? "Scholar, sell thyself." #3, everything I thought would be hot isn't. Everything I thought would be dead isn't.

Strong buys:
Bankruptcy law
Education Law
Energy Law
Family & Gender Law

Strong sells:
Admiralty law
Cyberlaw
Con Law

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=742625
*

2005-06-26T22:31:00.000-06:00

So wait, what?

Bolder Law's post reminded me exactly what I wanted to write on. So you're telling me that I can stall my car on train tracks, not get out of my car as a massive train slowly lumbers in my direction (at a whopping 40MPH), and that I can collect damages for that? Apparently the plaintiff's attorney's were clutch--there's not other rational explanation. I'm sure the lady's a wonderful woman--I saw her on the news, and it really is a tragedy what happened to her--but I'm sorry, this is the 21st century, and nobody, nobody should get hit by a train. Get out of the stupid car. Seriously.
*

2005-06-23T21:18:00.000-06:00

Show me the door

35 ways to lose an interview? Ok, so it's in jest, but here's how I lost most of my interviews: walking in the door. I do well with men ages 30-60. I do horribly with the 28-year-old female environmental litigator demographic. And yet the few OCI interviews I did, I always ran into this type. I know the firms are trying to send the most non-threatening folks they have, but it spelled disaster for me.
*

2005-06-22T22:05:00.000-06:00

Pass the booze

I wish I could get a little more riled up about the new alcohol policy. Hakim, Bolder, CowboysLaw, Coffinberry--not liking the new policy. Me? I just chalk it up to the utter incompetence of virtually every administrator at CU-Boulder. If you're a Seinfeld addict, you've seen the episode where George discovers every single impulse he does is exactly opposite of what he should do. So, he resolves to go against every instinctual urge he has--"Hi, my name is George, I'm unemployed, balding, and live in my parent's basement" ... "Hi, I'm Candace"--and he makes out like a bandit (BTW, I know that's not an exact quote, but close enough). I think our administrators need to embrace that urge.

At a time when there is so much that could be fixed, when there's so much wrong with CU Law, our administrators choose to "fix" the one good thing about the school. . Their instincts tell them we have an alcohol problem and they need to fix it--instead, they need to do the exact opposite. Don't ban FCQs--triple them. Turn CU Law into "the" scene. What do we have to lose? No one takes us seriously anyway. If you can't be Harvard, maybe it's better to be legendary in another right.

Our LSATs and GPAs keep the school up in the ranks. Our students built them a new school. And what have our administrators done lately? 0 significant donations. 0 big hires. 0 new measures we can get behind. 0 proposals to get us up in the rankings. 0, 0, 0.
*

2005-06-20T20:27:00.000-06:00

A boring evening

I don't have much to throw out there today. Anonymous 3L took a miniscule ranking hit; I took a huge one. Here today, gone tomorrow. Just when I thought I had this thing down ... Thank god there's only one year left, or I might just fall out the bottom. Maybe Getches will give me an honorary 323/168 rank. I feel like a boxer; I took a hit in the first round, and it wasn't so bad. In fact, I threw back a hard one come second round, a right hook, blindside. Caught the law school off guard. Getches wasn't sure how to handle that one. But the machine caught on to my game and arbitrarily punished me, and now I'm left bleeding on the mat, looking up at the ref counting down, wondering how the hell two seconds ago I thought I might actually win this thing. Alas, it's a rough sport, and even the winners lose.

I will never, ever miss law school.
*

2005-06-18T22:13:00.000-06:00

Morning Edition

Thanks to commuting, I am now a violent driver. Unlike most from CU who just hop on a bus to get to work, I drive. I listen to NPR in the morning and afternoon, weaving in and out of traffic at 80 MPH. I learn about Hasidic (sp?) Jew glam rockers in NYC, marveling at the world we live in, all while trying to run grandma off the road. I feel, so much so, like a lawyer.
*

2005-06-16T21:50:00.000-06:00

Pokes Law?

All this Wyoming Law talk got me interested in our quiet neighbors up north. I can't say I've ever thought much about Wyoming, or the University of Wyoming Law School for that matter. I'm a Joe Glenn fan, and I watched UW somehow, someway beat UCLA in a bowl game last year--I'm fairly convinced that Glenn will replace Barnett here at CU when Barnett's contract runs out. So aside from a random Wyoming football watching aside, and a drive to Cheyenne when I was about 10 for a soccer game, Wyoming has been totally off my radar.

Since saying anything even slightly off-color about our DU neighbors to the south is liable to get me run down one of these days, I thought a little Poke-poking would be fun. How else are we going to create a rivalry, as Runnin' Reb suggested, if we don't rib each other a little here and there? (Did I just say 'rib'?--Wow. Take me out to pasture.)

I'll fire off the first shot. (Quick disclaimer: This is all in good fun. I think Wyoming is a great place, and CowboysLaw seems like a great guy/gal. And I welcome any and all CU bashing. The CU bloggers seem to have that market cornered, but fire away).

Check out UW Law's website: http://uwadmnweb.uwyo.edu/Law/. I love the completely non-obvious URL -- everyone is law.school.edu or school.edu/law, but Wyoming is yahoo.com/webhost/sports/ronartest~pacers-pistons-fight.uwyominglawschool.com. I know it's free hosting space, but come on guys--just pony up $9.99 a month and you can get a URL all of your own!

Bringing up the two clip-art females on the homepage seems like a low blow, but I'm all about low blows. We throw up pictures of real students, and some of them actually look decent. Your web programmer just pulled random pictures from Microsoft FrontPage's 1996 clipart catalogue.

I will give you credit for not OD-ing on the brown. It's really Wyoming's fatal flaw--we see your horrific football uniforms, and it reminds us that yes, Wyoming is shit brown (not that Colorado isn't). You really need green, silver--something that reminds us of the mountains.

Your Career Services Dean is 22-years-old. (see the picture on the bottom of the page). http://uwadmnweb.uwyo.edu/law/career_services/. But otherwise, I'll avoid Career Services. We CU folk don't have much to talk about in that area.

At first I thought I'd accidentally been linked to DU's admission statistics: http://uwadmnweb.uwyo.edu/law/admissions/admissions_stats.asp (ok, take a deep breath my DU friends--I'm only kidding). But indeed, I realized instead that every single person in Wyoming--all 770 of them--apply to the law school every single year. I wonder if you apply twenty straight years they'll let in automatically?

Anyway, that's UW Law. I need to swing by there someday. But New Mexico Law really takes priority.
*

2005-06-14T21:19:00.000-06:00

LSAT Repeaters

I feel for the 171 and 169 who repeated and scored in the 150s. Probably trying to make a run at Yale, and they end up at Buffalo. I also feel for the three 160s who plummeted into the 140s. Trying to make one last great push, and they tanked. But the 150, 153, and 156 who re-scored in the 170s? You're living the dream, ladies and gentlemen, a la Elle Woods. DU to Yale in a heartbeat.

http://www.lsac.org/LSAC.asp?url=/additional-info/lsat-repeater-data.asp
*

2005-06-13T21:23:00.000-06:00

MJ walks

What?
*

2005-06-12T21:55:00.000-06:00

A tip ... Huzzah! Huzzah!

A rainy day at the Renaissance Festival. I'm always spooked by Renaissance Festivals. I'm a pretty straight-laced guy, and it's a bit disconcerting when the guy wearing the Star Wars storm trooper outfit -- complete with knight cloak thingie -- is the coolest guy around. And yes, that guy was there, and he was the coolest guy around. The swarms of elves, kilt-wearing techies, and "Level 4" wikkens (sp?) gawked enviously. The costume even beat the 16-year-old Douglas County High kids coated in goth make-up, wielding battle-axes, snickering, always snickering. I kept waiting for them to whip out their "Magic" cards and get in a quick game.

I loped along as any good male would, trying my best not to fit in, to be that constant social presence that said "20-feet away, just outside that fence, is reality, and I don't want you to forget it." I'm not good at playing along, especially because these sorts of things--not just Renaissance Festivals, but all fairs--are nothing more than massive rip-off schemes. $8 for a beer at the Renaissance Festival; $8 for a beer at the Weld County Fairgrounds; $8 for a beer at Invesco Field. Just ripping off different demographics.

But for what it's worth, if you tire of the 17th Street - LoDo - Boulder yuppie scene, where everyone's beautiful, young, and for whatever freakin' reason insanely, insanely wealthy (where do all these people work ... seriously?), the Renaissance Festival is a good reminder that Colorado is full of pseudo-Nebraskans. They're just a bunch of good-hearted yokels out for a good time; when the Jester yells, "Hey bubba, they don't make John Deeres big enough for you!" Bubba yells back defensively "Oh yeah, my grampaps got one for me and it fits me fine!" So uncynical, so beyond reproach. Lovable non-yuppies from Sterling, decked out in flowing 15th century Italian princess dresses.
*

2005-06-10T20:00:00.000-06:00

Castaway

One of my fellow clerks started hated on Castaway today. Sorry, but that movie rocks. Completely and utterly. There's no cop-out at the end, which is refreshing (ok, so Hanks pseudo-meeting that country girl at the end was kind of a cop-out; but how easy would it have been for his wife to have never re-married, and then they get back together in the end? Seriously, that's script writing 101, and instead the writers put themselves in a huge hole, which they somehow dug themselves out of.). In fact, the movie doesn't cop-out when he's on the island, either--it's just a miserable, horrific existence, and the movie doesn't give Hanks much in the way of anything good. Which is how it would really be, of course. Anyway, I just wanted to publicly state that Castaway-hating won't get you any good marks as far as I'm concerned.
*

2005-06-09T21:50:00.000-06:00

NBA

The NBA playoffs remind me of the NHL. On one end of the floor a player can absolutely level someone--no call. On the other end, a defender lightly puts two hands on the guy with the ball--instant foul. It's frustrating from a fan's perspective because the officiating doesn't make sense. I'm constantly guessing at the subtext to the officiating, wondering about make-up fouls and the like.
*

2005-06-07T19:10:00.000-06:00

Articles like this always remind me how far removed most of us are from the NYC big firm experience. Firms "flocking" to campuses, interviewing being the most "humbling" part of law school (are you serious?), writing mentors, and so on. But this article does provide some good advice here and there, and considering I don't have anything to write about, I'll throw up this article, taken from law.com, instead.
...
The 2L Summer Experience

Sarah Davies and Melissa Scott
New Jersey Law Journal
06-06-2005

This summer, second-year law students nationwide will acquire new titles: summer associates. As they embark on this career-changing experience, we offer the viewpoint of both key players: that of the law firm and the summer associate. Understanding the experience from both perspectives is the first step to delivering a win-win situation for everyone concerned.

THE FALL RECRUITING PROCESS

LAW FIRM: Fall recruiting season is grueling. Firms flock to campuses to meet a large number of law students, many of whom are prepared with professional credentials, great work experience and solid grades. Successful recruiting, however, is more than just identifying the best résumés. In the 20 or so minutes a firm spends interviewing each student on campus, it is also looking for students who will fit in at the firm and bring something unique to the table. During a callback interview, there is more time to get to know the students better and to give them opportunities to meet more lawyers in the firm.

LAW STUDENT: Interviewing is the most daunting and humbling experience a law student endures. Uncertainty is the name of the game. What are law firms looking for? Are we compatible? What skills and characteristics set me apart from other students: my public speaking skills, my write-up in the law review or my 100-meter gold medal at the Penn relays? Research helps ease the panic attacks. Most students search the Web, read legal publications, talk with professors or consult third-year law students trying to seek out the nitty-gritty on a firm.
During the interview, ask for specifics. Some firms do not allow client contact; others encourage it. Many firms create opportunities for summer associates to develop practical experience by observing hearings or sitting in on depositions. Some firms rotate their summer associates through each department; others allow them to work in one department throughout the summer. These details and the opportunities they afford are extremely important. The goal is to find a firm where you will be successful and will want to practice for the long haul.

THE SUMMER PROGRAM

LAW FIRM: The most important goal of the summer program is to hire an outstanding incoming class of young lawyers. The summer program is an opportunity for the firm to test its initial impression of the students' legal talents and to allow the students an opportunity to confirm that they want to join the firm permanently. By involving lawyers of all levels in the summer program, summer associates have a chance to explore many different types of practices.

Summer associates should seek out assignments that allow them to showcase their writing and analytical skills while exploring different practice areas. It is extremely important for a summer associate to make sure that he or she has enough completed assignments by the end of the summer and that each assignment represents his or her best work.
It is also critical that summer associates get feedback on their work product. In addition to evaluations from assigning attorneys, at Cozen O'Connor we also pair each summer associate with a writing mentor who provides feedback on each written assignment. This exchange is not a part of the formal evaluation process or discussed during hiring meetings. We have found, however, that writing mentors are a valuable resource for our summer associates and that this aspect of our program helps them in their professional development during the course of the summer.

Successful summer associates exhibit similar traits. They produce high-quality work product. They communicate well and seek out interaction with assigning attorneys and others. They are responsive to inquiries and timely in completing their assignments. They are prepared at meetings. They ask questions. They are professional in the workplace and during social events.

A summer associate should view the summer program as a 10-week job interview. It is very important for summer associates to remain professional at all times, even at social events. It is also important for summer associates to proofread their work carefully to eliminate typographical or citation errors. Summer associates should also ask for guidance on issues when they need it, whether it is related to a particular assignment, time management or general questions about the firm. Remember, the firm is heavily invested in the program and wants its summer associates to succeed.

LAW STUDENT: Initially, it may be uncomfortable to ask a senior partner questions, but do not be afraid. It is better to ask ahead of time than to work on a project for a week and find out that the assumptions you made were wrong. The importance of courtesy and a professional demeanor cannot be overemphasized. You never know who will be asked to comment to the hiring committee on your attitude or work. Learn from the support staff. They can give you valuable insight into how the firm runs as a whole as well as how a particular attorney may want a project done.

Little things make a big impression, such as always bringing a notepad with you to the attorney's office to write down the details of the case and project. Take a day to do some initial research and then go back to the attorney. Explain what you have found and ask if you are headed in the right direction. Similarly, do not be afraid to ask where your assignment fits into the overall scheme of a case. It is important for you to understand the big picture and why you are doing the project you were assigned.

It is helpful to have at least one other person read over an assignment before it is submitted. A proofreader may notice a mistake you were overlooking or may have questions that you should address to make the project complete. As for day-to-day behavior, it is important to act in a professional manner but, at the same time, give people at the firm a taste of the real you. The trick to successfully completing a summer program is to maintain the delicate balance between work and play.

For me, it was invaluable to get to know the attorneys with whom I worked. Spend time with your social and writing mentors. These attorneys are excellent sounding boards and can become trusted friends. Ask other attorneys for the opportunity to accompany them to a hearing or deposition. Make time to participate in all of the summer program activities. These activities are intended to help you get to know the attorneys outside of the work environment. Remember, while the firm is evaluating you, you are evaluating the firm as well.

FINAL DECISION MAKING

LAW FIRM: When the summer is over, the hiring committee goes into high gear to make its recommendations to the firm. Typically, the hiring committee will compile summaries of all of the evaluations and talk about issues that may have come up during the summer. The hiring committee works hard to make sure that all of the people who are recommended for offers have the skills and personality necessary to succeed.

At Cozen, we make sure that each summer associate performed an appropriate amount of quality work, communicated with the assigning attorneys, showed intellect, initiative and interest and conducted his- or herself in a professional manner. We usually make job offers within a few weeks of the conclusion of the program. Then, the decision making is all in the hands of the summer associates.

LAW STUDENT: While you await the firm's decision, think about whether the firm is a good fit for you. Believe it or not, money, while important, should be the last factor you consider. Instead, consider the following, which will be more important in the long run: the people, the work environment, whether the firm specializes in litigation or transactional work, whether the firm does the type of work you are interested in, how long it will be before you get into a courtroom or to the deal table, what department you would like to work in, and whether you want to work for a small, medium or large firm. Weigh these factors to determine whether the firm is the place you want to practice. If it is, you will be prepared to accept the offer when it comes.

--Sarah Davies, offering the firm perspective, is a member in the business litigation department at Cozen O'Connor of Philadelphia. She is also director of the firm's summer associate program. Melissa Scott, offering the summer associate perspective, is in the commercial litigation group. She participated in the firm's summer associate program in 2003.
*

2005-06-06T20:33:00.000-06:00

Roster of the blessed

For those of you who've lost sleep over the incredible pyramid scheme you invented, here are your investors.

http://www.coloradolottery.com/games/winners.cfm?view=lotto&directory=numbers

$7.5 and $6.5 million wins unclaimed? I'm thinking someone has some serious tales of woe out there.
*

2005-06-05T21:01:00.000-06:00

The 3-month interview

Doing actual legal work is vastly different than law school, almost refreshingly so (at least at first). And doing legal work at a firm, where what you're really doing is trying out for full-time employment, and the work is more or less meaningless, is even more different. It's such an odd situation--I think Anonymous 3L touches on some good points in his most recent post. Last week I was head deep in a project, door shut, and I started wondering whether this is what I should be doing. Trying to nail my projects, elicit a "wow" or two? Or should I canvass the firm twice daily, stepping in on any lawyer who accidentally left his door open, and make small talk? Because if I were a lawyer, and I had to bill at least 5 hours a day just to make my minimum billables requirement (weekends included, mind you), I sure as hell wouldn't want to have daily conversations with the clerks. Or would I? Maybe I'd pick the clerk who nailed the meaningless assignment on Colorado court jurisdiction issues. Or maybe I'd pick the one with suspect legal analysis skills who happened to be cool hang with.

From what I've been told, the big firms repeatedly tell you that clerks are not competing for offers. But that's not true for Anonymous 3L and myself. We're competing with other clerks; competing with paralegals who come at half the price and whose salaries top out at a relatively paltry figure; competing with the partners' reluctance to sink a huge amount of time and money on someone who might wash out after two months. This is a three-month competition, and in the end some will win, some will lose. Sure, if we went Yale and were summering in NYC, all we'd have to do is keep our noses clean and we'd be guaranteed a gig afterward. But this is CU and these are smaller firms with limited resources, where your future salary will come on the backs of current associates and partners.
*

2005-06-02T21:19:00.000-06:00

Cars galore

Cars are my parents' thing. They're not gearheads--they just like to collect cars. It's the weirdest thing. I can't recall a time when I was growing up when they didn't have at least 3 cars, and sometimes they had 4 (now 5). Not luxury cars; not collectible cars; just normal, boring, Buick-type sedans. It makes sense when my whole family is around, but most of the time it's just them; thus, they have a bunch of perfectly good Buicks lying around. It's like they're preparing for a weird Y2K when cars start going haywire, and they need to switch out just to stay afloat. The neighbors must think they're running some upscale meth lab in the basement, and all their customers happen to be old retired folks.

And they're a dealers dream--if a car starts pulling, my dad starts screaming and it's at the dealer's the next day. My car needed an oil change so I switched out with my mom for the day, and when she gave it back to me it had two new tires, new wiperblades, new filters, new oil, and about ten upgrades and whatnot. Not that I'm complaining, but seriously, this is insane.
*

2005-06-01T21:15:00.000-06:00

Picture framing law

Anon 3L and I had a conversation today about positioning ourselves in the firms we're working at. Half the time I'm trying to guess where the work is, and what practice group the attorneys want me to migrate to. Because if the work isn't there in a particular area, and that's what I want to do, guess what? No offer--no matter what.

We're dealing with smaller Colorado firms here; at the NYC monsters, you can probably say, "Hey, I'm really interested in picture framing law", and they'll say, "Great, that practice group is on the 81st floor and they just signed thirty new clients. Have fun." Though the 5 big Denver firms could probably add their summer associates to any practice group the summers wanted to go to, I have a nagging feeling that even there offers are very much dependent on where the work is--if ten summers went commercial litigation last year, and the commercial litigation group hasn't signed that many clients the past year, and eight more want to do commercial litigation this year, maybe they add only four or five to the group. Which means someone loses out.

I don't think most clerks realize this; or maybe they do, and that's how the hardcore environmental law folks all the sudden find themselves doing patents for Microsoft. Just subtle clues when they were clerking--a little more work from the patent guys, a little less from the environmental guys. Twenty years later they're flying to Seattle every other weekend, a stash of ties in the brief case.

I think Anon 3L and I are both at firms in the 15-30 lawyer bracket, which means we don't have much leeway. It's an interesting game, and I'd like to have some experience on the other side of the table. It's so difficult to see what's "thriving" and what's "stagnant", since there's always work, everyone's busy, and they certainly don't hand us balance sheets for each practice group. So it's a guessing game full of disinformation, and no one knows what everyone else is thinking. The firms wonder if we're jokers or legit hardcore securities people, and we wonder if it's better to be a joker or a legit hardcore securities person. They show their hand a little, we show ours a little, and hopefully in the end it works out.
...
By the way, thanks for the kind words on the grade issue. I still feel like shit, but a part of me is so used to getting shit on in law school that it's not that novel. Eat it and forge ahead.
*

2005-05-31T20:34:00.000-06:00

Law school, the story

Moop's post on her surgery, and Anonymous 3L's post on grades prompted this post. I really didn't want to write about my grades, but I figured what the hell, it might help, might be a good thing in the end. And I figured all those who'll be starting at CU Law will go through similar ups and downs, and maybe they'll remember that we all fall hard now and then in law school. And if I can't bitch to a bunch of random people, who can I bitch to?

After experiencing my best law school semester grade-wise last fall, I've reversed course so completely and fully that I'm not quite sure what happened. I feel like I'm in the trenches, having struggled for a long day, gaining twenty feet of ground. And then when I wake up the next day, I've lost those hard-fought twenty feet, and I'm now actually twenty feet behind where I started. I believe I jumped about 13 spots last semester; I will lose that and more this semester. It's demoralizing. Actually, it's more than that. I'm humbled and humiliated. What an interesting feeling, to feel that you've gotten it, this law school thing, and then to turn around and find out that you were wrong.

Anyway, it wasn't for lack of preparation--the exams I prepared the least for I did just fine on. The exam I knew the best sucker-punched me. The exam I wrote half-delirious, where I forgot half the pertinent subject matter midway through the exam--fine. The exam where I know the material cold, where I'm confident I could do it in my sleep--terrible. Go figure. And I'm not that angry; mostly, I'm confused. I'm kind of in an emotional limbo. When I got my grades Friday, I sat there in my office staring at the wall for the rest of the afternoon. Pondering my grade. The class. Wondering whose exam number mine got mixed up with because surely I couldn't do that poorly. But it appears I have. Moop has massive perspective, surgeries, a dying family member; Anonymous has more perspective than I'll ever have. It's probably my greatest weakness, my lack of perspective. These kind of grades give you perspective, at least a little. Maybe I'll be a little more humble next time, and certainly I'll fight twice as hard.

Last week I was worried what I'd do if I got multiple job offers for after I graduate. Quaint.

To echo the Kansas state motto: To the stars, through difficulties.
*

2005-05-27T20:36:00.000-06:00

Socks

General rule: shoes darker than socks. Circuit split: socks that are half lighter and half darker than the shoes. It looks ok, but if you look at it long enough it gets bothersome. Anyway, stupid post. I'll catch you all next week--blessed long weekend.
*

2005-05-26T20:44:00.000-06:00

Random Thoughts

Honestly, when is real estate going to crash? The average condo in Denver is up to $194,000. Insane.
...
Why do Lexis and Westlaw insist on putting every possible resource on their sites? Do I really need Canadian newspapers, Roman legal texts, and Kansas City Stars going back to 1888. Soon will be the day when some kid throws up a free legal database, and all the sudden Lexis and Westlaw are out of luck. If there's one thing I've learned in this life, it's that you can never, ever charge for anything on-line. It's the portal of free. Access will soon be free for all, e-mail's free, music's free, movies are free, browsers are free, search engines are free ... Law students 20 years from now will be amazed that people actually paid to pull cases. Then they'll hop into their hybrid SUVs, download their electronic casebooks into their car stereo, hit play, and go storming out of Wolf Law building's parking lot, the twisted tale of Vosburg mellowing out of their speakers.
...
Is there a U.S. law school that has a Chinese law program?
...
I haven't opened a phone book in a decade. If you advertise in there, you're an idiot. Unless you're a plumber.
...
I love A&M as much as anyone, but "Aggie Mom" bumper stickers don't belong in Colorado. Or anywhere on this planet, as a matter of fact. I get pissed enough when I see Bush '04 stickers, which for whatever reason I happen to see all the time.
*

2005-05-25T21:33:00.000-06:00

The Campos Racket

One grade in, one subpar performance. Should I be happy that I was exposed to a world I never knew existed--an archaic, insane yet incredibly important aspect of the commercial world--or disappointed that I didn't take a 3L-infested blow-off, guaranteeing myself at least an 87? Substance v. performance? The questions that keep law students awake at night ...

According to Esquire C., the law school is recommending that prospective students read Campos' Jurismania. Never read it, but I like the racket--170 prospective students, 100 buy the book at $10 a pop, and he pockets half that. So he basically has a few trips to the grocery store paid for. I wonder if prospective students feel obligated to devour the reading list? I don't remember having a reading list when I applied; but I can see the competitiveness seeping out early, with 0Ls wondering if maybe they're missing something. What if they get slotted into Campos' Property? Nice to quote something out of one of his books on the exam, or at least get an idea of how he thinks. And thus the stampede to the bookstore begins ...
*

2005-05-24T20:19:00.000-06:00

So why do we need an admission dep't again?

I wish this site was around when I was applying. CU's a little more exclusive than I thought--I was rather lucky to get in. But again, all these pre-law sites stress me out. Also, we should outsource our admissions dep't to the guy who runs this site; let him rank the applicants top to bottom numbers wise and mail out the acceptances and rejections. http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/search_schools.php?action=search&cycle=0405&code=4841&sort=lsat&amp;order=d&edea=all&ftpt=both
*

2005-05-23T21:10:00.000-06:00

Write-on Competition

Today I was trying to remember what I was doing this time last summer. I imagined waterfalls of wine, backpacking in Rocky Mountain, and snoozing away afternoons by the pool. Then I remembered that in reality I was hacking out my half-ass write-on essay in an empty, musty Fleming. What a glorious life I lead.

Words of wisdom when it comes to the write-on competition: commit or don't commit. It seems about half the slots are taken by top 10%ers, so in reality about 10-15 slots are up for grabs (I think about half the class tries to write-on). In other words, there's no point doing a half-ass job, because you'll end up as I did, having wasted too much time (but not enough) with nothing to show for it.

Second, for the love of God only cite things you know how to cite. Last year I used all these random articles in the packet that didn't have an easy citation format, and I ended up making way too many judgment calls. And 1Ls should not be making Bluebooking judgment calls. Hell, the editor of the law review shouldn't be making Bluebooking judgment calls. The system is too archaic, and weird citations are usually counterintuitive. So I implore you, only use sources that are cases or statutes--no point not getting a perfect grade on your citations. If I screwed up anywhere, this is it. Everything I cited fell under that notorious section of the Bluebook that has four paragraphs of explanation (that explains nothing, mind you) with no examples whatsoever. I think the editors throw in weird sources to see how you fare, but don't take the bait--when you're going through the packet, immediately nix those that you can't cite. And then tailor your article to those you can cite.

Finally, your topic is obvious. Trust me. You'll have a "great" idea when first perusing the packet. Don't write on that. Don't write on your second idea, either. In fact, if I could do it all over again, I'd pick one case in the packet and run with it. Write something crazy about it. Nail my citations, get the reader interested, and write short, concise sentences. Remember that law review write-on is a numbers game, much like law school exams, and the game really isn't being uber-creative, but nailing all the gimme points. Much like torts--you must get the basic intentional torts and negligence or else you're out of the game before it really even begins. The gimme points are the citation points. If you're not top 10%, you must nail these.
*

2005-05-22T17:56:00.000-06:00

Summer Prep

I don't have a lot of time, but I wanted to write a little something about what I wish I would've done two summers back, you know, in the pre-law school days. I miss those days; I caught myself staring out the window at work the other day, missing the freedom, the sun, and the anticipation of starting something new.

First, I would've found some sample exams and sample exam answers online. I would've gone through these and tried to understand what the "end product" should look like. So much of first semester is wasted on the irrelevant--might as well scare yourself early, and then as the weeks wear on, you'll probably find yourself annoyed at how off-track class seems to be. Second, I would've built a database of small-medium size firms in the Denver metro area, Boulder, Fort Collins, etc. I know CU's Lexis rep started doing this last fall, but I haven't checked it out since. Anyway, for most these are the relevant employers, and the people you need to prepare to go after. If you're fortunate enough to land in the top quarter to top third OCI might be all you need (I'll post on OCI this fall), but for most, be prepared to go after the hundreds of 2-10 lawyer Colorado firms. Third, I would've cleaned up my resume. Fourth, I would've read a legal history tome, something to familiarize myself with what exactly the law is, where it came from, and what these stupid words are. Finally, I would've spent more summer evenings drinking margaritas. Many, many of them.
*

2005-05-22T11:03:00.000-06:00

Star Wars

I remember sitting in a ratty theater, my sister, myself, and about five others huddled in dark corners, expecting the worse. I don't remember the name of the theatre, but it's somewhere near Cherry Creek, tucked away in a pseudo-residential neighborhood, and it shows foreign and independent films. It's the kind of place where the guy you buy your ticket from (invariably a Metro State art student) also tears it up for you, and might even sell you your popcorn. A Wednesday night, and the movie was a flick we'd never heard about, Lost in Translation. If you haven't seen it, it's a wonderful movie that addresses those not-so-subtle questions concerning human relationships, individualism, depression, and aloneness in a wonderfully subtle way.

Anyway, this post isn't about Lost in Translation. It's about my Star Wars experience Friday night. For as much as LIT reinforced my faith in humanity, in filmmaking, in all that's right with the world, Star Wars reminded me that we're not so far from those monkeys we evolved from not so long ago. The movie itself isn't much to speak of, and never really stands on its own. [*Spoiler Alert ... ah, who cares. The movie sucked.] BuffsGirl saw the movie Thursday, and when she said that you get to see the kid evolve into Darth Vader, I tried to come up with the stupidest, cop-out scenario humanly possible, knowing that George Lucas, master of the predictable, would inevitably run with the obvious and uninspired. I predicted that Anakin would fall into a vat of acid. Actually, he fell into a river of lava. So there you go. But the movie wasn't that horrifying, nor would it cause you to lose faith in humanity, at least not any more so than the first two Star Wars movies--it was the movie "experience."

Now I can be a prick sometimes, and I'm going to be one here. Remember, I came into this experience with an open mind, even though I'd sworn to myself I'd never again go to a summer "event" movie the first weekend it was out after too many Will Smith, 13-year-old-Highlands Ranch-hoodlum-disasters. Regardless, we were first carted into a massive, weaving wait line, which I found odd until I realized that everyone in line seemed to have come straight from the Wal-Mart three doors down. The dregs of humanity. And ropes are how you deal with the dregs of humanity. We were then jammed into the theater 45 minutes before the film started. The usher made us do the wave. The lady next to me--bless her heart and her sweating, 225-pound body--bought chili nachos from the concessions stand. A three hour movie, movie theater chili ... I figured I'd have to kill myself. I wondered if it would be possible to drown myself in my tub of Coke. I remembered hearing stories about people drowning in two inches of water so if worst came to worst, I was confident I could do it. The lady was nice enough--she even offered me some chips, which I politely turned down. The ushers made us do the wave again. People actually cheered when the "Lucas Films" symbol flashed across the screen. People clapped at the end of the movie as well. I thought people stopped clapping at movies back in the 1920s. During the movie, people laughed when Yoda knocked some guys over. It wasn't funny. After the movie, people raved at the depth of the characters, especially Anakin, and expounded on how surprised they were at the emotion put into the role, how conflicted and hurt he seemed. Yet Anakin's fabled "progression" into Darth Vader involved nothing more than some smeared eye-black and brow-furrowing.

I walked out of that theater three hours later, amazed that I was alive, amazed that people cared about these movies, these shameless profit-vehicles.

Star Trek was a hundred times better, people.
*

2005-05-14T09:33:00.000-06:00

Rest for the weary

I've done three different jobs/internships during my two years of law school. I've reached the tenative conclusion that working is better than law school. There's nothing more satifsying than actually solving a legal problem, or providing an astute, professional analysis of a difficult issue. It's a high-risk venture--the lawyer you're delivering the analysis to might already know everything you tell them (in fact, they probably do); it might be redundant; he/she could very well think you're wrong, or you're an idiot. In fact, I'd say it's impossible to go more than a few weeks without sounding like an idiot. But when you nail an assignment, and the lawyer is kind of sputtering, and asks "What do you think we should do?", it's great. But you have to go 4-5 layers deep in the analysis to get there, something I'm just learning. Last summer I was very much the 1-2 layer deep analysis guy.
...
My reliance on Westlaw and Lexis are so complete that I'm functionally unable to do any research outside those two databases. I Google quite a bit, but I seriously need to stay away from those two addictive venues. Especially since now they cost $$$. Screw the Westlaw points. They'll make back the tote bag they give me this year the first day I start working for real, when I run one Colorado case law database search. What a scam.
...
Yet another CU Law blogger: Esquire Coffinberry's Great-Grand-Niece (http://coffinberry.blogspot.com/). Apparently, she's looking forward to Professor Hill. I commend her courage. Welcome.
*

2005-05-10T21:04:00.000-06:00

Niche

Work is work. Long days where I try to pretend like I know what's going on, and fortunately I'm finding that I do know what's going on more so than last year. Rather surprising. When you're talking to lawyers who've been practicing in a particular area for 30 years, they tend to forget that you're only mildly familiar with the basics. But Google solves most of my problems these days.

One thing I'm starting to realize: it's all about niches. You got to niche the hell out of yourself. I'm already getting niched, which is fine, and the clerk who's coming in next week got hired because he's a niche guy. The more I think about law school and jobs, the more I see a thousand niche lawyers, who all practice in their own super-specialized areas (say, retirement homes and the various legal issues that surround them), and then they get a stack of law student resumes on their desk that have nothing to do with their niche, that say "I'm interested in litigation" or "I have some business experience." WTF? Then your retirement home lawyer gets a resume from a student who volunteered in retirement homes, has taken relevant classes, who has contacts in the industry, who writes a detailed, personalized cover letter, who is willing to extern for free during the year, and voila, there's your hire.
*

2005-05-08T20:07:00.000-06:00

Summertime, and the livin's easy ...

The CU blog world has quieted. It seems like everyone I know has flown the coop; some to exotic, foreign locales; others, like myself, just a few hours north or south along the Front Range. I haven't touched a computer since Friday, a wonderful thing. It feels like college graduation, when one day everyone's in town, just down the street like they've been for years, and then all the sudden someone's in Hong Kong, someone's hitting Wall Street in NYC, and a whole slew of people are somewhere in between. Shot out of a shotgun, randomly dispersed into this new world where Brussels is $499 away and Australia seems, well, so California.

I'll be starting work this upcoming week. I remember about 20 of the names I need to know, but there are another 30 I've fogotten. There will be more than one awkward, "So, how are you?"-s. Such is life.

I don't expect to blog all that much this summer--not a good idea to mix my rantings with my pseudo-professional life. Anyway, blogging is really only good for late November nights, when re-RULPA is calling and you desperately need to catch up on the FRE for Mueller. So it'll be a sparse summer, and then I'll get back into it in the fall. Until then, I wish those who graduated the best on the Bar, and the best in life. And for everyone else, try to match your belt with your shoes.
*

2005-05-05T17:34:00.000-06:00

Placement rankings

Interesting paper I came across a few minutes ago. The paper purports to be "the largest study of the labor market for first year associates at elite law firms ever conducted to date and fills a significant gap in legal education literature." I didn't take the time to read it, but I did cut and paste the relevant rankings for the Rocky Mountain region. Check out the full text of the paper here: http://www.autoadmit.com/studies/ciolli/draft14.pdf

All in all, not too surprising. The big top-20 schools out-place CU, but CU is essentially on par with or out-places the other regional schools, including DU. For whatever reason Syracuse, which I believe is somewhere between the third and fourth tier, places rather well here, though that's probably a product of some weird data. Certainly it's not a reflection of reality--you throw your Syracuse Law degree at H&H in Denver and they'll spit a rejection letter right back at you. They probably just have a few lawyers who moved here and happened to go big-time. Anyway, the paper probably explains the anomalies. ASU shows well also--probably because Phnx is absolutely huge.

Regional Placement Rankings

Region 8: Rocky Mountains -- AZ, CO, ID, MT, NV, NM, UT, WY (n = 20 minimum)

Michigan 100.00
Harvard 87.04
Texas 82.64
Arizona State 79.45
Georgetown 77.16
Iowa 72.92
Syracuse 63.25
Utah 60.90
U of Arizona 56.51
UC Berkeley 56.04
Brigham Young 55.23
George Washington 52.66
Colorado 50.87

AVERAGE SCHOOL 50.00

Vermont 36.83
Denver 35.08
Pacific 27.72
Tulsa 23.22
Gonzaga 20.60
Oregon 13.55
Idaho 11.17
U of Nevada – Las Vegas 9.49
Montana 5.68
San Diego 44.88
New Mexico 3.25
Wyoming 0.00
Chapman 0.00
California Western 0.00
Cooley 0.00

Per Capita Regional Rankings
Region 8: Rocky Mountains – AZ, CO, ID, MT, NV, NM, UT, WY (n = 20 minimum)

Michigan 52%
Harvard 28%
Texas 27%
Iowa 27%
Georgetown 24%
Syracuse 20%
Brigham Young 12%
Arizona State 11%
UC Berkeley 9%
Colorado 7%
U of Arizona 5%
Denver 5%
George Washington 5%
Utah 5%
Pacific 4%
Tulsa 4%
Gonzaga 3%
Oregon 3%
Vermont 3%
Idaho 2%
New Mexico 1%
Montana 1%
U of Nevada – Los Vegas 1%
California Western 0%
Chapman 0%
San Diego 5%
Cooley 0%
Wyoming 0%
*

2005-05-05T09:10:00.000-06:00

Hastings? USF? ... Study groups with Tony Z.

Blowing town
Denver Post, May 5, 2005

Former Ch. 9 sports anchor Tony Zarrella still won't say why he was suddenly fired by the station in the middle of May sweeps last year - but he's moving on.

He leaves today for San Francisco, where he will attend law school in the fall.

"It's something I thought about long before anything went down at Ch. 9," he said. "I had been losing my affection for the TV business. I don't know what I'm going to do with (a law degree); I've just always been interested in it."

Zarrella has been "hanging out" in Littleton for the past year, taking his LSATs and applying to colleges, including Harvard. Now, he says, he's ready to get back to work and back to school, at 41.

He is suing Ch. 9; the trial is scheduled to start in December. "I don't know what I can or should say," said Zarrella. "A lot will come out in the trial. I wasn't the bad guy here."
*

2005-05-04T15:46:00.000-06:00

More courtrooms ... and fin

A brief respite from drinking, watching the Nuggets suck their way through another game. Just wanted to point out that Denver approved a new jail yesterday, complete with 35 new courtrooms. So we have a new law school to learn how to get clients off, new courtrooms to test those polished law school theories, and a new jail to visit our disgruntled and newly convicted clients, all of whom will uniformly demand to know why we focused on how the prosecution didn't prove-- you know, really prove-- mens rea in their car jacking case. Silly lawyers.

...

So we're done. The 1Ls are 2Ls, the 2Ls are 3Ls, and the 3Ls are finished. Must be scary times to be a 3L. They're awash in the relief of knowing that there's no more law school exams, ever, and yet it must be disorientingly odd that this system, this cruel instution known as law school, is gone. Law school's a vicious, unfair game, and yet they've come to know, understand, and expect it. CU Law is their school, and it's imperfect--sometimes shockingly so--but the frosted Flatirons are known quantities; the stories the second story library carrels tell are understood, familiar. Stories about 1L fear from Hank Brown times on down, incomprehensible misunderstanding of superfluous revisions to Restatements, and gunners and comeuppance. Soon the 3Ls be forced to learn stories about first year prosecutors, the black and whiteness of the bar, ungrateful criminal defendants, and first year associate mania.

There is no Cindy down in Denver, or wherever. There is no free Westlaw or Lexis. And the law school the 3Ls know and (grudgingly) love will move into a new building where new generations will marvel at Mueller, famously attempt to transfer out of Hill's Property, and clamor to sign up for Sports Law and its friendly median.
*

2005-05-03T15:06:00.000-06:00

Blah ... do you hear me? I said blah!

If I was a 3L, I couldn't study for tomorrow's exam. I'm a 2L and it's become impossible. I just needed one more day of terrible weather to keep me inside, brooding, believing that in fact it was December and that I might as well study because there's nothing doing anywhere else.

On a random note, I've recently become re-addicted to Chicken McNuggets. I don't know what happen. I went a decade without eating them and then all the sudden I crave them every day. And the fact that they're worse for you than a Big Mac doesn't dissuade--in fact, it makes me want them more. They taste like candy. Chicken candy. You should check it out, because in the decade(s) since we were kids they've perfected the art of making the most addicting, fatty, delightfully wonderful bits of chicken. They were good when we were kids, but eh, not good enough to make you care. Now they're flat-out addicting.
*

2005-05-02T15:59:00.000-06:00

The answer? Lowenstein doesn't give no stinking answers, at least not easy ones ... And pre-1Ls surfing

Three down, one to go. I looked at myself in the mirror early this morning--a deadringer for Jack N. in The Shining. I started drawing parallels between law school and going crazy up in an old hotel in Estes, but then my mind started wandering. Corporations. Lovely. If Acquiror corp. tries to acquire Target corp., but Target corp. counters by tendering for shares in Acquiror corp., and so you have two outstanding tenders, and Target's acquiring Acquiror while Acquiror's acquiring Target, what happens? It's insane. It's like the picture of the snake eating its tale, or when you're sitting in Great Clips and there's a big mirror on one wall, and a big mirror on the opposite wall, and all the sudden your image is bouncing into infinity. Blew my mind when I was eight. Anyway, if Acquiror acquires Target and Target acquires Acquiror the space-time continuum probably goes askew and Marty and Doc have to hop in the Delorean and go back and convince Target and Acquiror not to even consider such a ridiculous idea.
...
I got a random link to a pre-1L message board in my e-mail (buffslaw1 at yahoo.com) the other day. Apparently, prospective students check out LIT's, Bolder's, and my blog, and presumably everyone else's as well. Scary business. I've so thoroughly slammed CU and its administration that I'm afraid I've painted CU in a terribly negative light (well, at least it feels like I've done some slamming ... I do try to temper my language, though). And of course, at times CU deserves to get kicked in the ass. But I've tried to post some of the great things about this school; things that make CU a great place to go through the law school experience.

So I just wanted to throw it out there that I'm happy to answer any questions pre-1Ls have. Throw them up in the comments and I'll do my best, and I know all the other CU bloggers would love to field questions. Except Moop. She's feisty this time of year.
...
One more thing. I love massages, even if they're in the Pit. But I'd much rather Career Services take that money and invest in a couple more RAs to start calling or e-mailing every single alum who's ever graduated from CU Law. Why aren't we all over Hank Brown's office, getting him to pick up some interns for this fall? Posting open clerkships in Alaska, Minnesota, or where the fuck ever just doesn't cut it.
*

2005-05-01T13:37:00.000-06:00

Neons galore ...

This has been bothering me for some time--what are the Nuggets going to do when baby blue is no longer 'in'? I mean, it was the color of the moment last year, but like all non-base colors, it's life will be short and fickle. Remember neons? Lime? Camo? Will the Nuggets change their unis ever two years to get in with the latest fashion trend? It seems NBA and MLB teams come out with a new throwback jersey every other game, so maybe the unis of the future won't be static--instead, they'll constantly be morphing, an ever-continuing game to stay one step ahead of the fashion curve.

Anyway, I bet the Nuggets have some poor guy sitting in the basement of the Pepsi Center pondering these very questions. Just wait for next season's neon blue unis ...
*

2005-04-30T16:20:00.000-06:00

The People's Republic

Why do I revel in sadistic pleasure when I hear that yet another Boulder company is moving to Longmont, Louisville, or Broomfield? WhiteWave, Leopard, and now Array--all large Boulder employers--have recently jumped ship. I guess I enjoy it because it doesn't affect us common folk, or even the employees of these companies (other than the fact that they now have to commute to work); in fact, the only entity hurt is Boulder's city government. Boulder's city government is so uppity, so far removed from any real issues, that it's nice to see them squirm a little. First the behemoth Flatirons mall, and now an exodus of local companies.

Boulder's been slapped in the face so many times in the past few years that it has now resorted to groveling. How the mighty have fallen. They're considering big box retailors at the 29th Street project in order to increase its devastated sales tax base (I heard a Home Depot is going in), despite vows that they would never, ever stoop that low. And not only that, but they're thinking about building more convention space to attract out-of-towners--in conjunction with CU. Associating with CU? Desperation makes strange bedfellows. I mean, when the city considers whether dogs can go off-leash on Boulder trails a big problem, you know something's wrong. (If you haven't been following this story in the Daily, this is the Boulder City Council issue du jour).

Anyway, it's just great to see Boulder's city government on its knees, begging. As Cartman would say, "Damn hippies."
...
From today's Daily Camera:

Economic director Stumpf resigns
City manager says position will not be filled immediately

By Alicia Wallace and Ryan Morgan, Camera Staff WritersApril 30, 2005

Nine months after the city hired him, Boulder's first-ever "economic vitality coordinator" is leaving.

Effective May 3, Michael Stumpf is quitting his position to join a local consulting firm, the city of Boulder announced Friday. Stumpf, who was earning $88,000, did not return calls seeking comment.

Last year, when Boulder was suffering from months of dwindling sales tax revenues, the city created the Economic Vitality Coordinator position. It then hired the 38-year-old Stumpf, who had been the director of community development for a small Wisconsin college town.
*

2005-04-29T16:28:00.000-06:00

Like locusts they flood ... and a note for my 1L friend

Let's talk about the undergrad who mans the door to the library from 7:00 p.m. to 7:15 p.m. to keep out other undergrads during finals. Man, he does a fine job. Just last night, at the official school where no one studies--in fact, at the official top-ranked party school where no one studies (less than a half hour a week according to a Princeton Review poll a couple years back)--there were undergrads a-plenty. They were reproducing every five minutes. Bunnys, they were. I couldn't believe it. A blizzard in late April. The #1 party school in the country. A Thursday night. And there were dozens of girls walking around in sweatpants emblazoned with Chi-O across the ass. Studying for what? Why? I'm perplexed. Maybe they were handing out condoms in the Rothgerber extension. Maybe there's actually a bar somewhere in their that doesn't I.D. There must be a rational explanation.

The ever-vigilant young man at the doors of the library must have been bull-rushed by study-happy Communications majors. He looked like a solid kid, so I'm surprised he wasn't able to take a few of them down. But then again, he looked like the type that doesn't give a shit, so if you just walked by him he'd let you go.

Also, I'd like to send a brief note to my 1L friend, Mr. Wait-Outside-Our-Exam-from-10:00-a.m.-On-Hoping-to-Get-"His"-Seat. I respect your endurance, friend. I respect the fact that you have a seat you like, a seat that gave you the MoJo last semester, that was kind on the grades.

Last spring I decided to listen to the same song right before each final, hoping that somehow it would help me get my game face on. I picked Eminem's "Lose Yourself"--admittedly kind of cheesy, and I'm loathe to admit it, but there it is. I did the same in high school before each game/match with a Metallica song (Hero of the Day, I believe), and it seemed to help me focus a little. And it's still cool to listen to that song and get back into that frame of mind. But friend, I just wanted to let you know that not only was no one going to take your seat, but that seat certainly won't help you. Eminem didn't help me at all--worst semester yet. Love something in law school and it'll turn around and leave you quicker than you can say "regression toward the mean." (See the punctuation inside the quotation mark? Pretty good, eh?).

That seat is going to burn you, son. Burn you like only law school finals can burn you. And anyway, waiting outside an exam for three hours is sick. Go sit in the library until noon. Seriously. There are a bunch of girls in there walking around in sweatpants emblazoned with Chi-O across the ass.
*

2005-04-28T13:23:00.000-06:00

Go, Buffaloes!

From April 25's Newsweek:

The peak seasons for STD testing at several different universities:

U Penn: Post-spring break. Students regret risky business once back from warmer climes
U Arizona: Every Monday. Wild on the weekends.
UGA: Football season. Parties, beer, bad decisions.
Duke: Basketball season. Anything goes in 'tent city.'
Boise State: Before Christmas and spring break. Students want to know before going home. How to tell the 'rents?
U Colorado: No spike. Health clinic booked solid year round. Go, Buffaloes.
...
And then there were three ...

A lick of confusion. I stared at the word "henece" for a while. Something wrong. Is that a word? Isn't that what Indians paint themselves with? Henna. Body art. Not Indians. And Henna is a Chevy dealership in Austin (www.henna.com). What am I talking about? Did I misspell something? Where am I, and after all, what's life anyway but elaborate, painstaking henna that washes away so effortlessly, so effortlessly? Does henna wash away? "Hence." Check. Now for the hard part: "hence" what?

8:15 a.m. finals are brutal, at least for me. I have a difficult time getting going before two or three in the afternoon; sometimes, I peak around eleven at night. Today was especially brutal. Every word was a struggle, an absolute fight. Nothing flowed; nothing was coherent. Words became a jumble of lines, and every 'that' was 'taht.' I started three straight sentences: "Hence", "Accordingly", and "Thus", and didn't think anything of it, at least not until the two minute warning popped up and I realized I should do a quick little read-through.

I'm still a bit delirious. I'm not sure this post makes any sense. Surely the first paragraph was overwritten. Dreadfully so. Do you put commas inside a list, where each word is individually quoted? Henna Chevrolet. Go fucking figure.
*

2005-04-27T10:19:00.000-06:00

Revolving door at law office
McElroy Deutsch committed to rebuild ranks to 30 for year

By John Accola, Rocky Mountain News
April 27, 2005

The Denver office of law firm McElroy Deutsch Mulvaney went on a hiring spree last year, boosting its attorney roster by roughly 30 percent. But in the past two months, a flood of defections and surprise resignations has reduced the Denver practice to its former 18-lawyer head count.
Managing partner June Baker Laird said Tuesday the national law firm, headquartered in Morristown, N.J., remains committed to Denver and is not scaling back.
"We're going back to 30 lawyers this year and headed for the 45 mark," she said. "We're here for the long haul."
McElroy Deutsch, New Jersey's fourth-largest law firm with 170 lawyers in three states, is known in Denver primarily for worker compensation and insurance work. Among the firm's highest profile attorneys here is Karen Mathis, president-elect of the American Bar Association. Mathis, an estate attorney, was among last year's new hires. Laird, who joined the Denver office five years ago when there were just four attorneys, attributes the recent departures to growing pains in a restless job market. Many of those who have left were first-year associates, she said.
"Sometimes you hire quickly and things don't work," Laird said. "Denver is a market where people seem to move many times. We had people who didn't make partner on their schedule. We had people leave simply because they wanted to do different kinds of work."
The biggest hit came just weeks ago when the firm's four-attorney construction litigation group, led by Carrie Rodgers, defected to Moye Giles LLP. Rodgers' three associates are Jennifer Gokenbach, Sara Walsh and Shannon Bell. Rodgers, a veteran construction attorney who joined McElroy -Deutsch last year, also brought to Moye Giles her roughly 50 business clients.
Founding partner John Moye said his nearly 30-year-old firm, which specializes in real estate development and commercial contracts, has 39 attorneys, up from 33 a year ago.
Plans are under way to recruit as many as four more attorneys with "large books of business in the commercial area" before the end of the year, he said.
"We've had as many as 47 attorneys, but Denver is a very mobile town in terms of professional services," Moye said.
"People do enjoy moving. The objective in managing a law firm is making sure you have a good balance of lawyers, and you need to be prepared to replace them if they aren't still there."
*

2005-04-26T21:08:00.000-06:00

A couple-three more Bs

I always like to predict my grades right before finals. I'm not the type to mess around on CU Connect, seeing how each predicted combination of grades will affect my overall GPA. Because GPA is moot, as we all know--a number of people I know went big time last semester and didn't move up at all. In fact, a couple moved down. So I move up to an 87.82 average, or down to an 83.421 average, or whatever; it doesn't matter. But predicting is fun. Last spring I over-estimated how well I'd do--turned out to be my worst semester in law school (knock on wood). Then I underestimated last semester and had my best semester yet. But all in all, I accurately predicted my grades highest to lowest both times, and I was always within 2-3 points of the correct grade. So here's how this semester will turn out:

1. Ungraded externship
2. Class X--86
3. Professional Responsibility--82
4. Class Y--80

All in all, not so hot. I left out Corporations since I know a few others who swing by here are in it, and it's kind of dickish to run around saying "I'm getting a XX." Peppet's Professional Responsibility is going to be incredibly arbitrary, so I'm erring a little low. I also sucked up his Contracts class after studying for 10,000 hours. Maybe if I study only 1 hour I'll do better this time?
...
"In law school, time is meaningless; but in time, law school is meaningless."
*

2005-04-25T10:30:00.000-06:00

Fear ...

All you need is fear. A many splendid thing, the juice, the grease, the motion in the ocean. God Almighty, fire and brimestone, fear. It's why Tyler Hamilton sits at home now, a washed-up biker, a gold medalist whose greatest fear, whose nightmare was that he'd end his career in 8th place. He feared, he doped. In Shawshank Redemption, it was hope, a good thing, maybe the greatest thing, and no good thing ever dies. But they were wrong, because in prison the currency is fear, not hope. Fear, the palpable kind, the kind that makes you nauseous, that turns you into an animal, is what really drives you there. Because you can beat hope out of a person in ten minutes. Fear is eternal. In Iraq, American soldiers don't hope for a better day, for a free country, for a time when they can drive down the road and not worry about hearing a cell phone ring--and wonder, their last wonder, why the hell Iraqis get perfect cell phone coverage in the middle of nowhere when you can't even drive up the hill leading out of Boulder without losing a call. No hope, but fear. It's why they relentlessly clean their guns. Why the black out their faces. They signed on to get the shit scared out of them, to make them better men and women, to be the few, the proud. A hopeful soldier is a dead soldier.

They serve fear at Peaberry's and Einsteins Bagels. I swear it. Getches walks over there with a spray bottle full of fear and saturates the air, because he knows that while hope is a good thing, maybe the greatest thing, and no good thing ever dies, the real money-maker is fear. No one stays in the library until it closes because they hope--they fear what will happen if they don't. Certainly no one does law review because they hope--they fear they'll regret not doing it ten years down the line. It's why thousands upon thousands across the country join journals and do moot court--because they fear they must, even though they can't articulate a single reason why they must. No one puts in an extra 10 hours studying for a class because they hope--instead, they fear there really is a difference between an 87 and an 84. Fear is the S&P 500, the benchmark for all law students, ebbing and flowing with the semester. Individual components drive it, but the effects are felt by all.

You step into the law school and the fear hits you. Attacks you. Palpable. Everything is fear. The clinics are fear, the library is fear, the classrooms are fear. Because nothing good can come out of any of it. You never walk out of a day of classes happy, hoping. You never walk in happy, hoping. Because the fear is implicit, oozing. You won't pass. You won't get a good grade. You won't be top 10%. You won't make law review. You won't pass the bar. You won't get a job. Reinforced, ten to the tenth power. They rank everyone because if they didn't, the fear would die for many. They hand out rewards not because they want to reward the few, but because they want to scare the many. The business school is built on a glorious mound of opportunism, self-serving empowerment, and usefulness. The business school builds its students. Their nationally-renowned entrepreneurship program is teaching them that fear is crippling, risk is glorious, and that all it takes is an idea and a VC and all the sudden you're in a yacht in SoCal living, really living. The law school, House of Usher-esque, is an ivory tower swaying on a foundation of what-ifs, should-haves, maybe-could-haves. It functions on fear, on lost hope. Tuition up, and, as Legally Intoxicated points out, medication up. Doped.

Law students embrace the fear; it's the weapon of choice, our Red Bull. Up and at 'em, thumbing through mind-numbing insanity. Rule 14(g)(2)(i). You can use the fear, turn the negative into positive energy, turn that frown upside down and hit the books, beat them mercilessly until you're a law god with pre-written answers. Cruising to an 87. No worse for wear.

I lost the fear. I hope it comes back, and soon. Because I'm only halfway through my notes in a couple classes, and I might not make it the rest of the way. Hit me Getches, hit me hard. Convince me to go on the offensive, to attack, to crave the 87. Convince me that all-cash freeze-out mergers are the be all, end all. That reverse subsidiary mergers are God's work, truly. That maybe re-reading that section on building codes is worth it, adds to the utility of my life, the utility of the world.

Hit me, hit me, hit me.
*

2005-04-23T10:57:00.000-06:00

Sex and clients

The topic for Thursday's Professional Responsibility course was sex with clients. The discussion was surprisingly boring, actually. Anyway, all the articles discussed the extreme power male lawyers have over frail, confused, devastated female divorce/criminal clients, and how that power can be used to coerce those clients into sexual relationships. There was only one reported instance of a female attorney sleeping with a male client (at least the materials in the packet indicated there was only one; I'm sure there are actually dozens of cases), and the female attorney was reprimanded, not because she abused her position of power when she slept with her prisoner-client, but because of the seeming impropriety of her signing in at the prison as an attorney and then sleeping with her prisoner-client.

I'm bothered by the overriding assumption that male lawyers are powerful, coercive figures, and that female lawyers are not. I'm bothered by the fact that we assume female clients (regardless of whether they're Fortune 500 CEOs, in-house counsel, or housewives) can't take care of themselves, and accordingly need a complex body of "no sex with client" rules to protect them. I'm also bothered by the fact that it doesn't seem female attorneys question these assumptions, or feel it's necessary to emphasize that it's not just the seedy male divorce attorney who has the power to abuse--they too have that power, even if they choose not to use it in an abusive way.

What I'm getting at is that at a very basic level, the underlying theme in all the articles we read is that male attorneys are incredibly powerful, and female attorneys are not at all. As one of the articles astutely pointed out: "Blanket prohibitions of sexual relations reek of paternalism and perpetuate stereotypes of female weakness and dependence." And it's true. And the problem with this stupid male attorney-powerful, female attorney-not powerful assumption is that this is why females don't make partner, this is why they get paid less on the dollar, and this is why they don't get the "Royal Jelly."

Anyway, I thought this was the real issue. We can all agree that no lawyer should abuse their position of power to sleep with vulnerable clients. That's beside the point.
*

2005-04-21T14:51:00.000-06:00

Watch out for the NIH, SEC, FBI, CIA, etc.

Special thanks to Flashman's Blast Radius, who transcribed the last five minutes of this UC Berkeley class from an audiotape. The original is available at: http://blastradius.blogspot.com/2005/04/world-of-pain.html. Just to set the scene, a student stole the professor's laptop, and the professor is conjuring evils galore, focusing them all on this one poor kid:

"Thanks Gary. I have a message for one person in this audience - I'm sorry the rest of you have to sit through this. As you know, my computer was stolen in my last lecture. The thief apparently wanted to betray everybody's trust, and was after the exam. The thief was smart not to plug the computer into the campus network, but the thief was not smart enough to do three things: he was not smart enough to immediately remove Windows. I installed the same version of Windows on another computer - within fifteen minutes the people in Redmond Washington were very interested to know why it was that the same version of Windows was being signalled to them from two different computers. The thief also did not inactivate either the wireless card or the transponder that's in that computer. Within about an hour, there was a signal from various places on campus that's allowed us to track exactly where that computer went every time that it was turned on.
I'm not particularly concerned about the computer. But the thief, who thought he was only stealing an exam, is presently - we think - is probably still in possession of three kinds of data, any one of which can send this man, this young boy, actually, to federal prison. Not a good place for a young boy to be.
You are in possession of data from a hundred million dollar trial, sponsored by the NIH, for which I'm a consultant. This involves some of the largest companies on the planet, the NIH investigates these things through the FBI, they have been notified about this problem. You are in possession of trade secrets from a Fortune 1000 biotech company, the largest one in the country, which I consult for. The Federal Trade Communication is very interested in this. Federal Marshals are the people who handle that. You are in possession of proprietary data from a pre-public company planning an IPO. The Securities and Exchange Commission is very interested in this and I don't even know what branch of law enforcement they use.
Your academic career is about to come to an end. You are facing very serious charges, with a probability of very serious time. At this point, there's very little that anybody can do for you. One thing that you can do for yourself is to somehow prove that the integrity of the data which you possess has not been corrupted or copied. Ironically, I am the only person on the planet that can come to your aid, because I am the only person that can tell whether the data that was on that computer are still on that computer. You will have to find a way of hoping that if you've copied anything that you can prove you only have one copy of whatever was made.
I am tied up all this afternoon; I am out of town all of next week. You have until 11:55 to return the computer, and whatever copies you've made, to my office, because I'm the only hope you've got of staying out of deeper trouble than you or any student I've ever known has ever been in. I apologise to the rest of you for having to bring up this distasteful matter, but I will point out that we have a partial image of this person, we have two eyewitnesses, with the transponder data we're going to get this person."

2005-04-20T18:49:00.000-06:00

Peppet and Campos blogging WWF-style

A while ago I read somewhere about how there are a bunch of "celebrity" law professor bloggers with sizeable followings. These guys are well-known in legal academia primarily because of their blogs, not their legal prowess, publications, or any of the conventional ways professors garner notoriety, or so I remember reading. Well, now that I think about it I might be making that part up and maybe these guys are legitimate, well-published law professors, but frankly I'm not going to look it up. Anyway, it's beside the point. A couple good examples are Brian Leiter, a guy who teaches over at UT Law, and Eugene Volokh, who teaches at UCLA Law. Leiter's blog is http://leiterreports.typepad.com/, and Volokh's "The Volokh Conspiracy" is over at http://volokh.com/. Anyway, I glance through each blog occasionally (maybe once a semester), and generally it's pretty boring stuff.

But what I really liked about the article was that it argued law schools should encourage professors to blog, perhaps even pay them to blog. At first I thought that was a pretty stupid idea, but then I pictured Campos laying the smackdown every afternoon, and I figured maybe we have something here. You get Campos ranting and raving, Peppet doing his thing; I'd be interested to hear what Getches said--also, it would be a great forum for him to throw out ideas, and then have people comment anonymously. Why not have an admissions blog by the admissions office, telling prospective students what's up, what events they can go to, how many applications are in, how long it's taking to review applications, application tips, and so on? I bet Hill would be worth checking out as well. In fact, we could have a blog roundtable, and any professor could chime in on any subject whenever they felt the urge. Anyway, I thought it was an interesting idea.
...
The bus to Denver

So I have it from reliable sources (who I believe now goes by "The Artist") that Dean Getches and Dean Trujillo take the bus to Denver together. No word on how often this happens, but even once is too often. Don't get me wrong. I love buses. I take buses. I Hop, Skip, and Jump all over Boulder. But I'm a student, a poor student in fact, and it's socially acceptable for me to take the bus. Think about it: here we have the front-men of our law school, the movers and the shakers, the guys who need to make it happen, deans of a law school, hopping on a RTD bus to meet with partners at Holland & Hart, all of whom have a Benz stashed in the garage below. All of whom would take cyanide and kill themselves if they had to take any bus that wasn't the 16th Street Mall shuttle.

"Deans, want to go lunch over at the Brown Palace to discuss that $2 million donation to the law school?"

"Sure, but you're driving, because we took the bus."

What? Look, there are a lot of times a dean of a law school can take a bus. But you don't take the bus when you're doing business. It's just one of those things. If I'm a lawyer and I'm headed downtown to do a big deal, I don't take the bus. Never. Because then someone's going to ask you to drive somewhere, and you're going to have to admit you took the bus. And then the other person gets the feeling that you're that 14-year-old kid who always shows up at high school events and then has to beg for a ride home. Do Harvard Law's deans take the bus? Do Stanford Law's deans take the bus? Hell no, just because. Because no one gives multi-million dollar donations to people who ride buses. No old, successful Denver lawyers associate with people who ride buses. And they themselves certainly don't ride buses. Because buses are for students and poor people. Sorry, but that's the way it is.

I hope this was a one-time deal. If not ... *sigh*.
*

2005-04-19T19:49:00.000-06:00

Prez ...

Here's a job I think we could all do. I cut and pasted the only specified prerequisites.

University of Colorado Hospital
President

"The President is the chief executive and administrative officer of the University of Colorado Hospital system ..."
Conditions of Employment
"As an Employee you will need to be able to exert 20 to 50 pounds of force occasionally, and/or 10 to 25 pounds of force frequently and/or greater than negligible to 10 pounds of force constantly to move objects."

...

"Climate" issues

We have racial/gender/lifestyle climate issues in Boulder ... maybe. CU Law recently formed a diversity committee, which threw together a survey on Westlaw concerning race and gender relations within the law school. Complete it, and $2 goes to LRAP, whatever that is (Legal Rights ... I really have no idea).

Whenever I hear about things like this, my first reaction is "What problem?" Of course, as a heterosexual, white male I never have a problem with anything. My second reaction: "Maybe there is a huge problem, and I'm a blind idiot." My third reaction: "Don't we already have a diversity committee, this being Boulder and all?" Next: "Are these guys going to put up a bunch of fliers in our bathrooms that insinuate we're all racists or sexists? I can get a dose of 'Trust No One' from the Honor Code fliers in one bathroom and a dose of 'You're Keeping Everyone Down' in another." Next: "Surely this is a reaction to the recent stories concerning a lack of diversity at CU." Next: "Why can the administration put together a diversity committee in under 5 minutes, but can't do anything else in less than 2 years?" Next: "Why do they always hyphenate CU-Law in the e-mails? I mean, I'm the king of hyphenation, and I would never put one there. What gives?"

Finally: "Could you imagine CU Law ever actually addressing a climate problem, if in fact there was one? For example, we could have an annual gay/lesbian night, where we invite Colorado's entire gay/lesbian community and give them a brief run-down of legal issues that concern them. Or we could reach out to the undergraduate minority and gay/lesbian communities and do the same. Or we could hire a gay/lesbian professor. Or we could reach out to the inner-city Denver community, and do some more street law programs. Give 2 credits a semester to students who set up shop in Five Points and dole out basic legal advice. Not like a clinic, where you take on clients (and thus only help a few people), but more along the lines of dispensing legal information to a lot of people. Like you set up shop every Tuesday night in a local church or school and help whoever comes through the door. Or we could ...

Alas, it's too easy. These issues will die in committee, like they always do.
*

2005-04-18T12:05:00.000-06:00

Jobbing, etc.

For those who might be interested, the Denver Business Journal reported that local firm Moye Giles is going on a hiring binge. They have about 34 lawyers, and they're interested in adding 15-20 new lawyers within the next year. Now might be an excellent time to go full court press those guys if you have an in.
...
Additionally, congratulations to CU Law grad Hank Brown, who was named CU's new president last week. Hopefully he'll be able to put out the fire created by Dick Tharp, former Athletic Director and fellow CU Law grad.
*

2005-04-15T18:10:00.000-06:00

How and why I chose CU Law ... Advice for Pre-1Ls

(Note: I'd love to hear how everyone wound up at CU Law, and others wound up at various other schools. Throw some anecdotes up in the Comments. Also, thanks to JD2b.com for linking to this post.)

A number of other blogs have posted on how to choose a law school. The advice ranges from vaguely helpful to vaguely idiotic to vaguely redundant. The obvious running theme: it's all vague. Also, the advice is usually for those choosing between Chicago and Stanford (the Cardinal wins this one), Michigan and Penn (can we say Big Ten football?), Columbia and NYU (Fordham), and Harvard v. Yale (I say Harvard, and then be a visiting student third year at Yale. Why? Because you can, hot shot. And quit asking dumb questions). So in the interest of not being vague, as well as giving advice for mere mortals who took the LSAT hungover (I'm not bragging ... well, I kind of am), here's exactly how I chose CU Law.

I applied to Duke, USC, Michigan, CU, ASU, Tulane, U of Arizona, UCLA, Iowa, and Texas. I applied in the late fall and supplemented my applications along the way. I wanted to apply to a good number of schools, since I figured this was the only time I was going to apply to law school (and what's another $500 in the grand scheme of things?). When applying for undergrad I made the mistake of not applying to a bunch of schools that, in hindsight, I would've loved to have gone to (Northwestern, UCLA, Rice, Texas, and a few others). I applied to one reach, a couple good schools, some dumb little liberal arts schools my mom liked, and CU. I got a full ride to CU and a partial scholarship at one of the good schools. Chose the good school.

Back to law school applications. I was rejected at Iowa (?), Texas, Michigan, and UCLA--being out-of-state proved an insurmountable handicap. I was WL at Duke and USC, and I got into CU, Tulane, U of Arizona, and ASU. Not exactly the list of schools I'd originally envisioned, but all told a number of relatively cheap, relatively good schools. Tulane was axed from the list because they only offered a few thousand in scholarship money. Arizona and ASU were attractive, but they're basically equivelant to CU, and out-of-state tuition was considerably more than CU's $6,000 annual bill.

Being one of the cheapest schools in the country aside, CU was by far the best school in the region I wanted to practice in (Mountain states, Front Range area). And fortunately, Colorado is one of the most standoff-ish states when it comes to out-of-staters (see the NATIVE stickers), and something like 80-90% of the bar is CU and DU, so hiring tends to be a bit incestuous here. Finally, the new law school was supposed to be up and running by 2004; unfortunately, it's now opening for business next fall, the semester after I graduate.

So here I am two years later. I don't have any specific advice about how you should choose your law school. But I do like Expressio Unius' (http://expressiounius.blogspot.com/2005/03/pre-ls.html) advice:

"Wherever you decide to go, love it. Buy a sweatshirt, pens, mugs, etc. with the school's name on it. Visit it, learn about its history, and do all you can to be one with it. With any major life decision, there is bound to be some buyer's remorse (unless you go to Yale). Doing these little things will get you out of that funk. Remember: no matter where you go, it's likely that you will get a good legal education and make a lot of friends while doing it. And if you don't, there's always transferring."
*

2005-04-14T11:58:00.000-06:00

Do you sodomize your wife?

A NYU Law student asked Justice Scalia this at a recent Q and A at NYU Law School (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1383214/posts). I don't particularly care about the point the student was trying to make (something about Scalia's dissent in Lawrence v. Texas)--I'm sure it was a good point, and Scalia isn't high on my list of justices, though unlike many law students I don't really care about justices, nor do I have "favorites" (though I do like the ones who write clearly and succinctly). In fact, I'd be hard-pressed to name all the justices. Call me a bad law student.

But this NYU students' question got me thinking about whether I could verbally attack a Supreme Court justice, or any famous person for that matter. Could I get up there and ask Bush some scathing, turn-off-my-mike-and-get-escorted-out-of-the-forum question? Or how about Gary Barnett? Governor Owens? Ward Churchill? Could I do it?

For whatever reason, I don't think I would, and that kind of bothers me. Maybe I'm just not one to ruin a Supreme Court justice's speech, or a Barnett press conference. I think the problem is that I'm just not angry enough. My dad always used to say that I don't have the sheer anger, that overwhelming pissed off drive that people who grow up poor/underpriviledged/disadvantaged/whatever have. My dad's mom grew up on an Indian reservation during the depression, and he grew up with pretty much nothing. Though he's gotten much softer over the years, I can imagine that early on he was one angry dude, ready to stick it to whoever, wherever, whenever. Reminds me of a Catch-22 song lyric: "Feeling so good/Cruising the hoood/Sticking it to the world like a rich kid never understood." Not to say only underprivileged people have this edge. There are probably any number of things that might give someone that moxie, that nerve.

I don't think anyone I know grew up in a legitimately tough neighborhood (Aurora hardly qualifies), and certainly no one I know is particularly angry, or itching to stick it to the world. If Scalia came to CU Law, someone might work up the nerve to ask a probing question, but I doubt anyone would ask him if he sodomized his wife.
--

2005-04-12T12:22:00.000-06:00

Line 16 and down are the best (BTW, this is legit; see http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050406/NEWS0501/504060306/1052/NEWS05)...

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 29
BY WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE
1 A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
2 STATING LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AND COMMENDING JARED AND JERUSHA HESS AND THE
3 CITY OF PRESTON FOR THE PRODUCTION OF THE MOVIE "NAPOLEON DYNAMITE."
4 Be It Resolved by the Legislature of the State of Idaho:
5 WHEREAS, the State of Idaho recognizes the vision, talent and creativity
6 of Jared and Jerusha Hess in the writing and production of "Napoleon Dyna-
7 mite"; and
8 WHEREAS, the scenic and beautiful City of Preston, County of Franklin and
9 the State of Idaho are experiencing increased tourism and economic growth; and
10 WHEREAS, filmmaker Jared Hess is a native Idahoan who was educated in the
11 Idaho public school system; and
12 WHEREAS, the Preston High School administration and staff, particularly
13 the cafeteria staff, have enjoyed notoriety and worldwide attention; and
14 WHEREAS, tater tots figure prominently in this film thus promoting Idaho's
15 most famous export; and
16 WHEREAS, the friendship between Napoleon and Pedro has furthered
17 multiethnic relationships; and
18 WHEREAS, Uncle Rico's football skills are a testament to Idaho athletics;
19 and
20 WHEREAS, Napoleon's bicycle and Kip's skateboard promote better air qual-
21 ity and carpooling as alternatives to fuel-dependent methods of transporta-
22 tion; and
23 WHEREAS, Grandma's trip to the St. Anthony Sand Dunes highlights a long-
24 honored Idaho vacation destination; and
25 WHEREAS, Rico and Kip's Tupperware sales and Deb's keychains and glamour
26 shots promote entrepreneurism and self-sufficiency in Idaho's small towns; and
27 WHEREAS, Napoleon's artistic rendition of Trisha is an example of the
28 importance of the visual arts in K-12 education; and
29 WHEREAS, the schoolwide Preston High School student body elections foster
30 an awareness in Idaho's youth of public service and civic duty; and
31 WHEREAS, the "Happy Hands" club and the requirement that candidates for
32 school president present a skit is an example of the importance of theater
33 arts in K-12 education; and
34 WHEREAS, Pedro's efforts to bake a cake for Summer illustrate the positive
35 connection between culinary skills to lifelong relationships; and
36 WHEREAS, Kip's relationship with LaFawnduh is a tribute to e-commerce and
37 Idaho's technology-driven industry; and
38 WHEREAS, Kip and LaFawnduh's wedding shows Idaho's commitment to healthy
39 marriages; and
40 WHEREAS, the prevalence of cooked steak as a primary food group pays trib-
41 ute to Idaho's beef industry; and
42 WHEREAS, Napoleon's tetherball dexterity emphasizes the importance of
43 physical education in Idaho public schools; and
44 WHEREAS, Tina the llama, the chickens with large talons, the 4-H milk

2
1 cows, and the Honeymoon Stallion showcase Idaho's animal husbandry; and
2 WHEREAS, any members of the House of Representatives or the Senate of the
3 Legislature of the State of Idaho who choose to vote "Nay" on this concurrent
4 resolution are "FREAKIN' IDIOTS!" and run the risk of having the "Worst Day of
5 Their Lives!"
6 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the members of the First Regular Session
7 of the Fifty-eighth Idaho Legislature, the House of Representatives and the
8 Senate concurring therein, that we commend Jared and Jerusha Hess and the City
9 of Preston for showcasing the positive aspects of Idaho's youth, rural cul-
10 ture, education system, athletics, economic prosperity and diversity.
11 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we, the members of the House of Representa-
12 tives and the Senate of the State of Idaho, advocate always following your
13 heart, and thus we eagerly await the next cinematic undertaking of Idaho's
14 Hess family.
15 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chief Clerk of the House of Representa-
16 tives be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this
17 resolution to Jared and Jerusha Hess, the Mayor of the City of Preston and the
18 Principal of Preston High School.
Statement of Purpose / Fiscal Impact

2005-04-11T21:32:00.000-06:00

Neo-style and CU undergrads go for crawling record

With all the fuss lately about talent shows, FCQs, finals, and new ADs, I completely forgot about the e-mail Cindy sent out concerning the splattered-blood vandalism on a 1Ls' statement of intent for class treasurer. Now there's random and then there's random. I had no idea class treasurer was such a sought-after position--after all, it seems most organizations have to beg people to serve in any capacity. Suffice it to say that if this was intentional vandalism (and not intentional vandalism by a drunk, bleeding, undergrad, which I assume it was, considering we're surrounded by about 10 freshman dorms, there are always tons of undergrads wandering around the law school, and the vandalism occured Thursday night, the biggest drinking night for undergrads), I'm completely perplexed.

If it wasn't a drunk, bleeding undergrad, here's the only rational explanation I can come up with: Late one evening, two 3Ls ran into each other after exiting the library. It had been an icy relationship--perhaps a squabble over a girl during 1L, a request for notes that went ignored in Mueller's Evidence, or even the dreaded switching of seats the second day of class before the seating chart is passed around. In any event, they passed in the dark hall, words were exchanged, and books hit the floor. One flew at the other Neo-style and hit into him, blood splattering--but only onto this 1Ls' poster. The second 3L retaliated, hurling his Advanced Torts book (irony only a law student could appreciate)--the other blocked with his copy of the Tax Code (what else is it good for?). Seconds later the fight ended, and the two 3Ls retreated.

In any event, if there wasn't a message on the poster supposedly directed at this 1L, I'd put good money on this being a random undergrad defacement. Hell, during last year's talent show undergrads snuck in and stole the kegs right out of the Pit--you think they wouldn't smear some blood on a poster? And who goes through college without a couple drunken blood-filled incidents?

1L feuds, 3Ls throwing down late one night, undergrads covered in blood. There's a good story behind this, and I wish I knew what it was.

...

Special thanks to sqtip, who pointed out this website: http://www.33milecrawl.com./index.html. Basically, two CU undergrads are going to crawl 33 miles to set the world record. It didn't sound like much to me at first, but after thinking about it, well, good freaking luck. 33 miles--99 times around a conventional track. I say they do two laps an hour max. So they're looking at some 40-hours at a minimum.
--

2005-04-10T21:50:00.000-06:00

South Park and "Don't cheat, don't overspend and work hard."

An incredibly brilliant waste of time--building your own South Park character. I had my doubts, but after creating a gas mask-wearing ghetto-thug with a light saber (my inner persona), I'm hooked.

http://www.planearium2.de/flash/sp-studio.html

...

According to the Daily Camera, CU's going to announce that Mike Bohn, San Diego State's AD, will be named CU's next AD. Bohn is a Boulder native (Boulder High grad) with a history of putting out fires. Here's what Neil Woellk, the only sportswriter worth in damn in this state, said in Sunday's paper:

At Idaho, he took over a debt-ridden program and balanced the budget in consecutive years -- and he didn't slash and burn to do it. Instead, he increased funding. He was the driving force behind a 20-percent increase in the Vandal Scholarship Fund, and helped produce a $350,000 increase in annual corporate support. Also, Idaho began construction on the Vandal Athletics Center during Bohn's tenure there, the first significant facilities improvement for the department in decades.

After five years at Idaho, he moved on to San Diego State, where he inherited yet another set of problems. The Aztecs were undergoing a state audit that discovered mismanaged funds, resulting in the resignation of the former A.D. Meanwhile, the NCAA was knocking on the door because of alleged abuses in the school's admissions procedures.

His answer was simple. On the day he was introduced at SDSU, he told reporters: "We'll have three fundamental principles: Don't cheat, don't overspend and work hard."

Bohn has lived up to those principles. In his 18 months at SDSU, he helped increase corporate and private support, increased attendance at football games (a direct revenue increase) and reinvigorated a department that had endured lean times.

I imagine most of you probably don't care--athletics aren't big at CU Law, for obvious reasons. But we're probably more affected by the athletic director than the university president; CU's athletic programs will always overshadow its acadmic programs. Forget the astronauts, the Nobel Prize winners, even Trey Parker and Matt Stone (creators of South Park). CU's most famous graduates are football players. Kordell Stewart? Byron "Whizzer" White, U.S. Supreme Court Justice and CU tailback? In this year's Super Bowl, there were more football players who went to CU than any other school. More from CU than Miami, Nebraska, USC, FSU, LSU, and every other traditional powerhouse.

Naturally, the law school is a little more removed from the successes and failures of the athletic department than other programs at CU, but aside from the Dean, I can't think of anyone who can give value to--or detract value from--our degrees more than the AD. Hopefully, Mike Bohn will be everything that Dick Tharp (a CU Law graduate) wasn't.

2005-04-09T21:27:00.000-06:00

Talent show, misc.

The law school talent show rocked the courtroom last night. If not for the new no-beer in the courtroom policy (which went largely unenforced, and deservedly so), the stench of spilled beer wouldn't subside until mid-summer. I remember walking into the courtroom the last day of finals last year and I swore I smelled frat house--it was courtesy of the talent show. For those in attendance, clearly the best act was karate guy. In terms of sheer entertainment value, he--and his heckler--took the prize. I give runner-up to the guy who sang about the leaves changing; third place to Professor Collins' acapella group. For those not in attendance, you missed out. Blow-up dolls, beer intermissions, poetry about oral sex, and Napolen Dynamite ... perfect.
...
As Jaded Law pointed out, the Colorado Creed e-mail is making its rounds (www.colorado.edu/creed). Though I think we'd all agree it's a misplaced gesture, I appreciate it nonetheless. I'm rather surprised that over the past year and half more undergrads haven't stepped up to defend the university. I did my stepping up in undergrad, and if law school didn't punish us for getting involved (as I've discussed in the past, by placing undeserved emphasis on grades law school creates an incentive for people to focus exclusively on class and not on outside activities), I'd be right there. The Creed isn't much, but it's something.

.

2005-04-08T10:41:00.000-06:00

FCQ (Alternative title: Why professors shouldn't assign 175 pages of reading the last two weeks of class)

It's getting to be that time of year; vengeance is at hand. Not only is it within reach, but it can be applied anonymously. I'm salivating already. I've never looked forward to FCQs, the professor evaluations we fill out anonymously, but this year I've stumbled upon the worst professor/teacher-class combo I've taken in almost 20 years of formal schooling. In the past two years I've had some of the best (Mueller, Collins, Eid, Peppet) and a good sampling of the good-to-average. But this professor-class combo beats Hill-Property any day of the week.

Anyway, last year a friend insisted that the only way to fill out the evaluations fairly is to grade on a curve, and I've wholeheartedly adopted the practice. Right now just about every professor gets As and Bs on the FCQs--only the workload factor varies to any great degree. So we don't express our true feelings, and the next year we're trying to choose between a professor who got an A, A-, B, B+, and B in the various categories and a professor who got a B, B-, A, A, and A-. Indistinguishable. Basically, we lose and the professors all win. And then what happens come mid-June or mid-Jan.? We the students collect an assortment of Bs, B-s, and C+s. I don't see the justice in that.

So when you get your FCQs this semester, go ahead and give out some non-As and Bs, or group all your professors around B-, like they do to us. You have three good professors, but can only give one A in a certain category, so the other two get Bs. And your other two professors? Sorry, someone has to be on the wrong side of the curve. As I said last year, don't hate the players, hate the game.
...
Having gone through 2 registrations, I thought I'd pass on a couple tips I've picked up:

(1) E-mail Cindy and overenroll. Pick up 7 classes, and then drop the worst the first week of school. This was a great game in undergrad, but the law school tries to stop it by capping you at 16. But Cindy approves requests to overenroll right and left, and you don't need to provide a good reason, or any reason for that matter.

(2) Reliance on FCQs is essential. I'm currently in a course taught by a professor whose only FCQs were for a course last fall. This professor had an incredibly high work load rating (the highest I've seen from a prof), and lo and behold I'm slogging through insane amounts of utterly irrelevant reading. Not to mention the cold-calling on the insane amounts of utterly irrelevant reading. You know it's not good when Hill's Property courses get significantly better ratings across the board--but I ignored that, and I'm paying the price.

(3) The real game is minimizing the number of finals you have to take. So use up all your externship credits, all your clinic credits, and take courses with papers. In fact, do a 4-credit non-judicial externship, then petition for 3 more credits to do a judicial one.

(4) Enroll in one course at a time. PLUS allows you to type in all your courses and enroll, or to do it one by one. Those one or two classes you want to take that you know are going to fill up (Mueller's Evidence for the soon-to-be 2Ls, for example)--enroll in those first. A couple seconds is huge when it comes to registration. One of the Professional Reponsibility courses filled up in under 2 seconds last fall.

2005-04-07T21:57:00.000-06:00

Footnote 30 fun

The issue of the moment is footnote 30, a decade old footnote that was "lost", then "discovered," that imposes a mandatory jury duty-graduation requirement on 1Ls. Footnote 30 was passed in 1993, then added into the document almost a year later, and promptly lost. Hmmm. Anyway, Bolder Law and the comments flesh out the core arguments: (1) This is complete BS; (2) There are better ways of doing this; and (3) Shut up and give up a couple hours to the 3Ls.

A quick comment on Bolder Law's proposal: First, I like the idea, but I doubt the administration is willing to implement it. If they find the idea of e-mailing alums revolutionary, certainly any proposal that asks them to re-think the 1L jury duty requirement will fall on deaf ears. But here's how we do it, in a practical way, that requires no money, no outlay of resources aside from a student committee's, one professor's, and the Dean's time.

First, we form a committee, or an administrator steps up (which is completely unrealistic) that contacts the criminal justice/pre-law programs at CU-Denver, CSU, DU, CC, and maybe the surrounding community colleges. We invite the classes up for a few Fridays each spring: in the morning a professor teaches them a “sample” torts class and the Dean talks to them about what we learn in law school, and what the school looks for in applicants. Maybe we throw together a couple law student panels to answer questions. In the afternoon we let the kids fill up the jury boxes for the trial advocacy courses and clinics. By getting all these kids up at our soon-to-be new law school, we get a bunch of potential law school applicants in our doors, thinking about CU, and thinking about law school generally. Considering 55% of each incoming class must come from Colorado, it's absolutely necessary we improve our admitted in-state applicants as much as possible, since statistically our admitted in-state applicants have lower GPAs and LSATs than our admitted out-of-state applicants. Even if we don't attract more than a dozen qualified kids through the program, the intangible community goodwill we'd generate would certainly be worth it. Not to mention the fact that we'd get the jurors we need.

2005-04-05T11:41:00.000-06:00

EDIT: As you can see, my hard afternoon of reading, outlining, and studying paid off in full. Four hours later I have a new blog design--let me know what you think. I suck with colors, so this was the best I could do. Also, I lost all the comments, which I didn't expect, so sorry if I censored you. You had it coming, you have to admit. And if I'm missing anyone's link, holla.

Winding down ... and winding up

We enter the looming fog, the spectacular confusion and anxiety of finals. They're mere weeks away; 3Ls marvel at the sheer absurdity of it, the idea that they, they are expected to pass tests when there is so much more out there, pressing. Jobs, the bar, post-law school life. And yet they still must hack out an essay on IP law. How quaint. Cute, almost. A trip down nostalgia lane, a couple 3Ls called it, remembering how it was in years past when exams burned acid in their throats--heartburn, law school style; when they'd rank themselves in each of their classes weeks before finals started ("I'm more on top of the subject than about 40% of the class, so I'll pull about an 83."); and when study groups seemed mandatory, and the most exclusive groups screened like L.A. clubs. Remembering years past when they were actually prepared. Cute, definitely.

2Ls have that same sense, but they keep running, circling inside the glass cage, eyes on the outside, wondering if anyone's watching. They're starting to realize no one's out there; no one cares if you spend forty hours on an outline; there are no gold stars for library-time. The professors watch American Idol in the evenings, maybe read Time. It's an internal game, this law school, and more and more people are opting out, refusing to internalize the game. Already they've stopped reading; the astute learned long ago that reading is for those with time and interest, and a good law student has neither. Just the facts, ma'am, nice and easy, no legal jargon, no bailor-bailee lessor-lessee word triangles. Parallelograms in some classes. The commercial outlines and canned briefs are out in force, and at times even those seem wordy and obtuse. The real studying won't happen for at least another week or two, and even then it's not "real studying" in the 1L sense of the phrase. Instead, it's a passable outline, and maybe glancing at a practice test. And then it's a couple months until a handful of Bs show up on CU Connect and everyone wonders why they even ran in the first place. No one's watching.

The universal 1L moan: "We have to do finals again?" Yes, and again, and again, and again. Until you don't care anymore and the whole process seems outright quaint. But now you do care, because if you're in the bottom of the class this is your big chance, if you're in the middle of the class this is your big chance, and if you're in the top of the class, you know this is everyone else's big chance and you don't want to blow it. But blow it you will, because for a minute there you thought were slick, a law school whiz bang, 100 words per second of Prosser-worthy verbage. A couple 81s will set you straight. And if you're in the middle you'll blow it, even if you do well, because 10 spots mean nothing and regression to the mean is the name of the game. If you tread water you're doing great, but the 50th spot in the class is the same as 150th sans a 1, and you can only tread for so long before Con Law or Contracts or Property teach you that a C isn't as hard on the ego as you thought it would be. Those at the bottom have swallowed their pride and are on the fence: throw in the towel or give it one last go. They settle for something in between, and seal their fate accordingly. But the 150th spot in the class is the same as 50th , plus a 1.

2005-04-04T13:34:00.000-06:00

Slow news day

I scrolled through a dozen different blogs, skimmed the Post and News, and even glanced through my old college newspaper looking for something to comment on. But it's a slow news day, the first in a long time. Here's a quick rundown of the ticker: Michael Jackson's trial continues (apparently an ex-manager at Neverland claims MJ got three boys drunk), Rudy G. spoke at CU, a lot of people have HIV along the I-70 corridor, the Rockies open today, CC and DU are playing in the Frozen Four (which would be notable if there were more than 10 college hockey teams), the Colorado Supreme Court said creditors can't seize IRAs, Irish bookmakers are taking bets on the next Pope, and so on.

And since it's a slow day, I thought I'd post a couple exam-related links:

http://stu.findlaw.com/outlines/index.html
--outlines and practice exams from a number of schools

http://www.ilrg.com/students/outlines/
--a website that buys law student outlines (only one CU outline here, however)

2005-04-02T17:10:00.000-07:00

"They're like, my most favorite animal ever."

Courtesy of Time Magazine: "When humans place lions and tigers in close quarters a little cross-species loving has been known to happen. The result: the liger and the tigon. Ligers have lions for pops and tigers for moms and grow much larger than their parents. Tigons have the reverse for parents and tend to be dwarfs."

Guess it's possible to have mad liger-taming skills after all. (http://www2.foxsearchlight.com/napoleondynamite/fanclub/index.php)

2005-04-01T12:09:00.000-07:00

EDIT: I kind of jumped the gun by assuming the plaintiffs would have to pay not only CU's costs, but CU's legal fees as well. As Tim Hadley of "Math class for poets" (http://blog.tph-lex.com/) and legally intoxicated pointed out, the order covers only costs, and the plaintiffs (Simpson and Jane Doe) will have to pay them. I edited the post below to reflect this. Thanks guys.

This is the end ... my only friend, the end

In case you didn't hear, the Title IX sexual harassment lawsuits against CU were dismissed (I assume on summary judgment, but the papers don't specify) because lo and behold the suits were frivolous, as was obvious from the get-go. The claimants couldn't prove even the most basic elements of their case. Judge Blackburn, a graduate of CU Law, punished Lisa Simpson & Co. with a vengeance--the case was dismissed with prejudice, and they have to pay CU's costs (but not attorney's fees). Payback's a bitch, as they say.

As Bolder Law pointed out, the firm representing Lisa Simpson, Hutchinson, Black, and Cook, is a local Boulder firm, renowned for its absurd, unfounded pretentiousness. A perfect fit for Boulder, actually. As I understand it, Baine Kerr (a DU grad, mind you), was counsel for Lisa Simpson. You think he slept well last night knowing he got humiliated by CU's lawyers? Also, what of that new Mercedes he'd been dreaming of, paid for with a potential CU settlement?

There are a couple lessons to learn from these lawsuits. CU's lawyers made a huge mistake not settling years ago, before all this hit the press. If you've read any literature on Title IX sexual harassment lawsuits, you realize there's few causes of action with a greater terror/harassment value. Commentators generally denounce the lawsuits as nothing more than an example of how absurd our legal system can get, and I agree. But sometimes you settle frivolous lawsuits because the bad PR will burn you, and that's exactly the case here. Give Lisa Simpson $200,000, spare the university two years of horrific press, and move on. CU's in-house counsel (presumably mostly CU Law grads) schooled the HBC boys in the end, but it wasn't worth it.

Also, Title IX sexual harassment lawsuits are the "cause of action" du jour for plaintiff's lawyers. Imagine, you could go after Nebraska, FSU, Miami, USC, and so on under Title IX, and no doubt they'd all settle. You could take Title IX to high schools--any school district where a male athlete assaulted a female student. But the way the judge burned the plaintiffs in this case is a bold reminder that you can't abuse Title IX. Title IX was groundbreaking legislation that created millions of opportunities for female athletes, and though there have been negative side affects, generally it's been an outstanding success. Lawyers have turned it into a vehicle for abuse, and hopefully this is a sign that Title IX will go back to being a vehicle for good.

2005-03-31T14:39:00.000-07:00

EDIT: For a good discussion of how and why U.S. News changed its methodology, see http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2005/03/slight_change_i.html. Apparently, it's a move by U.S. News to try to prevent rankings manipulation by schools. Those schools that manipulated their rankings by recruiting only half a class--by that I mean filling half the class with high numbers so that their median was as high as possible, while admitting a bunch of mediocre students to fill the bottom half of the class--were hurt the most in this year's rankings. I assume KU, DU, Emory, Duke, and others were all gaming, and the game bit them back.

CU v. DU deans' reactions to U.S. News

Dean Trujillo sent an e-mail concerning our 2 spot rise in U.S. News (net -8 spot drop the past two years, net approximately -25 spot drop the past ten years). CU was so thrilled by this subpar performance that the administration decided to compile their own rankings (in a poorly organized Word document, mind you). Of course, as Dean Getches and others have continuously emphasized, rankings mean nothing and "we don't play that game." But of course we do--and our administration does it worse than just about anyone. The unfounded pretentiousness of parading around a ranking of 48 shocks me, honestly; if there's anything everyone at CU needs to learn, it's the virtue of humility. Here's what Trujillo sent out:

"CONGRATULATIONS to everyone for all of your fine work to move us up in the ranks among our collegues. This is especially important to each and everystudent who will graduate, is graduating, and will graduate from CU LAW. We had a tremendous year of achievement from our teams that went forth to compete nationally. Our bar exam passage rate is up. The new building is starting to show visible signs of a building. This is to everyone's credit. Thank you for your wonderful teamwork. These successes are about our great students, faculty and staff and the reputation that our graduates (we -me too) carry forth into the practice of law.

CU LAW’S RANKING RISES

BASED ON U.S. NEWS AND WORLD REPORT 2006 RANKING

Rank: 48 (rose 2 points)
Rank in 2005: 50

Rank Among Top Public Schools: 23

Rank Among Top Law Schools in the West: 10
(category includes Stanford, UT, UCLA etc)

Rank Among Public Law Schools in the West: 7
(category includes UCLA, Hastings, UT etc)

Rank Among Top Law Schools in the SouthWest (CO, AZ, TX, UT, NM): 4
(rose 1 point; rank in 2005: 5)

Rank Among Top Law Schools by Specialty:
Environmental Law: 4
(ahead of Stanford, ranked 7th; Georgetown, ranked 9th; and Duke and GW, tied for 10th)

Rank of nearest neighbor: DU, ranked 95th (Dropped 18 points in one year: ranked 77 in 2005 ed.)

Our Student Body is Among the Best in the Nation
Average GPA of incoming CU students is higher than at (all top 50 schools):
the University of Chicago, the University of Pennsylvania; University of Michigan; Northwestern University; Cornell University; Duke University; Georgetown University; University of Texas, Austin; University of Minnesota; Boston University; George Washington University; University of Iowa; Washington & Lee; Notre Dame; Washington University; University of Illinois; Boston College; William &Mary; Fordham; University of North Carolina; Emory; University of California, Davis; University of Wisconsin; Indiana University; University of Georgia; Wake Forest; Ohio State University; University of California (Hastings); George Mason; Tulane; University of Ala; University of Arizona; University of Florida; University of Maryland; American University; Case Western; the University of Connecticut; and equal to University of Southern California

University of Colorado School of Law is ranked ahead of these notable schools and many others:
University of Connecticut (49); Southern Methodist University (52); Arizona State University (58); Cardozo (58); Loyola Law School, CA (58); Rutgers (65); University of Oregon (69); University of New Mexico (69); Pepperdine University (77); SUNY Buffalo (77); Catholic University (85); Northeastern University (85); Penn State (90); University of Denver (95)
.................................................
Here's DU Dean Ricketson's reaction, courtesy of visceral_piscean (Justin):

"Last year we were 77th in the US News rankings and this year we will be ranked 95th. Concerned, Forrest Sanford and I called US News and learned that they instituted a new procedure this year which adversely affected a handful of schools, including the College of Law. The new procedure caused them to report our median LSAT score as 158 instead of 160, which has been our median for the past two years. We do not feel this new, untested and unannounced procedural change was well considered and we, along with concerned alumni and friends of the College of Law, will be meeting personally with the US News staff about the situation. In our conversations with US News they stated the rankings would not be modified this year but that they were concerned that the new procedure may have had “unintended consequences” and that they were willing to review it’s applicability for future rankings. We will keep you up to date."

2005-03-30T16:08:00.000-07:00

Journal junk

There's an interesting discussion over at de novo (http://www.blogdenovo.org/archives/000792.html) discussing whether it's worth it to join law review and journals. Considering it's getting to be law review/journal write-on time for 1Ls, I thought this would be a good topic to comment on. I'm on law review/journal, as are approximately 60-80 other 2Ls (so basically a little less than half the class), and for most 1Ls it's a mystifying, confusing sub-world of the law school. It still mystifies and confuses me in so many ways, so don't worry.

Anyway, on de novo a number of people decried the sheer worthlessness of law review/journals, myself included. This was the best description I could find that adequately captures the experience:

"I'm a 2L on the law review at a 2nd tier law school. Is working on law review duller than watching porn with the nudity edited out? Yes it is. Have I become a better person, or a better intellect for all my work? No I haven't. Will getting on Law Review get your foot in the door for higher-prestige jobs? Yes it will."

Here's what I contributed:

"Hey, I'm a 2L at Colorado Law, on a law review/journal thing. Law review/journal is largely worthless aside from teaching you how to Bluebook, and learning to Bluebook is largely worthless outside of court briefs. I commend those who find the articles interesting, and I especially commend those who find reading 80-page articles on obscure topics interesting. Frankly, law review/journal is simply another hoop students grudgingly jump through, and though they come out slightly better in the end, it's doubtful it's worth the time and effort."

But that doesn't really answer the universal 1L question: should I or shouldn't I?

At CU we're stuck with law review, the environmental journal, and the tech journal. I've never been particularly impressed by any of the publications; then again, I've never been impressed by anything that's a product of "legal academia." I can't think of any other area of academia where the primary work product is summarizing a subject. Think about it: law reviews are largely vehicles for collecting and synthesizing the law, and maybe making a few irrelevant suggestions for changes. Psychology and sociology professors conduct cool tests and experiments. Anthropology, geology, and achaeology professors go on digs, look for new animals, and all that. Legal scholarship? Someone writes a massive article discussing the development of common law marriage. I know there are great law review articles out there that go after big topics and are earth-shattering (like that Harvard Law Review article that "invented" the right to privacy), but by and large nothing new is contributed.

Again, I haven't answered my own question, and I don't think I can. Let me sleep on it.

2005-03-29T20:08:00.001-07:00

EDIT: I apologize for all the rankings talk. I've always been a rankings guy, be it AP v. Coaches v. BCS, RPI, U.S. News, high school sports, and so on. I got pissed when Rolling Stone rated Dylan's "Like a Rolling Stone" the #1 rock and roll song of all time. It means nothing, but we all have our thing.

Duke's demise

Duke drops to 11th in the rankings, and Duke's Dean issues a preemptive strike: a whiny letter decrying US News. I think this a form letter that all law schools use when they lose ground. This letter covers all the talking points Dean Getches and former Dean Bastone covered last year after we dropped 10 spots. As a coach in youth baseball once yelled at me, "That's loser-talk." This truly is loser talk. I'm sure everyone at Duke who read this was irritated by its third grade-tone: "Sure we lost ground, kids, but we're all winners here! Look, we have good professors, and we have more water fountains than anyone else!" Dean Getches and Dean Bastone had a similar tone: "Look, I know things are tough, but something will happen! We have good students! And Boulder is nice!" I left that meeting befuddled and confused. Monkey Man asked the most brilliant, unanswered question of the day: How come you expect CU Law's students to submit to arbitrary, unfair rankings, and then when someone ranks CU Law in an arbitrary and unfair fashion you bitch and moan and say we don't play that game. Getches laughed, said, "Good point," and moved on. Anyway, I think I told this story in a post a while ago, but it bears repeating, if only to exemplify how completely out of touch our administration is. I will always contend that a monkey could put this school into the top 30 in five years.
...

To members of the Duke community,

Various on-line sources are posting the new U.S. News rankings, showing Duke Law School in a tie for 11th place this year with Berkeley and Cornell. I cannot verify the accuracy of these postings, but since those who will be visiting Duke this weekend for "Admitted Students Weekend" likely will have seen these numbers, I wanted to address them so that a preoccupation with the rankings does not drown out our positive message about Duke.

First, while I understand and share student concerns about the public relations aspect of the US News rankings, my primary concern always has been focused on the true quality of the law school, not its quality as measured by the methodology of a magazine. And no one questions that, in reality, Duke Law School is an excellent law school, and getting better every year. No law school has hired stronger new faculty since 2000, which in the long run is the best formula for improving a school's quality. Our facilities have improved substantially in this period, no law school is more advanced in terms of technology, and most would agree that the collaborative quality of our community is unparalleled.

Second, even in US News' own terms, Duke is in a cluster of schools that are virtually indistinguishable by objective measures. In the latest postings, there are 8 schools separated by only 4 raw points on a 100-point scale (Chicago, Penn, Michigan, Virginia, Northwestern, Duke, Cornell, and Berkeley). To put this into perspective, 6 points separate the top two schools (Yale and Harvard). The compression with our closest peer schools, along with the order changes that occur year to year, demonstrate the arbitrary nature of any "top ten" list.

Third, the most important factors in assessing law schools are the two reputation scores - one by other academics, and the other by lawyers and judges. (These are separately reported in the US News survey, and account for 40% of the overall scores.) The academic peer assessment represents the overall judgment of other law deans and selected faculty, while the lawyers and judges score represents the judgments of those in the profession - obviously very relevant in terms of employment opportunities for our graduates with the best law firms, judges, and public interest organizations. Duke continues to do well in these reputational surveys: our peer assessment score remains steady, even while the scores of several of our competitors (including Chicago, Michigan, Northwestern, and Virginia) declined slightly. And our lawyers and judges reputation score increased since last year, putting us in a tie for eighth place with NYU, Penn, and Berkeley.

The trend line is positive for Duke; I would expect that, eventually, these rating systems will fully catch up with the true, rising quality of the school.

Katharine T. Bartlett

Dean and A. Kenneth Pye Professor of Law
Duke University School of Law

2005-03-27T17:03:00.000-07:00

U.S. News speculation

Word on the street is that CU Law moved up 2 spots in the U.S. News rankings to #48. Good news, of course, but considering last year's 10-spot plummet, it's still pretty lackluster. I think a monkey could steer this school into the top 30 in five years, so a 2 spot recovery isn't going to have me jumping up and down. Also, the official rankings aren't actually out yet, but there are a number of scans on various message boards, so I suspect what I heard was accurate.

DU took about a 20 spot drop (from mid-70s to mid-90s, now tied with Hofstra, Indiana-Indianapolis, Syracuse, and Seattle), which totally sucks considering they just built a massive new law school ... I figured they'd be making a run at the 60s. I'm wondering if they actually reported honest employment numbers for the first time in a long while. The past few years they've reported something like 80% employment at-graduation, which is a blatant lie. I know the percentage is half that at best. CU is probably the only school that reports honest numbers--thus the 60% at-graduation employment rate. Anyway, I don't mean to gloat in DU's misfortune, since CU recently has been the king of misfortune, but it's nice to know that DU won't be making a run at us anytime soon.

All this rankings talk has me in my usual pissy rankings mood. I think the basic problem is that I still can't fathom how you can have a top 25 student body, a top 40 faculty, the lowest tuition in the land, and a location in the nicest city (arguably) in the world, and yet our monkey administration dolts along, doing a half-ass job. Last year I jotted down a number of ideas for turning CU into a top 30 law school in the next 5 years, and I still have that list:

(1) Feeder system with CU undergrad where we allow about 50 of the best and brightest undergrads to take 1-2 pre-law courses taught by 2Ls and 3Ls and give them "preference" when it comes to admissions. If we can keep the very best 20-50 undergrads every year, we'll be way ahead of the game. There's no reason we couldn't extend this feeder system to CU-Denver, CU-Colorado Springs, and CSU. Much like football recruiting, we absolutely must have the best locals choose CU.

(2) Fee waivers for applications. If you have over a 165, you get one no questions asked. Let's double the applicant pool and then reject everyone who obviously isn't interested in CU. A number of schools do this now.

(3) Conform to "standard" U.S. News employment stats reporting procedures, which means blatantly lying about how many are employed at graduation. We should be reporting an 80% at-graduation employment rate if everyone else is going to lie and report an 80% rate.

(4) Pre-application period admittance. Allow juniors to secure spots in future classes if they have certain #s (like, 3.7, 167 and up). Just make them pony up a $1500 deposit or something like that to create a disincentive for them to withdraw.

(5) "Brand" CU Law separate and distinct from our illustrious Gary Barnett CU football/Ward Churchill undergrad.

(6) Monthly e-mails and newsletters to alums

(7) $40 preference fee on applications. If an applicant pays an extra $40 fee, he or she will get a decision within the week of receipt of the application.

(8) Mass mailings to judges and law school professors around the country telling them what's new at CU.

Now these were a couple ideas I had on a 5-minute bus ride. I wrote them on the back of a business card. If I can come up with this in 5 minutes, the administration should be able to come up with a dozen others.

2005-03-21T15:58:00.000-07:00

Spring break time, so I won't be posting until next week. I'll leave you with this: N2THNO2. It was on a license plate. I don't get it; very shortly I'll be sitting next to a pool in the sun not getting it.

Adios.

2005-03-17T21:42:00.000-07:00

Fleming Prison Blues

An interesting discussion in Legal Ethics or Professional Responsibility or whatever you want to call it yesterday: Why everyone hates lawyers, and why lawyers hate themselves. It started out as a normal philisophical debate, with the professor walking through different academic views on the topic. Commentators blame the loss of lawyers' independence in the lawyer-client relationship, the fact that law students graduate with incredible debt and so practicing law suddenly becomes a money game, a decline in civility and professionalism, a lack of true community service, poor access to the legal system for indigents, inane complexity everywhere you turn, and so on. And then the discussion turned to law school, and it became a quasi-group confession with people raising their hands and saying "Law school has made me ... er, law students generally, amoral." Once the first few people got it out of the away, people got blunt:

"I focus on the negatives."
"I'm money and prestige driven now."
"I've lost my ideals."
"I find things frivolous that I once thought were great."
"I feel like I'm going to wake up twenty years from now and wonder went wrong."

It was interesting to see how even the best of us succumbed. One person described the experience as being comparable to Marine bootcamp, where you're trained to be an amoral gun-for-hire; the ex-service people concurred.

But what I found surprising was that all these people seemed so shocked by what law school had done to them. When you learn the intricacies of an amoral system, and you learn to manipulate that system, you yourself become a little more amoral. And when law school rewards amorality if not immorality, you naturally move in that direction. I can think of no better example of law school rewarding amorality than a practice torts test I looked at as a 1L (actually, it was an advanced torts test, which I mistakenly downloaded, but that's beside the point). One of the hypos still bothers me:

George is employed by Acme, a Wisconsin corporation. As part of George's job, he drives a tractor around Acme's complex, moving goods from warehouse to warehouse. In the middle of Acme's large campus is a lake which George and the other drivers have to drive around. The lake is frozen in the winter. Late one winter afternoon, George is getting off his shift and realizes he left his lunchbox at a building on the far side of the campus. He's in a hurry, so instead of driving around the frozen lake, which takes about 5 minutes, he decides to drive over it. Halfway across, the ice cracks, the tractor sinks, and George unfortunately drowns. You are George's widow. Who do you sue, and for what?

In my opinion, George's widow suing anyone for George's idiocy is flat-out wrong. It's immoral. George fucked up because he drove a 1000 pound tractor across a lake; he had it coming. But that's not the credited response, even if I think we'd all agree that's the just, moral answer. Instead, the right answer has you suing the tractor company (various products liability claims) and Acme (all sorts of employment-related claims). Huh? I'd say suing either entity is wrong and immoral, but that's how you get an A on the exam. You get an A by suing people who really aren't culpable on every cause of action you can think of. All law school exams are like this in some respect. The more cold-hearted, amoral, and crafty you are, the better you do. On every exam I've ever written I've sued everyone for everything. I once sued a dog (some owners, especially older ones, put money in trust for their pets). I sued a fellow who got hit by a car, on behalf of the drunk driver, for denting the fender. I sue everyone, and it doesn't bother me anymore. In fact, it irritates me when I miss potential defendants and causes of action.

We write exams that reward blatantly immoral conduct and then wonder what happened. How many times must you read a case where the good guy gets screwed and the bad guy wins and the professor exults in the result before it sinks in? How many times must someone raise their hand and start talking about what's "right" and "wrong", and then the professor completely dismisses them, before we grasp the underlying message to all of law school?

Trapped in Fleming Prison, we play an amoral game.

2005-03-17T10:50:00.000-07:00

In the past couple days, several people have asked where the FCQ results are. I had the same question last semester, and now I have the answer. In my opinion, they do a good job of hiding them: http://www.colorado.edu/pba/fcq/ I prefer to rely heavily on the FCQs when selecting classes, especially the work-level rating, which seem to generally hold true.

Also, the CU Law website now has detailed descriptions of most electives: http://lawweb.colorado.edu/courses/2-3yrcurriculum.jsp

2005-03-16T15:33:00.000-07:00

Rocky Mountain Mother Nature Way

I'll let Peter Blake of the RMN describe the latest story-buried-in-the-newspaper-because-the fact-that-someone-reiterated-the same-unsubstantiated-allegations-from-a-year-ago-deserves-front-page:

"Insiders call it the "Super Slab," a 210-mile privately funded toll road that Ray Wells dreams of building from the town of Wellington, north of Fort Collins, to just south of Pueblo.
The project, which Wells has been plotting for 20 years, would run well east of Interstate 25 and the populous Front Range cities. Not only would it take through traffic away from the overcrowded interstate, it would include parallel rail tracks for the coal trains and other freights."

I pray the developers didn't come up with the name "Super Slab." If I was in charge, I'd call it the "High Plains Scenic Bypass" or the "Front Range Eco-Drive" or the "Rocky Mountain Mother Nature Way". "Super slab" sounds, oh I don't know, so damn evil. And slabbish. Maybe they should throw a Starbucks or Halliburton into the name to make it super evil (The Starbucks Grande Express).

I love huge projects like this. Some guy got caught in traffic on I-25 20 years ago and said fuck it, I'm going to build my own highway that completely bypasses everything. My own damn highway that runs through half the state. And I'll let my friends use it, and maybe people who are willing to fork over $15 a trip. Flash to present day and you got a grumpy old (presumably) rich man with the law on his side (CRS 38-2-101, an 1891 statute that empowers any corporation building a road, ditch, reservoir, pipeline, bridge, ferry, tunnel, electric line or telephone line to use condemnation if it can't negotiate a purchase price), (presumably) an arsenal of lawyers ready to condemn every joe farmer's pasture when he refuses to sell, and enough people pissed off about traffic to make sure it happens--if not now, surely not long from now. The guy seems like a real hardass, too, so of course all the front range communities will unite against him, he'll go down in flames, and once the organized support has dissipated he'll just turn around and pick it up again.

If he was smart, he'd just form his own opposition. I read about this somewhere: a developer wanted to build in a certain community, so he had a friend start an anti-development neighborhood group to go out and fan the flames. Neighbors learned about the development, the anti-development group got big and violent, but the developer was able to call the shots and "settle" with the group when it was convenient because of course, he was essentially calling the shots. The neighbors were happy because they thought they won (the developer gave into all these demands), and two weeks later a Super Wal-Mart was going up.

2005-03-14T17:22:00.000-07:00

Search committees galore

I think CU has four prominent search committees right now. One for AD, one for Pres., one for Churchill (as in, a committee searching for plagairism or anything else so they can fire him for cause), and one looking for a provost or chancellor or duke or vicelord or whatever. And then the Regents are their own hating on Churchill committee. My crazy mom signed me up for the student President search committee (she listens to talk radio, and apparently someone was screaming that they couldn't get any students to be on the search committee, so she did me the favor ... really, I think she wants to use me as her puppet to get her ideas into the mix), which makes me wonder (1) what the search committee chair is going to think when she sees that a law student's mom signs them up for stuff; (2) if there even is a student President search committee yet (I pay way too much attention to this stuff, and I haven't heard anything about it); and (3) why she didn't sign me up for the AD or Churchill committees, which would be ten times as exciting.

At CU, we are kings of committees. We have about thirty football recruiting committees that continue to fail to give us the cause we need to fire Gary Barnett. We have law committees that talk about changing the rankings system, and yell about imposing a public service requirement on all future students (suckas!), when all we'd have to do is throw it to a student vote and we'd be done with it in ten minutes. The Governor (yes, the adulterer who bankrupt the state ... for more info on our Governor's infidelity and love child, see the Westword from about six months ago ... apparently, the Post and News refuse to run the story, but if the Luv Guv tries to run for office again, they'll burn him ... you wonder why he went from "Best Governor in America" to a nobody in two years, and his wife left him, and Bush stayed as far away from him as possible?) is talking about putting together yet another football recruiting commission.

And you wonder why most people tune out politics ...

2005-03-13T17:15:00.000-07:00

EDIT:

There's also CULaw.blogspot.com, "a saucy singleton trying to make her way in the 1L world." I like that copy, Moop. Anyway, I somehow totally missed the boat on CULaw -- alas, more procrastination.
...

We have another CU Law blog, which I always find kind of exciting because it gives me yet another online diversion. Considering the classes I'm in, I need as many online diversions as humanly possible. Welcome to http://www.legallyintoxicated.blogspot.com/, whose first post is quite poignant, and much more real and personal than any stupid honor code or MJ trial reenactment post I throw up. Go check it out.

So as far as I know, we now have four CU Law bloggers (Mooppoint.blogspot.com, Bolderlaw.blogspot.com, Legallyintoxicated.blogspot.com, and myself). There used to be an infamous fifth, who now goes by the name Monkey Man, or Money Man, or the Artist formerly known as M. Monkey Man was the first CU Law blogger that I know of, and he introduced me to this whole online journal thing last year. I didn't know what a blog was back then, and frankly, I automatically assumed anyone who used the word "blog" or "blogger" was in need of a serious beat-down, and anyone who actually took part in "blogging" needed a couple quick beat-downs and maybe a semester or two at a military school in Montana. I still have that feeling (honestly, blog? ... blogging? ... blogger?). I also kind of assumed blogging was for computer nerd-types who hated public interaction, could only carry on a conversation via a computer, and have an online girlfriend. I also still have that feeling. But I've come to realize that with an anonymous forum, you get a whole new level of candor, and people tend to cut to the chase incredibly quickly. If you met Legally Intoxicated on the street, do you ever think he/she would tell you what he/she told us in his/her first post? And the CU people I know who blog are incredibly social and don't fit the computer nerd-online girlfriend types at all--so much for that.

Anyway, after reading Monkey Man's blog, a guy who sat in front of me and who was then no more than an acquaintance, and reading his very personal blog about life in general, I was hooked. I turned Buffs Girl onto his site and we'd both marvel at how personal and intimate these blog things could be. I decided it might be fun to give it a go, Monkey Man pointed me in the right direction, and voila.

So yeah, I didn't mean to go into a history of CU Law blogging. I probably deserve a serious beat-down for that.

2005-03-12T15:50:00.000-07:00

If you haven't seen the MJ trial reenactments, you're missing out. As Bolder Law pointed out, the MJ look-alike is scary good; when I first flipped to it, I thought I was watching the actual trial itself. All the actors do is read the transcript--including all "ums", "I don't know", "Can you speak up?" etc., but it feels incredibly real, with the MJ look-alike glaring down the witnesses, the people in the background watching intensely, the actors stumbling at the appropriate times, and MJ's lawyer going crazy on cross. And the testimony makes it all the more entertaining: MJ licking the kid's head, simulating sex with a manequin (sp?), feeding the kid "Jesus Juice" (wine) even though he only has one kidney, showing the kids porn in magazines and online, masturbating while he has his hand in the kid's pants, and so on.

And the trial techniques are great as well: MJ's lawyers attacking the kid's brother on cross, the prosecutor having the kid go into a long description of his family's living conditions, abuse, and all that. I swear I've learned more in a half hour watching this than any trial advocacy course.

2005-03-10T22:31:00.000-07:00

Here's an idea I got from watching Dr. 90210 (though I still like the arbitration franchise take-over-the-court-system idea): Somehow raise about $50 million in capital and incorporate the first national plastic surgery corporation. Buy major plastic surgeons' practices in about ten different cities, like this Dr. 90210 guy. In fact, pay them to be the "faces" of the company. Turn them into celebrities like Emeril (sp?). Advertise nationally. Pick up fresh-out-of-school doctors and bring them into the national practice. Become the only recognized plastic surgery "name" (think "Smile Dental" or whatever that is). Prices are always the same everywhere, and guaranteed, and we only do four things: breast implants, nose jobs, liposuction, and botox. We are the McDonald's of plastic surgery. Get cutthroat. Free plastic surgery for celebrities. Coupons in every major newspaper. Package deals ...

Ok, plastic surgery isn't the most kosher business around. But I still like the idea.

2005-03-10T18:23:00.000-07:00

Westlaw and Lexis points

Ok, away from the honor code discussion and onto something much more important: Westlaw and Lexis points. I briefly got into the accumulation of Lexis points last year, but I kind of fell of the bandwagon. It's addictive, and when minute 48 of a class rolls around there's not much else to do but start answering questions. The artist formally known as M (you should just adopt one of the symbols on the keypad) wrote about his current addiction. So here's my game: Remember that kid who collected one million Pepsi points and actually tried to buy the Harrier jet in the Pepsi commercial that was supposedly a million points? Here's what I envision: we get 40-50 people in the law school together and only use one Lexis account and one Westlaw account. For searches, for research, answering questions, everything. We go on a point-collecting spree. Then we go and clean house.

Here's plan two: We create a market for Westlaw and Lexis points. 100 Westlaw or Lexis points is worth $10. Depending on supply and demand that number will fluctuate. Hopefully we'll be able to accumulate enough points on the super cheap that we can then buy a ton of stuff with the points, and then turn around and sell the stuff on e-bay. We make out like bandits.

2005-03-09T18:06:00.000-07:00

Update: All the 2Ls got an e-mail this morning from one of the nicest guys in our class regarding the honor code. The message: don't turn people in if you're not sure if they cheated. The implicit message: don't turn people in. Of course, it was a very ill-advised e-mail, but it does show that backlash to the honor code and the process isn't isolated to anonbuff, the artist, NaechsteHaltestelle, Jaded, greta, jigsaw_earth, etc. who posted in the Comments.

Also, I know someone tied to the Honor Council reads this blog, and I'd like to hear his/her take on this. We all like the idea of an Honor code, and none of us like cheaters. And we do respect your time and service, and this isn't in any way personal. But we have serious issues with the code and the process. We don't like the fact that you can get prosecuted for not reporting. We don't like the Inquisition-like secrecy and lack of due process (by that I mean you're not notified that you're being investigated). We don't like sketchy e-mail searching, either. Anyway, feel free to post anonymously in the comments if you want to chime in. As always, I'm completely for getting as many viewpoints as possible.
...
Honor code e-mail

I just wrote a beautiful post regarding the honor code e-mail, which I'm incredibly surprised I even bothered opening. And then my Internet connection went bad. Bummer. Anyway, a summary: It doesn't seem like we really have a problem with intentional cheating, based on the reported violations, so I'm not sure why the honor council folks decided to go all Nazi on us all the sudden with the fliers and what not. If they have that much energy, I highly encourage them to address the several dozen real problems this school has. That's not to say I don't respect the honor code and what they honor code folks are doing. But there will always be cheaters, and some will be caught, and then you can deal with them. Don't lecture me on an issue that's completely irrelevant to 99% of law students and 100% of the outside world. So suffice it to say that I don't appreciate people papering my law school with third grade level questions concerning the Honor Code ... it's stupid, and to the outside observer, it insinuates we don't trust each other. I know a number of people had serious issues with the fliers, Money Man included. I'll let him speak for himself in the Comments.

Second, no one rats anyone out. It's the law of the land; the fact that they didn't even move forward with 5 of the 7 or so instances just shows how reluctant people are to destroy other peoples' lives. I kind of knew this already, but I was surprised that so many people shut up and refused to talk. No one likes a rat, as they say.

There were a couple other things. I feel bad for everyone involved with the various violations; it's a tragedy to see people make the wrong decision. Since now it's public record, I don't understand why the person who forged their transcripts went through OCI and applied for high profile jobs. Hell, if you're going to take that risk, apply for small firms in Wyoming or something where people don't know and don't care. I think the person even applied for Colo S.C. stuff. What would Freud say about this?

2005-03-08T21:59:00.000-07:00

In Professional Responsibility today, we had a joint class session and had the privilege of getting lectured to by the guy with the worst job on Earth. I'm not exagerrating. The guy heads the Attorney Regulation committee or some such thing for Colorado, and all they do all day, every day is field complaints because someone's lawyer was drunk, was on drugs, or was drunk. Drinking seems to be a big problem, for whatever reason. Apparently, this guy is among the most hated people around--it's not personal, it's just a function of his position. He's had tons of death threats, and at one point he had $10 billion ... yes, billion ... in frivolous liens on his house. And people have a tendency to go Waco-style in their offices, so security is super-tight. Remember, this is a government gig so the guy probably pulls decent money, but not enough to put up with this crap. He seems to take it all in good humor, but still. I learned a couple things from his lecture: (1) Don't put the empty bottle of Johnny W on your desk; always put it in your desk; (2) Snort coke outside the office; (3) If you get in trouble, just do whatever the Attorney Regulation people say because frankly, they're too busy to do more than make you go to some BS classes ... if you go with the flow, you should be fine; (4) Don't go to court drunk; and (5) Call your clients back. Oh, and (7)--Never, never apply for that guy's job.

2005-03-08T12:32:00.000-07:00

I'd like to thank the person/entity who printed up the course schedules and put them on top of the newspaper stand. Bless you. You made my day.
...

2005-03-07T15:42:00.000-07:00

Betsy Hoffman, Dick Tharp, Ceal Barry.

Three down, two to go.

You paying attention, Gary Barnett and Pres. of the CU Foundation?

Ok, Ceal wasn't an absolute must-go, but if you watched any women's basketball games this year you'd know something was dreadfully wrong. And considering the incredible strength of women's high school basketball in the state, there's absolutely no reason you can't have a top-25 team year in year out. Just go pick up the #1 players at Thunder Ridge, Creek, Heritage, Grandview, and Douglas County and you have a hell of a team.
...
Unfortunately, CU can ABSOLUTELY NOT fire GB now. I apologize for using the CAPS LOCK, since I admittedly have severe issues with people who go beyond italicizing and underlining to emphasize anything, but then again I'm half crazy, and most certainly have OCD, so if you'll let it slide this one time. The University of Washington settled with CU's old football coach, Rick Neuheisel, today, to the handsome sum of $4.7 million. UW fired Rick, and it was debatable whether it was for cause or not, and apparently UW was afraid the jury was going to slam them. A very nasty precedent. Anyway, we're stuck with Gary for a while, I fear. Why is it that being a scandalous football coach is infinitely more lucrative than being a good football coach? Why?
...
Enough sports. I saw two shows down at the Gates Planetarium at the Denver Museum. Now this planetarium is first-rate, brand new--nothing like CU's planetarium. If I ever get mega-rich, I'm totally going to have one of those in my house. And then I'll hire some guys to make nothing but traveling-through-space-and-black-holes-and-watching-stars-explode-and-getting thrown-threw-infinity-movies. And then I'll just sit in there and blast through the universe.

2005-03-06T21:48:00.000-07:00

I was glancing through some other blogs, and apparently at NYU Law they have a coat check. For whatever reason this blew my mind. I can't even fathom CU having a coat check. Or virtually anyplace in Denver outside of a hotel or restaurant having a coat check. What good is a coat check? Who checks coats? Who invented the coat check? Was life not complicated enough already that we can't just sling our coats over the back of our chairs? Are people at NYU dying for a coat check? I mean, if they have that kind of money to spare, maybe they'd be willing to donate to us state school folk a couple new chairs for the library?

2005-03-05T16:47:00.000-07:00

Competition and CU Law

anon 0L posted in the comments on the last post that he/she construed my rankings tirade as implying that CU Law is competitive. Well, it is--kind of. It's competitive in the way all law schools are competitive. Whenever you have more opportunities when you do well relative to your peers, there will be competition. I think the way Bolder Law, Moop, and anon 1L immediately sought to correct the misperception is kind of telling. The best analogy I can come up with is a sports rivalry. Not a Nebraksa-CU type rivalry, where fans on both sides would be more than happy to see the other team's charter bus go up in flames off I-76. This would be Georgetown, NYU, GW, Cardozo, Fordham. The big schools out East where grades mean a big something; where a couple places in the rankings means the difference between a $125,000 NYC-D.C. gig and a $60,000 rural N.J. government position. Those places suck, and I would caution people from going to those schools if they're not ready for three years of not-so-friendly battle.

In contrast, CU's a friendly rivalry. A Montana-Montana State rivalry, where you want to see one team beat the other by one point, no more. And when you're not going head-to-head, you wildly cheer for the other team. During 1L, I dreamed of getting my first semester grades back with a a few 94s and a low 89 in Civ Pro or something--it's the universal 1L dream. Ah, so naive. Realistically, I knew getting above an 84, or an 84 in each class, would be pretty good, and so that became my realistic goal. Suffice it to say that it doesn't matter how I did, because talking about your grades is a major faux pas, and because now I'm a 2L and it doesn't matter nearly as much, and I now wonder why I put in all those hours into classes where no amount of studying would get me a good grade. Now, I could care less. When grades come in, I'm glad we did well, or at least didn't do too poorly, or if it was legitimately poor, I'm glad I survived one more semester. I've never been denied notes, and I've never denied anyone notes, even when I know the person was skiing or jerking around or had gotten into an intense on-line poker game during class and tuned out.

Basically, I guess what I'm trying to say is CU is uncompetitive as you can possibly get in a system that is set up to be as competitive as possible. We do a good job of keeping it low-key. And when the rankings change,
...
Sorry for the lack of posting. Blame the weather.

2005-03-02T16:29:00.000-07:00

Hating law school and grades

Bolder Law posted today about how we all constantly struggle with law school, wondering if it's worth it. It's a painful process, to be sure. And I think his post exemplifies precisely why we need to modify the rankings system. Sure we'll still all hate law school, and occasionally we'll enjoy it. But I'll tell you what, if I didn't have to fight for my grades in every single class every single semester life would be a whole heck of a lot easier.

Imagine if this semester, right now, you knew you could coast into finals, do some studying at the end, pull a grade around the median, and there wouldn't be any repercussions. You wouldn't drop 15 spots; you wouldn't drop out of the magical top 10%, 25%, 50%, 75% or whatever bracket you're fighting to stay in.

Imagine if there wasn't a world of statistical difference between an 88 and an 85.

Imagine if you could rack up 5 82s this semester and nothing happened. Sure, you won't get that big firm job, but let's be honest--you have to be top 10-20% anyway to even have a shot at those. And so for the sake of those 20-30 people, everyone else has to suffer? The guy ranked 95th in his class still has to worry about his grades because he doesn't want to drop any further? The girl ranked 140th is forced to take blow-off, high median classes she's not interested in so that maybe she can make a big run at top half? You're telling me this is a good system? A system that makes it impossible for me to take one of the best professors are our school, Professor Hill, because he curves around 78% or so? A system that forces fine distinctions for 165 people when only 30 people need that fine distinction? And you're telling me we can't have a system that preserves the fine distinction for those 30 people but not for the other 135?

I honestly think if you're against changing the system, you just don't get it. It would take me less than 5 minutes to draw up a new rankings system that better addresses student, employer, and faculty concerns than the current system.
...

Ok, it took me 5 minutes.

1. Numerically rank the top 25%. Allow anyone between the top 25% and top 33% to petition to get access to their ranking, but it must be for good cause (judicial clerkship or an employer has strict rankings cut-offs). Allow anyone between the top 25% and top 50% who participates in 2L and 3L OCI to petition to have access to their rank. Allow anyone in the bottom 50% to petition to get access to their ranking, but the petition will only be granted in unusual circumstances. We implement the new system next fall, but for all current students anyone can petition at anytime to have access to their ranking, though CU Law's official policy will remain to not rank students below the top 25%, so that students can choose whether or not they want to drag a ranking around for another few years.

2005-03-01T15:36:00.000-07:00

Here's Monkey Man's proposal:

"I had this great idea: Cops spend too much time and money driving around tagging people for speeding. We should develop a traffic "Honor Code" for all drivers to follow. All drivers will have a duty to turn in speeding drivers to the cops. Who better to enforce driving laws than the drivers themselves? This new program will undoubtedly make this a safer world in which to live. After the success of this program, I'll propose another one: all drivers will get together to set the speed limits and other traffic regulations. The drivers are surely best situated to judge the safest and most efficient speed to travel. This, too, will improve the world."

Interesting thought. I doubt the Honor Code would work, because people would just turn in everyone they disliked whenever possible. But letting the 'market' set speeds sounds like an incredibly efficient way of figuring out speed limits. Think about it: in a snowstorm, people generally drive where they maximize speed without unduly compromising safety. Some people have different set levels, so you might have a range of between 25 and 40 mph, but if that's how people want to drive, that's the market. If I want to drive 150 mph through Wyoming, which I'd like to do, then let me do it, and if the market follows, well, so be it. I remember hearing that Montana didn't have speed limits, which I believe no longer is the rule, but there was a greater incidence of accidents that result in fatalities, but not a greater overall incidence of accidents.

2005-02-28T17:09:00.000-07:00

What CU's really missing isn't a new building; it's missing an Admiralty law course. Honestly, I've always wondered what happens if my supertanker is traveling through the Arctic Circle and we hit a whale and it's not whaling season. Is it like Arkansas, where if you hit a deer you can either take it home and eat it, or call the animal control people? Also, I went sailing once up north and I guess you're not allowed to discharge your septic tank if you're within a couple miles of land, but screw it, we did. Right there in harbor, a bunch of times. Should we have gone to prison? Or should we have been fined? Also, did you know that aircraft carriers dischare their septic tanks out at sea? Think about it ... or not. And what if two boats collide? Do they have GEICO insurance? I once met someone in an admiralty law program, and they said it basically boiled down to massive crashes, drunken sailors, sunken treasure, and pirates. They were probably pulling my chain, but they couldn't have been exaggerating that much. Massive crashes, drunken sailors, sunken treasure, and pirates ... in law school.

2005-02-27T13:13:00.000-07:00

We had an absolutely horrible experience at a super-posh LoDo restaurant last night. The bartender treated us like dogs--it was so shocking I'm not sure either of us knew what to do about it. (BTW, "us" refers to BuffsGirl and myself). We were harassed; we were ignored; we were treated as though the $8.50 Jack & Coke (actual value, about 50 cents) and approximately 1 shot of champagne for $9 was nothing to them. Burn our money. It was worthless there. In fact, our very presence was so noxious, so not worth the approximately $15 they netted of of us ordering two drinks and sitting there for five minutes, that they would rather piss us off and have us slander them to everyone we know for the next twenty years than even pretend that they were even marginally glad to see us. So here it is, you POS chain know as Ruth's Chris Steakhouse--eat it. Your food rocked, our server and the busboys rocked, but the bartender was such a dog that you've been blacklisted. You are an overpriced chain restaurant. You are a glossy Applebee's. You are all that's wrong with LoDo. You are pretentious without reason or justification. If you can't hire a bartender that can pour a drink without making a snide remark--or about 5 of them--I'll consider it a personal affront.

Blacklisted, baby, blacklisted.
...
By the way, karma was good to us yesterday, our terrible dining experience aside. We almost hit an injured pigeon outside the Goodwill in Cherry Creek, and I ran out into traffic and put it into the bushes so it wouldn't get hit. We then go inside and score the nicest bedstand, a bunch of great picture frames, a Burberry 100% cashmere scarf (retails for $$$$$$$, but a fat $1 at Goodwill), and a couple other great buys. My best Goodwill/Salvation Army experience ever.