Cleary Gottlieb Associate Gets Benchslapped By Tax Court
As the old adage goes, "A lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client." And there is some anecdotal evidence in support of that proposition. See, e.g., Elana Glatt / Elana Elbogen (depending upon how you view the merits of her case against her wedding florist).
Here's another example of what can happen when Biglaw litigators represent themselves. From TaxProf Blog:
The Tax Court today decided Hynes v. Commissioner, T.C. Summ. Op. 2008-1 (1/2/08), a case involving Shawn T. Hynes, a fifth year securities litigation associate in Cleary Gottlieb's New York City office. The taxable year at issue was 2003, when Hynes was a Penn 3L (he tranferred to Penn after completing his first year at Oregon).
More about the facts of Shawn Hynes's case, and how he got benchslapped by the Tax Court, after the jump.
Still from Paul Caron's summary of the opinion:
Before attending law school, Hynes had worked as a paralegal at Cravath and participated in the firm’s qualified pension plan (QRP). In April 2003, he took a $16,263 distribution from the Cravath pension plan, less $3,252 of withheld income tax. After studying for the California bar over the summer, he started work in September as an associate at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett in Palo Alto.Hynes reported $51,304 of wage income from Simpson Thacher in 2003, but did not report the pension distribution from Cravath. At trial, he conceded that he should have reported the pension distribution but contested the 10% early distribution penalty:
"Petitioner ... argues that he should not be held liable for the 10% additional tax on this distribution on the grounds that his request was based on economic hardship, and an exception for such a request exists under § 401(k)(2)(B)(i). Petitioner testified that the costs of his law school education, coupled with the costs associated with his studying for the bar exam, left him with no viable alternative other than to take a premature distribution from his QRP. Petitioner testified that he used the disbursement to pay school loans, pay credit card bills, and provide for his day-to-day living expenses during the summer of 2003."
On the one hand: C'mon, Your Honor -- didn't you have law school loans? Doesn't having to subsist on ramen noodles constitute "economic hardship"?
On the other hand: Hynes went to work for Simpson Thacher after taking the bar. As noted in the opinion, STB provided him with a salary advance, to tide him over until his start date.
And it turns out that Hynes's case had some other problems, as the IRS helpfully pointed out:
Respondent [IRS] argues that while § 401(k)(2)(B)(i) does provide for hardship distributions from qualified pension plans, that section does not exempt a taxpayer from the 10% additional tax that may apply to such a distribution. At trial, petitioner admitted that he did not research the tax ramifications that might result from his request for a hardship distribution beyond looking at § 401(k)(2)(B)(i). Petitioner also admitted that he could have overlooked and/or misunderstood the 10% additional tax exceptions enumerated in § 72(t)(2).Upon review of § 72(t)(2), we cannot find any exception that would exempt the distribution made to petitioner in taxable year 2003. Moreover, petitioner admits that his argument that the 10% additional tax should not apply is based on a provision pertaining to the request for disbursement and not, as we are concerned with here, the taxation of such a disbursement.
Oops. And the coup de grace:
The Tax Court also sustained a 20% accuracy-related penalty, concluding that "Petitioner’s argument that he did not remember this distribution at the time he filed his 2003 return because of the extraordinary demands of his job as an attorney is without merit."
If you bill 3000 hours a year, expect sympathy from your family and friends -- but maybe not from the U.S. Tax Court.
P.S. Speaking of Cleary Gottlieb, remember Afrogate? Here's a little postscript on that hair-raising controversy.
Tax Court: Cost of Law School and Studying for Bar Not Sufficient Justification to Waive 10% Tax on Premature Pension Distribution [TaxProf Blog]
Hynes v. Commissioner (PDF) [U.S. Tax Court]
Glamour Attempts To Negotiate Peace Between Blacks, Bitchy Redheads [Jezebel]
(93) Comments
There's nothing wrong with transferring.
What's wrong with Penn?
Lat, you've really started to get pathetic. (Perhaps you've been pathetic, but I missed it). Why don't you get over it. You went to Yale. Yeah. Good for you. It's only Yalies who give a fuck about that ten years after the fact. It's kind of sad that you're still hung up on it.
Who gives a flying fuck that this guy transferred to Penn from Oregon? Why would you write that? Does it make him a weaker lawyer? No. Are you trying to suggest that he's not as a good as those who started at Penn 1st year?
Penn sucks.
It doesn't matter where he went to school, he's a moron for making the "poor me" argument to the judge.
11:136: Just stating the facts. Transfer students are not as good as their pure-blood classmates. Penn sucks. Transfers suck. Transfers to Penn SUCKY SUCKERS.
Another white pretty boy trying to game the system... in other news...
The references to Hynes' law schools are from the TaxProf Blog post (which Lat is merely quoting).
she's hot.
What's the big deal? The IRS always wins in Tax Court.
Nice hairdo.
The IRS doesn't always win, but morons alwyas lose.
thank god he isn't a tax associate.
That still doesn't excuse his failure to look to the statute imposing the 10% penalty (IRC 72(t)) versus a statute with similar language that does impose a penalty in and of itself.
11:36, it matters because the case was tried in the tax court chambers in Bend, OR.
Nothing excuses his hair. He should be thrown in prison for that choice alone.
Good point 11:58, but I think it raises the even larger question:
When did Willy Wonka start practicing law at Cleary?
Response to 11:53, while there is no excuse for not looking up the law, the fact is, he is not even remotely alone. I work with a about 75 lawyers, partners and associates with huge tax liens. I've worked with a number of other professionals, but no group has even come close to number and amount of tax liens as lawyers. Oddly enough, most do seem to be in securities groups.
Whoa, that's a dude? I was thinking that she was kinda hot, but now I'll just retreat back to work.
the silly thing is that he could have avoided the 10% penalty by transferring the funds in the 401(k) to an IRA and then taking a distribution from the IRA for educational expenses. instead he took the proceeds directly from the 401(k), which doesn't have the same exemptions. the policy reasons underlying the difference in the treatment of the two accounts escape me...
He clerked. Maybe he didn't receive the stipend.
Isn't there an Aerosmith song about this guy?
Did he pass the NY bar? I searched bc I thought it curious how it reads Nov 07 on profile.
LOL @ 11:49
What an assclown. He got basically benchslapped for not paying $1,600 in additional income tax, not to mention possibly imperiling his law license.
Considering what he is making at Cleary Gottlieb now, I have zero sympathy for him.
Maybe he didn't have the money then - but even The Man takes payment plans.
Transfer students are the scum of the earth.Transfer students are the scum of the earth.
Transfer students are the scum of the earth.
Transfer students are the scum of the earth.
Transfer students are the scum of the earth.
Transfer students are the scum of the earth.
Transfer students are the scum of the earth.
Better path for T5-->V10: high stakes, cross-border transactional work or bet-the-company litigation?
The genius litigator should have read the WIKIPEDIA entry on 401k:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/401k#Withdrawal_of_funds
"Any withdrawal that is permitted before age 59½ is subject to an excise tax equal to ten percent of the amount distributed, including withdrawals to pay expenses due to a hardship, except to the extent the distribution does not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under Internal Revenue Code section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regard to whether the employee itemizes deductions for such taxable year)."
Doesn't seem to fit the EXCEPT clause, does it?
Hey 3L's: If you continued to pay rent over the summer at your school location, are you taking a deduction for the rent you paid while away as a summer associate? Have any associates taken such a deduction?
Whatever . . . I actually agree with Lat on this one. Transfers are NOT the same, and, as long as we're being catty and bringing in extraneous garbage, it does matter . . . as extraneous garbage goes.
As an order of the coif graduate from a barely top 50 school, I can say that I sucked it up, finished my scholarship, and DID NOT TRANSFER. So it really pisses me off when the transfer types who fled the jurisdiction get more love! Beeyatches, we all started from the same place.
And it really pisses me off when the students who didn't even get into my crappy school . . . and went to like Gonzaga or something super dreadful . . . transferred and managed to get in the top 10%. Of course you did! Most schools don't have strict curves like they do for 1L year. Congrats that you could do well 1L year when compared to people who can barely tie their own shoes . . .
I realize the last statement applies to me, but I freaking take it!
1:17, you are truly pathetic. From my experience at HLS (not a transfer; did not apply outside the top 10), transfer students did better than average. The numbers actually bear this out. But it's much harder to get in as a transfer than as a 1L. So you probably would not have been able to get in.
But it's all irrelevant to this post, since Penn is not a first-tier school in any case.
The only true first-tier school are Yale and Loyola.
I don't care what you guys think, he has nice hair!
Um, like I totally kicked ass on my finals this semester. And like, my writing professor totally wanted me so I got an A on my memo. Do you guys think I should lateral over to NYU?
This hating on transfer students is baffling. I imagine that an organic student at Yale who received a legacy preference is somehow more qualified than a transfer who got in on what is likely an astounding first year at a lower tier school? I don't get it. Much of the snobbery expressed on this blog is supposedly built on meritocratic factors. But apparently posters are motivated by snobbery for its own sake. Or more likely crippling insecurity.
did anyone read his bio on cleary? it provides that his native language is english. what a bozo.
2:26,
Insecurity/jealousy is probably the main thing. I went to a good school and a friend of mine with identical grades transfered up to a great school. We ended up working at basically identical firms in New York. It's jealous and insecure, but it irks me that everyone presumes that he's brilliant and presumes that I must be a "real hard worker."
Transfers are like the neuvo riche; if you weren't there to begin with, you have no business being there at all.
2:26, hardly anyone ever gets into Yale Law due to legacy status, and even those who do have outstanding college accomplishments that certainly are more impressive than just one year of permance at a law school.
I was a transfer and am now a COA clerk. I wonder how many of those bashing transfers have had federal appellate clerkships.
2:57 --
You don't count. You're the exception that proves the rule.
your typical poster--
in the interest of fairness to this debate, I should say that I transferred from a top 20 school to a top 10 school for family reasons (to be closer to a dying relative) and my judge has had clerks from the top 20 school at which I started--though at the absolute top of the class.
2:57
FYI, senior judges don't count.
Legacy students are far more impressive than transfer students, because they likely had blue bloodlines, rich parents and proper breeding. You don't see many Yale legacy poors.
2:42 I totally agree. Almost everyone on their site lists English as their "native" language, as if they're too fancy to speak American.
****LAT****
Now that 1st semester is over for 1Ls and their grades are either in or coming soon, do a survey/post on those (douche bags) hoping to TRANSFER.
The results are guaranteed to generate a comment clusterf~ck from both A) students who feel that the prestige of their degrees/schools is diminished by the acceptance of x-fers (e.g. Georgetown, which accepts ~100 transfers each year according to its ABA data), and B) students who wished desperately that they could go to better schools.
And to 1:32 above, the suggestion that it's more difficult to gain admission to a school as a transfer is almost wholly lacking in merit. There are at least 2 good reasons for this:
1) Transfer stats (LSAT & GPA) are NOT included in USNWR rankings, which means that schools may accept students with low numbers without damage to the school's reputation.
2) The ratio of applicants to available seats is lower for transfers than it is for 1L applicants (witness again GULC), and thus admissions are less competitive.
3:16--I'm with an active COA judge. However, I don't agree that the active/senior division means that much. Some of the finest minds in the judiciary are senior judges and their clerks are quite impressive. Back to work, but I felt the need to chime in with my posts to stick up for my fellow transfers.
Lat didn't mention anything about transfers or that the guy transferred in his comments on this article. The only mention of the fact the guy transferred was in the quote portion from the other site. Where are you guys getting the idea that Lat is against transfers?
Who the hell cares who transferred or for that matter, what law school you went to at all? Once you make it into biglaw and are making the big bucks, that is all that really matters. Your path to getting there is completely irrelevant. They don't pay you more because you went to Yale vs. the University of Texas once you actually get hired on as an associate at any given firm. I think the smartest people out there are the ones that make it into biglaw from lesser schools, it shows they had to be more impressive to succeed.
Transfer do nothing all of their lives, and then do well on seven tests. Schools take them in for their tuition.
the sickest transfers are those who transfer "up" from a place like, say, Rutgers, to something outside the T14, like Boston College.
you've studied hard.
you're at the top of your class.
you'll succeed no matter where you go, at this point.
stay with the school that believed in you when all the others dumped your application in the trash-bin.
bring honor to your non-elite school, and break the US News caste system.
the students in your new school will hate you, anyway.
Up until a few years ago, many schools would place a notation on a transfer's diploma listing their transfer status.
3:39
What did the notation say?
"Student is douche bag?"
Transfers are not in the 1L classes with the other students that deserve to be there. 1L is when people try their best. A transfer's subsequent performance, therefore, has little bearing on how they would perform had they had what it takes to be admitted in the first place.
it's really just a business decision to transfer. a classmate of mine in my first year class and i applied for a transfer. we both got accepted. i transferred but he did not because our law school had offered him almost full scholarship for the remaining years. he took the scholarship and ended up with less debt. there's nothing wrong with doing well and building more options. either way, we both ended up in the same place: clerking and working for a large law firm.
12:10--You can't roll over hardship distributions from 401(k)s into IRAs. Also, transfer students are traitors.
2:53(2) a/k/a allegedly "typical poster" -
People who can't spell "nouveau" (or even "nuevo," if that is what you were going for) have no business criticizing the nouveau riche, the transfer students, or anyone else for that matter.
Here's the problem with transfers . . .
I know a kid who was a 1L at the UC-Davis. He's not from California; it was just the best school he got into. After his first year, he had NO job prospects. He managed to scrape his way into some free internship using family connections.
Then the guy transfers to the University of Virginia. Suddenly, his life is mystically different -- EVEN THOUGH HE HASN'T TAKEN A SINGLE CLASS AT VIRGINIA. He's fighting off Skadden, Kirkland, you name it. I think he ended up at Kirkland . . .
With the same grades from Davis that didn't get him any attention at all. While his Davis peers get nothing. And while many people at the University of Virginia who were there the whole time get nothing.
That's why I hate transfers. It's all about undeserved rewards based on gaming the system. Go to an easier school to get good grades. Then use those grades to get you access to a top school.
People on here are pretty dense when it comes to sarcasm. It's pretty clear that "the typical poster" is making fun of elitists, not actually trying to be one.
The transfer racket makes great financial sense for schools (which can fill vacancies AND, more importantly, scale-up their profit margins with students who will never take classes with marquee/premium-priced 1st year faculty, but rather with dopey/low-cost adjuncts) and for firms (which can hire these kids' diplomas to beef-up their firm websites).
The system will only change if and when clients begin to demand of their firms "real" graduates from top schools or show a qualitatively similar (MCL/order-of-the-coif) grads from lesser schools.
4:26:
If "the typical poster" is making fun of elitists, not actually trying to be one" then how come "People on here are pretty dense when it comes to sarcasm"?
4:26:
If "the typical poster" is making fun of elitists, not actually trying to be one" then how come "People on here are pretty dense when it comes to sarcasm"?
"the students in your new school will hate you, anyway", NOT SO.
anyhow, my classmate at USF transferred to Stanford, and now he is the managing partner of one of the most profitible law firms in SF.
I cannot see transfering to a LS other than Yale or Stanford though....
4:10
And of course you don't sound bitter and jealous. Not even a bit.
4:30(2) and 4:31--
See, e.g., 3:52.
4:10,
Very few people have any job prospects after their first year. But any student at Davis with the grades to transfer to Virginia would have found biglaw work as a 2L.
As for this kid getting better offers than some of the people who went to UVA from day one, my guess is that Skadden and Kirkland made those offers for a reason.
Anyone who has ever worked at a decent firm knows that it takes a hell of a lot more than being smart to succeed. You have to work really hard, you have to be ambitious and you have to communicate well. If he interviews well, It's not that crazy that a firm would want a kid with stellar grades from Davis with the ambition to transfer up over a bottom 25% UVA veteran that stumbles through an interview.
As for students at Davis not having the same opportunities, a lot of that has to do with where firms focus their recruiting resources. Skadden and Kirkland are probably interested in a grand total of 10 students at Davis, only two of which probably want to work in New York or Chicago. It makes no sense for them to fly an interviewer across the country to compete for those two students. UVA is a different story.
THAT'S A GIRL???????
Sounds like you got served and are still in shock over it.
Transfer'd
4:30-
I wonder what you think about transfer students who perform far better than the "real" students? Or is pedigree, not merit, what counts?
And while we're talking about elitism v. merit, I'm curious how many succesful top tier applicants used application advisers (who essentially write your essay for you), LSAT tutors, or came from a school with high grade inflation (such as Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton, et al). On this last point, I recall a statisitc that in the top 14 undergraduate colleges, over 50% of grades issued were A minus and above. I also recalled statements from these schools that one reason curves aren't enforced is to maintain high admitance rates to grad schools, and especially law schools.
Just to throw it out there - but I'd bet dollars to donuts that transfers tend to be from lower socio-economic status than their "real" peers, and outperform their peers after transferring. But that would mean that the meritocratic admissions process is merely a mask for a system that advantages the advantaged. Shock! Horror! What a suprise! What would happen if the Ivy myth were to finally burst?!
3:36-
Are you stupid or ignorant? You got in on ONE test, not seven. I suppose your LSAT score is a better measure of legal ability than seven law school exams?
I'm a transfer. I stole your interview slot, your seat in all the best classes with all the best professors, owned your girlfriend's beave behind your back and nutted on her face.
I will continue to do these things until my demands are met.
I want a cookie damnit. Double chocolate chunk.
Ah, isn't this a splendid way to start a new year. With bonus season all but over and with the next raises months away, this place has been taken over by Autoadmit lowlifes.
sophisticatiowned.
6:00 said: "Just to throw it out there - but I'd bet dollars to donuts that transfers tend to be from lower socio-economic status than their "real" peers...."
Stipulated.
You guys are a bunch of filthy poors.
:shakes off filth:
Someone call me? I'm still waiting on my cookie.
And teh beave is getting ser pwned.
6:52
Suave.
Enjoy the "beave."
6:05,
I was my ridiculously good grades at my ridiculously prestigious school, in addition to my cool and diverse extra curricular activities, that got me into my T10 school. The LSAT--the easiest reading comprehension test ever--only keeps people out.
6:08,
What top 10 schools have "interview slots" based on grades? Not mine, sucker. You didn't steal a thing, except an extra space at graduation, at which, no one knew you, because you had no friends.
Your classmate is managing partner at a firm? What are you, at least 40? Any you are trolling this board, sticking up for transfers? How dumb do you think we are?
3:40:
The notation said: TRANSFER
9:42
Over-usage of comma'd.
LOL at poors who think doing well at a law school test means anything in the grand scheme of life. A poor should know his station.
Its spelled poorz fool.
It's it's, poor.
Hey, ease up on the transfers. I know what it's like to be the new kid in school. You didn't do anything to anybody and all of the sudden a bunch of guys dressed up like skeletons are dancing on your face. Here's some advice, do what I did. Find youself an older asian gentleman and learn the ways of the warrior. I didn't learn karate so I could fight, I learned karate so I wouldn't have to.
i worked with this dude, and he is a total asshat. also creepy. and the hair is just as bad in person. worse, actually.
6:00--("And while we're talking about elitism v. merit, I'm curious how many succesful top tier applicants used application advisers (who essentially write your essay for you), LSAT tutors . . .Just to throw it out there - but I'd bet dollars to donuts that transfers tend to be from lower socio-economic status than their "real" peers")
--you are way off-base. Transfer students often give up merit scholarships to pay full tuition at their new school. Many of them had all of the so-called advantages (such as LSAT) the first time around but just didn't achieve the necessary scores to get in the first time around. In fact, there is a famous story about a transfer student who scored in the 150s on the LSAT even with a private tutor, didn't get into any top schools, did well 1L year from a Tier 2 school and then transferred to a T5.
9:40-
You're a jackass. I'd bet the only grades they give at your ridiculously prestigous school were ridiculously good ones. And I wonder how you got into your prestiguos school. Legacy? Prep school? Daddy gave some money? Admissions consultant? SAT tutor? Maybe you're just good at standardized tests, and a total failure as a human being, you insecure little sh!t.
6:00 PM --
The law school admission process advantages the advantaged?!?! Give me a break! You're a moron. It advantages the GPA. Regardless of the issuing institution. Period.
I worked my butt off in HS, rocked the SATs, went to a top 5 undergrad university and majored in a particular school with a notoriously low average GPA (3.4). I screwed off too much and ended up with a 3.5.
Now . . . I'm classmates with morons who screwed off and got 4.0s from schools that nobody has heard of. Schools where the median SAT score is in the three digits. Schools where they don't even take the SATs. These peers are literally "shocked" when they hear how low my undergrad GPA was. Of course it was! My peers could actually write and think!
To get into Harvard for undergrad, you need to be a bright, rockstar. Bright rockstars competing with bright rockstars don't deserve Cs, hence the "grade inflation" that you find so objectionable. Morons who can't tie their own shoes competing against other like-minded morons don't deserve As. Oh, but they get them anyway. Is this your "advantaging the advantaged"?
THE LAW SCHOOL ADMISSIONS GAME TREATS EVERYBODY THE SAME!!!
It's okay. I'm order of the coif now, and I'm looking forward to blazing past your underperforming top 10 law school arses.
OH BUT WAIT! Now suddenly it matters what brand of diploma you have! Undergrad brand apparently didn't matter. But graduate brand? Oh! It's an indication of my quality as a human being. Guess I should've transferred!
4:47 seems like he has his shit together.
Question. How do I choose between sophisticated cross-border transactional work or high-stakes, bet the company litigation work?
447- Still smarting from the prestige drop, are you? It's ok, TTTs are full of people who peaked early.
N.B. For all those "natural" students who do not hold the above opinion, this retort is not for you. I am sure you guys are cool and have big dicks and everything. It is those bitter, jealous, needle-dick fucks who deserve this response.
Anyway, I never knew this animosity existed. Let me tell you the way it is:
I am a transfer. Got a 160 (hitting 165 on the practice exams) on my LSAT. I achieved a mere 2.9 in college because I got blacked out 5 days a week, was the social chair of my fraternity, and "entered" lots of women. My apartment smelled of rich mahogony and had lots of leather bound books. I managed to make it to about 10% of my college classes, but crammed for finals.
All you "shit-talking" naturals don't get it. I got into a Tier 3 school per my collegial behavior. But I now am your classmate. One thing I have noticed that the schools in the Top 12 are way easier once you get in. They don't push their students as hard, because it is presumed the students are "smarter" -- whatever that means. I go to a top 12 schools, and have several friends who transferred to similar schools. I have had friends from this year and years past, who transferred to University of Texas, Georgetown, Vanderbilt, WashU, NYU, Chicago, UVA, and they all agree. The schools are less competitive, and the students are not pushed as hard.
At my old school, we read every single case in all of my classes and had 40-60 pages per class per night. That is cover to cover folks, with the classes that are split up into two semesters. From the school's perspective, they want to push their students hard, so they can pump out competent lawyers and scrape their way higher in the flawed US News rankings. At my new school, the teachers skip over cases, gloss over material, and assign much less reading. I was shocked with how much free time I had during the first 1/2 of the semester. But, at the same time I actually feel less prepared for the bar. I am really, really glad I took my basics at my old school.
Anyway, my friends from my 1L class and I all agree: Our old school (where we were all in the top 10%) was more competitive and difficult. In all fairness though, the top students at the new school are WAY smarter than the average students at my old school. That is obvious, but I don't feel like they have anything on me. And BTW, intelligence will yield to work ethic 7 times out of 10.
This semester I studied 16-18 hours a day for 8 weeks and owned my exams at my new school. That is how hard I studed during my 1L year, and that is how hard everyone studied who was in the top 10% at my old school. I assumed that was how it was at all law schools, but none of the students at my new school studied near as hard as I did. In fact, they were still drinking and going out 2 weeks before exams. Maybe my T3 school is unique, but I doubt it.
It appears to me that the shittier the school, the more competitive it is. This is because all the students who are smart but fucked off in college now realize that only 20 students (the top 10%) get big dick jobs.
You "natural" students spent the weekends in the library in college and actually went to class in order to make that precious 4.0, while maybe having had sex with 3 girls. I on the other hand was a frat-master and could not have had a better college experience.
We ended up at the same school. We both went through the interviews. I now get the better offers because I know how to look a person in the face and bullshit.
You relied just on your grades, but have never developed the social skills to complement your alleged "intelligence."
Really, we are probably on the same level in terms of "intelligence." You may have scored higher on the LSAT (which is merely a PREDICTOR of law school performance) and may have studied in college. Whereas scored lower than my practice LSAT exams and jacked off in college on girls faces. You study as hard as you did in college, whereas I get my shit together and start applying myself. I have tons of motivation, because I was jolted into reality when I realized I didnt get into the school I had wanted to attend.
Of course, now I am the dork and you are the "cool" dude going out 2 weeks before finals. But how cool are law students really. We are all losers for the time being. And how sad do you really think I am that I am not invited to the "keg party" that starts at 8PM. I have all the friends I need from high school and college. I couldn't care less whether anyone at my new school likes me or not. There is no room for you in my black book anyway.
Enjoy your wasted highschool and college career. I am sorry if I made fun of you in high school, I now do see the big picture in life. But don't think that just because you chose to for-go having sex, you are automatically entitled to a big-dick job. You have to interview just like everyone else. Maybe you should have spend a little more time on your social skills in order to handle awkward social enviornments. Props to those who know how to use the system to their advantage.
One interesting story: some chick had a 174 on her LSAT at my old school but went locally because of her boyfriend. (Yes, one of those girls who was "in love"). Well, she attended most classes and basically went through the motions. She studied maybe 3-4 days for finals (which is all the students here study) and ended up in the Top Half.
The LSAT doesn't mean shit. If you can hire 1 student, would you rather take a hard worker who will spend every waking hour making sure he/she does a good job? Or would you want the pompus so-called "intelligent" asshole who has skated his way through life, believes he is always right, and has no idea what hard work really is all about? Who would you rely on when you realize you have a 36 hour deadline? The thing that matters is that the transfer students have gotten their shit together when it counts. They know how to work hard and have proved it in the classroom covering material that is much closer to "lawyer work" then the LSAT and some 4.0 GPA in biology.
A quick note on the US News rankings. They are a total scam. I read an article where some school (e.g., Oklahoma) got a new dean, and that caused another school (e.g., Florida) to drop 5 spots, even though neither the schools nor the event had nothing to do with each other. That is a computer formula for you. What a bunch of crap.
Your a fag if you try to critique my grammer/spelling -- do you really think I will waste my time to review this post?
Transfer students don't get to transfer their former grades. Transfer students were mosly on scholarship, but now have to pay full tuition. Many transfers are not eligible for law review.
Its not all peachy.
4:50,
If you can't make your point succinctly, no one will bother to read your work, including the senior associate, partner, and if you are so lucky, judge.
You are an idiot for getting a 160 on the LSAT. I could have gotten that score if I took it in Spanish.
4:50,
There is no such thing as Top 12. Just say that you are going to Northwestern.