Over the holiday weekend, reports came pouring into the ATL inbox about the most expensive iPhone app currently on the market. It costs $1,000 and is aimed at legal types, specifically those who want to be lawyers in California. From PCWorld:

BarMax: California Edition, available now in the iPhone’s App Store for $999.99, is a study guide for the California Bar Exam. Harvard lawyers oversaw development of the app, which weighs in at 1 GB and includes outlines, lectures, a study calendar, and real questions and essays from previous exams. The only comparable app available now is from BarBri, but you must be enrolled in the company’s $3000 to $4000 classes to use most of the features.

According to TechCrunch, the man behind the app is Mike Ghaffary, a JD/MBA ‘06 Harvard grad. Ghaffary was just recently admitted to the California bar himself, in December 2009.

He says he came up with the BarMax app idea while studying…

Holy crap.

We did not Photoshop this picture. It actually appeared in a New York Times wedding announcement. Chuckle at it, if you must. But know that when you do, you’re fiddling while a venerable institution goes up in flames.

December isn’t a great month to get married, and this December was particularly bad. Still, our final Legal Eagle Wedding Watch couples for 2009 have some surprisingly strong Biglaw credentials. Here they are:

1. Nicole Schreier and Matthew Kaplan

2. Rachel Lu and Jimmy Gao

3. Elizabeth Cronise and Joe McLaughlin

Check out these couples’ bios, after the jump.

Thanks to all of you who sent along good wishes after the birth of Baby Lin. It’s been a busy two months, but we’re emerging from the vicious beatdown that is new parenthood. (By which we mean that we’re sleeping in luxurious two-hour stretches and showering almost daily.)

We’ve been keeping up with the NYT weddings, but as usual the November and December offerings were relatively weak, which gives us a good excuse to eliminate the dreary matches (e.g., Fordham-marries-Fordham; Cardozo 1L, no picture; U. Penn., blah, blah) and bring you each month’s top three. And if ATL management accuses of slacking off, we’re totally playing the mommy card.

We’ll be back soon with December’s couples and our 2009 Couple of the Year reader poll.

Here are your November couples:

1. Mia Feldbaum and Mark McGoldrick

2. Lisa Rockefeller and Edward Sebelius

3. Stephen Davis and Jeffrey Busch

Read more about these newlyweds, after the jump.

Yesterday, we reported that Harvard Law School was making a change to its grading curve before finals. We told you that HLS lifted the requirement to have a certain percentage of the class received a “low pass” in the law school’s new High Pass/Pass/Low Pass/Fail grading system.

After our report went live, Harvard Law School’s Vice Dean for Academic Programming, Andrew Kaufman, sent around an email to all students. According to Dean Kaufman, mandatory low passes were never a part of the HLS grading plan:

We have recently become aware of all sorts of rumors floating around about “changes” in our so-called grading curve, in particular the percentage of Low Passes. In fact, we have never had and do not now have a mandatory curve. All we have had for the last twenty years is a recommended curve. We did not recently change that curve. All we have done is to make clear to faculty that under the new grading system and in keeping with the recommended nature of the curve, they have discretion regarding the exact percentage of grades to be given in each category.

Andrew Kaufman

Vice Dean for Academic Programming

Fair point. Thanks for clearing that up.

But HLS dropped letter grading over a year ago. Are you telling me that the Harvard Law School faculty wasn’t entirely clear on how to grade students, for a year? During the worst legal job market in recent memory?

Some HLS students we talked to aren’t very happy with that.

Given the state of the legal economy, I don’t have a problem with grade inflation at top law schools. The job market is terrible enough as it is. If an extra (inflated and totally BS) third of a grade helps a student get a job right now, I think that is fine. Whatever, sometimes you have to “juke the stats,” and I understand that.

But it’s not cool when schools institute grade inflation secretly and hope nobody will notice. It’s not cool when schools try to pass off grade inflation as something other than grade inflation. Law schools have to do what they have to do, but there is no reason to pretend that everybody is stupid.

At Harvard Law School and at Georgetown University Law Center, the administrations have decided that their students need things to be a little easier. But neither law school seems willing to admit that the economy played a role in their sudden embrace of grade reform.

Details after the jump.

In parsing the fate of law school students, there’s no point in talking about the 3Ls. Their chances of success in the job hunt are about as bright as Obama’s prospects of winning the war in Afghanistan. In other words, abandon hope all ye who enter here.

The 1Ls can actually pray the economy will improve. And unlike the poor 3Ls, they knew what they were getting into when they enrolled this fall.

But what about the 2Ls? They have a year and a half more to stay in the law school bunker. Is that long enough for the economy to pick up and for firms to open their wallets doors to draw them close to the Biglaw bosom? Many 2Ls report that their dance cards for the summer are empty.

But there may be hope for current 2Ls without summer suitors, reports Zach Lowe at AmLaw Daily. Some firms are coming back for another round:

[A] small number of those 2Ls stand to benefit from an added mini-round of recruiting, which law school officials and firm recruiters attribute to the cautious stance some firms took the first time around in August and September. The reason, according to about a dozen sources we interviewed: Firms shooting for smaller class sizes limited their offers to the best of the best in the class of 2010. The students in that group found themselves with several offers to choose from, leaving firms short of the already smaller-than-usual targets they’d set. Now those firms are going back to top law schools and asking about candidates who have not yet secured a gig for summer 2010, according to career services deans at law schools, law firm recruiters, and industry groups.

Which firms are still looking? What are they looking for? And, if Adolf Hitler was a 2L, what would he do?

Find out after the jump.

We mentioned in Morning Docket that Harvard Law School is cutting back on loan forgiveness to students bound for public interest jobs. The news that HLS is gutting a major initiative that it started just last year is pretty shocking, and we figured you’d like to see the full email from HLS Dean Martha Minow.

First, some background on what HLS was going to do. The Public Service Initiative was launched in 2008. Under the program, HLS would waive 3L tuition for students that committed to public interest jobs for five years after graduation.

It was a pretty good idea. If you are running up the huge HLS bill but you don’t want to go into Biglaw — or BIglaw doesn’t want you — the program would allow you to take the job you want/can get without ruining your financial future.

The problem, apparently, was that way too many HLS students either decided to forgo Biglaw or couldn’t get in the door. The Harvard Crimson reports:

When the program was launched last fall, administrators were unsure how much student interest to expect. Yet, last year, over 110 first-year students indicated their interest in the program—50 percent more than the targeted number—according to then-Law School Dean Elena Kagan.

There are two main takeaways from this overwhelming response: 1) It sure seems like a lot of students end up in Biglaw not because they want to, but because it’s the only way for them to pay off their huge debts. What a surprise. 2) There are a whole lot of 1Ls — at the second best law school in the country — who don’t think they’ll be able to snag Biglaw jobs.

So in response to this information, HLS cuts the program. Brilliant. Let’s get some student reaction and look at Minow’s email after the jump.

Jeremy Haber’s star rose and and fell before we had a chance to draft a post. Haber is a first year student at Harvard Law School and recently made the finals in the Washington Post’s “America’s Next Great Pundit” contest. From the Harvard Crimson via ABA Journal:

Jeremy L. Haber, a first year student at the Law School, is one of four finalists remaining in the Post’s “America’s Next Great Pundit” contest, the winner of which will write 13 weekly op-ed columns on a topic of his choice.

Haber, who said he entered the contest on an impulse, has emerged from over 4,800 entrants to outlast six other finalists — including a Nobel laureate in physics, an assistant secretary of commerce in the Bush administration, and a Middle East expert at the Council on Foreign Relations.

These are the columns that got him into the final rounds. Unfortunately, some other finals got in the way of his punditry. He is a 1L and it is mid-November…

Last night, the WSJ Law Blog previewed a new set of law school rankings. Today, we have the full list from SuperLawyers. The magazine, in association with Minnesota Law & Politics and Washington Law & Politics, has ranked law schools based on the number of Super Lawyers they produce.

Is it a little self-serving for a magazine to rank law schools based on how many of the school’s graduates end up in its own magazine? Sure. It’s a little like US Weekly handing out Oscar nominations based on how many times a star has appeared on its cover.

But at least it is an attempt to rank schools based on graduate outcomes. The Super Lawyers Blog explains the rankings this way:

Most law school rankings look at things like bar passage rates, professor-to-student ratios and the number of books in the library, but they ignore the end product — the quality of lawyers produced. We think it’s like ranking football teams based on athletic facilities, player size and equipment without considering who wins the games.

In the real world — the world of clients and juries and judges — no one cares about your GPA or LSAT score. All that matters is how good and ethical a lawyer you are. That’s the focus of Super Lawyers.

Schools are ranked according to the total number of graduates named to the state and regional Super Lawyers lists in 2009. In the event of a tie between schools, the cumulative peer evaluation and research scores of graduates are used as tie-breakers.

They care about how “ethical” you are in the real world? Who knew?

Enough with the preamble. Let’s explore the cream of the crop, the Super Lawyers top 20, after the jump.

We wrote earlier today about Brian Schroeder’s Halloween misadventures. On the morning of October 31, the Harvard Law ‘09 grad set fire to a chapel housing the remains of unidentified 9/11 victims. He turned himself in that evening.

Sidley Austin has responded to our inquiry regarding Schroeder, who had summered with the firm in 2008. The firm says it officially rescinded Schroeder’s job offer today.

Many have written to us about Schroeder, expressing surprise that he would do something like this. A collection of comments, after the jump.

Delaying start dates for incoming associates may have another downside: leaving them with nothing to do but get into trouble.

Brian Schroeder has an impressive résumé. The Texan graduated from Duke in 2005, having majored in theater studies, and went on to Harvard Law School. There, he was an editor of the Harvard Latino Law Review and a co-president of Lambda, an LGBT student group. He also took part in Parody, the HLS comedy show (which Elie was involved in during his time at Harvard Law).

After taking a year off to travel around Southeast Asia, Africa and Europe, he graduated from HLS this spring and moved to New York for a Biglaw job. He was supposed to start at Sidley Austin. [Update: Tipsters say Schroeder had taken the Sidley deferral package and was doing pro bono work.]

On Friday at 6:31 p.m., Schroeder’s Facebook status read, “Brian Schroeder is all tattooed and ready to go.” He included a link to these tattooed self portraits.

That night, Schroeder got very drunk and got up to some serious trouble on the morning of October 31. Yesterday a friend wrote on his wall:

“I totally just read this article that someone with your name and age set a fire…just a coincidence huh?!”

Unfortunately, it’s not a coincidence.

There’s nothing scary about this Halloween edition of the Legal Eagle Wedding Watch. Our featured newlyweds include two Skadden associates, a SCOTUS clerk, and a famous heiress / model / entrepreneur.

Here are our fabulous finalist couples:

1. Limor Robinson and Jordan Mann

2. Heather Elliott and Stuart Rachels

3. Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner

Marvel at the accomplishments of these couples, after the jump.

From Jeff Zucker, president and CEO of NBC Universal:

Getting rejected by Harvard Law School was “the greatest thing that ever happened to me.”

Winning admission to HLS is the dream of many a college student (not just Elle Woods). Being a Harvard Law alum puts you on the fast track to a prestigious law firm job with a $160,000 starting salary (and allows you to attend exclusive dating events).

So why was HLS rejection Zucker’s lucky break? Click on the link below for the full story (and a possible implicit dig at UVA Law, which Zucker got into but never attended).

Jeff Zucker [Digital Facility]

Warning: The penis-to-vagina ratio in this week’s column is quite high. If you’re already on the mailing list for Rick Santorum 2012, you may want to avert your eyes — or go make fun of sissy-boy John Kerry for helping plan his daughter’s wedding.

Our fabulous finalist couples:

1. Sebastian Dungan and Lavi Soloway

2. Adam Levine and Janson Wu

3. Alisha Bhagat and Mark Egerman

Read more about these newlyweds, after the jump.

There has been quite a bit of coverage on how the recession is affecting the august Harvard University. For example, the undergraduates aren’t getting hot breakfast anymore.

Meanwhile, over at Harvard Law School, things have gotten so bad that HLS is looking to sell off some naming rights to wealthy donors. Tax Prof Blog reports:

The following list provides a representative sample of named gift opportunities. In addition, several naming opportunities exist in the Law School’s Northwest Corner building project currently under construction.

* $25,000,000: International Graduate Student Fellowship Program, The Low Income Protection Plan Program
* $10,000,000: The Harvard Law Library Reading Room, Research Program (Academic/Clinical)
* $5,000,000: Combined Professorship and Research Fund
* $4,000,000: Professorship
* $2,000,000: Visiting Professorship
* $1,000,000: Research Fund
* $250,000: Scholarship/Fellowship Fund
* $100,000: Financial Aid Fund
* $10,000: Revolving Loan Fund

Remember, Harvard is only called “Harvard” because John Harvard had a nice library.

Maybe graduates of Harvard Business School can still afford to make lavish $25,000,000 gifts; alas, graduates of Harvard Law School probably don’t have that kind of flow anymore. But why should they be iced out of the naming game?

After the jump, let me suggest some low-cost naming rights that HLS could sell.

Commenters often complain that we feature too many Biglaw associates in this space — uninspiring young people who’ve drifted through college and law school and are now drones at soulless firms. We’re delighted that this week, Biglaw associates make up only one-third of our couples. Rounding out the field are a soulless-drone partner and a former associate who abandoned Biglaw for the classic refuge of the disillusioned JD: law teaching. Enjoy this foray into the unexpected!

Our couples:

1. Caroline Dougherty and Marc Packer

2. Patricia Wencelblat and Richard Cooper

3. Tania Tetlow and Gordon Stewart

Get the details on these newlyweds and vote for your favorite couple, after the jump.

Jerry Maguire appeared as a guest lecturer at Harvard Law School last night. A HLS tipster tells us that Professor Bruce Hay invited Tom Cruise to talk to his Entertainment Law class on Monday night.

A most excellent guest, Tom Cruise is quite familiar with lawyers. He’s had legal star turns in The Firm and A Few Good Men. And he’s been involved in lots of litigation, including a suit filed by injured extras in Valkyrie, a RICO lawsuit against him and the Scientologists, and his plaintiff turn in that I’m-not-gay suit. (Insert “you can’t handle the truth” joke here.)

One HLS student sent us a link to this photo from last night. No word on whether or not Cruise jumped up and down on Hay’s lectern.

Our tipster was not in the class, but he did catch a glimpse of Cruise’s getaway.

The stalk-and-eventually-marry-your-doorman phenomenon continues to enthrall the NYT weddings editors. This week they shine the spotlight on yet another bride — this time a producer at CNN — who found love in the lobby. LEWW encourages female Biglaw associates to embrace this trend. You’re in and out of office buildings all day, ladies — open your eyes to the lusciousness perched behind those security desks!

And now, this week’s finalist couples:

1. Monique Mendez and Graham O’Donoghue

2. Ashlee Conley and Andrew Veit

3. Anne Claiborne and Andrew Grotto

Read all about these newlyweds, after the jump.

We suppose it’s fitting that on Yom Kippur, when our Jewish friends are fasting at home, today’s Legal Eagle Wedding Watch is a total WASP-fest. (Last weekend was Rosh Hashanah, which explains the unusual dearth of Jewish nuptials in the NYT announcements.) We look forward to receiving plenty of tasteful feedback about how there are “too many gentiles” this week.

Here are your six finalists — all Biglaw associates, as it happens:

1. Elisabeth Madden and Wesley Mullen

2. Ann Parker and Robert McKeehan

3. Emily Harris and Matthew Mauney

Read all about these couples and evaluate their credentials, after the jump.

[Speaking in the voice of the late, great Don LaFontaine] In a world where 2Ls are terrified. In a time when Biglaw openly flouts NALP rules. There was one man who would not take it anymore.

[Cue sweeping and inspiring theme song]

That man was Harvard Law School’s Assistant Dean for Career Services, Mark Weber.

Without the knowledge of the general public, the law firm Sullivan & Cromwell told 2Ls interviewing with the firm that it would disregard the 45 day waiting period for holding open offers. Instead, the firm would expect a decision in just two weeks. Am Law Daily reports:

In late July, S&C called several of the nation’s top law schools and informed career services personnel at those schools that the firm would not be following the 45-day guideline, according to six sources with direct knowledge of the situation. All six spoke only on the condition that they not be identified publicly.

Instead, S&C told the career services personnel, the firm would require prospects to respond yes or no in two weeks.

But S&C wasn’t prepared for Mark Weber.

Click below to continue listening to this trailer.