I agree with some of LSAC’s past policies and am happy to see others, like the flagging of score reports, go. I think that it’s hard, though, to contribute much to this conversation by worrying about people faking their way through an ADD exam . . . without knowing what an “ADD exam” means in this setting. It’s hard to move the issue forward by insisting that LSAC discourage abuse without being unfair. . . without knowing what LSAC has done in the past and why.
I’ve worked as a clinician administering many of the tests used to assess learning disabilities and difficulties, and I’ve helped individuals whose tests show they need intervention. (My favorite may be the Woodcock – Johnson Battery, just because of its name.) I currently use cognitive science to study how people best learn in law school. I may not be an authority like Dick Woodcock, but you could do a lot worse than me on a legal blog. So, I’d like to fill out the picture in the LSAC story a bit more….
As we previously mentioned, LSAC and the Department of Justice have entered into a consent decree over LSAC’s alleged discrimination against disabled people. LSAC agreed to pay $7.73 million to settle the claims against it, and to make policy changes. Most notably, LSAC will no longer denote when a person has received extra time on the LSAT.
That is great news for disabled people who want to be treated with fundamental fairness when taking this important test and applying for law school. It’s also great news for anybody who can fake their way through an ADHD exam and wants a little more time than everybody else…
Ever have that feeling that someone got your slot in law school even though they didn’t deserve it? They had worse grades, worse test scores… they may not even be able to pass the bar. It’s ridiculous that schools are allowed to have biased admissions policies that discriminate against qualified students in favor of some politically popular factor.
Because this is a story about candidates who — on the face of it — just don’t appear qualified to attend the school, and who just so happen to have political pedigrees and got in….
* Lawyers for Jones Day got a light spanking in court after sending out some of Detroit’s confidential negotiation documents to its creditors. Quick, blame the doc reviewers. Oh wait, you already did. Nice work. [WSJ Law Blog]
* Cynthia Brim, the judge declared “legally insane” who collected a $182K salary for months without working, was booted from the Illinois bench. She’s the first member of the state judiciary to be removed in a decade. [Chicago Tribune]
* Massachusetts is instituting a $30,000 pay hike for state judges which will prime the pump for pension bumps and retirements. For the love of God, think of the poor ADAs next time, Massholes. [Boston Globe]
* The power of diagramming compels you! If you’re studying for the LSAT, here are tricks you can use when trying to exorcise the demons from the logic games section. [Law Admissions Lowdown / U.S. News]
* Prosecutors want Oscar Pistorius to undergo a psychiatric evaluation in order to urge the court to consider an insanity defense, even though Bladerunner’s legal team doesn’t intend to mount one. [CNN]
I really don’t like this categorization of schools as first, second, and third-tier. The U.S. News and World Report rankings of law schools are an abomination. The legal profession and the country would be better off if they were eliminated.
* Gibson Dunn released the records for all interviews it conducted in order to clear Gov. Christie’s name in the Bridgegate scandal. They all said he was too busy working out to know. [New Jersey Star-Ledger]
* “You understand that you can’t have two defenses?” The prosecution is accusing Oscar Pistorius of changing his testimony mid-trial, and it seems at this point he’s got no leg to stand on. [Bloomberg]
* If you’re still thinking about going to law school, you should probably brush up on the logical reasoning section of the LSAT… because you’re not very good at it now. [Law Admissions Lowdown / U.S. News]
* If you feel like stepping out on your spouse, you might consider moving to New Hampshire. The state is about to repeal its adultery law which makes the act of cheating a Class B misdemeanor. [Post-Standard]
It’s time to answer the age old question: how useless are political science majors?
Actually the question is what undergraduate majors provide the best credentials to a law school admissions officer deciding how to best game the U.S. News rankings create a mutually rewarding academic environment. Political science majors don’t look so hot as a category. Even philosophy majors do better than poli-sci students on the LSAT. I guess realizing that law school is the only marketable skill they’ll be able to get since Slavoj Žižek already has “being paid to spout off about ‘The Real’ while dressed as a homeless man” locked up is a powerful incentive to study.
Professor Derek Muller of Pepperdine Law took the time to crunch the numbers for the 2013 incoming class and arranged the findings into a handy chart.
This passes for flying for this penguin, kind of like these test takers pass as good news for law deans.
For the first time since 2010, the year-over-year number of test takers for an administration of the LSAT has held steady. There were slightly more people who took the February LSAT this year than last year.
The worst is over, law deans! I’ll pause so you can hug and cry and feel good about taking your yachts out of dry-dock this season…
* According to a confidential report from Deloitte, another major firm is set to follow in Heenan Blaikie’s footsteps within the next year. The sheer number of “sorries” after another Canadian Biglaw collapse would be simply terrifying. [Legal Post]
* Dean Demleitner of Washington & Lee Law doesn’t think its 3L reform program is to blame for its decline in rank. It’ll “take five to 10 years for the benefits of the program to become apparent.” Oh, that’s great… for the Class of 2023. [Fortune]
* Here’s another look at the U.S. News rankings. Compare Nebraska and Hofstra. One shot up in rank and tuition increased slightly. The other sank like a stone and tuition skyrocketed. [WSJ Law Blog (sub. req.)]
* For the first time in years, the number of LSAT test takers has increased by a whole 1.1 percent year over year. We can guarantee law schools will fight to the death to enroll those 213 students. [LSAT Blog]
* Judge Judy has never sued anyone, but now she’s suing a personal injury firm for using her picture in its ads. Damages recovered will be donated to scholarships for women. Classy lady. [New York Daily News]
* Sedgwick is the latest Biglaw firm to jump on the back-office bandwagon. The firm will be moving all of its administrative operations — from HR to IT — to Kansas City, Missouri. Don’t be sad, it’s probably better than West Virginia. [Am Law Daily]
* Lawyers may be pecking at Biglaw’s rotting carcass, but at least there are lessons to be learned for Big Med, the next profession supposedly on the brink of implosion. It’s time to stop obsessing over revenue and rankings. [The Atlantic]
* Ten states rushed to help Utah defend its ban on gay marriage using “pretty embarrassing” arguments, but Nevada just washed its hands of its own appeal, saying its ban was “no longer defensible.” [Bloomberg]
* Here’s something that’ll make you love or hate Chris Christie even more: he once made Bristol-Myers Squibb donate $5 million to Seton Hall Law to avoid securities fraud charges. Yep. [Washington Post]
* Faruqi & Faruqi doesn’t want its attorneys’ compensation information to be disclosed to Alexandra Marchuk in her sexual harassment case against the firm. A kinder, gentler firm, huh? [Law 360 (sub. req.)]
* Soon you’ll be able to take the bar before you graduate in New York, but only if you do pro bono work during spring semester of your 3L year — and you’ll likely have to pay to complete it. [New York Times]
* If you just took the LSAT, you’re cutting it pretty close, buddy. Guesstimate your score so you can avoid sending out applications that will make admissions officers laugh. [Law Admissions Lowdown / U.S. News]
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past seven years. You can reach them by email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Please note that Evan Jowers and Robert Kinney are still in Hong Kong and will stay FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK. We still have a handful of available slots for meetings with our Asia Chronicles fans. If we have not been in touch lately, reach out and let us know when we could meet! There is no need for an agenda at all. Most of our in-person meetings on these trips are with folks who understand that improving a legal practice through lateral hiring is an information-driven process that takes time to handle correctly.
Regarding trends in lateral US associate hiring in Hong Kong, we of course keep much of what we know off of this blog. Based on placement revenue, though, Kinney is having one of our most successful years ever in Asia. We are helping a number of our law firm clients with M&A, fund formation, cap markets, project finance, FCPA and disputes openings. These are very specific needs in many cases, so a conversation with us before jumping in may be helpful. As always, we like to be sure to get the maximum number of interviews per submission, using a well-informed, highly targeted, and selective approach, taking into account short, medium and long-term career aims.
Making a well informed decision during a job search is easier said than done – the information we provide comes from 10 years of being the market leader in US attorney placements at the top tier firms in Asia. There is no substitute for having known a hiring partner since he/she was an associate or for having helped a partner grow his or her practice from zip to zooming, and this is happily where we stand today – with years of background information on just about every relevant person in all the markets we serve, and most especially in Hong Kong/China/Greater Asia. So get in touch and get a download from us this week if we can fit it in, or soon in any case!
The legal industry is being disrupted at every level by technological advances. While legal tech entrepreneurs and innovators are racing to create a more efficient and productive future, there is widespread indifference on the part of attorneys toward these emerging technologies.
When the LexisNexis Cloud Technology Survey results were reported earlier this year, it showed that attorneys were starting to peer less skeptically into the future, and slowly but surely leaning more toward all the benefits the law cloud has to offer.
Because let’s face it, plenty of attorneys are perhaps a bit too comfortable with their “system” of practice management, which may or may not include neon highlighters, sticky notes, dog-eared file folders, and a word processing program that was last updated when the term “raise the roof” was still de rigueur.