These things do happen, but they’re usually one-time occurrences that would otherwise be missed by the members of the legal community, if not for our coverage here at Above the Law.
On the other side of the coin, when you screw up so many times that a federal judge feels the need to publicly excoriate you with the ultimate insult — by comparing your work to that of a pro se litigant — maybe it’s time to hang your head in shame for the rest of your days…
We were driving back from my girlfriend’s hometown. There are plenty of long silences during these drives. I like it that way. Occasionally, though, the silence is punctured by questions from Stephanie about evolutionary psychology (“Why do I crave sugar sooooo much?”) or animal husbandry (“When are we getting a dog and can we name it Chuck Bass?”). During this last drive, Stephanie asked me a particularly penetrating question. “What is the worst state?” Before I could answer semisolid, she clarified, “I mean, it’s gotta be Indiana, right?”
Probably? I thought about it awhile. Indiana is awful and, yet, boring at the same time. All the boredom of Kansas with all the progressive racial relations of Idaho. I can already hear the complaints that will emanate from this random introduction to a column that is nominally about sports and the law. “What about Florida?” “Has Stephanie ever been to Ft. Wayne in autumn?” “Does Lat even know you’re writing for this website?” These are all excellent questions and I respect the hell out of every single one of them. But I’m not going to apologize for my girlfriend’s bigotry. We’ve had Chuck Bass exactly one week and I love that dog. I love him with all my heart and I just want to say this right now, that regardless of what you say about it, we’re going to keep it.
It’s that time of year again, and people are starting to get very antsy as they await the results of the July 2013 bar examination. While a handful of states have released test takers from their torturous waiting game, other locales will keep bar examinees on pins and needles until November.
We’ve already heard about the results from North Carolina — as usual, the Tar Heel State was the first to get its results out. Speaking of North Carolina, we’ve heard this year’s results were rather ugly. It seems there was about a 10 percent dip in the passage rate this summer, even though no one had to take the bar in the dark. Yikes! Getting back to the results, next in line came Utah (remember when we released the state’s unofficial results?), followed by Florida, and then Indiana.
In 2011, when Indiana Tech announced it was going to open a law school in Fort Wayne, Indiana for no good reason, Indiana Tech President Arthur Snyder said that access to legal education in Indiana was a big reason for opening the fifth law school in the state: “There are potential students who desire a law school education who cannot get that education in this area, and there are people in our state who need legal services who don’t have access to them.”
This was always an incredibly weak argument. Now, as Indiana Tech is set to welcome its first starting class, we have some measure of proof that those 2011 prognostications were as incorrect as everybody knew they’d be in 2011….
A while back, someone wrote a book accusing a prominent former Karl Rove aide and conservative commentator of being a scheming, intellectually dishonest, shell of a person with nothing more to commend her than her beauty queen good looks.
Once you recover from the shock, the wrinkle in this kerfuffle is that the book was written by her long-time friend and attorney, and draws upon what he learned over his years of representing the woman in various legal scrapes from divorce to criminal activity.
If you think writing a book divulging the confidences of a former client sounds suspect, well the Indiana Supreme Court agrees with you…
A few weeks ago, we learned that when it comes to failed professional endeavors, hell hath no fury like a patent attorney scorned. Now we know the same sentiment applies to their failed romantic wranglings.
What would a patent partner do if a summer associate turned away his sexual advances? He’d do what any dork would: in the hopes of ruining her budding career, he’d obtain a movie clip of the girl in a state of undress and pass it around via email to more than 50 Biglaw attorneys.
Of course, this led to a disciplinary action in which the brokenhearted patent practitioner employed some pretty wild defenses, the most entertaining one being that his slut-shaming was beyond ethical reproach because it was constitutionally protected speech….
* The revised transcript from the day Justice Thomas spoke during oral arguments has arrived, and it seems his record for not having asked a single question from the bench is still intact. [WSJ Law Blog (sub. req.)]
* The Seventh Circuit ruled on Indiana’s social media ban for sex offenders, and the internet’s filth will be pleased to know they can tweet about underage girls to their heart’s content. [National Law Journal]
* Propaganda from the dean of a state law school: lawyers from private schools are forcing taxpayers to bear the brunt of their higher debt loads with higher fees associated with their services. [Spokesman-Review]
* Rhode Island is now the only state in New England where same-sex couples can’t get married, but that may change as soon as the state Senate gets its act together, sooo… we may be waiting a while. [New York Times]
* It’ll be hard to document every suit filed against Lance Armstrong, but this one was amusing. Now people want their money back after buying his autobiography because they say it’s a work of fiction. [Bloomberg]
These days, passing or failing the bar exam can have a great impact on employability in what little remains of the entry-level job market for recent law school graduates. That’s probably why those who took the July exam have been so cranky lately — they want to know if they’ll even have a chance to launch their careers.
Not even a month has passed since our last open thread devoted to bar exam results, but it appears that we’ve got a lot of catching up to do. It’s not yet November, so New York and California test takers still have some time left to wait, but we do have confirmed news about results from other states.
Within the past week, including today, at least three states announced their bar exam results. In fact, test takers from one state were so desperate to find out whether they passed that a post about the state’s results from two years ago is one of our most heavily trafficked pages today.
Applying to an unranked law school ‘early decision’ is like playing musical chairs with one other person and three chairs.
Remember when you were applying to college how some schools had “early decision” programs? You’d apply to your first-choice school, and in exchange for them telling you early, you had to commit to go to that college and no other. As if applying to colleges was some kind of national game of musical chairs, and people who didn’t get a seat would end up being forced to pursue higher education in Mexico.
I didn’t apply to anywhere “early decision” because I value options and don’t scare easily. I applied to 11 colleges, got into ten (eff you, Stanford), and then visited four or five of them. Obviously, other kids did things differently. It’s not uncommon to see a lot of Ivy League caliber kids commit to a great school early in the process. People choose their colleges based on all kinds of factors, and when you know, you know.
Law schools are very different. Students usually go to the best law school they get into, unless a school that is slightly lower-ranked offers them a ton of money. The only places that should be running an “early decision” program that includes binding commitments are Harvard, Yale, and Stanford.
You could make a case for some other top-ranked programs doing early decision for law school. But when you see an unranked program getting in on the action, it feels like the school isn’t tempting students into “early” decisions so much as it is trying to rush people into “bad” decisions….
The holiday season is upon us, and yet again, you have no idea what to get for the fickle lawyer in your life. We’re here to help. Even if your bonus check hasn’t arrived yet, any one of the gifts we’ve highlighted here could be a worthy substitute until your employer decides to make it rain.
We’ve got an eclectic selection for you to choose from, so settle in by that stack of documents yet to be reviewed and dig in…
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 six years. You can reach them by email: email@example.com.
We currently have a very exciting and rare type of in-house opening in China at one of the world’s leading internet and social media companies. Our client is looking for an IP Transactional / TMT / Licensing attorney with 2 to 6 years experience. The new hire will be based in Shenzhen or Shanghai. Mandarin is not required (deal documentation will be in English) but is preferred. A solid reason to be in China and a commitment to that market is required of course. This new hire will likely be US qualified (but could also be qualified in UK or other jurisdictions) and with experience and training at a top law firm’s IP transactional / TMT practice and could be currently at a law firm or in-house. Qualified candidates currently Asia based, Europe based or US based will be considered. The new hire’s supervisors in this technology transactions in-house team are very well regarded US trained IP transactional lawyers, with substantial experience at Silicon Valley firms. The culture and atmosphere in this in-house group and the company in general is entrepreneurial, team oriented, and the work is cutting edge, even for a cutting edge industry. The upside of being in an important strategic in-house position in this fast growing and world leading internet company is of the “sky is the limit” variety. Its a very exciting place to be in China for a rising IP transactional lawyer in our opinion, for many reasons beyond the basic info we can share here in this ad / post. This is a special A+ opportunity.
If your firm is in ‘go’ mode when it comes to recruiting lateral partners with loyal clients, then take this quiz to see how well you measure up. Keep track of your ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses.
1. Does your firm have a clearly defined strategy of practice groups that are priorities of growth for your office? Nothing gets done by random chance, but with a clear vision for the future. Identify the top practice areas for which you wish to add lateral partners. Seek input from practice group leaders and get specifics on needs, outcomes, and ideal target profiles.
2. In addition to clarifying your firm’s growth strategy, are you still open to the hire of a partner outside of your plan? I’ve made several placements that fit this category. The partner’s practice was not within the strategic growth plan of my client, but once the two parties started talking with each other, we all saw how it could indeed be a seamless fit. Be open to “Opportunistic Hires.” You never know where your next producing partner might come from, so you have to be open to it. I will be the first to admit that there is a quirky element of randomness in recruiting.
The traditional job application and interview process can be impersonal, and applicants often struggle to present themselves as more than just the sum of their GPAs, alma maters, and previous work history. ATL has partnered with ViewYou to help job seekers overcome this challenge. ViewYou NOW Profiles offer a unique way for job seekers to make a personal, memorable connection with prospective employers: introduction videos. These videos allow job candidates to display their personalities, interpersonal skills, and professional interests, creating an eDossier to brand themselves to potential employers all over the world. Check it out today!