The Shark

no lucite platforms for biglaw

[brian lauter]

Aside from fashion lawyers, the legal profession is not known for being particularly fierce. Thus, I was surprised to read in WSJ's Law Blog that there is a fashion revolution (and the obligatory backlash) percolating in the legal world.

Apparently, the internet bubble of the 1990s inspired a drastic relaxation of the traditional rules of legal dress and the trend has continued since the bubble burst. As part of the aforementioned backlash, some firms have hired fashionistas to come in and play Heidi Klum to every Britney Spears of the legal world. Earlier this month a London firm even told its female employees to say auf wiedersehen to fishnet stockings at work.

As a fashion Neanderthal, I was looking forward to worrying even less about personal style at work than I do normally. This discussion has me dizzy and worried. Luckily, almost everybody I’ve talked to was told to wear a plain old suit-and-tie (or whatever you call traditional women’s business wear) this summer, so at least I won’t be the only hot mess. There was one exception, a friend whose firm told her, apparently with a straight face, that their only rule was no bare midriffs.  Bare midriff at work? That would be so tranny!

NOTE: This item contains googled Project Runway catch-phrases inserted at random and probably used incorrectly. My apologies to Project Runway fans.

rolling backpacks: you are not a commuting executive

[justin gosling]

Have you ever been behind a group of students as they are about to ascend a staircase and just before they head up someone stops to lower the retractable handle of their rolling backpack and you stub your toe? Well, it's happened to me enough times that I'm officially calling to end the law student's infatuation with the rolling backpack. Not only is a rolling backpack an inconvenience for fellow students, but you look just plain silly carting around carry-on baggage.  Rolling backpacks take up the whole aisle behind classroom seats and really bring down our collective street cred. Seriously.

I had a conversation with two rolly backpack users yesterday and asked them about their choice in book carrying devices, and I must say the conversation was shocking.

The first person complained that their school materials were too heavy for a conventional backpack, especially with their laptop. Humm, maybe you shouldn't have purchased a 20" laptop that weighs more than a Christmas ham.

I didn't ask if they were bringing every casebook  with them every day, but it seems to me that they could use their locker to store casebooks that are not in use. That's why we have lockers, right? Use your locker.

The conversation with the second person was brief and they said that they could only fit two casebooks in their rolling backpack. Now, had you seen this rolling backpack you would have instantly called BS, because the wheeled device was massive. I would have guessed that just in the main compartment you could fit a half dozen casebooks, a lifetime supply of highlighters, lunch, a full suit, and a small child. Lord knows what they were carrying, but I really question the necessity of carrying so much stuff that you only have room for two casebooks.

There are a two exceptions where rolling backpacks are acceptable: pregnancy and surgery. And I've only seen one person at school with the surgery excuse. Come on law students, our profession isn't always well regarded among the general public and we don't need to make the case for them. Down with rolly backpacks, use your locker.

For some alternatives, and more complaints about rolling backpacks, give this a click.

class registration woes. also entitled: red tape at hastings is no joke.

[justin gosling]

I'd like to thank the refresh button (F5), as well as my cat-like reflexes, because I just registered for one of the last available seats in two of my Fall 2008 classes.

It's a good thing I am a class registration ninja, because my spot in line wasn't until the last day of registration, and a lot of the classes were already full. I don't know how other schools process registration requests, but UC Hastings employs a method similar to a fantasy baseball snake draft, where students register for classes in one order and then register for waitlist positions in reverse order (A-Z for registration, then Z-A for waitlist).

Anyway, I was so happy to enroll in the classes with only a few open seats that I took the dog out this morning when it was clearly my wife's turn. Registration ninjas are all around great guys.

Not everyone was fortunate enough to enroll in most of the classes they want for next fall.

While I still need to join the waitlist for one class, Copyright, I'll have a very good waitlist position because I'll register first as the line snakes back through the alphabet. Really, it's the kids in the middle chunk that are at a disadvantage when attempting to enroll into small classes. Not only did they register after the class was likely full, but their waitlist spot will also occur in the middle of the pack. Maybe that is the true registration ninja test...

In all seriousness, however, I've overheard quite a few student complaints about things other the actual registration calendar.  Click the jump to overhear, too, or email me/post a comment below with your own hellish registration experiences.  For information on Berkeley's registration woes, check out the post on the issue over at Nuts & Boalts.

no facebook poking in class? i quit you, law school.

[brian lauter]

University of Chicago Law School has declared war on the internets. Last month the Dean Saul Levmore (a.k.a. Ned Ludd?) sent out an email letting students know that the school was cutting off internet access to classrooms. 

I am a little late writing about this, as it happened last month, but I wasn’t really concerned until I saw this tidbit in an article this morning:

“Levmore has received inquiries from about 10 other law schools interested in possibly following suit on the move, he said.”

Oh, man. I really hope Davis is not one of those 10 schools. I mentioned the possibility of an internet ban to some of my friends.  The first three responses:

1. “I would never attend class again.”
2. “They'd better get more interesting professors then.”
3. “I knew I should have gone to business school”

In response to the last comment, it turns out business schools have been doing this for a while, and others have been promoting the anti-laptop, anti-internet agenda for years.

Although I certainly understand professors’ complaints about internet usage in class and acknowledge that my education would probably be greatly improved if I didn’t have internet access, it is hard for me to imagine Evidence without CNN.com, Facebook, Drudgereport/Drudgretort, and, of course, The Shark.

linx: the ratings tremors continue, except for john choon yoo. lucky him.

[cynthia foster]

Did you all survive tax day?  Have you already spent your "economic stimulus rebate"?

• Facebook Reportedly Near Accord Over Origin (NYT)
• There Are Only Two Kinds of Law Schools (The American Lawyer, via law.com)
• Academic Freedom for Yoo and Me (Dorf Law) and related: Academic Freedom, Horrible, Horrible, Freedom (Nuts & Boalts)
• The Law School Rankings Czar Speaks Out (Res Ipsa Blog)
• What Law School Rankings Don't Say About Costly Choices (The National Law Journal, via law.com)
• Law School Summer Boot Camp for Students of Color (Grand Valley State Political Science blog)

scotus clinics aren't just last year's next big thing. they're this year's, too!

[brian lauter]

Stanford Law School has a pretty good thing going with its Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.  The clinic recently argued two cases back-to-back before the U.S. Supreme Court.  Professor Jeffrey Fisher argued Burgess v. U.S., a mandatory drug sentencing case, and Professor Pamela Karlan argued Riley v. Kennedy, a voting rights case.

Founded only four years ago, the clinic “reports that its lawyers are arguing six cases this semester — more than any other private law firm in the country for the court's January through April sittings.”  Pretty amazing, and they’re itching for more. 

The success of Stanford’s Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, to a degree, supports many schools’ recent emphasis on incorporating more experiential learning into law school curriculum.  Being involved in a case at such a high level certainly integrates research, writing and theory in a way that cannot be replicated inside of a classroom.

Although Supreme Court litigation clinics were, apparently, the next big thing a couple of years ago, King Hall still doesn’t have one.  The Civil Rights Clinic is probably the next best thing here and at many schools.  After all this talk of clinics, maybe I’ll give it a shot next year. 

byebyebye, dean ortiz.

[abony holmes]

Reaction to Berkeley Dean of Students Victoria Ortiz’s departure (*sniff*) makes me wonder, what other California law schools will lose faculty and staff to U.C. Irvine’s new campus? Perhaps more intriguing, what other California law schools will lose students to U.C. Irvine’s new campus?

More on Ortiz here.

A list of schools (California and otherwise) currently searching for new deans can be found here, although it is out of date — as we reported, UC Davis has found its new dean.

boalt's meeting of the minds on class privilege

[abony holmes]

Yesterday Boalt held a town hall on class privilege. The conversation was both emotional and productive, and addressed some of the issues discussed by 1L Danielle in a previous Shark video, and me and another Boalt student in the comments of that entry. Highlights of the town hall included:

• The legal profession is incredibly hierarchal, and law school and the legal profession promote hierarchy and conflating self-worth and “prestige” — all of which exacerbates problems of class privilege.
• Attorneys and law students should, in response to this do several things:

1. Do not carry a sense of entitlement around with you. This means treat the staff (of the law school and of your future firm) the way you’d treat a fellow associate and partners. Be respectful, be cordial, and every now and then, before you ask them to do something for you, ask them how their day was.
2. Use your power and class privilege to be an advocate for those who do not have that privilege. If you witness mistreatment speak up on behalf of those who (for fear of losing their job) cannot speak up for themselves.
3. Recognize that not everyone at the law school is from the same class background. Some of us identify more with the workers in Café Zeb and the people who empty the trash bins than the incredibly prestigious professors.

Although one participant describe the entire event as “talk therapy,” some concrete action items came from it. Several students plan to create a similar conversation for 1Ls during orientation to combat the hierarchy of the legal profession and encourage 1Ls and expose its damaging effects.

obama an "average" associate

[abony holmes]

It seems that even with an “average” legal career, you can be a serious contender for the most important job in the country.

According to this Houston Chronicle article, senior attorneys at Barack Obama’s former civil rights law firm (now Miner, Barnhill & Gallard) say “he was a strong writer and researcher but was involved in relatively few cases — about 30 — and spent only four years as a full-time lawyer before entering politics.”

Granted, strong writing and research skills are pretty much all one can offer when they are a fresh graduate of law school. Firm head Judson Miner remarked that Obama “was doing the work that any first-year or second-year associate would do… doing basic research and writing memos.” Basic research? Writing memos? Sounds like my legal education really is preparing me for my legal career, or at least the first four years of it.

Now if only I can figure out how Obama managed that transfer into politics…

is law school vocational training or not? yes and no, according to the experts.

[brian lauter]

A couple of weeks ago Justin blogged in The Shark about Washington and Lee’s changes to their third year law school curriculum and the slow rate of change within legal education system.   Today, I ran across a mobblog over at the Madisonian entitled “What Kind of Institution Do We Want a Law School To Be?” 

In the mobblog, UC Irvine School of Law’s newly minted Dean Chemerinsky discusses his plan to include more experiential learning in Irvine’s first year curriculum.  (Take that Washington and Lee!)  He also outlines Irvine’s commitment to emphasizing interdisciplinary courses and dual degree programs.

Professor Alfred Brophy of the University of Alabama takes Dean Chemerinsky’s interdisciplinary sentiment even further, imagining law school as a mini-university in the mold of a liberal arts college that focuses on a broad range of subjects. 

My favorite post from the mobblog so far was contributed by Professor Nate Oman of the Marshall-Wythe School of Law at The College of William and Mary. 

Professor Oman questions the assumption that law schools should be teaching legal practice at all.  He argues that law professors know theory and should teach theory, and law students should get practical knowledge from practitioners in legal apprenticeships after law school. 

If I could redesign the All-American Law School, I would design it in a combination of these images. 

A two year school-based program emphasizing theory and interdisciplinary studies, followed by a one year apprenticeship to nail down the practical aspects.  In my second year I am finding it difficult to schedule the core classes employers want to see on a resume, the interesting courses I want to take for my own enjoyment and personal edification, and the skills courses I think will help me succeed in whatever practice area I decide to pursue.  A broader academic base in the first two years would give students the time and intellectual freedom to really figure out what kind of practice they want to pursue, and a third year apprenticeship would allow for practical development in that area.

Although these ideas are unlikely to become law school reality anytime soon, it’s exciting to see talented people thinking critically and creatively about the future of law schools as institutions.