Check out the best legal tweets this week:

Cool Law School Prof Entry

If my 1Ls are reading this , they are FINISHED WITH THEIR FIRST YEAR OF LAW SCHOOL EXAMS! Congratulations–it’s party time!/1 pic.twitter.com/KRCSPiD2xO

— Rachel Gurvich (@RachelGurvich) May 5, 2017

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Garet Bradford, a former University of North Dakota School of Law student filed a lawsuit against the Board of Regents, dean, assistant dean, the university president, and two professors earlier this month. However, the frivolous 22-page complaint leaves out many critical details, making it difficult to evaluate the propriety of the school’s actions and leaving more questions than answers about this odd case.

Bradford, 46, claims he was denied basic information regarding his dismissal from the school, violating his right to due process. He is also suing the school for violating his freedom of speech and equal protection rights, breach of contract, defamation, and emotional distress. For relief, Bradford is seeking compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees.

According to the complaint, the whole ordeal began when he refused to take a quiz that was different than the quiz other students in class took, resulting in a severe penalty and a subsequent appeal by Bradford, which was denied. Despite his academic performance allegedly being “more than adequate,” Bradford claims that he received “less favorable treatment than similarly situated classmates” following his appeal.

Bradford alleges that Professor Steven Morrison arbitrarily lowered his grade for “no apparent reason except for personal and institutional bias against the plaintiff.” The complaint does not explain why Bradford was taking a different quiz, why he felt that taking a different quiz than his classmates was unreasonable, or why these professors were biased against him.

A few weeks later, Bradford received an email from Assistant Dean  Brad Parrish that issues had “come to light” concerning his application for enrollment. After weeks of correspondence between Bradford and Parrish and deliberation by the admissions committee, Bradford was dismissed from the institution.

If Bradford is telling the truth, he may have a case that the distribution of an email suggesting that his “woefully inadequate” academic performance justifies his dismissal was untrue and harmful to his reputation, possibly constituting defamation. He can further argue that these events caused him undue emotional distress. Depending on school policy, Bradford may even have a case for breach of contract, considering he allegedly did not violate the school’s code of conduct. Nevertheless, his argument that his right to criticize the school without fear of retaliation was infringed upon appears flimsy, especially when considering he does not specify the nature of the criticism he is referring to.

Unfortunately, Bradford’s story does not appear to add up. His allegations that university professors and administrators decided to conspire against one particular student for no apparent reason seems outlandish; this is the first time UND Law is being accused of such actions.

According to the complaint, James Grijalva, the professor to whom Bradford appealed his quiz grade to, told Bradford in an email,

[The appeal is] an unconsidered, immature unwillingness to take responsibility for your [Plaintiff’s] own actions. That approach will not serve you well in any professional career, particularly in law, and does not help your cause now.

When Bradford forwarded this email to Dean Katheryn Rand and Assistant Dean Bradley Parrish, Rand replied that Bradford’s “tone” was negative, and that he was “not professional” and “lacked character.” At one point, Bradford says his academic advisor told him, “Every professor has an issue with you.”

It seems likely that Bradford has academic issues, disciplinary problems, or both, and a quick look at Bradford’s records should provide an answer one way or another. According to the Grand Forks Herald, Bradford said he could ask for “extensive” repayment in damages. “I wouldn’t be doing this for a cup of cofee,” he said.

My guess is that Bradford gets nothing. Lawsuits that involve defendants’ intent are notoriously difficult to litigate to begin with, and Bradford simply does not provide enough information to validate his allegations. In fact, his experience in court will likely have a similar ending to his experience at UND Law: dismissal.

Hyunjae Ham

Hyunjae Ham is a member of the University of Maryland Class of 2015 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Hyunjae at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Want to be a Lawyer? Maybe You Shouldn’t Sue Your Law School appeared first on Law Street.

In the current economic climate, it is incredibly hard for young people to get proper experience in their desired fields. For law students, there are little-to-no options when it comes to receiving training and being mentored by professionals in their chosen specialties. On the other end of the spectrum, many Americans cannot afford costly legal services for even basic civil court proceedings. In an effort to innovate and grow their programs, law schools across the country are attacking both these problems by running legal incubators to better train law students and provide low-cost services to low-income Americans.

Incubators: Training Law Students

The Incubator for Justice, created at the City University of New York, has been successful in preparing recent graduates to enter the work force. Over 40 law schools throughout the United States have now begun offering select students the opportunity to participate in one of these prestigious programs, including major schools such as Rutgers School of Law, the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, and the James E. Rogers College of Law at the University of Arizona. Schools create incubators usually by implementing small law firms on their campuses or in nearby cities in which the students take on a large amount of cases for very little pay.

Most other professions offer graduates a chance to hone their skills under the guidance of experienced professionals. Medical students do internships and residencies, and dentists participate in a similar training program, as do most workers of the medical field. These incubator programs give new lawyers the chance to work under and be led by experienced lawyers and retired judges in certain programs. These programs provide recent law school graduates with many of the tools they need to join a prominent law firm upon completion, continue working toward a legal aid career, or possibly begin their own firm in the future.

Law students often are able to participate in clinics and externships offered through their schools, but this is still not enough training. Incubators are similar to the aforementioned opportunities, although they allow participants to take on a much more extensive caseload. Once law students graduate, they are expected to dive right into the field, although this is very difficult to do when they have not first been given the proper instruction and tools.

Incubators: Bringing Legal Services to the Masses

These programs help not only law school graduates, but also the public. One of the biggest problems in the United States is the lack of affordable legal services, which is needed by many Americans. People of lower incomes often cannot afford legal services due to the prohibitive hourly cost of a lawyer’s time. An incubator program charges $75 or less an hour in most cases, and sometimes they offer their services pro bono.

Millions of Americans lack proper legal representation, especially in cases that could completely change their lives. This is due to the high price of lawyers, how most are concentrated only in highly populated areas, and few can or want to take on work that isn’t very profitable. Many people also end up not being represented because they are rejected when they apply for civil legal aid. It was found that in 70 to 98 percent of the cases brought to civil court in the United States, one or both parties did not have a lawyer present to represent them. There are many programs already established throughout the country that are dedicated to providing free or low-cost legal services to people of low income, although most have very few resources available and few lawyers willing to take on the extra–sometimes menial–work. Given how many law school graduates are unable to find work in the field, more should be encouraged to do this type of work.

One of the most difficult aspects of starting and running an incubator program is finding the proper funds to support it. Many of the schools allocate funds for them, although this is not always enough to run them. The Moritz College of Law at the Ohio State University has been running a program that is financed by multiple sources, such as alumni donations and private funds. Michigan State University offers an innovative approach to its program by partnering with government organizations, nonprofits, and other university departments so that participants can engage and practice in a wide variety of subjects. These programs, as well as many others, seem to be thriving, as they have given students genuine experience and have provided legal aid to those who need it most.

It is widely said that it is easier to get into law school these days due to far fewer people applying and enrolling. The current job market for lawyers is abysmal, and so these programs could be instrumental in helping graduates begin prosperous careers. Only 40 percent of law school graduates are employees at law firms, and 20 percent hold jobs that don’t even require a law degree. Considering how astronomically high the average debt of most law school graduates is, it is imperative that they start their careers off on the right foot so that they can pay off this debt and achieve success.

Toni Keddell

Toni Keddell is a member of the University of Maryland Class of 2017 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Toni at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Law School Incubators Are Attacking These Two Major Problems in America appeared first on Law Street.

ICYMI, check out the best of the week from Law Street, including the latest in law school admissions, rape culture in the workplace, and shocking pictures from Egypt’s hospitals.

#1 Are You Sure Now’s a Good Time to Go to Law School?

Beaches, sun, internships, and vacations; these are some of the highlights associated with Summer. That’s not the case though for thousands of 19 and 20 year olds frantically preparing for arguably one of the most overrated exams looming in the second week of June: the Law School Admission Test (LSAT). By now, every college sophomore and junior has probably heard that getting into law school  is “easier” than ever due to the decline in the applicant pool. Is it really though? Read full article here.

#2 “Time Macho” is the Rape Culture of the Workplace

People cite it all the time: women make 77 cents to every dollar men make. We use it as a linchpin in arguments about equal pay, feminism, glass ceilings. We offer it up as proof–because mind-bogglingly, we still need to “prove it”–that feminism is a necessary thing. But the whole 77 cent thing? Not actually true. Read full article here.

#3 The Sad State of Egypt’s Hospitals: Shocking Pictures Released

Doctors need the proper resources to be able to treat their patients. But a new viral Facebook page started in Egypt illustrates that doctors and dentists in that country don’t necessarily have access to what they need. The page is shocking to many, as photos of multiple hospitals in Cairo, Egypt have been shared illustrating that they are unequipped and unsanitary for doctors to properly operate in. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Check out the best of the week from lawyers and law students on Twitter in the slideshow below.

Lawyer’s Lunch

Can’t seem to get out of this courtroom this morning. Hope they are planning on serving lunch. #lawyering http://t.co/uOx6sTZb8X

— Pabst Law Firm (@Pabstlaw) June 11, 2015

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Check out the best legal tweets of the week from these lawyers and law students. No summer vacation for you!

Macho Lawyering

My take on #macho #lawyering — dismissing vicarious #trauma ignores fundamental #ableism & #sexism in the #workplace http://t.co/xQGrr2CZQZ

— Jennifer Polish (@JenniferPolish) June 4, 2015

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Beaches, sun, internships, and vacations; these are some of the highlights associated with Summer. That’s not the case though for thousands of 19 and 20 year olds frantically preparing for arguably one of the most overrated exams looming in the second week of June: the Law School Admission Test (LSAT). By now, every college sophomore and junior has probably heard that getting into law school  is “easier” than ever due to the decline in the applicant pool. Is it really though? Moreover, what does this notion entail once graduating seniors actually commit to their respective law schools? It seems that what used to be a competitive challenge for those truly passionate about law and policy has become an option for the thousands of students wanting to avoid “funemployment” and who are unsure of their post-graduation plans.

Millennials are being victimized by the fallacy that a law degree from a middle-top tier institution will provide stable employment upon graduation. Many refer to the phenomenon of the smallest applicant pool in 30 years as a “buyers market,”  wherein students are sold the idea that applying to law school now is a good idea because they will have a higher chance of attending a top Law School, thus potentially being scouted by a top law firm and earning a six-figure starting salary. Although this sounds very appealing, the “buyers market” leaves out a minor detail–law firms are placing little emphasis on the small applicant pools given the excess law graduates from years past and job demand finally stabilizing.  

Last year saw the smallest class of incoming law students at 38,000–a 37 percent decline from 2010. There is no denying that the smaller applicant pool and decreased percentage of high-test scorers contributes to the evidence that admission into tougher law schools is in fact a more viable option.  Furthermore, these numbers indeed provide an incentive for thousands of students who, prior to the applicant decline, would never have considered taking the LSAT. The formerly serious and competitive reputation of the LSAT, wherein students would prepare months in advance for the arduous five-hour assessment, has become arguably as common as taking the SAT.  The increase in under-prepared students taking the exam is shown by studies conducted on the Law School Admissions Council (LSAC) data. Statistics disclose that the number of applicants with higher LSAT scores (above 170) has declined exponentially more than the number of applicants with lower scores, advocating that some students with high LSAT scores do not apply to law school at all while students with lower scores continue to apply.

Moreover, statistics demonstrate that companies are not hiring more lawyers than they were in 2010. Top law firms not only continue to scout and favor aspiring attorneys from top-ten schools, but now have the luxury of choosing from a much wider pool of applicants than just students who have just graduated.

According to the American Bar Association,  in 2013 only 57 percent of all law school graduates found full-time work, meaning the job lasted one year or more and was either a clerkship or mandated bar passage. It is important to note that 4,714 of the jobs reported were in fields that technically did not require law degrees, but rather employers preferred to hire Juris Doctorates (i.e. congressional staffers, labor organizers, or NGO workers etc). An additional 1,724 jobs were completely unrelated to law.

The employment numbers are not expected to differ much for the Class of 2016. There are 36,000 students predicted to graduate in 2016, as opposed to 46,776 in 2013. The ABA further projects that there will be 19,650 jobs available for those graduates. While these numbers convey that fewer people will graduate unemployed, the previously mentioned values do not take into account individual student qualifications and readiness, which prominent law firms rely heavily on before offering employment.

So while at face value the numerical indicators provide an optimistic view for undergraduate students banking on attending a higher-ranked law school, confounding variables such as fierce competition among peers and lack of preparedness factor into the discussion. As Slate’s senior business and economics correspondent puts it:

Most people should not attend law school. Specifically, you shouldn’t attend law school unless: a) you have an overwhelming compulsion to actually become a lawyer and b) you understand exactly what becoming a lawyer entails.

Although not the worst time to apply to law school, do your homework. Completely disregarding the average $122,158 debt law students graduate with–because that is an entirely different topic on its own–undergraduates who are not 100 percent convinced about law and policy might want to think twice about applying to law school. What momentarily may seem like a fantastic educational opportunity to attend a slightly better law school than what would’ve been the case a few years ago could end up being a curse in disguise; a detrimental and slipshod attempt at a legal career.

Symon Rowlands

Symon Rowlands is a member of the University of Miami Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow during the Summer of 2015. Symon now blogs for Law Street, focusing mostly on politics. Contact Symon at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Are You Sure Now’s a Good Time to Go to Law School? appeared first on Law Street.

Unfortunately, it seems as though another law school is feeling the effects of the declining enrollment facing law schools across the country in recent years. George Kosko and Robert Carr, the owners of Charleston School of Law located in South Carolina, have recently announced that they might not enroll a new class of students this coming fall. The statement they put out read:

We cannot in good faith enroll another class when, like last year, the school is spending more money than is coming in; when we cannot assure the students that they will be able to use federal student loans for their full three years; and when we cannot be sure the school will be able to maintain its license and stay open

While this was not a formal announcement of closure, it does not look promising that the school is going to be able to turn things around.

Understandably, many of the students were shocked and confused by this news. The announcement came during the thick of finals season, a bizarre time to announce something that could rattle and greatly affect the futures of the school’s current students. Many students expressed that they were in disbelief that the administration would announce something of this magnitude during finals.

Other students expressed disappointment. Second-year law student Drew Waxler believed that he would finish his three years at Charleston School of Law and then head back home to Burlington, Vermont to start his career. However, it appears that his plans may have to change. He says that, “it is discouraging that you won’t have an alma mater to take pride in after graduation if they do decide to stop taking” new classes of students.

While many of the students were shocked by the news, the school has actually been in trouble since 2013 when its owners announced that a sale to the education company Infilaw was under consideration. At the time, many students and faculty members expressed their outrage with the sale. They explained how the three schools currently under Infilaw are of a lower caliber than Charleston. If the school were to become an Infilaw school, it would decrease the value of a Charleston Law degree. To the relief of many, the sale didn’t go through. However, it appears as though the process has done lasting damage to the school.

So, what does this mean for the students? According to the American Bar Association and state rules, a law school is not allowed to simply close its doors without doing anything for its students. If they decide to close, they will have to submit a “teach-out” plan that details how current students will finish their education programs. So, while certainly not ideal, at least the students can know that they won’t be left to figure things out for themselves.

The owners have stated that they expect to release a formal announcement at some point this week.

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will This Law School Shut Down for Good? appeared first on Law Street.

This week’s installment of the best legal tweets of the week feature law students motivated for finals by TV lawyers, contracts-fueled breakups, and everyone’s favorite development: Chipotle deliveries! Check out the slideshow below of the best legal tweets of the week.

[SlideDeck2 id=38768 ress=1]

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Sponsored Content

Portland’s Lewis & Clark Law School, the top-ranking law school in the country for Environmental and Energy Law, opened its doors for the first “Eat, Pray, Law” food forum on March 13, 2015. Food affects pretty much every part of our lives, and concerns about food exist at every level. From an individual perspective, we all obviously want to be comfortable with the nutrients we put into our bodies; on a larger scale, questions of sustainability, regulation, and equality all have their parts to play in a discussion about the ethics and legal issues of our food industry. In an attempt to answer some of those questions, Lewis & Clark brought together a day of panels to engage in lively discussion on some of the most pressing questions in food law.

I had the opportunity to speak to two of the event’s organizers, Janice Weis, the Associate Dean and Director of the Environmental & Natural Resources Law Program, and Vytas Babusis, a 2L and the President of the law school’s Food & Wine Law Society, in order to answer some of my questions about the event’s inception, purpose, and reception.

The fact that there’s been rising interest in topics such as sustainable eating, food justice, and food ethics is no surprise. But Dean Weis reports seeing a noticeable uptick in applicants who cite food law and policy as topics of interest in recent years. Given Lewis & Clark Law’s cutting edge environmental, animal, and business law programs, delving into the different facets of those issues seemed like a natural fit. It was out of this collaboration that the “Eat, Pray, Law” forum was born.

The event hosted at least 120 attendees, although Babusis told me he believed there were more who were drawn in at the last moment who had not registered. The day started out with a keynote speech from Congressman Earl Blumenauer, who represents Oregon’s third district.

Just addressed Lewis & Clark’s Eat Pray Law food summit -no wonder my alma mater was judged #1 enviro law program in the nation! @lclarklaw

— Earl Blumenauer (@repblumenauer) March 13, 2015

Blumenaur discussed the ongoing attempts to overhaul the “Farm Bill” to reflect current food policies and public consciousness.

Each of the three departments–environmental law, business law, and animal law–had a panel that loosely corresponded to it. Weis told me the panels touched on a veritable “potpourri” of hot issues in food law. Most interestingly, she also reported that while each panel had its own focus, consistent themes were apparent across the discussions–a good reminder that so many aspects of food law and policy intertwine and intersect.

One of those consistent themes was a focus on transparency–consumers want to know what is in their food, where it comes from, and the collateral effects of its production. This applies across the board–from consumers reporting these concerns, to the possibility of government regulations to ensure greater transparency, to businesses making the commitment to provide greater transparency.

The day wrapped up with a discussion on food justice. Babusis explained food justice as he sees it by saying,

For me “food justice” is doing the right thing for the planet and for the people in every aspect along the food chain.

He continued:

If we truly understand where our food grows, how to grow it sustainably regenerating the soil and what we have to do to feed people the right food from plants to animals, then we are better prepared to make laws which encourage that and know best how to help those in the industry from employment, IP and business law, to environmental and animal advocacy.

An important facet of food justice is the accessibility of food for many of our low-income citizens. “Food deserts” are defined by the Department of Agriculture as:

Urban neighborhoods and rural towns without ready access to fresh, healthy, and affordable food. Instead of supermarkets and grocery stores, these communities may have no food access or are served only by fast food restaurants and convenience stores that offer few healthy, affordable food options.

Essentially, it’s all very well and good if sustainable, transparent food is made a higher priority, but it needs to be made a higher priority for all of our citizens. The last panel at “Eat, Pray, Law” brought in members of the community for a tangible discussion on promoting food justice and accessibility.

Weis said that they plan on reprising the event again next year, and continuing to expand opportunities for students to discuss and become involved in food law. Overall, this panel was a great example of the innovative work going on at Lewis & Clark Law with regard to the intersections between food, animal, business, and environmental law.

Lewis & Clark Law School

With robust practical skills options, flexible scheduling, and a faculty invested in your success, Lewis & Clark Law School is an ideal place to start a legal career. The school’s innovative programs, such as the NCVLI, CJRC, and the criminal law certificate program, offer students the opportunity to learn and work in a rigorous, collegial environment in scenic Portland, Oregon. Learn more at law.lclark.edu. Lewis & Clark Law School is a partner of Law Street Creative. The opinions expressed in this author’s articles do not necessarily reflect the views of Law Street.

https://law.lclark.edu/

The post Eat, Pray, Law: Lewis & Clark Law Forum Discusses Food Law appeared first on Law Street.

Wondering what lawyers and law students were up to this week? Check out this week’s slideshow below of the Best Legal Tweets of the Week.

[SlideDeck2 id=37261 ress=1]

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Lawyers, law students, and even a baby who will absolutely be a litigator some day had the very best week ever. Check out this week’s slideshow of the best legal tweets of the week.

[SlideDeck2 id=36459 ress=1]

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

It’s another rough week in the lives of law students and lawyers everywhere. Check out the best legal tweets of the week in the slideshow below.

[SlideDeck2 id=35260 ress=1]

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

In September of 2013, the American Bar Association Task Force on the Future of Legal Education called on law schools to embrace technology as a useful tool for educating future attorneys. Finally, someone has responded to that call. Just this month, William Mitchell College of Law launched a new and unique legal education experiment combining traditional classroom learning with online courses.

In December of 2013, school officials met with the ABA Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar to request a variance from ABA accreditation standards, which state that no more than one-third of an accredited law school institution’s curriculum can take place outside of the traditional classroom setting. A variance was granted to the William Mitchell program, which it allows it to be more flexible and focus more on an online portion.

Under the terms of the variance set by the ABA, the school will be allowed to admit four entering classes of students to this hybrid program, and each class size must be limited to 96 students. Additionally, the school must provide detailed reports to the council that include information pertaining to applications, admissions, attrition, course evaluations, and skills training.

The ABA’s managing director of accreditation and legal education, Barry Currier, considered several factors before granting the variance to William Mitchell. These factors include the school’s 113-year history and its vast experience with part-time law students. According to Currier, the school’s application for the variance was detailed and well thought-out. It was clear to him that the school was determined to making this program succeed.

Currier stated that:

It’s fair to say that this is most substantial variance that’s been granted, and it’s not an exclusive agreement between the ABA and William Mitchell. Any school that submits a variance application as carefully thought out and researched, and demonstrates this level of commitment will get a serious listen from the council.

He encourages other schools to develop their own innovative programs as well-thought out as this one.

The program welcomed 85 students, who have an average age of 38, for its first year of operation. According to the law school’s press release, over one-third of the students already have graduate degrees in other fields. These students will participate in a four-year part-time JD degree program that requires approximately one to two weeks of classroom attendance per semester at the law school’s brick-and-mortar campus located in St. Paul, Minnesota. The rest of the time, students will take their law school courses online. Annual tuition will be $27,770, which is the same as the cost of the school’s traditional part-time program.

This unique program will give people who may not have have the time to travel and sit in class all day the opportunity to earn their law degree in a more convenient way. One of the students in this new hybrid program, 59-year-old Brian Kennedy, jumped at the opportunity to be a part of this program. He told Star Tribune,  “I was accepted to William Mitchell in 1981 and life got in the way.” After being sidetracked by an entertainment-industry career, he regretted not going to law school. Now, he’s looking forward to his second chance. He said, “I’m starting a new career. It just took me a while to get here.”

Others, like 41-year-old Vershawn Young, plan to keep their current carreers while attending law school. Young is a communications professor at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, and said that he chose William Marshall because it was the only law school option that would allow him to keep his current job. He expects that the program will allow him “to experience something phenomenal.” It sounds like he’s probably right–the flexibility that this hybrid program allows is one of it’s truly unique aspects, and it is one that will likely lead to the program’s success.

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post William Mitchell College of Law Launches Hybrid Online Legal Program appeared first on Law Street.

Vacation is OVER. Okay, not for all of you students, but for some of you it’s already back to the second semester grind. As my favorite legal tweeter for this week put it, “It’s like I’m in a dark tunnel, lost, with no light at the end of the tunnel and no flashlight.” Depressing? Yes. Totally, 100 percent accurate? Absolutely. Check out the the best legal tweets of the week in the slideshow below.

[SlideDeck2 id=32242 ress=1]

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

If there are two things common to basically every law student ever, it’s this:

1. You’re exhausted in every possible way imaginable and subsisting on caffeine; and,

2. There’s no point in even thinking about the 30 years it’s going to take you to pay off your student debt.

Lucky for (a handful of) you, Starbucks announced its new “Starbucks for Life” campaign.

Courtesy of Giphy

What is this amazing, sent-from-the-heavens development you ask? Well, we’re not exactly sure — they’re being fairly tight-lipped about it. But what we do know is that later this winter the coffee mega-chain is launching a campaign in which 100 lucky people will win a free food item or drink everyday for 30 years. Which, conveniently, is exactly the same as your loan period so you can be wide awake for every day of it.

Maybe this was a little gem that Oprah thought up while she and CEO Howard Schultz thought up while brainstorming Oprah Chai — YOU GET 30 YEARS OF STARBUCKS! AND YOU GET 30 YEARS OF STARBUCKS! EVERYBODY GETS 30 YEARS OF STARBUCKS!

Courtesy of Giphy.

(It’s a tough call in this moment whether I’d rather have 30 years of free coffee or an Oprah-gifted car…the coffee sounds amazing right now.) However it developed, I can’t wait to compete. Or, OK, probably by “compete” I mean use my Starbucks app a bunch of times and spend a ton of money hoping to increase my chances of winning. Is that how it works? We’ll see.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Starbucks for Life Campaign: You’re Welcome Law Students appeared first on Law Street.

What did we learn from lawyers and law students on Twitter this week? That they are sleep deprived, haven’t had a fruit or vegetable since the elementary school lunch line, and are in desperate need of a drink. Oh and also my personal favorite — they don’t wear jeans because they aren’t cowboys. Check out the Best Legal Tweets of the Week.

[SlideDeck2 id=26773 ress=1]

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

On Wednesday, Drexel University announced that it will be renaming its law school after receiving the largest donation in the school’s history. The school will now be known as the Thomas R. Kline School of Law, after Kline made a generous $50 million donation to the university.

Drexel Law School was founded just eight years ago in 2006, and was originally named after Earle Mack after he pledged $15 million to the school. However, he was dropped when University officials decided that the school needed a stronger foundation.

Kline, the new benefactor, is a trustee of Drexel University, and has spent most of his thirty-year long career as a Philadelphia trial attorney focused on medical malpractice, personal injury, and whistleblower cases. Kline made this donation in hopes that the school can work its way to the top ranks of legal education.

In addition to his work as a trial attorney, Klein is chairman of the law school board. He stated that the idea for the trial advocacy center came from a conversation with the law school dean, Roger Dennis. Kline shared:

It is our collective vision to create a law school with national stature, the foundation is there. What we now have is an opportunity to not only build programmatic changes, but we also have a magnificent magnet that is a true gem of the City of Philadelphia.

The large donation includes the former Beneficial Savings Fund Society building in downtown Philadelphia, which will be home to a new trial advocacy center. Drexel President John. A Fry has stated that “This is a major, major moment for the law school”. He believes that this donation gives Drexel “the opportunity to put this relatively new law school on a firm financial footing and, in particular, establish it as a force for the practice of trial advocacy.”

With the new downtown building, which is projected to open in 2017, the law school will have two sites: the main campus in University City and the new campus in Center City surrounded by city and federal courts as well as many law firms. This new location is sure to give students even more opportunities to find jobs and internships while at law school.

In addition to providing a new trial advocacy center in a prime location, the donation will also give Drexel Law the means to increase scholarships and financial aid for students. This comes at a crucial time, when many top law schools are reducing tuition and increasing financial aid to entice more students due to a drop in overall law school applicants. According to recent statistics, enrollment in the nation’s top law schools has dropped 24 percent overall in the last three years. It is the hope that with this donation, more scholarships and financial aid will entice more students to enroll in Drexel Law. Currently, tuition is about $40,000 a year. These new scholarships and aid packages will relieve some of that burden and ultimately increase Drexel’s competitive edge amongst the top law schools in the nation.

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Drexel Law Receives $50 Million Donation and New Trial Advocacy Building appeared first on Law Street.

With the next LSAT just over a week away, 1Ls settling into that special experience we call law school, and clients wanting selfies in court, this turned out to be a great week in the world of funny legal tweets. Check out this week’s best, and then head over to #300Voices and discover the top accounts to follow for all things law and policy.

[SlideDeck2 id=25077 ress=1]

—

Chelsey Goff (@cddg) is Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University in DC. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at cgoff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Garrett Heath via Flickr]

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

As part of the ongoing debate about the value of law school in the current market, Brittany Alzfan tells you why now is the time to go. For the flip side, check out Matt DeWilde’s take on why you shouldn’t send in that application just yet.

Now is a good time to go to law school, because things are looking up for future lawyers. Now I know most of you are skeptical, especially given the latest job statistics for the class of 2013, but just hear me out here. While the numbers put out by the National Association for Law Placement revealed a lower employment rate for the sixth year running, there was some good news: law school graduates in 2013 found more jobs overall than in 2012. That means that students who enter law school now will probably have more potential jobs at their disposal.

The huge drop in students enrolling in law schools over the past several years leaves graduates looking at a surprisingly strong job market. Let’s use the class of 2016 as an example here–39,700 students enrolled in the fall of 2013. If we take into account that about ten percent of each law school class generally drops out, then we are looking at no more than 36,000 J.D. graduates in 2016.

Compare that number to the 46,776 graduates in 2013, and we see a drop of 23 percent. With significantly less competition amongst the graduating class, graduates are far more likely to secure a decent job.

Does this mean that I’m saying that every law graduate will go on to work in the legal field right out of graduation? No, of course not. Like in every other field, some complete their degrees and pursue other things anyways. Many J.D. graduates end up pursuing careers in finance or business.

But the numbers can’t be ignored here. According to statistics put out by the American Bar Association, 32,755 graduates from last year’s class found full-time, long-term work lasting more than a year. Of those, 26,337 jobs required passing the bar, meaning that they were typical legal jobs that required a law degree. Another 4,714 students secured jobs in fields that did not require a law degree, but preferred to hire J.D.s, such as NGO organizers or congressional staffers. Lastly, 1,724 graduates ended up in jobs that were completely unrelated to the legal field.

If these numbers remain relatively steady, then we can expect that about 91 percent of the class of 2016 will find long-term, full-time employment. This is significantly higher than the 72 percent of graduates that found full-time employment last year. If we break this down further, about 73 percent of graduates will be in full-time legal positions, compared to only 58 percent last year.

This debate is pretty entrenched–some experts agree with me, others say the risk is still not worth the expensive price of a legal education. Kyle McEntee, the founder of the nonprofit Law School Transparency, said, “I do expect that the employment rates are going to improve greatly.” The issue is whether or not these job opportunities are worth the three years, and over $100,000 that it takes to graduate from law school.

Even when they do find jobs, law school graduates have to face the unfortunate fact that while starting salaries have fallen, debt is way up. Median pay right out of law school has dropped to around $62,000 a year from $72,000 in 2008. When you take inflation into account, starting salaries are actually lower than they were in 2000. On top of this, the New America Foundation estimates that the median student who borrows for law school–and most of them do borrow–finishes school with $128,000 in loans to pay back.

Yet, despite the cost of tuition and resulting debt, there is evidence that law school may be a smart financial decision in the long run. Michael Simkovic, a Seton Hall law professor, published a paper last year that showed that even for graduates at the 25th percentile of pay–such as those in jobs at small law firms or as public servants–law school was still a profitable investment, even if they spent $60,000 a year on tuition. In addition, President Obama has just announced a plan designed to alleviate student loan debt. His “Loan Forgiveness” plan is set up so that students with loans who meet certain income eligibility standards will only need to pay back 10 percent of their discretionary income for a maximum of 20 years. In some instances, if you work in public service, such as in a public defender’s job, you only need to pay back loans for 10 years. After that, the rest is forgiven. So if debt is what’s holding you back from law school, loan forgiveness might be an excellent option for you.

Now, of course, law school is not for everyone. It shouldn’t be a fallback if you don’t know what to do with the rest of your life, nor is it something that should be chosen on a whim. It’s hard work, and without passion, you probably won’t succeed. Additionally, some programs are not worth the cost. Most graduates from bottom-tier law schools will continue to have little success in the job market, just like they always have. Employers are more likely to hire a past graduate that has struggled to find a job than hire someone from a failing institution. It is important to do your research when applying, and ultimately deciding whether or not to attend, law school.

However, if you have thought it through and have decided that law school is for you, then your future is looking bright.

—

Brittany Alzfan (@BrittanyAlzfan) is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Penn State via Flickr]

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post If You Want to Go to Law School, Now’s the Time to Apply appeared first on Law Street.

In a couple of months thousands of college students and recent graduates around the country will take the June LSAT test. Which means that right now, those thousands are trying to figure out how to prepare for the test. But if you’re one of them, have no fear, because we here at Law Street have your back!

You got this.

Without further ado, here’s a list of the top dos and don’ts when preparing for the LSATs.

Do: Take a class or get some tutoring

There are so many ways to improve your LSAT score, and classes aggregate them for you and then present those tips, tricks, and skills in a scheduled format. The problem, I know, is that these classes and tutors are super expensive. But remember how I said Law Street is totally here to help? Well, we’re giving away 3-hour sessions with an awesome, super-qualified LSAT tutor named Nick. The only thing you need to do to enter is like us on Facebook and like the contest post on our page, here. One-on-one tutoring is an awesome resource for something like the LSAT because it allows you to get targeted help exactly where you need it the most.

Do: Make a schedule and stick to it

It’s going to suck, I know. But the best possible way to do well on the LSAT is to work your ass off. Treat it like a part-time job. It will be time-consuming and insane, but it’ll pay off. Take practice tests, learn new strategies, the whole shebang. And make sure that your schedule is focused on you. Here are some examples, but make sure to tweak them so that they help you work on your weak spots.

Do: Learn how to relax

Studying for the LSAT can be completely overwhelming, and it’s possible to get lost in that stress and repetition. So you need to make sure that you still take care of yourself. Find something that helps you unwind – and make it a healthy habit. For example, our Resident Legal Post-Grad, Peter Davidson, loves to use yoga for stress relief. Although, most of us aren’t quite as talented as he is:

Casually editing my article.

You can find what works for you. I highly recommend random dance parties.

Don’t: Always practice in a quiet area

In a perfect, beautiful, ideal world, you would be able to take the LSAT in total peace and quiet. In the real world, however, you are going to take the LSAT in an unfamiliar environment, with a bunch of people you don’t know, and you have no idea what that’s going to be like. I’ve heard plenty of horror stories about people being able to hear sirens from outside, or a meeting happening a few rooms over. Now, this isn’t said to scare you, but realism is important. Take a few practice tests in a coffee shop or other loudish place to make sure that if the worst does happen, you’re prepared. Also make sure to check out this wiki — it contains reviews for LSAT testing sites. While it’s not all-inclusive, it may help you narrow down what environment would be the best for you to take the test in.

Do: Read Outside Articles

Seek out sources that will have articles that are similar to what you might see on the test. Here’s a great example of an article about attractiveness in the workplace from The Economist. Reading articles outside of your test prep book is great because it allows you to read something relevant and interesting while still getting some studying done.

Do: Get a Logic Book

Even though there are obviously specific books and classes for the logic reasoning section, there’s something to be said for getting yourself a background in the topic. This tip actually comes from Matt DiCenso here at Law Street, who just went through the whole law school admissions and choosing process. (After you ace the LSAT and get into a bunch of awesome law schools, make sure to check out Matt’s post on picking the right one for you.) He says that taking a logic class as an undergrad helped him prepare to wrap his mind around the logic problems and the strategies for completing them. If you have the chance, check out a free online class on logic, like this one, or pick up a book on the subject.

Do: Practice your timing

The various sections of the LSAT are, obviously, timed. So it’s important that you know how to watch that time and plan your test-taking accordingly. It’s also important to manage the anxiety that can happen for some people when they’re on the clock like that. If that’s something you’re worried about, check out this article from Manhattan LSAT blog on “time-shaving.” If you’re having a hard time getting your time down for a section, this article can help you plan out a way to take a few minutes off each week until you reach your goal time.

Don’t: Freak out about the writing section

The writing section, to be honest, really doesn’t matter at all. It’s not scored, and while it’s given to the schools, many don’t even really pay attention to it. Furthermore, while skimming over a list of possible questions can be helpful, you don’t know what it’s going to be. Usually the format is that someone has to make a decision between two different things, and your job is to write a persuasive essay in favor of one or the other. Honestly, if you’ve gotten far enough in school that you are taking the LSAT and considering law school, you should be used to writing anyway.

So now that you’ve got these tips down, head over to Facebook and enter yourself in our LSAT Prep giveaway. Remember, Law Street has your back!

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Dan Hancock via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The DOs and DON’Ts of Mastering the LSAT appeared first on Law Street.