Быть или не Быть..... Лоером

NEVA · Post by **NEVA** » 15 Mar 2005 21:29

nazar wrote:
NEVA wrote:Nazar,
1. You need to marshall the caselaw to support your point/conclusion. State a point you are trying to prove, then cite the specific proposition in the case law that supports that point. Do not retell the case without first establishing what you are doing it for.

Можно поподробнее об етом пункте. Етот недостаток я и сам вижу. Как не пробовал, не виходит по-людски.

It takes practice, but it's very important. The focus must be on your argument. All the cases you cite are just support for what you are trying to say.

First, write down what you are trying to prove. Look for cases that are most factually similar. The case always comes down to facts. Pretend you are the opposing counsel and look for facts that might make this case distinguishable from yours. Focus on the cases that are least distinguishable. Cite them in a string citation format (see above post).

Then find one case (two at most) that is most persuasive b/c its facts are the closest (but also consider whether it's recent and whether it's in the same jurisdiction). Discuss it in no more than 2 paragraphs - briefly give its general factual and procedural history, then focus on the similarities between your case and this case, and emphasise how the court in that case came to the same conclusion you are seeking.

Hope this helps. :radio%:

nazar · Post by **nazar** » 15 Mar 2005 21:52

NEVA wrote:
nazar wrote:
NEVA wrote:Nazar,
1. You need to marshall the caselaw to support your point/conclusion. State a point you are trying to prove, then cite the specific proposition in the case law that supports that point. Do not retell the case without first establishing what you are doing it for.

Можно поподробнее об етом пункте. Етот недостаток я и сам вижу. Как не пробовал, не виходит по-людски.

It takes practice, but it's very important. The focus must be on your argument. All the cases you cite are just support for what you are trying to say.

:

What if the cases are (1) very factually similar and (2) with the needed outcome, but our facts are broader (the rule of the previous cases is applied to the broader group of people).
Should I (a) bring up policy arguments and talk about reasonableness of the expanding of the existing rule, or
(b) try to argue that the differences are irrelevant.

What is a better strategy? At least, from practitioner’s point of view.

I asked that my Legal Writing Prof 1000000000 times. Every time the answer was “It depends.”

DanielMa · Post by **DanielMa** » 15 Mar 2005 22:03

Obviously, you want to explain why the cases are similar and explain why the differences are not important. How you do it, depends on the facts of the cases.

NEVA · Post by **NEVA** » 15 Mar 2005 22:04

nazar wrote:
NEVA wrote:
nazar wrote:
NEVA wrote:Nazar,
1. You need to marshall the caselaw to support your point/conclusion. State a point you are trying to prove, then cite the specific proposition in the case law that supports that point. Do not retell the case without first establishing what you are doing it for.

Можно поподробнее об етом пункте. Етот недостаток я и сам вижу. Как не пробовал, не виходит по-людски.

It takes practice, but it's very important. The focus must be on your argument. All the cases you cite are just support for what you are trying to say.

:

What if the cases are (1) very factually similar and (2) with the needed outcome, but our facts are broader (the rule of the previous cases is applied to the broader group of people).
Should I (a) bring up policy arguments and talk about reasonableness of the expanding of the existing rule, or
(b) try to argue that the differences are irrelevant.

What is a better strategy? At least, from practitioner’s point of view.

I asked that my Legal Writing Prof 1000000000 times. Every time the answer was “It depends.”

In the real world, no question - it's (b) - try to argue that the differences are irrelevant. IMHO, policy arguments are worthless, unless you work for the government or are arguing a very high-publicity case at the Supreme Court. From my experience as a law clerk, I can tell that judges' decisions on policy issues have little to do with what you argued, and even less with the merits of the case. It has more to do with whether they think they are likely to be overturned on appeal. Thus, unless its the Supreme Court you are talking about, judges are not likely to even consider, much less buy, any policy arguments. In my 2.5 years of private practice I've never seen anyone make such an argument.

nazar · Post by **nazar** » 15 Mar 2005 22:28

I SHOULD HAVE SHOWED YOU MY WRITING BEFORE I TURNED MY BRIEF IN. NOW I SEE HOW BAD IT IS. I SHOUD CHANGE WHOLE ARGUMENT SECTION.

I OWE ALL OF YOU GUYS A HUGE FAVOR. THANKS.

P.S. Practicing law in the US is more interesting and more intelligent that doing the same in Ukraine. Thanks god I moved here. :mrgreen:

babyatlaw · Post by **babyatlaw** » 15 Mar 2005 22:38

Nazar, don't worry, you are at law school right now - not practicing. And your brief is for the teacher, not the judge who is hesitating whether his decision will be overruled or not:) Полиси аргументс надо делать во всех ло скул екзамс, во всех брифах - поинтересуйтесь у учителя, Назар, он вам скажет то же самое.

NEVA · Post by **NEVA** » 15 Mar 2005 22:44

nazar wrote:I SHOULD HAVE SHOWED YOU MY WRITING BEFORE I TURNED MY BRIEF IN. NOW I SEE HOW BAD IT IS. I SHOUD CHANGE WHOLE ARGUMENT SECTION.

I OWE ALL OF YOU GUYS A HUGE FAVOR. THANKS.

P.S. Practicing law in the US is more interesting and more intelligent that doing the same in Ukraine. Thanks god I moved here.

It's really not a bad brief at all. I don't have my law school briefs handy, but I'm sure they were a lot worse. Just keep writing!

nazar · Post by **nazar** » 18 Mar 2005 23:28

Dear Neva and BabyatLaw, one more favor I’ll need from you.

Now, I’m trying to find a job in civil litigation law firm with no more than 20 attorneys. I’ve sent my resumes all over Chicago and I have seven appointments scheduled for the next week. My problem is following: even though I live in the US almost four years, I was unsuccessful in adjusting my psychology to the American style. What kind of “perfect candidate” are potential employers looking for???? How should I behave during those interviews? Should I look pitiful and desperate for the offered position, or calm and not giving a s… ???? Should I ask about salary???? Should I call after the interview?????

Help !!!!!! Please.

Carina · Post by **Carina** » 19 Mar 2005 01:05

In general:

You should act neither "pitiful and desperate" nor as if "you don't give a..s" Try to come accross as self-confident but also enthusiastic about the job for which you are interviewing"

Don't ask about the salary during the interview,--either wait until the person interviewing you brings this up or wait until you get an offer.

After an interview you may want to send a "thank you" note. In a few weeks, if you don't hear anything, you may want to call to re-state your interest in the position.

Also, you may want to make an appointment with your law school career develpment services and ask if they are willing to conduct a "mock interview" to help you polish your skills.

hope that helps. if you have any other questions, let me know

cheers

babyatlaw · Post by **babyatlaw** » 19 Mar 2005 04:47

Я навряд ли здесь могу помочь.. Я искала работу после клеркшипа (вернее во время такового), но в любом случае вести себя как будто вам все равно возьмут вас на работу или нет я бы не рекомендовала. В целом Карина дала правильные, на мой взгляд, советы. Я не успевала спрашивать о зарплате, так как обычно работодатель сам сообшал о ее размере.. Вам, как новичку самое главное сейчас опыт, лучше задавать вопросы о своих служебных обязанностях и обозначить собственные интересы.
You should not come across as a person who is looking to make big backs from the start and chooses the firts job place accordingly. You should show why exactly you want to work in this company and how the job could enrich your career aspirations and how the company can benefit from you as a professional.

madam Liza · Post by **madam Liza** » 19 Mar 2005 19:39

Carina, я отправила вам личное сообщение, проверьте пожалуйста.

Carina · Post by **Carina** » 19 Mar 2005 21:29

Madam Liza,

Я только что отправила вам ответ и мои e-mail.

nazar · Post by **nazar** » 19 Mar 2005 23:05

Carina wrote:Я только что отправила вам ответ и мои e-mail.

А мне можна "вопрос, ответ и e-mail" ?

Или я не заслужил?

Carina · Post by **Carina** » 20 Mar 2005 02:19

Назар,

конечно заслужили :лол: пишити, с удовольствием отвечу

babyatlaw · Post by **babyatlaw** » 20 Mar 2005 02:53

Будьте осторожней, Карина, за удовольствие он денюшку может взять:) лол:)

Carina · Post by **Carina** » 20 Mar 2005 03:36

the best things in life are free :wink:

madam Liza · Post by **madam Liza** » 20 Mar 2005 06:31

nazar wrote:
Carina wrote:Я только что отправила вам ответ и мои e-mail.

А мне можна "вопрос, ответ и e-mail" ? Или я не заслужил?

да это мы всё по поводу работы....ну и по поводу Хьюстона...

nazar · Post by **nazar** » 20 Mar 2005 21:12

Carina wrote:Назар,

конечно заслужили :лол: пишити, с удовольствием отвечу

Пользуюсь случаем !

Меня недавно приняли в Northwestern на LLM in Taxation. До того как получил положительний ответ, все било ОК. Теперь мучаюсь. Не уверен как поступить в етой ситуации.

Знаю что школу закончу хорошо или как минимум не вигонят. Знаю что работу наиду без особих проблем. Деньги особо не интересуют, так как все равно они будут, если делать работу хорошо. Проблема только в виборе специальности. Душа лежит больше всего Тортс, Такс и Контрактс (ни в однои отрасли опита нет).

Если есть какието мисли по етому поводу, поделитесь plz. Через полтора года на вольние хлеба виходить, так что начинать двигатса нада уже.

nazar · Post by **nazar** » 20 Mar 2005 21:16

babyatlaw wrote:Будьте осторожней, Карина, за удовольствие он денюшку может взять:) лол:)

А за такое берут $$$ ? Видать я совсем от жизни отстал.

nazar · Post by **nazar** » 20 Mar 2005 21:21

Madam Liza, мой принцип - "не спросишь - не узнаешь." Чем больше суешь свои нос куда следует и не следует, тем больше вариантов появляется. Так что извините за назоиливость.

NEVA · Post by **NEVA** » 20 Mar 2005 23:55

nazar wrote:Dear Neva and BabyatLaw, one more favor I’ll need from you.

Now, I’m trying to find a job in civil litigation law firm with no more than 20 attorneys. I’ve sent my resumes all over Chicago and I have seven appointments scheduled for the next week. My problem is following: even though I live in the US almost four years, I was unsuccessful in adjusting my psychology to the American style. What kind of “perfect candidate” are potential employers looking for???? How should I behave during those interviews? Should I look pitiful and desperate for the offered position, or calm and not giving a s… ???? Should I ask about salary???? Should I call after the interview?????

Help !!!!!! Please.

In addition to what Carina said, be prepared to answer the following questions:

1. Why you want to live in this area (very important)
2. Why you want to practice this area of law - what you enjoy about it
3. Talk about your classes/assignments/projects, etc. (pick a few you want to discuss)
4. Make small talk about social subjects - football, waeather, restaurants - something that will make you appear like a normal, friendly, easy to work with person.

As Carina said, appear eager, but confident and friendly.

Personally, I don't believe in thank you letters - they are nice, but never change anyone's mind. Nor does calling back make any difference. If they like you they will call, no worries.

DanielMa · Post by **DanielMa** » 21 Mar 2005 02:58

nazar wrote: Деньги особо не интересуют, так как все равно они будут, если делать работу хорошо. Проблема только в виборе специальности. Душа лежит больше всего Тортс, Такс и Контрактс (ни в однои отрасли опита нет).

Ну ты даеш, деньги не интересуют. Все равно они будут если работу делать хорошо? Я бы не надеялся что одна хорошая работа принесет много денег.

Душа должна лежать либо к Litigation либо не лежать к Litigation. Oпределись, нравиться ли писать Motions for Summary Judgment и ходить изредка в court.

Я бы получил LLM в Northwestern, после этого намного больше дверей откроеться.

Carina · Post by **Carina** » 21 Mar 2005 17:41

Nazar,

Во первых, поздравляю с acceptance to Northwestern!

Мое мнение: получать LLM in Таxation следутет идти если ты уверен что хочеш быть tax lawyer так как уже имея ллм ин тахатион довольно сложно поненят профиль так как потенциальные работадатели будут на тебя смотреть как специалиста в налогах.

я работаю tax lawyer (без llm) почьти 5 лет и сеичас хочу переклучитса на что-нибудь другое что бывает достаточно редко. Most tax lawyers really like tax and know relatively early on it is a field for them.

How long do you have before having to decide if you'll go to Northwestern. Is your deadline around May 1?

nazar · Post by **nazar** » 22 Mar 2005 19:53

Carina wrote:How long do you have before having to decide if you'll go to Northwestern. Is your deadline around May 1?

Да, начало Мая.

Не знаю на сколько ето правда, но слишал что на больших фирмах очень трудно пробитса в партнеры если не приводишь нових клиентов. Ета новость немного встревожила. Не хотелось би всю жизнь проходить в лейтенантах, когда можно довольно бистро стать генералом в civil litigation. Тем более что партнер в civil practice (20 attorneys) зарабативает больше чем лейтенант с 7-летним опитом на большой фирме. Если реально оценить шанси то мне займет около 4-5 лет стать партнером в civil practice. Что мне светит в Tax Law - понятия не имею. Расскажите plz кем би я мог стать с ЛЛМ в Такс за 5 лет, если буду справлятса с заданиями и работать по 15 часов день ??????

SpartakNY · Post by **SpartakNY** » 23 Mar 2005 01:13

I am with Carina on the tax law. I had my tax practice (before going to law school) and was working as a tax consultant with tax attorneys. Got so bored in 3 years that unless it is a part of a larger business deal I do not want to deal with them anymore as I now about to graduate. If were Nazar I would try to get an internship in a tax law firm to see if he likes it

P.S. From what I know the partnership track is hard to get unless you bring clients, and that is hard to do unless you know someone within the company.