Saturday, May 27, 2017
From Trust Advisor:
The U.S. government is raising prices for new student debt, adding hundreds of dollars to the cost of the typical federal college loan.
Beginning in July, interest rates on new government loans are set to rise by 0.69% point, according to Wednesday figures from the Department of the Treasury.
For undergraduates, that could amount to nearly a 20 percent increase in interest charges.
New undergraduate loans from the Department of Education are due to carry an interest rate of 4.45%, up from 3.76% for the academic year ending in June.
Rates on some graduate loans are set to rise from 5.31% to 6%, while rates on loans to parents and guardians are due to experience a jump from 6.31% to 7%.
For example, the cost of a $10,000 loan would increase by about $400, according to an online calculator maintained by Bankrate.com.
That may not seem like a lot of money, but the mes on top of a mountain of student
You can read more here.
Friday, May 26, 2017
Donald Trump's administration is pledging a Supreme Court showdown over his travel ban after a federal appeals court ruled that the ban "drips with religious intolerance, animus and discrimination."
Citing the president's duty to protect the country from terrorism, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Thursday that the Justice Department will ask the high court to review the case, although he offered no timetable.
The Ninth Circuit also has the travel ban on its docket; a federal judge in Hawaii invalidated the ban.
President Donald Trump’s youngest daughter, Tiffany, is headed to Georgetown Law. Tiffany, 23, was accepted to the school’s class of 2020 after she graduated from the University of Pennsylvania where she majored in sociology and urban studies. She begins classes this fall at Georgetown Law, one of the top programs in the country.
After posting on Instagram last year a photo of LSAT prep books and the phrase, “I got this,” it became apparent that she was looking towards law school. The Daily Mail first reported her plans on which law school to attend. It is reported that a law degree will help her find a place within the Trump organization.
You can read more here.
Thursday, May 25, 2017
At Attorney at Work, Alexey Pisarevsky addresses the problem of too many emails and social media contacts eating up too much of the work day. Here is an outline of his suggestions on how to deal with the problem:
Completely turn off notifications for all services on both your phone and computer.
Artificially limit the number of times you open distracting services.
Understand that nothing will happen if you don’t respond right now.
Get used to the fact that Inbox Zero is impossible in today’s world.
Organize your work so that no one distracts you.
You can read the full explanations here.
Wednesday, May 24, 2017
From the Spring 2017 issue of Perspectives:
I spent time last summer interviewing attorneys around my State to find out how our students were doing in professional legal settings. Most were pleased with the quality of the work our students produced, but many wanted to talk with me about a lack of professionalism that they’ve seen creeping into their law firms, courthouses, and other legal offices.
One attorney asked if I could teach our students to wear “real shoes” instead of flip-flops to the office. Who will teach them to wear shoes? Those of us who wear shoes, I suppose. After all, won’t our students be filling ours someday?
Jan M. Baker, Assistant Director of Legal Writing, University of South Carolina School of Law, Columbia, S.C.
Tuesday, May 23, 2017
Joseph William Singer and Todd D Rakoff, Problem Solving for First-Year Law Students.
"Law students need to learn how to solve client problems and not just how to interpret and apply the law to the client's situation. This article describes the Problem Solving Workshop, a course required for all first-year students at Harvard Law School. It is designed to help students focus on determining the client's goals, the facts necessary to help the client and to apply the law, the various laws that create both constraints and opportunities, and the options available to solve the problem. We describe both the structure of the problems used in the course and the problem solving methodology, as well as tips on how any professor can create such problems for her or his own course. The problems used at Harvard Law School are available for use by law professors at any school at very low cost, and new problems are being written and posted from time to time. The problems can be found by going to The Case Studies website at Harvard Law School under the Subject of Problem Solving."
Monday, May 22, 2017
At the Michigan Bar Journal (March 2017), Professor Nancy Vettorello surveys many online websites helpful to lawyers:
While none of the many free sites offer the sophisticated search abilities of fee-based research services, a few minutes spent exploring free sites can help researchers significantly narrow their searches once they turn to a fee-based system.
Remember to always take advantage of the advance search option when available on a free site. Free sites are offering increasingly sophisticated search options, such as Boolean and proximity searches, which were previously exclusive to paid services.
To see her list of sites, with her annotations, please click here.
Sunday, May 21, 2017
As I noted in an earlier posting, the Hollywood Reporter has released a list of the top 100 Hollywood entertainment lawyers (here). JDJournal has identified the law schools where the lawyers received their degrees. Here are the top twelve schools with the most alumns on the top 100 list:
- Georgetown Law School(tie)
- Cornell Law School(tie)
- Brooklyn Law School(tie)
- University of Michigan Law School
- George Washington Law
- Southwestern Law School(tie)
- Columbia Law School(tie)
- Stanford Law School
- UC Berkeley School of Law
- USC Gould School of Law
- Harvard Law School
- UCLA School of Law
You can read more here.
Saturday, May 20, 2017
Daniel McCormack is a postdoctoral fellow in international politics who is leaving academia for the private sector. At Vitae, he identifies aspects of the academic life that academic aspirants may not have thought about. Though he writes from the viewpoint of a Ph.D., his views are worth the consideration of legal educators.
You have to like long-term projects. With few exceptions, the most time an undergraduate has spent on a research or writing project is a few months. In academe, everything is a long-term project.
You also have to be good at managing your time over very long stretches.
You don’t need to feel like you’re succeeding.
You don’t care where you live.
You don’t mind moving frequently.
You can read his full discussion here.
Friday, May 19, 2017
The results of a recent survey may surprise you. Making partner is high on the millennial list. From the Indiana Lawyer:
According to a study recently released by Major Lindsey & Africa and Above the Law, roughly 44 percent of millennial law firm attorneys surveyed said they hope to someday make partner, either at the firm they’re currently with or at another firm. That result came as a surprise to Major Lindsey & Africa partners who, like many older attorneys, bought into the assumption that the law’s youngest employees were exploring options off the traditional partner track.
Ru Bhatt, managing director of Major Lindsey & Africa’s Associate Practice Group, said the perception in recent years has been that millennials pursuing a career in the law prefer to become in-house counsel, a position that is often desirable because of its more flexible hours.
But according to the survey, just 18.75 percent of respondents indicated they saw themselves working as in-house counsel 10 years down the road, compared to the 43.64 percent who want to make partner. . . .
While members of the baby boom generation were more inclined to take a job at a firm out of law school and stay with the firm for the span of their career, the results of the survey show roughly one-quarter of millennial associates intend to work at their current firm for two years or less. That number rises to one-third when discussing junior associates.
You can read more here.
Thursday, May 18, 2017
Wednesday, May 17, 2017
Professor Douglas A. Kahn recently posted an article on SSRN, The Downside of Requiring Additional Experiential Courses in Law School, in which he declares that "the imposition of additional, required experiential courses will have a negative effect on the adequacy of a student's preparation to practice law because it contributes to a reduction in the student's exposure to a range of doctrinal courses (especially core courses) and to the skills that those courses develop." He is particularly critical of the proliferation of clinical courses. For reactions to this article, see the comments to this article on the TaxProf Blog.
In response to Kahn's article, Professor Jones Merritt has posted a defense of clinics on the Law School Cafe: What Do Students Do in Clinics?
She asserts, "It’s an old debate, one that has bristled for more than 50 years. The discussion doesn’t surprise me, but Professor Kahn’s ignorance of clinical education does. His bold assertions about clinics reveal little familiarity with the actual operation of those courses. Let’s examine some of Kahn’s claims."
In response to Kahn's claim that “[S]kills in legal reasoning, analysis, and statutory construction are best learned in doctrinal courses," she asserts, "Decades of research on cognitive science show that students learn critical thinking skills (like “legal reasoning, analysis, and statutory construction”) through explicit instruction, hands-on practice, written exercises, and individualized feedback. Doctrinal courses offer surprisingly little of that work."
She continues. "Well-staffed legal writing courses offer much better instruction in legal reasoning, analysis, and statutory construction than doctrinal courses."
She asks, "And now let’s talk about clinics. Does Professor Kahn really believe that clinic students represent clients without engaging in legal reasoning, analysis, or statutory construction?" For example, "I am even more certain that clinics give students a chance to advance their statutory construction skills (along with other types of legal reasoning and analysis) to a new level. Students in my clinics must interpret a variety of statutes drawn from very different fields, integrate those statutes in a single case, explain the statutes’ meaning to clients, and develop persuasive arguments for opposing counsel and the court."
Kahn: Seminar sessions in a clinic “likely are more focused on the delivery of legal services than on the analysis of legal issues and policies.” Merritt replies, "How in the world does one deliver legal services without analyzing legal issues and policies?" In addition, "the clinics I know radiate novel legal issues and provocative policies."
Kahn: “Another reason [to prefer simulation courses] is that the instructor in a simulation course can control the issues that will arise rather than . . . depend on what issues a client brings.” She responds, "Most clinics choose their clients and cases, which allows considerable control over the issues that students face. But it’s exactly the uncontrollable elements that students need by their third year of law school. They won’t be able to control their facts or issues once they graduate, unless they focus on appellate work."
In sum, "One can, as Professor Kahn suggests, debate the appropriate balance among doctrinal, experiential, and (I would add) interdisciplinary, perspective, and seminar courses in law school. But to have an intelligent debate, we need to know the content of those course types. Professor Kahn’s article reflects many of the stereotypes that educators hold about clinical and other experiential courses. Let’s learn the facts before we begin to negotiate: that’s a key lesson we teach in clinics."
There is much more detail to Merritt's article so I suggest you read the whole thing. But, her main point is clear: Don't criticize something you don't understand. We see this so much in everyday life; we don't need it in supposedly scholarly debates.
The other big thing to get out of her article is that students learn more when they apply doctrine to real-life situations. Having a lot of knowledge is not enough; a lawyer needs to know how to use that knowledge. Knowing doctrine is the basis of traditional legal education. Today's law schools are moving toward teaching students to use that knowledge. This progress is still slow, but we have to fight for it. We owe it to the students. Professor Merritt is at the forefront of that fight.
At the Christensen Institute, Michael Horn has published a paper in which he reports on how some non-elite law schools are innovating to provide more and better services and to keep afloat financially.
Tuesday, May 16, 2017
Good Grief Department. From the National Law Journal (May 15, 2017):
David Stras once wrote that U.S. Supreme Court justices should not have term limits. Instead, he said they should be incentivized to leave when they get old, through “golden parachute” pensions and a heavier workload, including being forced to hear cases around the country by “riding the circuits.”
Stras, 42, is currently an associate justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court and before that was a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School whose extensive research focused on the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary in general.
Soon, Stras may be able to continue his scholarly scrutiny from the inside
President Donald Trump announced plans to nominate Stras to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on May 8. If the Senate confirms Stras, his perch on the circuit court could be a stepping stone to the high court. Stras was one of the 20 judges on the lists Trump touted as possible Supreme Court nominees before the November election.
Nearly two-thirds of recent law school graduates believe that law schools should raise their admissions standards.
But, some of these grads may very well have been admitted under the academic standards they want tightened.
This surprising statistic comes from a recent survey conducted by Kaplan Bar Review. The survey also indicated that law school graduates feel underwater in debt and are split on the merits of online learning.
Over the past several years, law schools experienced saw smaller applicant pools and falling enrollment. To fill classroom seats, many law schools admitted students with lower LSAT scores and GPAs. Lowering academic standards generally raised overall enrollment rates, bar passage rates also declined.
You can read more here.
Monday, May 15, 2017
The answer seems to be yes. From Bloomberg:
Fired employees never quite recover to the same level of well-being, a measure that includes mental health, self-esteem and satisfaction with life, according to data provided to Bloomberg this week from a review of more than 4,000 research papers.
Losing a job can be a sharp blow, one that causes a bigger drop in life satisfaction than being widowed or getting divorced, according to the review conducted by the University of East Anglia and the What Works Center for Wellbeing, an independent body set up by the U.K. government.
Extroverts and church-goers handle the situation better.
You can read more here.
Sunday, May 14, 2017
In the Michigan Law Review, Linda Greenhouse has published the results of her study of the 2015-16 Supreme Court term. Here is a capsule view of her findings:
Categories of Books Cited
Treatises and practice manuals 51
Primary sources, historical 27
History and political science 17
Primary sources, modern 3
( Excluded from this review are per curiam opinions, as well as concurrences and dissents to those opinions).
You can read the full study here. It has lots more information.
Saturday, May 13, 2017
From the ABAJournal online:
A federal judge didn’t abuse his discretion when he imposed a $500 fine on an assistant public defender who refused to give a yes-or-no answer.
The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week upheld the fine imposed on William Hermesmeyer, the Houston Chronicle reports. The appeals court’s unpublished May 2 opinion is here (PDF).
U.S. District Judge John McBryde had demanded a yes-or-no answer after he asked Hermesmeyer to clarify his objections to a potential sentence. Hermesmeyer gave a one-sentence answer and, when pressed for more, replied, “Just what I said.”