Friday, December 27, 2013

Wisconsin Bar Task Force Reports that More Than 40 Percent of Wisconsin Lawyers Would Not Attend Law School if They Had a Do-Over

The Task Force’s Findings: In November 2013, the Wisconsin State Bar issued a 25 page document labeled “Challenges Facing New Lawyers Task Force Report and Recommendations.”  According to the introduction, the task force was appointed by the bar president in January 2012.  Check out the following, from page 7 of the PDF:

“To provide background, more than 9 out of 10 respondents reported suffering tremendous burdens as a result of their debt.  The median cost of a law school education for the respondents was $95,000, the mean was $94,822.  The middle half of respondents ranged in law school costs from $68,000 to $120,000.  About half of all respondents (53.8%) had educational debt before they entered law school with the median value of $20,000.  Overall, respondents reported still owing a median of $90,000 on their law studies.  The survey also confirmed that the overall amount of loans borrowed for law school from 2005 to 2008 had increased by approximately 36.8%.” [Emphasis mine]

On to page 8 of this report:

“While the data suggests that students were less surprised about their debt levels, a much larger percentage  of the respondents (78.9%) indicated that their earnings were less than they expected during law school.  These individuals had an average law practice compensation of $41,591...

Not only was income than expected for most law school graduates, but most (71.4%) said that they had benefits less than expected.  Many attorneys were not covered by benefits.  Fifteen to twenty percent of respondents had their benefits, including health, dental or vision, covered by a spouse or partner.” [Emphasis mine]

Yes, what a great return on investment, right?!?!  This is one reason why I ripped Christopher Knorps a new rectum.  The rodent - from a well-off family - constantly bitched about students “expecting six figure salaries.”  In reality, these men and women removed themselves from the full-time work force for several years - and incurred substantial student debt in the process - with the intent to enter a decent profession.

Other Coverage: On December 20, 2013, the ABA Journal published a piece from Debra Cassens Weiss, which was entitled “Would you go to law school if you had a do-over? 40 percent of young lawyers in this survey said no.”  Here is the opening:

“More than 40 percent of young lawyers in Wisconsin would not go to law school if they had it to do over again, given what they know now, a survey has found.

The survey, chronicled in a report (PDF) by a State Bar of Wisconsin task force, found that young lawyers in the state still owed a median of $90,000 for their law school studies. Said one respondent: “I think about my debt several times a day. Unfortunately there is no solution to it, so I just drag this debt around with me, like Jacob Marley was forced to drag his chains around for all eternity.”

About 600 lawyers in the bar’s Young Lawyer’s Division responded to the August 2013 survey. About 72 percent of the respondents had graduated from law school since 2008. Nearly 80 percent reported they were earning less than expected in law school; lawyers in this group had an average law practice compensation of about $41,000.” [Emphasis mine]

Good luck paying off $90K+ in NON-DISCHARGEABLE loans, while earning $41K per year.  Plus, the latter figure is before payroll taxes, SSI and health insurance are deducted.  Try supporting a family or purchasing a home on that income level.

By the way, imagine if the state bar swine had exclusively surveyed recent law graduates.  Keep in mind that those who attend a Wisconsin law school, and intend to practice there, do not need to take the Wisconsin bar exam.  This at least saves the JD the added stress and financial costs associated with the test.

OLSS contributing author Antiro wrote a December 20, 2013 entry entitled “Wisconsin Legal Task Force Comes Down on the Side of the Reformers.”  Review the passage below:

“The CFNLTF also compiled a survey of 599 young lawyers (about 70% have graduated since 2008), most of which whom worked in smaller firms.  The survey found that more than h,alf had found their loans to have majorly impacted their lives, while a quarter expected to not pay off the debt for 6-10 years, and about a third expected to be stuck with their loans for more than 20 years.

I'm not going to continue to summarize the survey results much longer; it's exactly what you would expect: most found their pay and benefits to be lower than they expected, most didn't learn about the difficulties facing lawyers until they were already enrolled in law school, and most who went to law school "wanted to help others or serve justice."  It's encouraging that the State Bar of Wisconsin is paying attention to the future of the legal profession, and while many in the legal ed reform movement have been beating these particular drums for a few years, it is clear that the momentum is clearly in our favor.” [Emphasis mine]

Conclusion: Law school is a piss poor “investment” for those who are not wealthy or seriously connected, i.e. the vast majority of students.  Head to the FinAid Loan Calculator, provided by Pussy Mark Kantrowitz.  Enter the loan amount of $90,000 at an 8.25% interest rate.  If you were to take 30 years to pay off the loan, you would have paid $243,410.31 in total.  The monthly payment would be $676.14.  In the event that you paid this amount off in 20 years - at the same interest rate -  you still would have made $184,045.85 in cumulative payments.  

Hell, you would be fortunate to make the monthly $676.14 monthly payment, on the longer schedule, if you are making roughly $40K per year.  After taxes and insurance are taken out, you would be looking at around $28K-$30K in net salary.  Your minimum annual loan payments - under the 30 year plan - would eat up $8,113.68 of that amount.  That doesn’t leave much for food, shelter, or other bills.  Of course, the law school pigs do very well under this arrangement.  They are paid up front, in full - while you are left holding the bag for the next 20-30 years of your life.  Their unjustified pay is in no way tied to the students’ job prospects or outcomes.  Heed this warning, Lemmings.

Sunday, December 22, 2013

First Tier Toxic Sewage: University of Southern California Gould School of Law

Tuition: Full-time law USC law students will be charged $52,814 in tuition, for the 2013-2014 school year.  To put this into perspective, full-time tuition at first-ranked Yale Law School is $52,400 - for 2013-2014.  Does anyone with an IQ above 60 believe that these two schools are in the same league?!?!

Total Cost of Attendance: According to this same document, those first year students living at home will incur an additional $15,061 in expenses - whereas off campus students will face an extra $25,861 in costs. Hell, the swine don't even include the cost of insurance.  As such, the commode lists the total, estimated COA as $67,875 and $78,675, respectively.

Seeing that ABA-accredited diploma mills only base living expenses off of a nine-month school year, we will need to prorate the following items: board; miscellaneous; and transportation.  After making these adjustments, on-campus, first-year students attending full time will have a total estimate of $71,058 - and full-time, first year USC law students living off campus will have a total COA amounting to $85,478!  That is simply outrageous.  Anyone who defends the law school pigs is lower than dog excrement.

Ranking: Based on the latest ratings scheme by US “News” & World Report, this private toilet is listed as the 18th best law school in the entire country.  That doesn’t stop the swine from charging more - in tuition - than Yale Law School.

Published Employment Placement Statistics: The law school notes that 85.5% of its Class of 2013 was employed within nine months of graduation.  Keep in mind that this includes all types of jobs, I.e. attorney positions, non-law, full-time, part-time, short-term, and long-term.  If you are selling insurance or teaching grade school, as a member of this cohort, then you are considered “employed.”  Yes, that is super-fantastic, huh?!?!

Average Law Student Indebtedness: USN&WR lists the average law student indebtedness - for those members of the USC Law Class of 2012 who incurred debt for law school - as $138,858. In fact, 81 percent of this school’s 2012 class took on such foul debt. Remember that this figure does not include undergraduate debt – and it also does not take accrued interest into account, while the student is enrolled.

University Administrator Pay: In order to see how the pigs are doing, in contrast to the debt-strapped students, we head to the 2012 Form 990 for Employer ID No. 95-1642394, i.e. the Univer$ity of $outhern California.  Surprisingly, no member of the law school faculty made it on the list of highest compensated employees - for the tax year ending June 30,  2012.  Then again, look at the following TOTAL COMPENSATION figures that this “in$titution of higher learning” lavished on its sports programs - starting on page 127 of this PDF.

Then-head football coach Monte Lane Kiffin raked in $2,594,091, while his father, Monte George Kiffin, made $1,791,555 in total - as assistant football coach.  Athletic director Patrick Capper Haden rolled around in $2,247,678.  Lastly, Kevin O’Neill, head men’s basketball coach, received $1,717,749.  Heading to non-athletic department officials, you will see that Chrysostomos Nikias made out with $1,439,126 in loot - as university “president.”  However, the school paid its former “president,” Steven Sample, a total of $1,815,643 - apparently to sit on his old, wrinkly ass.  Does that mean that he is performing more “work” than the current rodent in charge?!?!

Garbage Opportunities: As a student at this overpriced toilet, you will have the unique opportunity to write onto the “world-famous” Southern California Review of Law and Social Justice!  From the mission statement:

“The Southern California Review of Law and Social Justice (RLSJ) promotes the discussion and examination of issues lying at the intersection of social justice and the law. RLSJ publishes legal narratives and analyses of case law and legislation that address the law's interaction with historically underrepresented groups and highlight the law's potential as an instrument of positive social change. These narratives and analyses borrow from the perspectives of a wide range of disciplines. The goal of RLSJ is to influence the development of the law in ways that encourage full and equal participation of all people in politics and society.”

Yes, what woman will be able to resist a student editor of this TTT publication?!?!  Employers - especially all of those “social justice” law firms - will be scrambling over themselves, in an effort to gain your services.  [Disclaimer: Nothing of the sort will happen.]

As a USC law student, you can also participate in the Space Law Society.  Here is the description:

“Space Law Society is an organization formed to promote an understanding of space law, encourage participation in its development, and coordinate collaboration between students and professionals in space-related industries. As an organization, we organize social activities, educational events and discussions. We also arrange a team to compete in the international Manfred Lachs Space Law Moot competition.”

One would think that an accredited law school - especially one that is supposedly the 18th best in the nation - would be embarrassed to offer such nonsense.  By the way, who the hell knew that there was a space law moot competition?!?!

Conclusion: USC Gould Sewer of Law is a grossly overpriced, private toilet located in the LEGENDARILY FLOODED California lawyer job market.  According to Economic Modeling Specialists Inc., this state is the SECOND MOST GLUTTED attorney market in the country.  If you don’t have excellent connections before entering, then you will not be served well by incurring an additional $165K in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt.  Keep in mind that Biglaw is not secure.  If you manage to land an associate position, but can’t bring in major business and move your way up quickly, you will likely be out on your ass within 3-5 years.

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Great News: First Year Law School Enrollment Hits a 36 Year Low!

The Report: On December 17, 2013, the Wall Street Journal Law Blog published Jennifer Smith’s article, which was entitled “First-Year Law School Enrollment At 1977 Levels.”  Look at this opening:

“First-year enrollment at U.S. law schools plunged to levels not seen since the 1970s, as students steered away from a career that has left many recent graduates loaded with debt and struggling to find work.

The American Bar Association said on Tuesday that the number of first-year law students fell 11% this year. So far, 39,675 full-time and part-time students enrolled in law school, nearly 5,000 fewer than in 2012.

That’s one student shy of 1977 enrollment levels, when the ABA reported 39,676  first-year students. The lowest previous tally was in 1975, when 39,038 students entered their first year of law school and there were only 163 ABA-approved schools (the current count is 202).

The 2013 drop extends a decline that is now in its third year. More than 52,000 would-be lawyers entered their first year of law school in 2010, an all-time high. Many of those students were thought to be seeking shelter from the economic tumult of the recession.

But even then the job market for newly-minted attorneys was contracting.

Many big law firms laid off junior lawyers during the downturn and slashed expenses as clients facing their own financial troubles pressed for discounts. Some lower-level legal tasks that firm associates used to do, such as document review, are now increasingly farmed out to contract attorneys or legal outsourcing companies that can do the work more cheaply.” [Emphasis mine]

You’re welcome, law school cockroaches.  In the end, you greedy bastards brought this upon yourselves.  At any rate, this is a significant development.  The general public is catching onto the scam, thanks to our collective efforts.

Other Coverage: Mark Hansen’s piece, “Law school enrollment down 11 percent this year over last year, 24 percent over 3 years, data shows,” appeared in the December 17, 2013 edition of the ABA Journal.  Check out the following excerpt:

“Law school enrollments nationwide are down 11 percent this year from last year and 24 percent from 2010, new figures show.

The nation’s 202 ABA-accredited schools reported that 39,675 full- and part-time students were enrolled in a first-year J.D. program this fall, according to figures released Tuesday by the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar.

That’s a decrease of 4,806 students from the fall of 2012, when 44,481 students began their law school studies, and a decrease of 12,813 students from 2010, when an all-time high of 52,488 first-year students were enrolled in an ABA-accredited school.”

Now, even the law school pigs are agreeing with the scam-bloggers that the commodes have been enrolling too damn many students:

“David Yellen, dean of Loyola University of Chicago School of Law, says while the figures are not surprising, it is "still kind of stunning" to think that law school enrollments have declined nearly 25 percent in three years. "The last time fewer than 40,000 students were enrolled in law school was in 1977," he says.

Yellen also says that while he thinks 52,000 new law school enrollees a year is too many, we're now at the point where we might want to ask whether the market correction has gone too far and is being driven as much by negative publicity as anything else.

However, new applications are projected to be down another 10 to 15 percent in the coming year, he says, "so we're definitely not at the bottom of the cycle yet." [Emphasis mine]

How will the jackals be able to lower their ridiculous costs?!?!

The Pigs Have Been Forced to Trim the Fat: Back on July 15, 2013, the Wall Street Journal Law Blog featured a post from Ashby Jones and Jennifer Smith, which was labeled “Amid Falling Enrollment, Law Schools Are Cutting Faculty.”  Review this portion:

“Law schools across the country are shedding faculty members as enrollment plunges, sending a grim message to an elite group long sheltered from the ups and downs of the broader economy.

Having trimmed staff, some schools are offering buyouts and early-retirement packages to senior, tenured professors and canceling contracts with lower-level instructors, who have less job protection. Most do so quietly. But the trend is growing, most noticeably among middle- and lower-tier schools, which have been hit hardest by the drop-off.

Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul, Minn., for example, has shrunk its full-time faculty about 18% since 2010, and the school is exploring ways to further scale back its head count. Ten faculty members have retired since the school began offering early-retirement incentives in 2011, and four more have accepted agreements and plan to retire in the coming academic year.” [Emphasis mine]

We have seen the stories at various diploma mills and trash pits. For instance, VermonTTT Law Sewer was forced to cut faculty, staff, maintenance and cleaning services.  This past July, $eTTon Haul Univer$iTTy SOL announced a 10% reduction in faculty compensation.  Last week, on December 12th, Paul Campos noted that TJ$L was cutting jobs and trimming the operating budget by nearly 10 percent.

Conclusion: Due to our work in getting the message out, applications to ABA-accredited law schools are down.  The bitches and hags are now admitting a higher percentage, but this cannot prevent a big-ass drop in first-year enrollment.  The cockroaches are getting desperate, which is why you are seeing so many op-eds from “law professors”/parasites telling people that “Now is a great time to apply to law school.”  In the final analysis, the rodents will do and say anything in order to avoid having to find a real job.

Thursday, December 12, 2013

First Tier Pile of Bear Feces: University of California, Los Angeles School of Law

Tuition: California residents attending this commode on a full-time basis will be charged $45,225.75 in tuition - for the 2013-2014 school year.  Out of state, full-time law students at UCLA will be pistol-whipped with a big-ass tuition bill of $51,719.75 - for 2013-2014.  Yes, that is one hell of a bargain for the students, right?!?!

Ranking: According to Vagina Bob Morse of US “News” & World Report, UCLA Sewer of Law is the 17th greatest, most spectacular and amazing law school in the United States.  Don’t be fooled by this rating.  You need to focus on the job outlook facing the toilet’s graduates.

Employment Placement Statistics: The Employment Summary for the Class of 2012 shows that there were 333 total members in this cohort.  Employment status was unknown for one graduate.  As such, the pigs published a nine-month rate of 91 percent, i.e. 302/332.  Of course, this figure includes non-law jobs, part-time work, and temporary assignments.

UCLA $chool of Law hired 40 grads from this class in university or law school-funded positions!  Of that amount, only nine of those jobs were long-term and full-time.  Furthermore, 28 of those jobs were garbage posts, i.e. short-term and part-time, designed to bump up the trash can’s placement rate.  Without these 40 BS jobs, the placement rate for the UCLA JD Class of 2012 would have been 78.9%, i.e. 262/332.  What a “prestigious” in$titution, huh?!?!

Average Law Student Indebtedness: US “News” lists the average law student indebtedness - for those members of the UCLA Law Class of 2012 who incurred debt for law school - as $109,539. Hell, 82 percent of this school’s 2012 class took on such toxic debt. Remember that this figure does not include undergraduate debt – and it also does not take accrued interest into account, while the student is enrolled.

Administrator and Faculty Pay: Let’s see how well the pigs are doing, in contrast to their debt-strapped recent graduates.  For this info, I cite to the figures - for 2011 - compiled by David Lat in his May 30, 2013 entry, “How Much Does Your Law Professor Make? UCLA Law Edition.”  He states that he received the data from the Sacramento Bee.

“Here are the ten highest-paid faculty members at UCLA Law:

1. Rachel Moran (dean) – $427,825.01
2. Seana Shiffrin$369,024.00
3. Kirk J. Stark$358,346.61
4. Steven A. Bank$358,183.13
5. Stephen M. Bainbridge$356,619.39
6. Jennifer L. Mnookin – $348,490.82
7. Kal Raustiala – $344,069.04
8. Sharon Dolovich – $336,199.01
9. Devon W. Carbado – $323,208.49
10. Mark Greenberg – $320,519.51” [Emphasis mine]

TTTT Law Journals: Take a look at the numerous offerings of politically correct academic journals at this public dump.  Here are just a few examples: Asian Pacific American Law Journal; Dukeminier Awards Journal for Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Law; Journal of Islamic and Near Eastern Law; and the Women’s Law Journal.

Now, take a look at the following description:

“The National Black Law Journal has been committed to scholarly discourse exploring the intersection of race and the law for thirty-five years. The NBLJ was started in 1970 by 5 African-American law students and 2 African-American law professors. The Journal was the first of its kind in the country. The Journal has aimed to build on this tradition by publishing articles that make a substantive contribution to current dialogue taking place around issues such as affirmative action, employment law, the criminal justice system, community development and labor issues. The Journal has a commitment to publish articles that inspire new thought, explore new alternatives and contribute to current jurisprudential stances.”

Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature believe that being a student editor on any of these fifth-rate law journals will help anyone land a decent legal job?!?!  Academics love to espouse liberal ideas, but in the end they don’t really care about anything other than keeping their grossly overpaid positions.

Conclusion: The Univer$ity of California, Lo$ Angele$ $chool of Law is a gamble - for the students.  ABA-accredited diploma mills are run for the benefit of the  “professors.”  Based on this chart from Economic Modeling Specialists, Inc., California has the SECOND MOST GLUTTED lawyer job market in the entire damn country.  Good luck trying to eke out a living, while paying back your massive student loan, on a $40K annual salary in pricey Southern California, Bitch.

Sunday, December 8, 2013

Rutgers University School of Law-Camden Knowingly Admitted Students Who Didn’t Take the LSAT; The Pigs Receive a Slap on the Wrist from the ABA

The announcement: The American Bar Association cockroaches issued a December 4, 2013 press release labeled “ABA accreditation committee sanctions Rutgers University School of Law-Camden.”  Read the portion below:

“The Accreditation Committee of the American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar today reported that it has sanctioned Rutgers University School of Law-Camden for violating the ABA Standards for Approval of Law Schools.

The committee found that Rutgers-Camden violated Standard 503, which requires law schools to use a valid and reliable admissions test, and Interpretation 503-1, which requires law schools that use an admissions test other than the Law School Admission Test to establish the test’s validity and reliability in determining an applicant’s ability to complete the J.D. program.

Rutgers-Camden operated an admissions program, without obtaining a variance from the ABA, that allowed some applicants to use a standardized graduate admissions test score instead of an LSAT score to gain admission to the law school. The school subsequently qualified for a variance but elected to suspend the program.

The accreditation committee imposed a public censure on the law school, which must post the censure document prominently on its website home page for one year. The censure is also posted on the website of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar.

The committee also imposed a $25,000 monetary penalty based on the benefit the school received from operating the program.” [Emphasis mine]

Yes, that immense $25,000 fine is sure going to deter other ABA-accredited filth pits from engaging in the same conduct, right?!?!  What the hell is the point of having “standards,” when the punishment for violations of said regulations amounts to a mere slap on the wrist?!  By the way, if the school admitted 70-80 students under this scheme, then the pigs received a few million dollars in federally-backed student loan money.  I know that "law professors" love to state that all lawyers suck at math, but you would need to be a waterhead in order to think that a $25K fine - for receiving millions - is adequate.

Other Coverage: On December 5, 2013, the Philadelphia Inquirer published reporter Jonathan Lai’s piece “Rutgers-Camden law school fined over avoiding LSATs.”  Check out the following excerpt:

"In a three-paragraph statement, the law school said it had violated procedural aspects of the bar association's standards.

"We were negligent in failing to seek a variance, regret and apologize for this procedural violation and accept the ABA censure as appropriate," the statement reads.

Between 2006 and 2012, the law school admitted dozens of students who took tests other than the LSAT. In 2009, the bar association sent a memo to all accredited law schools clarifying its policy requiring the LSAT, except with prior arrangement." [Emphasis mine]

Yeah, sure you bastards were negligent - and Salma Hayek just scratched her name into my back!  $omehow, this conduct is ALWAYS an “error” or an “accident.”  It’s also uncanny how these “mistakes” benefit the law school swine every single damn time.  By the way, does anyone with an IQ over 80 believe that the administrators at RuTTger$ Univer$iTTy Sewer of Law-Camden were not aware that they were admitting dozens of students who had not taken the LSAT, without first seeking a variance from the ABA?!?!

On December 4, 2013, the ABA Journal posted Mark Hansen’s piece, “Rutgers School of Law-Camden is fined $25K and censured for accrediting violations.”  Here is his concluding paragraph:

“The committee also fined the school $25,000 for the benefit it received from operating the program without the required variance.  That money will be used by the section to help enforce the standards.”

According to the commode, in-state residents attending full-time for the 2013-2014 academic year 2013-14 will be charged $22,746 in tuition. Non-resident, full-time law students at this notorious trash heap will be ass-raped to the tune of $34,478 in tuition - for 2013-2014.  Essentially, the pigs will be penalized the cost of a single year of one New Jersey resident’s tuition.  The ABA report noted that the school admitted between 70-80 students without an LSAT.  Yes, that will teach the bastards a lesson, right?!?!

Conclusion: The criminals at the American Bar Association CLEARLY DO NOT GIVE ONE DAMN about law students.  The schools are run for the benefit of the failed lawyers known as “professors.”  During orientation, the bitches and hags constantly tell their victims that this is a “noble profession.”  If you believe that academic nonsense, then you should not be allowed to make any decision that might impact another person.  In fact, if you buy the rats’ drivel, you should be declared mentally unfit to enter into a contract.  

In the final analysis, the Rutgers University Sewer of Law-Camden already had a reputation lower than rat piss.  As a result of this worthless penalty, the rodents will likely lower their admi$$ion$ criteria even further - in order to maintain enrollment.  The ABA merely decided to hand down this “punishment,” because the cockroaches felt that they had to do something - so that they could “show” the public that they do enforce their “standards.”  Apparently, RuTTger$ would have been fine had the dolts simply applied for a variance in advance.  I wouldn't be surprised to see the supposed 91st greatest law school in the country admit students who have at least a 2.5 undergrad GPA and a 148 LSAT.  I can see it now: "Okay, so this guy provided a picture of his girlfriend's feet on his Personal Statement.  However, he did graduate from University of Phoenix and he has a 2.8 UGPA."

Sunday, December 1, 2013

Profiles in Academic Excrement: Ryan Calo, Assistant “Law Professor” at the University of Washington

The Bastard’s “Argument”: On November 24, 2013, a sewer rat called Ryan Calo wrote a piece for Forbes, with the idiotic headline “Why Now Is A Good Time To Apply To Law School.”  Before listing his three $elf-$erving reasons for applying, Cockroach Calo states that his remarks are addressed to “those who think they want to be lawyers someday and are simply not pulling the trigger on applying because of all the bad news.”

In the swine’s own words:

“1. Fewer applicants means schools compete fiercely for decent students.

A law school faced with fewer applicants must either lower its admissions standards or shrink its class size. (University of Washington, where I work, has chosen the latter.) Regardless, schools are competing feverishly for good students. An applicant who, a few years ago, would have been wait-listed at a top twenty school, may now find herself with a scholarship. A smaller class size, meanwhile, unless offset by layoffs or a long hiring freeze, translates into more individual attention for the students that do enroll. 

2. A lot of law jobs will be opening up over the next five to ten years.

My parents are part of a large generation so large they are known as the Baby Boomers. My father retired last month and my mother plans to retire soon. Even if people work longer than in the past, many (many) people will be leaving the workforce in the next five to ten years. Some of these people will be lawyers. The demographics are such that knowledgeable folks like the head of the Washington Bar Association are predicting a market gap. They worry that future demand for legal services will not be met by a dwindling supply.

3. Reports of the death of the legal market are greatly exaggerated.

One premise of these predictions is that clients are moving away from relying on enormous law firms that bill them by the hour. A second is that technology is changing the face of legal services in ways that eliminate lawyerly tasks, such as the drafting of a will.

Both of these claims are true. I just don’t know what they prove.” [Emphasis mine]

Analysis: Let’s break down this academic thief’s “case” for applying to law school now.

Regarding point one, Aaron Nathaniel Taylor - “professor” at Saint Louis University Sewer of Law - made the same weak-ass argument back on October 11, 2011.  In that NaTTTional Juri$TTT opinion piece, he stated the following:

“And if applications fall again during the 2011-2012 cycle, as predicted, applicants will find themselves in a very favorable environment for gaining admission. At some schools, applicants who would have been considered “borderline” just two years ago might be shoo-ins for admission this year. So the strategic benefit of applying during a string of down years is worth ample consideration.”

Take a look at this Average Law Student Indebtedness chart, provided by US “News” & World Report, for the JD Class of 2012.  Keep in mind that these figures do not account for interest that accrues while the student is enrolled.  They also exclude student debt from undergrad.  How in the hell does the typical unconnected law student benefit by incurring an additional $120K-$180K in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt?!?!

Check out this Oregon State Bar bulletin labeled “Restaging the Third Act: Baby Boomer Attorneys Diversify Career Option as They Reach Their 60s.”

In short, older attorneys don’t retire.  This is white collar work, consisting mostly of shuffling paperwork.  The article notes that old-ass lawyers do the following: reduce their work schedule and hours; continue as independent consultants; and work from home.  Again, we are talking about greedy Boomer pigs who do not want to see their income shrink.

Calo’s second “argument” is comical.  In fact, I had to suppress my laughter.  Ryan, if you truly believe your own drivel, then you need to be committed to a hospital for the clinically stupid.  Your argument is akin to the following: “You should climb into a lion cage at the zoo.  All of them will be well fed.  Many of them will be old and weak.”

By the way, Ass-Hat: are those Washington State Bar cockroaches aware that Economic Modeling Specialists Inc. showed that their state has the 20th most GLUTTED lawyer job market in the country?!  In particular, Washington will have an estimated 619 annual attorney openings from 2010-2015.  In 2009 alone, 935 passed the state’s bar exam.

Lastly, Calo’s third point is a straw man.  None of the scam-bloggers has stated that the legal market is dying.  We have simply pointed out that it is GLUTTED.  This means that tons of law graduates each year are competing for fewer attorney jobs.  For example, the JD Class of 2012 had 46,346 members - all competing for a total of 28,567 positions where bar passage was required!  Do you see how that impacts students, dolt?!?!

Hell, you accepted reality and admitted that fewer Biglaw clients are relying on the billable hour and that technology is eating away at lawyer tasks.  If you cannot figure out the effects of these two developments, Ryan, then you have no business teaching others anything.

Conclusion: Ryan Calo DOES NOT GIVE ONE DAMN about you, the law student or recent graduate.  He doesn’t care what happens to you upon graduation.  If you end up in doc review, selling insurance, waiting tables, or serving up lattes, it does not concern him in the slightest.  Note that this rodent DID NOT ONCE MENTION student debt, in his entire piece.  He merely wants to spread the lie that now is a good time to apply to - and enroll in - law school.  Remember, this jackal makes a living off of fools’ decision to attend his commode.

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Profiles in Duplicitous Swine: Edward Zelinsky, “Law Professor” at Cardozo Law School

The $elf-Intere$ted Parasite’s “Case” for Another Year:

On November 4, 2013, a dung beetle calling itself Edward Zelinsky posted an Oxford University Press blog entry labeled “Add a fourth year to law school.”  Take a look at his excrementitiously ripe “argument”:

“Three considerations counsel the need for an additional year of law school:

First, there is today much more law to learn than there was in the past. There are today whole new fields of law which did not exist a generation ago, e.g., health care law. Moreover, within pre-existing areas of the law, the amount of law has expanded enormously over the last two decades…

Second, through expanded LLM programs, we are de facto creeping towards four years of legal education. In many areas of the law, such as tax, LLM degrees have grown in prominence. Several factors are fueling the expansion of LLM programs. Chief among these is that there is now more law to cover in a fourth year of law school.

Rather than the currently haphazard growth of LLM programs, it would be more sensible to require universally a fourth year of education for all law students.

Third, many of the same critics who favor a two year law school curriculum also support expanded clinical education for law students. Such expanded clinical education should not come at the expense of substantive legal education but in addition to it.” [Emphasis mine]

Keep in mind that Cockroach Edward A. Zelinsky is something called the “Morris and Annie Trachman Professor of Law” at the 58th "greatest" law school in the country, i.e, the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law of Yeshiva University.  Now to the rodent’s conclusion:

“An ancillary benefit of a fourth year of legal education would, in the short run, be a reduction in the supply of law school graduates. A fourth year would also abate the job-related pressures students currently feel after the second year of law school by giving students another bite of the employment-related apple after their third year.

The world is more complicated than it used to be. For better or worse, the law’s complexity has grown apace. Well-trained lawyers in the 21st century will need to know more law than did their predecessors. A mandatory, universal fourth year of law school is the right response to the shortcomings of legal education in a complex world.” [Emphasis mine]

Yes, the rat is clearly concerned with the attorney GLUT in this country, right?!?!  By the way, law school doesn’t teach people how to practice law, Bitch.  At this point, the students are bored to death by the third year.

Other Coverage:

Elie Mystal posted a November 5, 2013 ATL entry entitled “Law Professor Suggests Adding An Extra Year To Law School — Seriously?”  He rips Zelinsky’s garbage argument to shreds, and then delivers this epic conclusion:

“If technology is supposed to decrease the cost of legal education, then why hasn’t it already? Wh[y] hasn’t tuition at Cardozo gone down over the past ten years? Why are law schools terrified about the decreasing number of law school applicants? Is Professor Zelinsky honestly suggesting that somehow four years of law school will be cheaper than three? Why don’t we focus on retarding the current administrative outlays before we try to increase the cost of school by 33 percent?

Zelinsky’s idea is a joke, and not a funny one. It’s a callous thought experiment by a professor who seems more interested in helping law schools take advantage of their students, instead of seriously looking at what law students need in this challenging market.” [Emphasis mine]

“Law professors” love to joke that lawyers suck at math, but Pig Zelinsky’s piece takes that to a whole new level of stupid.

On November 7, 2013, MA of Outside the Law School Scam authored a post labeled “Edward Zelinsky: The Most Deluded Law Professor I Have Seen Yet.”  Check out this brilliant portion below:

“I see. So adding a fourth year of law school is going to cause administrators to say, "Hold on guys! These students are paying us way too much in tuition now. We need to cut costs pronto!" And this will be aided in some mysterious way by "technology". Ed, I see that you care more about buying a new Mercedes than the fact that the majority of your students will be unable to afford the lifestyle your school's glossy law porn promised them. What have law school administrators done to date that would lead anyone to the conclusion that adding another year of potential revenue will lead them to start thinking more about students? Most law students are already carrying educational debt from undergrad when schools like Cardozo add another $276,000 to the tally. A fourth year will only allow law school admins to hire more useless faculty and for people like Ed Zelinsky to keep writing more academic books about IRAs and how Baby Boomers can save more for retirement.” [Emphasis mine]

My only disagreement with this entire article is the headline.  I doubt that the academic thief is delusional.  He is merely trying to make potential law school applicants believe that he has their best interests at heart.  This is akin to the man who slowly approaches little kids with his old van, and tells them that their father asked him to pick them up from school today.

Conclusion: Edward Zelinsky is a shameless turd.  The jackal even compares “legal education” to medical school.  Apparently, he does not understand that medical students will enter a true profession, i.e. one that looks out for and protects its students and practitioners.  In the final analysis, this sewer rat does not give one damn about YOU, the law student or potential applicant.  He wants to burden you with an additional year of law school.  Remember that the bastard is aware of continuously falling applications and enrollment at ABA-accredited diploma mills.  His suggestion would merely ensure that the commodes and trash pits would rake in more money with fewer students.

Saturday, November 23, 2013

Unaccredited Texas Trash Pit: University of North Texas at Dallas College of Law

Tuition: This pile of waste has not yet opened its filthy doors.  Of course, that doesn’t stop these pigs from charging non-resident, full-time students $23,760 in tuition - for the 2014-2015 school year.  In-state, full time UNT law students will be charged a rate of $12,540 for 2014-2015, once the $1,500 partial tuition waiver is applied.

Why Attend This Vile Toilet?: In the pigs’ own words:


We are a new law school, with a fresh emphasis on learning by doing. We utilize the best instructional practices, offer engaged, experiential and collaborative learning, and provide ongoing assessment for our students. Since sound legal judgment is cultivated by experience, we give you ample opportunities to do real law. Most of our upper level courses include a “lab” component that applies the subject matter while developing practical competencies. And our students actively participate in practice settings while receiving mentoring and guidance.” [Emphasis mine]

You will still be taught by failed attorneys known as “law professors.”  Most of these dolts will have roughly seven minutes of experience as lawyers.  If "the law" is so wonderful and amazing, why aren't these old bitches and hags practicing?!?!  Plus, this school has no alumni network at all!

Message from the Swine Dean: Arlen Specter-doppelganger Royal Furgeson puts forth the following reason for attending his outhouse:

“So you want to go to law school. Why should you consider us, the UNT Dallas College of Law, a brand new school? Without making any extravagant promises, I can think of a few reasons, and not simply because I am the Dean.

Our goal is to be a teaching law school, concentrating on student learning, but with a different vision of what that means. For one thing, in the first year and beyond, your courses will include periodic feedback and assessments during the course, not the usual single test at the end of each semester. This will help you know how well you are learning the material, and how to improve.  It also will help us monitor how effectively we are teaching. We don’t want anyone to fall behind if we can prevent it. So we will be challenging you, but we will also be supportive.” [Emphasis mine]

Cockroach Specter, you will recall, was the author of the idiotic “magic bullet” theory, in order to help cover up the November 22, 1963 assassination that took place in Dealey Plaza - and he went to Yale Law School!  In the final analysis, Furgeson is also grasping at straws - in an attempt to justify his unaccredited filth pit’s existence.  It goes without saying that this periodic feedback will not create any additional lawyer job openings in the state.  Plus, legal employers outside of Texas will not be looking at UNT Dallas Commode of Law grads.

Epic Flush of UNT Dallas COL: Back on July 6, 2010, Elie Mystal posted a hilarious entry labeled “How to Sell a Law School to Texans.”  Check out this segment:

“Over the weekend, a tipster sent us the pitch North Texas is using on Texans who don’t know any better. Here’s the school’s headline:

Opening a public law school at the right time in the right place

You have got to be freaking kidding me…

As with the travesty at UMass, the North Texas argument is that North Texas somehow deserves a law school, not whether a new law school is needed (or whether its graduates will be able to find jobs). The website has five bullet points for why it’s a good idea to open a public law school in Dallas/Fort Worth. They are exceedingly stupid reasons:

* Since 1980, Texas’ population has grown from 14.3 million to an estimated 23.9 million in 2007, but no additional opportunities for legal education have been added.

I’ll stipulate that the demand for legal education is up if you stipulate that the supply of actual lawyers has totally saturated the market.

* The last public law school in Texas opened in 1967. Since 2000, the number of bachelor degrees is growing at an average rate of 2,400 per year.

Objection: relevance.” [Emphasis mine]

Anyone with an ounce of integrity and honesty realizes that there is no need for another law school in Texas.

The Lawyer Glut in Texas: Catherine Rampell’s piece, “The Lawyer Surplus, State by State,” was published by the New York Times Economix blog - on June 27, 2011.

According to Economic Modeling Specialists Inc., Texas had the SEVENTH MOST GLUTTED LAWYER JOB MARKET in the entire damn country.  Does that sound as if the state needed another piece of garbage law school?!?!

Conclusion: The UniversiTTTTTTy of NorTTTTTTh TTTTTTexas aTTTTTT Dallas Commode of Law is a pathetic joke.  As pointed out above, the Texas attorney job market is GLUTTED.  There are already nine ABA-accredited diploma mills located in the state.  Does anyone with a functioning brain stem believe that Texans are in need of legal representation from waterheads who couldn’t get into a real law school?!?!  Furthermore, will those clients be able to pay for these garbage services?!

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Fourth Tier Trash Pit New England Law | Boston Shedding Faculty Due to Falling Enrollment

Wonderful News!:

On November 11, 2013, the NaTTTional Juri$TTT published Alicia Albertson’s piece, “New England Law downsizing enrollment, faculty size.”  Look at this excerpt:

“John O’Brien, previously the highest paid dean in the nation, will take a 25 percent pay cut this year, amid enrollment cutbacks and faculty buyouts at New England Law | Boston.

Its part of the school’s effort to stay ahead of the curve.

“Looking ahead, New England Law, like most law schools, anticipates fewer applications and smaller classes for the foreseeable future as a result of national trends,” said Patrick Collins, director of communications and marketing at the stand-alone law school. “The school is positioning itself for those realities.”

O’Brien’s salary will drop from $867,000 to around $650,000 a year. They faculty buyouts would go into effect for the 2014-2015 academic year.

“The Board of Trustees has proposed a generous incentive plan for voluntary separation by some faculty members, to take effect at the beginning of the new academic year,” Collins said. “The final number of participants in the plan will depend on faculty interest, enrollment projections, curricular needs and other institutional requirements.” [Emphasis mine]

You’re welcome, cockroaches!  I love how the bitches and hags at this dump tried to spin this as a “voluntary” reduction in student enrollment.  Yeah, sure it was their choice - and I decided not to ask Salma Hayek out last weekend.

Other Coverage:

Paul Campos reported on this development with his October 25, 2013 entry labeled “Law school dean threatens to summarily fire faculty who don’t accept buyouts or doubled teaching loads.”  Read the following portion:

“Paul Caron quotes an anonymous source “close to the situation” as they say:

New England School of Law plans to eliminate 14 fulltime faculty positions by August 1, 2014. Depending on how one counts, this is about 35-40% of the regular faculty. . . . Faculty have been told by Dean John O’Brien that these 14 positions will be eliminated according to the School’s needs, regardless of tenure or seniority. An incentive plan has been offered to senior faculty and certain clinical faculty, but those who don’t take it have been threatened with termination. Their decisions must be final by the end of the Fall term. Those who still do not comply or were not offered the plan, were told that if they remain, their workload during the next academic year will move from 2 to as much as 4 courses per semester and that they will be required to be at their desks from 9 to 5 each day of the work week or an equivalent time period if they are teaching evening classes.

(I asked Caron how confident he is in the source’s reliability, and he replied “100%.”).” [Emphasis mine]

I am enjoying this development thoroughly.

A Severe Uppercut to the Swines' Snouts:

The Law School Truth Center blog went off on Pig O’Brien, in the October 28, 2013 post entitled “The Intolerable Acts of King O'Brien.”  Check out this epic, hilarious opening:

“New England School of Law - close to the place where Britain really put the vicegrip on the American colonies' revolutionizing nutsack - is paying homage to that heritage by cracking the whip on its law professors:

35-40% cut in faculty.

Increased teaching loads to 8 classes per annum.

9-5 work schedule.

9-5 work schedule!!!!!!!

Intolerable.  These are academic professionals.” [Emphasis mine]

I’m sure that the academic thieves at this notorious dung pit are sweating their little balls off over this fact.  Remember, the vast majority of house cats work harder than these bastards.

Conclusion: John O’Brien is a reprehensible cockroach.  As you can see, New England Law | Boston is rated as a FOURTH TIER PILE OF TRASH - by US “News” & World Report.  Yes, that surely makes this sewer rat worth every penny of his $867K annual compensation, huh?!?!  In the last analysis, this commode announcing that it is cutting staff is akin to a plumber slicing a turd in half.  What’s the big deal?  Well, according to USN&WR, the average law student indebtedness figure for the NELB Class of 2012 stood at a $132,632.  In fact, 92% of this unfortunate cohort incurred debt for a TTTT law degree.  At least, these academic dung beetles will not be FINANCIALLY RAPING as many students each year.

Thursday, November 14, 2013

First Tier Vomit: Vanderbilt University Law School

Tuition: Full-time law students at Vanderbilt Univer$ity will be ass-raped to the tune of $47,746 in tuition - for the 2013-2014 school year.  These sewer rats are essentially charging medical school rates.  In fact, Vanderbilt Law charges a higher amount of tuition than the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, i.e. $44,030.  Someone explain to me how in the hell the law school incurs higher costs than the medical school!

Estimated Cost of Attendance: According to this same document, living expenses will add another $21,198 to the gigantic tab.  Loan fees account for an additional $1,158, while books and supplies amount to $1,842.  Using the first tier toilet’s numbers, the total COA - for the 2013-2014 academic year - is $71,944.

At least, the pigs at Vanderbilt are up front about basing their living costs on a nine-month school year.  Actual law students will require twelve months of expenses.  In order to reach a more accurate figure, we need to prorate the following items: housing; miscellaneous; meals; and transportation.  After doing so, the total estimated cost of attendance - for 2013-2014 - amounts to $79,010.  Yes, the school truly cares about the students, right?!?!

Ranking: Bob Morse and US “News” & World Report lists Vanderbilt Univer$ity Law Sewer as the 15th best law school in the entire damn country.  It only shares this distinction with one other ABA-accredited commode, i.e. the Univer$ity of Texa$ $chool of Law.

Employment Placement Statistics: The Class of 2012 had 196 members.  Of this amount, three graduates did not supply their job status to the school.  Ten JDs from this cohort were unemployed.  Notice that the bitches and hags cannot add, as the column only amounts to 195.  As such, the employment “placement” rate was 94.8 percent, i.e. 182/192.

Under Employment Types, you will notice that 52% of employed grads went to work for private law firms - of any size.  From this segment, 37 percent were hired by firms of more than 500 attorneys.  Basically, 18.24% of this class entered Biglaw, i.e. 94.8*0.52*0.37.  Still like your odds, ass-clown?!?!

Average Law Student Indebtedness: USN&WR lists the average law student indebtedness - for those members of the Vanderbilt JD Class of 2012 who incurred debt for law school - as $124,493. Yet, “only” 76 percent of this school’s 2012 class took on such vile debt. Remember that this figure does not include undergraduate debt – and it also does not take accrued interest into account, while the student is enrolled.

Law Faculty and Administrator Salary Info: Let’s see how well the academic thieves are doing, in juxtaposition with their debt-strapped students.  In order to do so, we will look at the 2012 Form 990.  Head all the way down to pages 359 and 360 of this document, to find highest paid swine.  Yes, you read that correctly.  Can you believe this nonsense?!?!  The following TOTAL COMPENSATION figures are for the tax year ending on June 30, 2012.

Nicholas Zippos “serves” as chancellor, but he is also listed as a “professor of law.”  This rodent raked in $1,234,749 - with $1,007,183 coming in base salary.  Meanwhile, David Williams II rolled around in $1,215,566 - for his dual role as vice chancellor for university affairs and athletics and “law professor.”  Who says that “higher education” doesn’t pay off handsomely?!

Vandy Law Grads Waiting Tables:  Check out this story, from Jennifer Brooks, which appeared in the February 16, 2010 edition of The Tennessean.  It was entitled “Young law school grads face uncertain job market.”  Read the excerpt below:

"After graduation, I think as many as 20 to 25 percent of my (classmates) were laid off. Either they had (job) offers taken back, or they worked a few months and then were laid off," said Sarah Laird, who graduated from Vanderbilt Law School in 2008, just as the economy was beginning to tank and her classmates were beginning to notice that lucrative job offers from big corporate law firms weren't rolling in as expected.

Laird landed a clerkship with the state court of criminal appeals. Some of her classmates weren't so fortunate.

"I know a couple that waited tables. I've even done that, when I needed some extra money," she said." [Emphasis mine]

Yes, what great outcomes for graduates of the co-15th greatest law school in the country, right?!?!

Vanderbilt Law Faculty Member Warns Students About Law School: Back on October 29, 2009, Herwig Schlunk published a draft law and economics paper entitled “Mamas Don’t Let You Babies Grow Up To Be…Lawyers.”  In that document, Schlunk concluded that law school is a poor investment for MOST students.  I remember citing to this paper during the early days of the scamblog movement.  Now, look how far the message has spread since that time.

Conclusion: Vanderbilt University Law Sewer is ridiculously overpriced.  REMEMBER, THE VANDERBILT LAW SCHOOL PIGS CHARGE MORE IN TUITION THAN THE MEDICAL SCHOOL!!  You will essentially be required to take on an additional $135K-$170K in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt - for a chance to enter the legal “profession.”  Also,  it is significant that the two founders of Law School Transparency were former students at Vanderbilt Law.  Plus, don’t forget the importance of VULS “professor” Herwig Schlunk’s law and economics paper.  In sum, avoid this commode unless you come from a wealthy family and you don’t really need a career.

Saturday, November 9, 2013

Drop a First Tier Deuce: Duke University School of Law

Tuition: Full-time law students at Duke Univer$ity will be charged the insane amount of $52,620 in tuition – for the 2013-2014 school year. To put this into perspective, this is higher than the current $52,400 tuition rate at Yale Law School. Isn’t it great to see that the students’ interests are placed first?!?!

Total Cost of Attendance: This same document includes a budget for the 2013-2014 academic year. With fees and living expenses added in, the high priced toilet lists a total, estimated COA of $75,103. Keep in mind that the pigs only consider nine month living costs, when calculating these figures. Surely, they don’t do this in order to deceive lemmings, and make the overall figure lower, right?!?! It MUST be a mere oversight that every single ABA-accredited diploma mill has failed to correct.

Seeing that actual law students will require living expenses over twelve months, I have pro-rated the following four items: rent &; utilities; food; personal; and local transportation. Doing so, we reach a more accurate total COA of $80,797 – for 2013-2014. That is one hell of a bargain, huh?!?!

Ranking: According to US “News” & World Report, Duke Univer$ity $chool of Law is the 11th best law school in the country. Who wouldn’t want to incur a king’s ransom in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, for such a fancy law degree?!

Employment Placement Statistics: Based on this chart, there were 225 members of the Duke JD Class of 2012. Of this figure, 217 found some form of employment. Only one grad did not supply his status to the school. As such, the school reported that 96.9% of this class was employed within nine months of graduation, i.e. 217/224.

Scroll down to Employment Type, for a moment. You will notice that 126 graduates of this particular cohort ended up working in private law firms. Three of these positions were full-time, long-term and two of them were listed as part-time, short-term. To be fair to the greedy, gluttonous pigs, 21 JDs were employed by firms of 251-500 lawyers, and another 91 were hired by firm with more than 500 attorneys.

Duke Law’s Bridge to Practice Program: On June 10, 2010, Kashmir Hill posted an ATL entry labeled “The Secret to ‘100% Employed at Graduation’: Duke’s Bridge to Practice.” Look at the excerpt below:

“As Duke Law News reported, Duke worked hard to ensure its graduates had jobs. While it didn’t go the SMU route of paying employers to “test drive” its graduates, it does now provide stipends to some of its unemployed graduates to allow them to work for a couple months at no cost to employers. Using SMU’s car metaphor, the law school pays for the gas while Dukies and prospective employers take a little spin. Duke calls it “The Bridge to Practice” program. 

It started in 2008 — employing the nine graduates who would have otherwise ruined that nice round 100%. The numbers of participants have increased since then, as the economy has worsened.” [Emphasis mine]

Yes, a perennial top 12 law school had to resort to this gimmick - in order to bolster its employment placement rate. In fact, this project is still in operation at Duke Law. It is now referred to as a fellowship program.

Average Law Student Indebtedness: “US News” lists the average law student indebtedness - for those members of the Duke Law Class of 2012 who incurred debt for law school - as $131,092. Hell, 88 percent of this school’s 2012 class took on such foul debt. Remember that this figure does not include undergraduate debt – and it also does not take accrued interest into account, while the student is enrolled.

Outrageous University Salaries: Surprisingly, no member of the law school faculty or administration made the list of highest paid employees. Scroll down to page 90 of this ridiculously lengthy Form 990. You will notice that the head basketball coach, Michael Kryzewski, made $9,682,032 in TOTAL COMPENSATION - for the tax year ending June 30, 2012.

In case you were wondering, the rat’s salary far exceeds that of any NBA head coach - as of August 12, 2013. The highest listed salary is $7 million, even though the season is much longer, the stress is constant and the stakes are significantly higher. Who says that “higher education” doesn’t pay off handsomely?!?! 

Conclusion: Duke University School of Law is a place for rich kids. If you don’t belong to “the club,” then you will be out of place at this school. Connections, wealth and having the right family name trump “hard work” – when it comes to securing the best jobs. After all, YOU will be expected to take on an additional $145K-$185K in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, for a chance to enter the door. Plus, Biglaw positions are not exactly secure. If you don’t bring in a ton of business or are not on a path to becoming a partner within 3-5 years, you can look forward to being unceremoniously tossed out on your ass.

Friday, November 1, 2013

LLM Mania: More ABA-Accredited Toilets Offering Advanced Degrees in Legal Excrement

Proliferation of Idiotic LLM Programs:

On October 25, 2013, Jack CriTTenden’s rag, NaTTTional Juri$TTT, posted a story, under the headline “LL.M. degrees explode as law gets more specialized.”  Read this opening:

“The job market is tight and law firms are looking for graduates with specialized training. Enter the LL.M., a graduate degree that was once exclusive to tax lawyers and a few select others. The degree, however, has grown in popularity in recent years, and law schools are responding with more specialized offerings.

“We’re probably seeing an increase in LL.M. programs to what’s going on in the marketplace due to the job market,” said Christopher Pietruszkiewicz, dean and professor of law at Stetson University School of Law.

There are currently more than 265 LL.M. programs in 42 practice areas for U.S. students. In addition, foreign students can earn an LL.M. in U.S. Studies, and a handful of law schools open those programs to U.S. students as well.

The total number of programs has grown rapidly during the past 10 years — there were only 110 programs in 28 practice areas in 2000.” [Emphasis mine]

The LLM degree did not “grow in popularity” due to its inherent quality or worth, which isn’t much.  The fact remains that DESPERATE law grads are having a hell of a time finding any type of legal positions.  Each year, many foolishly decide to throw good money after bad, in an attempt to get an advanced Humanities degree from a better, name-brand school.

As this anonymous commenter – over at OTLSS – noted on October 29, 2013, at 8:20 am:

“What I am seeing in all this is a reaction to the scamblog movement. As applications decline more and more toilets are resorting to gimmicks that they hope will draw the snowflakes and lemmings to them for a supposed leg up." Sure, Loyola is ranked higher than Kent but if you come to Kent you will graduate "practice ready" and will have multiple offers from big law because they won't have to train you!" [Emphasis mine]

Another Space Law Program Has Liftoff!:

On August 19, 2013, the NaTTTional Juri$TTT published a piece entitled “Space Law: Mississippi launches LL.M.; Nebraska adds J.S.D.”  Check out the following hilarious portion:

“The University of Mississippi, which bills itself as a world leader in air and space law education, research, and public service, will offer the only LL.M. program in the U.S. that covers both air and space law. The University of Nebraska program focuses on Space, Cyber and Telecommunications Law.

Like its Nebraska counterpart, the University of Mississippi program will be offered online as well as on campus. It is designed for both U.S. and foreign-trained law school graduates and is available on a part-time and full-time basis. Mississippi has been home to the National Center for Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law since 1999 and the Journal of Space Law since 2003.” [Emphasis mine]

Yes, NASA is dying to hire people with LLMs from “powerhouses” such as 102nd ranked UniversiTTTy of Mississippi Sewer of Law - or the 61st greatest, most fantasticand amazing law school in the land, i.e. University of Nebraska Commode of Law.  In reality, there is a MUCH higher likelihood that Salma Hayek is moaning my name right row – while scratching her name into my back.

More Garbage Offerings by Desperate Law School Diploma Mills:

Also on August 19, 2013, the same TTT publication featured an article labeled “Miami, Florida International and West Virginia to each launch new LL.M. in 2014.”  Take a look at the excerpt below:

“West Virginia University is the eighth U.S. law school to offer an LL.M. in energy law. It’s Energy Law & Sustainable Development degree will kick off in August 2014.

“West Virginia is at the center of energy production for the country,” the school’s website states. “There is no better place to learn about the intersecting laws and policies governing all of the country’s energy resources than at WVU Law.” [Emphasis mine]

Oil companies can simply rely on experienced attorneys who deal in utilities.  None of those economic heavyweights is waiting to hire some ass-hat who is earning a useless LL.M. in “Energy Law & Sustainable Development” – from West Virginia University Commode of Law, the supposed 91st“best” law school in the country.  Then again, the toilet is sure to have the highest-rated LLM in this specific academic area. 

Conclusion: Since the number of applications has been shrinking for the last three years, there are fewer people enrolled in law school today.  The pigs are getting desperate for asses in seats. Let me ask each of you readers: Wouldn't YOU be personally embarrassed to offer such a garbage product at a ridiculous price?!?!  The question obviously does not apply to "law professors" or administrators - since they are sociopaths and have no shame or integrity.

Web Analytics