Friday, September 12, 2008
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Northern Ontario on Track to Have its Own Law School
Northern Ontario has inched closer to having its own law school after the Law Society of Upper Canada gave preliminary approval last week to a bid from Lakehead University.
But, while the law society benchers voted overwhelmingly in support of the initiative by the Thunder Bay school, some voiced concerns and voted against it.
Bencher Bob Aaron said the law society should commission a study into the demand for lawyers in Ontario before moving ahead with the approval of any new law schools.
“How many lawyers does the province of Ontario need?” asked Aaron. “Do you think we should be studying that?”
Bencher Laurie Pawlitza, chairwoman of the professional development and competence committee, said the law society likely doesn’t want to fund such a study without knowing if the proposed school will get government approval.
Bencher Vern Krishna — a member of the National Committee on Accreditation, which must make a recommendation on the Lakehead proposal — said the motion passed by Convocation on April 24 was “unusual.”
The motion informed the NCA, which is a subcommittee of the Federation of Law Societies of Canada, and the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities, that LSUC believes Lakehead’s “proposal is an important initiative. The proposal appears to have sound and persuasive objectives.
It is worthy of careful consideration.”
Krishna said it’s uncommon for the law society to pass a proposal on to another governing body with a qualifier.
The professional development and competence committee also isn’t convinced that the Lakehead law school would have access to enough articling and co-op positions.
Noting that articling positions have been sparse in northern Ontario and other rural parts of the province, the report states that the law society is concerned that “insufficient commitments have been obtained to date to implement a co-op program and between 45-55 articling jobs.”
Lakehead sent surveys to 123 firms in northwestern Ontario to see if they would accept co-op or articling students, the report stated. While one-third of the questionnaires were returned, indicating a total of 10 to 15 spots would be available, Lakehead estimates that 20 to 30 more positions will likely also exist, based on the assumption that firms not responding to the survey would offer support.
The committee doubted that forecast.
“Moreover, given the focus on a co-operative program, each student would be seeking two placements, one for the co-op placement and one for articling, thereby doubling the number of positions that must be found,” the report stated.
The committee acknowledged that it’s difficult to gauge future commitments when the faculty has yet to form.
“Further, the committee acknowledges that its concern is not unique to Lakehead, as established law faculties will have to consider more significant efforts to assist their students to obtain positions, given the likely shortage of positions in the future,” stated the report.
The law society’s licensing and accreditation task force in January reported that the current demand for about 1,300 articling placements in Ontario is expected to grow to 1,730 — a 30 per cent jump — by next year.
The Lakehead proposal also could be affected by a pair of task forces at LSUC and the federation that are weighing possible changes to the way lawyers are licensed.
The LSUC report stated, “Commenting on the Lakehead proposal in the context of those requirements would be of little assistance to Lakehead, the National Committee on Accreditation, or the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities. This is particularly true given that the requirements are likely to change following the reporting of the task forces.”
The report says that the law society’s current requirements, which were drawn up in 1957, with small revisions in 1969, are “out of date and do not reflect a modern, national approach.”
Lakehead president Frederick Gilbert, who believes the pending task force reports shouldn’t slow down the school’s approval, said in his executive summary of the proposal that the law faculty would address the decline of sole and small firm practice; create better access to legal education for northern Ontario students; deal with legal issues involving northern Ontario’s resource-based economy; and focus on aboriginal law.
The school would accept 55 students each year, with preference given to those from rural, northern, or aboriginal communities, said Gilbert in his summary. Lakehead hopes to have the new faculty up and running by next year.
Members of the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, the County and District Law Presidents’ Association, and other individuals approached Lakehead about creating a law school, said Gilbert.
McGill University law professor Roderick Macdonald, who conducted an external review of the proposal, has signed off on Lakehead’s plans, and the school has at least one influential backer.
“There is a need for more aboriginal and non-aboriginal lawyers who have a clear understanding of the law as it applies to key aboriginal issues,” said former prime minister Paul Martin in a letter to LSUC Treasurer Gavin MacKenzie. “I fully support Lakehead University in this endeavour and urge the law society to give its backing to the proposal as soon as possible.”
The Ontario Law Deans, however, gave a cool response to Lakehead’s proposal.
In a letter to an LSUC policy counsel, Osgoode Hall Law School Dean Patrick Monahan said the deans aren’t satisfied by the proposed curriculum for the school. The deans believe too many non-law courses will be offered for credit, and that the courses won’t provide a sufficiently “broad ranging” legal education.
But Gilbert tells Law Times in an interview that the deans’ reaction was based on an incomplete view of the proposed school’s curriculum, and that their concerns “are not of substance.”
LSUC’s preliminary backing was an important first step, and Gilbert says it was vital for the proposal to have the support of the governing body for the jurisdiction in which it will operate. But a lengthy set of approvals must come before the final go-ahead.
Canadian law societies in the early 1990s put a committee of the federation in charge of assessing and recommending to them whether they should recognize new law school programs. Since 1994, that responsibility has been given to the federation’s National Committee on Accreditation.
So after the NCA releases its recommendations, each of the federation’s 14 member law societies, including LSUC, must pass Lakehead’s proposal through their governing body. The NCA and the law societies are to base their decision on “whether a law program is such that its graduates will be entitled to enter provincial bar admission programs without having to satisfy any additional requirements,” according to the LSUC report.
The Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities must also approve any new law faculties in the province, and it uses different criteria than the federation and law societies, according to the report.
Lakehead’s proposal also may end up competing against expected law school proposals from Laurentian
University in Sudbury, the University of Waterloo, and Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo.
But, while the law society benchers voted overwhelmingly in support of the initiative by the Thunder Bay school, some voiced concerns and voted against it.
Bencher Bob Aaron said the law society should commission a study into the demand for lawyers in Ontario before moving ahead with the approval of any new law schools.
“How many lawyers does the province of Ontario need?” asked Aaron. “Do you think we should be studying that?”
Bencher Laurie Pawlitza, chairwoman of the professional development and competence committee, said the law society likely doesn’t want to fund such a study without knowing if the proposed school will get government approval.
Bencher Vern Krishna — a member of the National Committee on Accreditation, which must make a recommendation on the Lakehead proposal — said the motion passed by Convocation on April 24 was “unusual.”
The motion informed the NCA, which is a subcommittee of the Federation of Law Societies of Canada, and the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities, that LSUC believes Lakehead’s “proposal is an important initiative. The proposal appears to have sound and persuasive objectives.
It is worthy of careful consideration.”
Krishna said it’s uncommon for the law society to pass a proposal on to another governing body with a qualifier.
The professional development and competence committee also isn’t convinced that the Lakehead law school would have access to enough articling and co-op positions.
Noting that articling positions have been sparse in northern Ontario and other rural parts of the province, the report states that the law society is concerned that “insufficient commitments have been obtained to date to implement a co-op program and between 45-55 articling jobs.”
Lakehead sent surveys to 123 firms in northwestern Ontario to see if they would accept co-op or articling students, the report stated. While one-third of the questionnaires were returned, indicating a total of 10 to 15 spots would be available, Lakehead estimates that 20 to 30 more positions will likely also exist, based on the assumption that firms not responding to the survey would offer support.
The committee doubted that forecast.
“Moreover, given the focus on a co-operative program, each student would be seeking two placements, one for the co-op placement and one for articling, thereby doubling the number of positions that must be found,” the report stated.
The committee acknowledged that it’s difficult to gauge future commitments when the faculty has yet to form.
“Further, the committee acknowledges that its concern is not unique to Lakehead, as established law faculties will have to consider more significant efforts to assist their students to obtain positions, given the likely shortage of positions in the future,” stated the report.
The law society’s licensing and accreditation task force in January reported that the current demand for about 1,300 articling placements in Ontario is expected to grow to 1,730 — a 30 per cent jump — by next year.
The Lakehead proposal also could be affected by a pair of task forces at LSUC and the federation that are weighing possible changes to the way lawyers are licensed.
The LSUC report stated, “Commenting on the Lakehead proposal in the context of those requirements would be of little assistance to Lakehead, the National Committee on Accreditation, or the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities. This is particularly true given that the requirements are likely to change following the reporting of the task forces.”
The report says that the law society’s current requirements, which were drawn up in 1957, with small revisions in 1969, are “out of date and do not reflect a modern, national approach.”
Lakehead president Frederick Gilbert, who believes the pending task force reports shouldn’t slow down the school’s approval, said in his executive summary of the proposal that the law faculty would address the decline of sole and small firm practice; create better access to legal education for northern Ontario students; deal with legal issues involving northern Ontario’s resource-based economy; and focus on aboriginal law.
The school would accept 55 students each year, with preference given to those from rural, northern, or aboriginal communities, said Gilbert in his summary. Lakehead hopes to have the new faculty up and running by next year.
Members of the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, the County and District Law Presidents’ Association, and other individuals approached Lakehead about creating a law school, said Gilbert.
McGill University law professor Roderick Macdonald, who conducted an external review of the proposal, has signed off on Lakehead’s plans, and the school has at least one influential backer.
“There is a need for more aboriginal and non-aboriginal lawyers who have a clear understanding of the law as it applies to key aboriginal issues,” said former prime minister Paul Martin in a letter to LSUC Treasurer Gavin MacKenzie. “I fully support Lakehead University in this endeavour and urge the law society to give its backing to the proposal as soon as possible.”
The Ontario Law Deans, however, gave a cool response to Lakehead’s proposal.
In a letter to an LSUC policy counsel, Osgoode Hall Law School Dean Patrick Monahan said the deans aren’t satisfied by the proposed curriculum for the school. The deans believe too many non-law courses will be offered for credit, and that the courses won’t provide a sufficiently “broad ranging” legal education.
But Gilbert tells Law Times in an interview that the deans’ reaction was based on an incomplete view of the proposed school’s curriculum, and that their concerns “are not of substance.”
LSUC’s preliminary backing was an important first step, and Gilbert says it was vital for the proposal to have the support of the governing body for the jurisdiction in which it will operate. But a lengthy set of approvals must come before the final go-ahead.
Canadian law societies in the early 1990s put a committee of the federation in charge of assessing and recommending to them whether they should recognize new law school programs. Since 1994, that responsibility has been given to the federation’s National Committee on Accreditation.
So after the NCA releases its recommendations, each of the federation’s 14 member law societies, including LSUC, must pass Lakehead’s proposal through their governing body. The NCA and the law societies are to base their decision on “whether a law program is such that its graduates will be entitled to enter provincial bar admission programs without having to satisfy any additional requirements,” according to the LSUC report.
The Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities must also approve any new law faculties in the province, and it uses different criteria than the federation and law societies, according to the report.
Lakehead’s proposal also may end up competing against expected law school proposals from Laurentian
University in Sudbury, the University of Waterloo, and Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo.
Stanford's Law School Takes on Fair Use Case
The Fair Use Project of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society today announced that it is signing on to defend Premise Media’s right to use a clip of John Lennon’s song “Imagine” in its documentary, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” [www.expelledthemovie.com] for the purposes of commentary and criticism.
The film, released in the United States on April 18, 2008, is about alleged discrimination against people who support alternative theories of evolution such as intelligent design. The song is played for roughly 15 seconds to illustrate and criticize the ideas suggested in it — that the world might be a better place without religion.
Lennon’s widow Yoko Ono Lennon and sons Sean and Julian, along with EMI Blackwood Music, filed suit on April 22, 2008 claiming that Premise Media’s unauthorized use of “Imagine” violates copyright and trademark law. The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleges that Premise Media, C&S Production LP, Premise Media Distribution LP, and Rocky Mountain Pictures misappropriated the composition in violation of the Copyright Act, the Lanham Act, and New York state law. On the same date, EMI Records Ltd. and Capitol Records LLC filed suit against the same defendants in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, alleging violation of their rights in the sound recording under New York state law.
Premise Media contends it has the right to use the song under the fair use doctrine, which among other things permits the use of copyrighted material for the purpose of comment, criticism, and discussion.
“The right to quote from copyrighted works in order to criticize them and discuss the views they may represent lies at the heart of the fair use doctrine,” said Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project. “These rights are under attack here, and we plan to defend them.”
Falzone will serve as counsel on the case along with Stanford Law colleagues Julie A. Ahrens and Brandy Karl. The Stanford team will be joined by Roy Hardin and April Terry, partners at the Dallas office of Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP.
The producers of “Expelled” spent two years interviewing scores of scientists, doctors, philosophers, and public leaders, including University of Minnesota biology professor P.Z. Myers, who does not support alternative theories of evolution. The clip of “Imagine,” which is audible for approximately 15 seconds, is used in a segment of the documentary in which the film’s narrator and author Ben Stein comments on statements made by Myers and others about the place of religion. In the documentary Stein says: “Dr. Myers would like you to think that he’s being original but he’s merely lifting a page out of John Lennon’s songbook.” This is followed by an audio clip of Lennon’s song “Imagine,” specifically, the lyrics “Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too.”
“We included the ‘Imagine’ clip not only to illuminate Ben Stein’s commentary but to criticize the ideas expressed in the song,” says Logan Craft, chairman and executive producer of Premise Media.
“Yoko Ono and the other plaintiffs are trying to redefine the Constitution and the free speech protection it affords,” Craft continued. “Our movie is about freedom — the freedom to discuss alternative views of how life began on our planet, the freedom to ask reasonable questions about the adequacy of Darwin’s theory, and the freedom to challenge an entrenched establishment. Now we find that we also have to fight for our free speech rights.”
The plaintiffs in both cases have filed motions asking the court to issue a nationwide injunction against showing the film in its present form. These motions are likely to be heard in the next few weeks.
About the Fair Use Project
The Stanford Center for Internet and Society’s Fair Use Project (“the FUP”) was founded in 2006. Its purpose is to provide legal support to a range of projects designed to clarify, and extend, the boundaries of “fair use” in order to enhance creative freedom. The FUP represents filmmakers, musicians, artists, writers, scholars, and other content creators in a range of disputes that raise important questions concerning fair use and the limits of intellectual property rights. In doing so, it relies on a network of talented lawyers within the Center for Internet and Society, as well as attorneys in law firms and public interest organizations that are dedicated to advancing the mission of the FUP.
The film, released in the United States on April 18, 2008, is about alleged discrimination against people who support alternative theories of evolution such as intelligent design. The song is played for roughly 15 seconds to illustrate and criticize the ideas suggested in it — that the world might be a better place without religion.
Lennon’s widow Yoko Ono Lennon and sons Sean and Julian, along with EMI Blackwood Music, filed suit on April 22, 2008 claiming that Premise Media’s unauthorized use of “Imagine” violates copyright and trademark law. The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleges that Premise Media, C&S Production LP, Premise Media Distribution LP, and Rocky Mountain Pictures misappropriated the composition in violation of the Copyright Act, the Lanham Act, and New York state law. On the same date, EMI Records Ltd. and Capitol Records LLC filed suit against the same defendants in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, alleging violation of their rights in the sound recording under New York state law.
Premise Media contends it has the right to use the song under the fair use doctrine, which among other things permits the use of copyrighted material for the purpose of comment, criticism, and discussion.
“The right to quote from copyrighted works in order to criticize them and discuss the views they may represent lies at the heart of the fair use doctrine,” said Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project. “These rights are under attack here, and we plan to defend them.”
Falzone will serve as counsel on the case along with Stanford Law colleagues Julie A. Ahrens and Brandy Karl. The Stanford team will be joined by Roy Hardin and April Terry, partners at the Dallas office of Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP.
The producers of “Expelled” spent two years interviewing scores of scientists, doctors, philosophers, and public leaders, including University of Minnesota biology professor P.Z. Myers, who does not support alternative theories of evolution. The clip of “Imagine,” which is audible for approximately 15 seconds, is used in a segment of the documentary in which the film’s narrator and author Ben Stein comments on statements made by Myers and others about the place of religion. In the documentary Stein says: “Dr. Myers would like you to think that he’s being original but he’s merely lifting a page out of John Lennon’s songbook.” This is followed by an audio clip of Lennon’s song “Imagine,” specifically, the lyrics “Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too.”
“We included the ‘Imagine’ clip not only to illuminate Ben Stein’s commentary but to criticize the ideas expressed in the song,” says Logan Craft, chairman and executive producer of Premise Media.
“Yoko Ono and the other plaintiffs are trying to redefine the Constitution and the free speech protection it affords,” Craft continued. “Our movie is about freedom — the freedom to discuss alternative views of how life began on our planet, the freedom to ask reasonable questions about the adequacy of Darwin’s theory, and the freedom to challenge an entrenched establishment. Now we find that we also have to fight for our free speech rights.”
The plaintiffs in both cases have filed motions asking the court to issue a nationwide injunction against showing the film in its present form. These motions are likely to be heard in the next few weeks.
About the Fair Use Project
The Stanford Center for Internet and Society’s Fair Use Project (“the FUP”) was founded in 2006. Its purpose is to provide legal support to a range of projects designed to clarify, and extend, the boundaries of “fair use” in order to enhance creative freedom. The FUP represents filmmakers, musicians, artists, writers, scholars, and other content creators in a range of disputes that raise important questions concerning fair use and the limits of intellectual property rights. In doing so, it relies on a network of talented lawyers within the Center for Internet and Society, as well as attorneys in law firms and public interest organizations that are dedicated to advancing the mission of the FUP.
Harvard Forum on Life After Bush
The Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action, a Boston-based civil rights organization, and the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute of Race and Justice of the Harvard Law School, have announced a symposium at the Harvard Law School on May 16, 2008, on the topic, “Restoring America After Bush.” Cooperating sponsors include the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and the Boston Lawyers Chapter of the American Constitution Society.
Responding to nationwide dismay over how to restore the country to constitutional government and to its traditional position of world leadership, these organizations have brought together distinguished panels to discuss such vital issues as: curbing the “imperial” presidency; restoring governmental checks and balances; depoliticizing government agencies and the courts; reinvigorating habeas corpus and the Fourth and Sixth Amendments; reversing the Bush-Cheney doctrine of pre-emptive war; renewing American commitment to multilateralism; achieving real security without sacrificing fundamental rights; and reversing America’s current image as the propagator of arbitrary detention and even torture.
Panelists include Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who serves on the Select Committee on Intelligence and on the Judiciary Committee; Prof. Andrew Bacevich of Boston University, a widely published expert on international security affairs; F.A.O. Schwarz, Jr., of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School; Louis Fisher, distinguished constitutional law specialist at the Library of Congress; Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute; Prof. Charles A. Fried, Beneficial Professor of Law at the Harvard Law School and former solicitor general of the United States; and Prof. Detlev Vagts, Bemis Professor of International Law, Emeritus, also of Harvard Law School.
The conference will be held in the Ames Courtroom in Austin Hall on the Harvard Law School campus from 1 to 5 p.m. Admission is free and the public is invited. For questions or reservations, call the JALSA office at 617-227-3000 or email us at rsvp@jalsa.org.
Responding to nationwide dismay over how to restore the country to constitutional government and to its traditional position of world leadership, these organizations have brought together distinguished panels to discuss such vital issues as: curbing the “imperial” presidency; restoring governmental checks and balances; depoliticizing government agencies and the courts; reinvigorating habeas corpus and the Fourth and Sixth Amendments; reversing the Bush-Cheney doctrine of pre-emptive war; renewing American commitment to multilateralism; achieving real security without sacrificing fundamental rights; and reversing America’s current image as the propagator of arbitrary detention and even torture.
Panelists include Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who serves on the Select Committee on Intelligence and on the Judiciary Committee; Prof. Andrew Bacevich of Boston University, a widely published expert on international security affairs; F.A.O. Schwarz, Jr., of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School; Louis Fisher, distinguished constitutional law specialist at the Library of Congress; Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute; Prof. Charles A. Fried, Beneficial Professor of Law at the Harvard Law School and former solicitor general of the United States; and Prof. Detlev Vagts, Bemis Professor of International Law, Emeritus, also of Harvard Law School.
The conference will be held in the Ames Courtroom in Austin Hall on the Harvard Law School campus from 1 to 5 p.m. Admission is free and the public is invited. For questions or reservations, call the JALSA office at 617-227-3000 or email us at rsvp@jalsa.org.
Lawyerly Love
This month, thousands of law students all over the country will be graduating from law school marking the end of a tumultuous three-year journey of learning how to "think like a lawyer" to actually becoming lawyers. Although it will be a joyous celebration as they receive their well-earned law degrees, they will soon begin preparing for the notorious bar exam. Passing this comprehensive two to three-day exam testing both state and national law is required in almost every state in order to obtain a license to practice law. Studying for the bar exam is no easy feat. It takes hours upon hours of focused and diligent preparation. The intense and grueling bar exam study period not only affects the almost-lawyers who sacrifice to put their entire lives on hold to study for the exam day and night, but impacts the lives of loved ones, friends, and associates who want to be a source of support during an especially stressful time.
Now, a lawyer has created a business specializing in unique "supportive care packages" geared specifically to law students and law grads. The idea began as she went searching for the "right" cards and gifts to support friends who had just graduated from law school who were about to prepare to take the bar exam, as well as friends who were getting ready to take the exam again after previous unsuccessful attempts.
"I surfed the Internet, searched in store after store, and just couldn't seem to find the right gifts to say in a special way what I felt - that I knew what they were going through and wanted them to know that I knew they could do it and that I supported them. There was really nothing geared toward law students and grads. When people are studying for the bar exam, it's a time of tremendous stress and pressure, and the process can shake the confidence of even the brightest and strongest people. It's a time when love and support from loved ones and friends is needed more than ever. I reflected on those things that I could have used during those long study obsessed days while preparing for law school exams and the bar. Somehow I found myself putting together care packages, and the gesture was extremely well-received." Lawyerly Love was born. It is the only care package company exclusively geared to aspiring lawyers.
If you have a friend or loved one getting ready to graduate from law school, prepare for the bar exam, or take the bar exam, the Lawyerly Love supportive care packages are a must-send gift idea. These packages include popular study snack favorites, energy boosters, sweet treats, study supplies, cool novelty items like stress balls, puzzle balls, mind teasers, and mini puzzle cubes, and even a handy Starbucks gift card. Most importantly, they contain encouragement in different forms such as quotes on success regarding the importance of persistence, perspective on overcoming "failure," and even mock law school acceptance letters, law degrees, bar exam passage congratulatory letters, and law licenses that can be customized specifically for the recipient. Every package includes a cute stuffed teddy bear wearing a "LAW" t-shirt and a greeting card with the sender's special, personalized message. All items are packaged in your choice of either a gable box or "brief case" with crinkle paper and tissue paper, and topped with a big red bow. These packages are thoughtful gifts that save you precious time and effort from having to seek out all of these different items individually, wrap and package them, and then make a trip to the post office or a shipping/delivery service.
The company also provides care packages for encouraging those trying to get into law school, helping law students persist during the everyday stresses of life as a law student, assisting those trying to survive final exam time, as well as those for giving kudos to new lawyers upon passing the bar exam, or encouraging persistence and a positive mindset if they have to re-take the exam. Plan to send and spread some "lawyerly love" by checking out their website at www.lawyerlylove.com.
About Lawyerly Love (http://www.lawyerlylove.com)
Lawyerly Love specializes in supportive care packages geared specifically to aspiring and new lawyers offering a wonderful combination of study snack favorites, study supplies, energy drinks, quick meals, sweet treats, fun novelty items, energy boosters, encouragement and wisdom for earning success, a Starbucks gift card, as well as a "LAW" teddy bear and a personalized greeting card.
Now, a lawyer has created a business specializing in unique "supportive care packages" geared specifically to law students and law grads. The idea began as she went searching for the "right" cards and gifts to support friends who had just graduated from law school who were about to prepare to take the bar exam, as well as friends who were getting ready to take the exam again after previous unsuccessful attempts.
"I surfed the Internet, searched in store after store, and just couldn't seem to find the right gifts to say in a special way what I felt - that I knew what they were going through and wanted them to know that I knew they could do it and that I supported them. There was really nothing geared toward law students and grads. When people are studying for the bar exam, it's a time of tremendous stress and pressure, and the process can shake the confidence of even the brightest and strongest people. It's a time when love and support from loved ones and friends is needed more than ever. I reflected on those things that I could have used during those long study obsessed days while preparing for law school exams and the bar. Somehow I found myself putting together care packages, and the gesture was extremely well-received." Lawyerly Love was born. It is the only care package company exclusively geared to aspiring lawyers.
If you have a friend or loved one getting ready to graduate from law school, prepare for the bar exam, or take the bar exam, the Lawyerly Love supportive care packages are a must-send gift idea. These packages include popular study snack favorites, energy boosters, sweet treats, study supplies, cool novelty items like stress balls, puzzle balls, mind teasers, and mini puzzle cubes, and even a handy Starbucks gift card. Most importantly, they contain encouragement in different forms such as quotes on success regarding the importance of persistence, perspective on overcoming "failure," and even mock law school acceptance letters, law degrees, bar exam passage congratulatory letters, and law licenses that can be customized specifically for the recipient. Every package includes a cute stuffed teddy bear wearing a "LAW" t-shirt and a greeting card with the sender's special, personalized message. All items are packaged in your choice of either a gable box or "brief case" with crinkle paper and tissue paper, and topped with a big red bow. These packages are thoughtful gifts that save you precious time and effort from having to seek out all of these different items individually, wrap and package them, and then make a trip to the post office or a shipping/delivery service.
The company also provides care packages for encouraging those trying to get into law school, helping law students persist during the everyday stresses of life as a law student, assisting those trying to survive final exam time, as well as those for giving kudos to new lawyers upon passing the bar exam, or encouraging persistence and a positive mindset if they have to re-take the exam. Plan to send and spread some "lawyerly love" by checking out their website at www.lawyerlylove.com.
About Lawyerly Love (http://www.lawyerlylove.com)
Lawyerly Love specializes in supportive care packages geared specifically to aspiring and new lawyers offering a wonderful combination of study snack favorites, study supplies, energy drinks, quick meals, sweet treats, fun novelty items, energy boosters, encouragement and wisdom for earning success, a Starbucks gift card, as well as a "LAW" teddy bear and a personalized greeting card.
City Law School wins National BVC Criminal Trial Competition
The City Law School has won the National Bar Vocational Course (BVC) Provider Criminal Trial competition for the third consecutive year in a row.
The winning team comprised BVC students Piers von Berg, Timothy Hogman, Rachel Willcock and Eleanor Rose. The law school was also runner-up in the competition, with fellow BVC students Christopher Williams, Tom Devine, Hayley McLorinan and Christopher Saad taking second place
The teams competed in front of distinguished legal professionals including Penelope Barratt, a commissioner at the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The final was held on 26 April at the Royal Courts of Justice.
Professor Adrian Keane, director of professional programmes at the City Law School, said: “This record-breaking winning streak amounts to a very flattering comment on the quality of our advocacy training. We're extremely proud of our students and congratulate all of those involved.”
The BVC is the one-year course aspiring barristers need to complete before embarking on their puillages.
The winning team comprised BVC students Piers von Berg, Timothy Hogman, Rachel Willcock and Eleanor Rose. The law school was also runner-up in the competition, with fellow BVC students Christopher Williams, Tom Devine, Hayley McLorinan and Christopher Saad taking second place
The teams competed in front of distinguished legal professionals including Penelope Barratt, a commissioner at the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The final was held on 26 April at the Royal Courts of Justice.
Professor Adrian Keane, director of professional programmes at the City Law School, said: “This record-breaking winning streak amounts to a very flattering comment on the quality of our advocacy training. We're extremely proud of our students and congratulate all of those involved.”
The BVC is the one-year course aspiring barristers need to complete before embarking on their puillages.
Wilkes University Works on Law School
Wilkes University announces that Loren D. Prescott Jr. has been appointed dean for the Wilkes University Law School Planning Initiative.
Prescott, who has served as vice dean and professor at Widener University School of Law, Harrisburg, Pa., will lead efforts to develop plans for northeastern Pennsylvania’s first law school. Preliminary plans call for enrolling between 80 and 100 first-year students in fall 2010.
As dean, Prescott will also complete an in-depth market analysis of enrollment trends, of the parameters for the law school library, and develop a trailblazing curriculum that answers many of the critiques of legal education today. He is scheduled to submit the final plans for the law school for consideration by the Wilkes Board of Trustees at its April 2009 meeting.
“If feasible, the addition of a law school represents a great opportunity for the revitalization of Wilkes-Barre and the region. Wilkes’ mentoring culture is uniquely suited to training a new generation of attorneys skilled in the practice, not just the theory, of law,” said Tim Gilmour, president of Wilkes University. “Chip Prescott brings both experience and vision to this initiative. We’re honored to have a leader of his caliber to lead the effort.”
“It will be a great privilege to serve as dean of the Wilkes Law School Planning Initiative. I look forward to working with the faculty, administrators, staff and students, and with members of the bench and bar in northeast Pennsylvania, during the coming months as work proceeds on this initiative,” Prescott said. “This initiative could provide Wilkes University with a unique opportunity to participate in the development of a 21st century model of legal education and, in the process, to take advantage of its experience and success with mentoring in higher education.”
“The establishment of a law school would be another element in Wilkes’ strategy to provide graduate and professional education programs that are important to the future growth and development of northeastern Pennsylvania,” said Reynold Verret, Wilkes provost.
The law school would be another contribution to local and regional economic development and would enhance the region’s reputation.
Job demand for lawyers remains strong, with starting salaries dependent on where and in what fields one practices, according to the Association of Legal Career Professionals. In addition, 90.7 percent of 2006 law school graduates for whom employment status was known were employed as of Feb. 15, 2007. The overall median starting salary reached $62,000, while the median compensation for private practice was $95,000.
Prescott began his career as a certified public accountant, having received a bachelor’s degree in business administration from University of Washington. He earned his juris doctor degree from Willamette University College of Law and a master of laws degree in taxation from University of Florida College of Law. He is currently a doctoral candidate in public administration at Penn State University.
At Widener, which has about 500 full- and part-time law students, his responsibilities included coordinating academics, hiring faculty, scheduling classes and budgeting, plus fundraising and serving as primary spokesperson for Widener’s Harrisburg law campus.
Wilkes trustees began discussing a law school in 2004. Its curriculum would emphasize legal practice and incorporate Wilkes’ core value of mentoring. The school would integrate the skills needed to practice law with professionalism and ethics. The law school could complement and strengthen the university’s existing mix of academic programs, most notably in the liberal arts and sciences and also in business and health professions.
For more information on the law school initiative, e-mail law@wilkes.edu or phone (800) WILKES-U Ext. 3220. Updates on progress will be posted at www.law.wilkes.edu.
Wilkes University is an independent institution of higher education dedicated to academic and intellectual excellence through mentoring in the liberal arts, sciences and professional programs. Founded in 1933, the university provides its students with the experience, mentoring and education necessary for career and intellectual development as well as personal growth. Providing a sense of values and civic responsibility, Wilkes encourages its students to welcome the opportunities and challenges of a diverse and continuously changing world.
Prescott, who has served as vice dean and professor at Widener University School of Law, Harrisburg, Pa., will lead efforts to develop plans for northeastern Pennsylvania’s first law school. Preliminary plans call for enrolling between 80 and 100 first-year students in fall 2010.
As dean, Prescott will also complete an in-depth market analysis of enrollment trends, of the parameters for the law school library, and develop a trailblazing curriculum that answers many of the critiques of legal education today. He is scheduled to submit the final plans for the law school for consideration by the Wilkes Board of Trustees at its April 2009 meeting.
“If feasible, the addition of a law school represents a great opportunity for the revitalization of Wilkes-Barre and the region. Wilkes’ mentoring culture is uniquely suited to training a new generation of attorneys skilled in the practice, not just the theory, of law,” said Tim Gilmour, president of Wilkes University. “Chip Prescott brings both experience and vision to this initiative. We’re honored to have a leader of his caliber to lead the effort.”
“It will be a great privilege to serve as dean of the Wilkes Law School Planning Initiative. I look forward to working with the faculty, administrators, staff and students, and with members of the bench and bar in northeast Pennsylvania, during the coming months as work proceeds on this initiative,” Prescott said. “This initiative could provide Wilkes University with a unique opportunity to participate in the development of a 21st century model of legal education and, in the process, to take advantage of its experience and success with mentoring in higher education.”
“The establishment of a law school would be another element in Wilkes’ strategy to provide graduate and professional education programs that are important to the future growth and development of northeastern Pennsylvania,” said Reynold Verret, Wilkes provost.
The law school would be another contribution to local and regional economic development and would enhance the region’s reputation.
Job demand for lawyers remains strong, with starting salaries dependent on where and in what fields one practices, according to the Association of Legal Career Professionals. In addition, 90.7 percent of 2006 law school graduates for whom employment status was known were employed as of Feb. 15, 2007. The overall median starting salary reached $62,000, while the median compensation for private practice was $95,000.
Prescott began his career as a certified public accountant, having received a bachelor’s degree in business administration from University of Washington. He earned his juris doctor degree from Willamette University College of Law and a master of laws degree in taxation from University of Florida College of Law. He is currently a doctoral candidate in public administration at Penn State University.
At Widener, which has about 500 full- and part-time law students, his responsibilities included coordinating academics, hiring faculty, scheduling classes and budgeting, plus fundraising and serving as primary spokesperson for Widener’s Harrisburg law campus.
Wilkes trustees began discussing a law school in 2004. Its curriculum would emphasize legal practice and incorporate Wilkes’ core value of mentoring. The school would integrate the skills needed to practice law with professionalism and ethics. The law school could complement and strengthen the university’s existing mix of academic programs, most notably in the liberal arts and sciences and also in business and health professions.
For more information on the law school initiative, e-mail law@wilkes.edu or phone (800) WILKES-U Ext. 3220. Updates on progress will be posted at www.law.wilkes.edu.
Wilkes University is an independent institution of higher education dedicated to academic and intellectual excellence through mentoring in the liberal arts, sciences and professional programs. Founded in 1933, the university provides its students with the experience, mentoring and education necessary for career and intellectual development as well as personal growth. Providing a sense of values and civic responsibility, Wilkes encourages its students to welcome the opportunities and challenges of a diverse and continuously changing world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)