Really?

I'm sure you've all seen the headlines on every single news outlet by now, the release of George Mitchell's steroid report. I'm not the biggest baseball fan, having lost interest during the strike, but the item that every article leads with is how shocking Roger Clemens was named. The same Clemens who was given up for dead by the Red Sox while in his mid-30s, but somehow had the best seasons of his career and threw with increased velocity, all after the age of 40? That his defying of human aging was not all due to his secret intense Texan workouts? Is the media going to tell me next that Santa Claus is not real?

I also learned today that Mitchell was a U.S. Attorney, federal judge, and actually declined a nomination by Clinton to the Supreme Court to stay in the Senate.

Anyway, off for break. See y'all in 2008.

P.S. Did I mention that I am 1/2 done with law school?

This is what we resort to...

I wrote previously about law students' crazy obsessions with craigslist personals during finals. A post was recently written by Legal Bachelor about craigslist personals. I was forwarded the following post by a (female) reader to ask me to ridicule this supposed UCLAW student.

If you (like most people) think craigslist personals are shady, you might make an "acception" after reading this wonderful post. Because this is a family-friendly blog, I am not posting his NSFW pictures that came with the ad.


los angeles craigslist > westside-southbay > casual encounters

hi 25 years old 6 ft 180 lbs 8 incher looking for hot girl for nsa - m4w - 25

---

Reply to: pers-497556033@craigslist.org
Date: 2007-12-03, 12:44PM PST

Hi I'm an educated 25 year old ucla law student 6 ft 180 lbs 8 incher here. I am looking for a hot girl near my age but I"ll make an acception if you are good looking. I'm open to all races but it's a plus if you are Asian, Latin, or Eastern European. Please let me know if you are intersted in having some fun. Please send a pic if you are intersted(i don't mind if it's a naughty one

PLEASE NO MEN WOMEN ONLY! I'm not into that so please don't even try I will just delete your message.

• Location: brentwood
• it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests

Q&A

Q:


A: depends on if it was mortally wounded.

Interview advice

Interview advice from male 3L to male 1L at school:

"Law firm interviews are like talking to girls. When you're hitting on girls, you just pretend to act interested and let them talk about themselves, responding with only an occasional "hmm...that's interesting" or "wow." Same thing with lawyers. Both like to talk about themselves and hear the sound of their own voices."

Law school

Fan mail

The following question was emailed to me by a 1L at school.

Dear Fox,
As I am studying for finals right now during the eve of our first 1L final, I am wondering what GPA one needs from UCLA to get a job at a big firm during 2L interviews? I know it's hard to get a firm job 1L summer, but what will I need for 2L year?

My response:
1) Stop worrying about the 2L job hunt now. Study for finals.
2) That being said, I think the magic number is around a 3.2 for a "biglaw" (i.e. firm that pays 130-160) job. This number doesn't guarantee a job; there are people with GPA above this but interview poorly and don't have a job yet. On the other hand, there are people lower than this who have connections or interview well who have firm jobs. But generally, straight B+ with a scattered B should put you in good shape.

Interesting readership

I don't know much about Chicago, except that I didn't apply there based on some bad things I heard about it, but given my blog's history with the school, I apparently draw all the crazies from there. See here and here for past stories. And because the hits are not just from one computer or IP, it's not just one poor soul at Chicago with issues.

Today's gem:
That you resort to the internet (at 1:54AM Central Time, no less) to find out how tells me that you're way beyond help.

After all, we're lawyers

Interesting article on law firm bonuses...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/business/02deal.html

The highlight, in my opinion, is the last 2 paragraphs:

"IT’S a nice thought but somewhat specious. Partners at law firms are a notoriously greedy bunch — that’s why they accept so few new partners — making it hard to believe that they are willing to part with their money so easily. I suggest there is something else at play: Law firms match bonuses to secure bragging rights.

Within their risk-averse, insular world, it’s a way of saying, “We’re in the top tier.” But it doesn’t necessarily make good business sense. Though partners at elite firms routinely pocket millions, law firms have never been run as efficiently as truly great companies. After all, they’re run by lawyers."