Bar Exam: Run Through The Line
Do. Not. Stop.
This is the final weekend before the fun and games we call the California Bar Exam. Three days of bliss. First, a day of reading and writing, then a day filled with lots of coloring in of circles (staying inside the lines is very important... maybe even more important than the actual answer if my conspiracy theories about the Bar trying to kill our inner child are correct), and finally, a third day of more reading and more writing. And then... we wait till November to find out if we're official and certified.
As Jack Handey explains about his first day in Hell:
To relieve the boredom, you can throw rocks at other people in line. They just think it was a demon. But I discovered the hard way that the demons don’t like it when they’re beating someone and you join in.
It’s odd, but Hell can be a lonely place, even with so many people around. They all seem caught up in their own little worlds, running to and fro, wailing and tearing at their hair. You try to make conversation, but you can tell they’re not listening.
Rap Lyrics Appropriate For Bar Prep
Saul Williams
It was a cold night. Not cold like the Winter/ just cold like an energy / was in the air I generally / don't like. / The Driver had to dip / so he left me in the whip / turned round said "You know you're on your own, right?" - Black Thought
In order of progress from Start to Finish during this two-month marathon of study...
- I'm workin' while the Boss relaxin' - Black Thought
- I'm the shaky hand that touched George Foreman in Zaire - Nas
- Bone gristle poppin' from continuous grindin' - Mos Def
- Everybody knows me like the Contra code for extra men - Wale
- Cuttin' up bodies and talkin' to the pieces - Notorious B.I.G.
- I know where I'm goin' even when it's dark - The Roots
- I'm half dead / never felt more alive - Peedi Peedi
- Who's gonna stop us? Not a god damn one o' ya - The Clipse
Three from Lil Wayne:
- I like brain so I f*ck with a whole lotta nerds
- If it's bullsh*t you want, it's bullsh*t I share
- I do what I do and I do it right
And my favorite, by Saul Williams:
These words are not tools of communication
They are shards of metal
Dropped from eight story windows
They are waterfalls and gas leaks
Aged thoughts rolled in tobacco leaf
The tools of a trade
Barbers barred, barred of barters
Catch phrases and misunderstandings
But they are not what I feel when I am alone
Surrounded by Everything and Nothing
And there isn't a word or phrase to be caught
A verse to be recited
A man to de-fill my being in those moments
I am blankness, the contained center of an "O"
The pyramidic containment of an "A"
I stand in the middle of all that I have learned
All that I have memorized
All that I've known by heart
Unable to reach any of it
There is no sadness
There is no bliss
It is a forgotten memory
A memorable escape route that only is found by not looking
There, in the spine of the dictionary the words are worthless
They are a mere weight pressing against my thoughtlessness
But then...
Who else can speak of thoughtlessness with such confidence?
[Like this post? Check out my Muxtape.]
Me, At The Moment
The toughest part of Bar Prep is recalling the information I need, when I need it. I know everything I'll need is packed into my head. I just hope nothing has slipped out. Just one more week to go...
Image is Memory by Jinyoung Shin.
A Sign The Composition Works
From The Plantation To The Penitentiary
I've generally been in an internally beastly mood while prepping for the Bar Exam. I find it's helpful. If I'm too at peace, I get complacent while studying. Though relaxation allows for Brawny-like absorption of rules and elements, over time that relaxation also draws in anxiety, which builds and festers till it paralyzes. I'd guess that a mongoose experiences the same euphoric calm before it realizes it's been ended.
So instead, I've chosen snarling aggression as my study mode. To keep me in the mood, I've been listening to a lot of angry music: conscious rap, beats by The Rza, passion-imbued compositions. It also follows that I've been avoiding jazz - normally effective study music as so much is sans lyrics - like the plague.
This morning, while studying at SF's Best Neighborhood Cafe, I turned on some tunes to escape the enraptured yells from a trio of preschoolers, at once shouting for Tour cyclists to "go faster!" while marveling that they could ride so close together and, not understanding what they wanted, shouting for the riders to "crash and break their necks".*
Headphones on, my thumb spins through options on my iPod. Let's see... Genre will quickly filter for mood. Hrm. Jazz? Well then. Who's here? No, no, no, no, Ah. Wait... Wynton Marsalis? I'd forgotten. Haven't listened in a long time. Sure, why not. Give it a go. Perfect. Exactly what I wanted. Which disc is this? Tap to illuminate screen, and... Of course: From The Plantation To The Penitentiary
And what have I been studying all morning? Criminal law. I guess Wynton hit his mark.
[* Have the little tikes already seen Michael Bay's "work". Did they think a bike would burst into a giant fireball if it crashed? If only Hollywood would think of the kids when letting guys like Bay make movies...]
Putting a stake through Corps(e)
So. I was reading (for fun) in a cafe today. Two women were sitting at the table next to me, studying for their Corporations exam. Wow. So annoying.
First of all, they were studying out loud. OK generally, but in this case one girl was...
- Not using her indoor voice,
- Facing me instead of her study partner, meaning that she might as well have been using a megaphone on top of her already-too-loud voice,
- Absolutely dominating the conversation, Shaquille-style - I mean her study partner barely got a word in edgewise in an hour and a half, and
- Speaking with that most annoying of accents, the snobby San Franciscan, where everything? sounds like? a question?.
Second, they had no idea what they were talking about. They weren't stupid, just too intent on hearing themselves speak to stop and think for a minute.
What's that? You'd like some examples? Thanks for asking...
- They decided to "skip that, um... partnership stuff? because, um...there's like, no way? he can test us? on that like right?"
- Could NOT get their heads around insider trading. I mean, is the difference between Chessman (where the family phone trees news and someone winds up trading on the info) and the inside-trading printer really that tough to suss out? (At this point, I almost interrupted to explain because they were getting it all *wrong*. Only reasons I didn't explain were that I was really, really annoyed, and because there was a slim chance they would be competing for grades with some friends.) "But, like, what's the duty? um... how are we supposed to know what the duty is?! like, how does the um fiduciary duty? fit in here?"
- "Like, I'll like never understand how people only study? you know? for like the last week of the semmmmmmmester. in law school?"
- "What's like, the deal with reliance investor reliance? Does that put the burden on the company?"
- "I'm going to ignore this policy stuff?"
OK. Done venting. To my friends still studying and busting their behinds for their last-ever law school exam, I say best of luck on Corps. No, better yet... I want to see your impersonation of Ghandi. Well, you know... if Ghandi was really pissed off.
Kill that thing.
The Future of the Internets
I'm currently taking a class on Telecommunications and Broadcast Media Law. Much of the reading and discussion is timely, and one of the most cutting edge topics we're discussing is Net Neutrality. My school even put on a symposium focusing on the issue of earlier this year. How the issue is settled will decide how the Internet will grow and develop. While some of the statements about the history of telecom regulation, umm, lack accuracy, this Op-Ed in today's NY Times is one of the clearest, most concise, best reasoned pieces I've read regarding the direction that movement on the issue should take.
Under current law, [Network Operators] can block certain files or Web sites for their subscribers, or slow or obstruct certain applications. And they do, albeit pretty rarely. Network providers have censored anti-Bush comments from an online Pearl Jam concert, refused to allow a text-messaging program from the pro-choice group Naral (saying it was “unsavory”), blocked access to the Internet phone service (and direct competitor) Vonage and selectively throttled online traffic that was using the BitTorrent protocol.
And what is likely to happen without government regulation? What if the operators are free to do what they want to "optimize traffic" over their network?
[Network Operators] won’t be blocking anything per se — we’ll never know what we’re not getting — they’ll just be leapfrogging today’s technology with a new, higher-bandwidth network where they get to be the gatekeepers and toll collectors. The superlative new video on offer will be available from (surprise, surprise) them, or companies who’ve paid them for the privilege of access to their customers. If this model sounds familiar, that’s because it is. It’s how cable TV operates.
We can’t allow a system of gatekeepers to get built into the network. The Internet shouldn’t be harnessed for the profit of a few, rather than the good of the many; value should come from the quality of information, not the control of access to it.
For some parallel examples: there are only two guitar companies who make most of the guitars sold in America, but they don’t control what we play on those guitars. Whether we use a Mac or a PC doesn’t govern what we can make with our computers. The telephone company doesn’t get to decide what we discuss over our phone lines. It would be absurd to let the handful of companies who connect us to the Internet determine what we can do online. Congress needs to establish basic ground rules for an open Internet, just as common carriage laws did for the phone system.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
JPMorgan's Attorneys Blew It (Like A Ref)
An old friend of mine, a guy I've known since I was 10, was in town last night. It was a rare treat to see him, as he works a lot and lives in NYC with his wife and son. We hung out, caught up, and watched the Warriors/Lakers game. And what a game it was. The Warriors are the best show in the NBA.
Says Truehoop:
The Lakers and Warriors better meet in the playoffs. It's unbelievably fun to watch them play each other. If sports are an analogy for war, then the Warriors, it occurs to me, play the role of terrorists. They'll never rule, but they'll take somebody down with them.
The Lakers got the win thanks to a horrible call by the refs on a dirty, dirty play by Fish. Also, Monta Ellis is an amazing finisher. Unreal.
Anywho, my friend works for Bear Stearns, and he told us a little bit about a tiny mistake that's causing HUGE problems for JPMorgan. Apparently JPMorgan's attorneys mis-worded one sentence in one clause of the contract formalizing this huge, extremely complex acquisition. The result? By the language of that sentence, JPMorgan agreed to be responsible for Bear's debt, no matter what. In other words, even if Bear's shareholders rejected the offer and the deal fell through, JPMorgan would still be on the hook for billions. Ummm, whoops? Do over?
MARCH 24, 2008, 9:30 AM
Did JPMorgan Chase get snagged in a legal loophole? A careful read of its guaranty agreement with Bear Stearns, part of its deal to acquire the troubled investment bank, suggests that the agreement may be much broader than JPMorgan intended. This apparent oversight likely played a role in JPMorgan's decision over the weekend to consider raising its offer for Bear. [Upped from $2/share to $10/share. Also, Bear agreed to issue more shares to JP, giving them enough of a stake to push the deal through regardless of what the shareholders want.]
Under the merger agreement, if Bear's shareholders vote down the takeover deal for a year, Bear can terminate the agreement. This we already knew. But it also appears that, in such circumstances, JPMorgan's guarantee to backstop Bear's liabilities stays in place - forever. That is, even after the rejection from Bear's shareholders, JPMorgan's guarantee would continue to apply to any liabilities Bear accrued up to the termination of the agreement. This provision could allow Bear's shareholders to seek a higher bid while still forcing JPMorgan to honor its guarantee. The guarantee would not apply to liabilities accrued after termination of the agreement. Still, as The New York Times reported Monday, the agreement may have been much broader than JPMorgan and its law firm, Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz,* meant it to be.
According to The Times, one participant in the negotiations described James Dimon, JPMorgan's chief executive, as being "apoplectic" as he sought to have the sentence modified.
* No relation. My father's side of my family is from Brooklyn!, but they're more likely related to the Katzes from Crim in Terry (one of the guys casing the store) or Katz (the wiretap case).
JD = no guarantee
According to an excellent report by the Wall Street Journal, law school graduates who are not in the top 10% of their class at all but the elite schools are having an increasingly difficult time finding work. Work that is found (outside of the big firms, of course) offers starting salaries more modest than in the past.
Evidence of a squeezed market among the majority of private lawyers in the U.S., who work as sole practitioners or at small firms, is growing. A survey of about 650 Chicago lawyers published in the 2005 book "Urban Lawyers" found that between 1975 and 1995 the inflation-adjusted average income of the top 25% of earners, generally big-firm lawyers, grew by 22% -- while income for the other 75% actually dropped.
To which I say cry me a river. The vast majority of law school graduates are still going to find quality work and earn a more-than-comfortable salary. What really caught my eye were these paragraphs:
[D]ebate is intensifying among law-school academics over the integrity of law schools' marketing campaigns. Defenders argue that the legal profession always has been openly and proudly a meritocracy: Top entrance-exam scores help win admittance to top schools where top students win jobs at top firms. Even the system that is used to issue law-school grades -- a curve that pits student against student -- reflects the law profession's competitiveness. . . . [The Dean of second-tier Loyola Law School] says it is problematic that big firms only interview the top of the class, "but that's the nature of the employment market; it's never been different."
. . .
"Prospective students need solid comparative data on employment outcomes, [but] very few law schools provide such data," adds Andrew Morriss, a law professor at the University of Illinois who has studied the market for new lawyers.
Students entering law school have little way of knowing how tight a job market they might face. The only employment data that many prospective students see comes from school-promoted surveys that provide a far-from-complete portrait of graduate experiences. Tulane University, for example, reports to U.S. News & World Report magazine, which publishes widely watched annual law-school rankings, that its law-school graduates entering the job market in 2005 had a median salary of $135,000. But that is based on a survey that only 24% of that year's graduates completed, and those who did so likely represent the cream of the class, a Tulane official concedes.
It often feels that my school has forgetten that Law School is a professional school. It's an investment, and our goal, as students, is to be prepared for and to land a job after we graduate. As an example, On Campus Interviews (OCI) are taking place right now, and the application process began in early August. Unbeknown to the majority of students, however, was the fact that our Office of Career Planning (OCP) is not as we left it in the Spring. Our entire staff (of 3, for 750 students) resigned, was released, or is on sabbatical. Upon returning this Fall, we found one new OCP attorney, with her Director not arriving until mid-September, long after OCI applications were due.
I'm sure there's an interesting back story here, and while we do seem to have upgraded our OCP staff, leaving students high and dry for OCI was a horrible means to that end. Some students at my school have lost out on interviews, quality internships, and possibly even jobs because Career Planning has not been enough of a priority for our administration. I can only hope that the positive reports I've heard and the positive acts I've seen from the newly hired staff marks a change in attitude at my law school.
For a larger discussion on the WSJ piece, see the WSJ Law Blog »