Hey lawyers in the house
I'm coming up to my senior year of my undergraduate career and I want to continue my education. So a few months ago I started flirting with practice GREs and LSAT questions. However, the GRE just really reminds me of an old test I took a little over five years ago
I've always been turned off to the GREs. There's nothing more uncomfortable than a test that is similar to the SAT. I did poorly on the SAT considering how well my overall high school GPA was. However, college wasn't so kind to me and my GPA is a less than stellar 3.1. I can definitely pull that sucker up higher this fall so I'm not too worried. However, I really have taken a liking to these LSAT questions. It reminds me a lot of my discrete mathematics class and the mental reasoning behind them makes sense. I've done quiet well on everything except the games (obviously). I have a practice book and have been working through it, but what else can I do to practice for these games? Any type of precision reading/unwarranted assumption drills I should look at? |
GREs aren't that bad! There are more people with law degrees than positions out there, even the ABA knows it and has admitted it. I know many J.D.s with no job at the moment.
|
I used to teach an undergraduate informal logic class that typically had lots of students using it to prep for the LSAT's. So any informal logic textbook or critical thinking textbook or class should be helpful on the LSAT's.
|
Quote:
Lt. Kaffee: "I forgot. You were sick the day they taught law at Law school!":rolleyes: How's the place across the tracks doing these days (post USNWR cheating revelations)? Applications down? |
a question on the California State Bar Examination
This was revealed to us in the early 1970's in a law school class
Usually these questions are closely guarded by the State Bar but this one was let out. ~~~~ A terrible storm was raging in the city and around. Visibility was very poor and the roads wee extremely wet and slick. Two automobiles were speeding down 2 different streets. The driver of the first car was speeding. The second driver was not speeding but was driving in violation of a statute which stated you may not drive while intoxicated. The storm knocked out power in some areas but where these two streets intersected, power was not knocked out but the storm had damaged the street light controls such that the traffic lights in BOTH directions now both showed GREEN. The municipality's traffic department had been notified of this condition at this intersection 3 hours earlier but had not sent out a crew or done anything else yet to rectify this condition.. The two drivers arrived at the intersection at the same time. BOOM !!!! There was a HUGE crash. DISCUSS. |
Quote:
Back then the multiple choice questions were in sections, iirc. Fact pattern, then 4 choices. Next question, different fact pattern, 4 choices, but answer not to be inconsistent with previous answer(s). Tough sledding.:o |
Quote:
How liberal was the Bench in CA in the 1970's? Well now. What's wrong with the contributory negligence theory being applied to each driver and the state not being reponsible for acts of nature? No winners. Lawyers only losers. Judge Wapner rules.:P Da Peoples Court. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I think the best thing you can do to prepare for the lsat is take a lot of practice lsats. I took a prep course before I took the test and I did just fine. The prep course basically consisted of 10 practice tests, three of which we took in a simulated testing environment. Don't listen to the people who say they didn't need to study and still did really well, they're not the norm. You can improve your scores on all of those standardized tests by studying.
I never ended up applying to law school, but I don't think you can ever go wrong with more education. I worked at a law firm for awhile and my experience there was partly to blame for dissuading me from applying to law school. It was a small firm and the lawyers there were the most unhappy people I think I've ever met. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Driver #1: Speeding - Determination made by which method? Driver #2: DUI - Determination made by On-The-Scene LEOs. Malfunctioning Street Lights - Not an issue in this circumstance. MTD: ***** happens. Union CBA allows days to repair lights...get over it. Short and sweet? Driver 2 gets ticketed/arrested for DUI/Property Damage/Driving Against Court Orders/Violation of Probation-Court orders to consume no alcohol while under jurisdiction of court and/or probation control. Driver #1: Ticket for "Driving Too Fast For Conditions." Malf. SLs: They get fixed AFTER the storm. MTD: See Union CBA Lawyers and enjoy the dance on the pin-head. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ :D :rolleyes: :cool: |
:musicbooh:musicbooh:musicbooh:musicbooh:musicbooh:silly::silly::silly::musicbooh:musicbooh:musicboo h:musicbooh:musicbooh:musicbooh
Quote:
|
Quote:
Typical lawyer question with incomplete information and a storm thrown in just to obfuscate matters. You need the speed of both automobiles and the distance between them. After that the solution is simply a matter of summing the series. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:48 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website