good luck with that.Anonymous User wrote:Detrimental reliance.PKSebben wrote:offers to work at a law firm isn't a contract. hth.
Offer contingent upon background check Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
- PKSebben
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:35 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
The issue is dead. Not trying to get blacklisted.PKSebben wrote:good luck with that.Anonymous User wrote:Detrimental reliance.PKSebben wrote:offers to work at a law firm isn't a contract. hth.
But the information and reality remains.
-
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 11413
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
Yes, but you can't be fired if you weren't hired.
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
That and many others.NYAssociate wrote:Sorry folks. It's at-will employment. Didn't you all read that case in Ks?
Several law school professors have said the case is absolutely compensable, shockingly common, and not worth pursuing if ever want to work biglaw.
Welcome to the real world. Not all cases get brought to court.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
Out the firm. Nobody cares about 1L Ks class.
-
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
No chance. Note all the personal information and desire to remain off the blacklist.Anonymous User wrote:Out the firm. Nobody cares about 1L Ks class.
-
- Posts: 11413
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
"At Will Employment" is not relevant in this discussion regarding withdrawal of an employment offer. Conditional offer of employment is probably more on point as is detrimental reliance. But we don't know all the "facts" so anything reasonably related can be argued, but at too high of a cost for most.
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
Thing with "conditional offer" is conditions must be placed when the offer is made.CanadianWolf wrote:"At Will Employment" is not relevant in this discussion regarding withdrawal of an employment offer. Conditional offer of employment is probably more on point as is detrimental reliance.
Detrimental reliance; TITCR.
-
- Posts: 11413
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
Not in the real world. You'll quickly learn that there are at least three sides to every story. If you truly believe that all parties to legal matters stick to the absolute truth, testify truthfully or even that there is an "absolute truth", then you are in for a rude awakening or need to pursue a career in academia. You'll be amazed how many will be willing to state that a "conditional offer" was made; and, if it needs to be in writing, a writing stating the condition will be "found", or the prospective employee will be accused of lying in response to a direct question about this area or ....
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
Actually, this factor is precisely one of the reasons the case is not worth litigating. Much of it will come to what I was told verbally by the hiring partner. What do you want to bet he doesn't say "Absolutely, we made a firm offer, induced him to give up his job hunt, and then backpedaled."CanadianWolf wrote:Not in the real world. You'll quickly learn that there are at least three sides to every story. If you truly believe that all parties to legal matters stick to the absolute truth, testify truthfully or even that there is an "absolute truth", then you are in for a rude awakening or need to pursue a career in academia.
But thanks for thinking you've got the market cornered on good sense. It will make it easier to sandbag you in court.
-
- Posts: 11413
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
No need to be impolite. Lots of issues remain including were there writings &, if so, what was in the writing & were all terms unambiguous, etc. If you believe that you're going to "sandbag" another in court, then....
P.S. I never suggested that this type of matter was worth litigating; in fact, my posted responses suggest just the opposite.
P.S. I never suggested that this type of matter was worth litigating; in fact, my posted responses suggest just the opposite.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
I believe that those who assume they are seeing all the angles that others must have failed to perceive just because they didn't spell it out are easier to defeat (at anything) based on that assumption than those who are more modest in their self conception.CanadianWolf wrote:No need to be impolite. Lots of issues remain including were there writings &, if so, what was in the writing & were all terms unambiguous, etc. If you believe that you're going to "sandbag" another in court, then....
So, yeah.
As to the rest, I'm sure there's a thousand evidentiary issues that can be litigated under such circumstances. Just another reason the issue was let go.
The simple fact, because I am, should we say, intimately familiar with the facts of the case, is that when the actual facts are considered and not the potentially distorted set of facts that would actually make it into a courtroom, this is a clear case of detrimental reliance. That is the opinion of professors of law with vastly more experience than any of us. Everyone recognizes that the objective reality and what might be the result of litigation rarely if ever coincide.
That you think this is news, see statement(s) above.
-
- Posts: 11413
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
What ? Try to calm down. I'm sorry that you are in this situation.
P.S. Not sure why you are trying to start an argument. And I'm not sure why you are directing your anger toward me.
P.S. Not sure why you are trying to start an argument. And I'm not sure why you are directing your anger toward me.
- Kohinoor
- Posts: 2641
- Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:51 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
I remember reading a case where, despite it being at will employment, the plaintiff was entitled to damages based on an income valuation that looked at the average length of employment.NYAssociate wrote:Sorry folks. It's at-will employment. Didn't you all read that case in Ks?
-
- Posts: 11413
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
Yes, and at-will-employment is not relevant based on the discussion so far. At-will-employment assumes that one was employed & discharged. This seems to be a issue involving contract negotiation or pre-contract issues or whether there was ever a "meeting-of-the-minds", etc.
P.S. If anything I wrote in this thread offended anyone, I apologize. It was not intended to do so.
P.S. If anything I wrote in this thread offended anyone, I apologize. It was not intended to do so.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- Kohinoor
- Posts: 2641
- Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:51 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
Wouldn't the argument be that, even if he proves a violation of the contract, the expected value of the contract was zero because his employment was terminable at will?CanadianWolf wrote:Yes, and at-will-employment is not relevant based on the discussion so far. At-will-employment assumes that one was employed & discharged. This seems to be a issue involving contract negotiation or pre-contract issues or whether there was ever a "meeting-of-the-minds", etc.
P.S. If anything I wrote in this thread offended anyone, I apologize. It was not intended to do so.
he chief argument which defendants make is that, had the contract been fully performed, the value of the performance would have been zero, and that reliance damages must not exceed the value of the contract had it been fully performed. L. Albert & Son v. Armstrong Rubber Co., 178 F.2d 182 (2d Cir. 1949). In support of this defendants cite a number of cases involving employment contracts, in which courts have held that where employment is terminable at will there is no breach of contract, and therefore no damages.
-
- Posts: 11413
- Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:54 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
Depends upon what damages are claimed under the facts of the case. Detrimental reliance was mentioned. We don't know what, if anything, was lost &, therefore, possibly compensable as damages. Damages could be zero, a dollar or a much larger amount based on what is alleged & subsequently proven.
My best guess is that it is not worth pursuing, but I don't know the "facts" & circumstances involved.
Regardless, this just shows that in a one lawyer town the lawyer will starve, but in a two lawyer town both will thrive.
My best guess is that it is not worth pursuing, but I don't know the "facts" & circumstances involved.
Regardless, this just shows that in a one lawyer town the lawyer will starve, but in a two lawyer town both will thrive.
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
how do you account for leaving a previous job ( with less than 4 months remaining on a 2 year contract) due to medical issues? Simply state that you left for medical reasons, or explain them?
- seespotrun
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
ITT: CanadianWolf continues to overestimate his lawyering skills, and when people call him out, he attempts to deflect by asking them why they got upset, backpedals, and then apologizes.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
Can we get back to talking about background checks, criminal convictions, and law firm hiring? Anyone else have any experience with this or know anything?
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
I won't out the firm that is being discussed as the V5 the rescinded out of respect for the poster. But I know that Boies does, from personal experience.
-
- Posts: 428538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Offer contingent upon background check
i'm not trying to simply plain the old man card but haven't any of you held a corporate job before? of the jobs i have held, 2/3 have conducted background checks. i can see why you all think that this is an elevated check given the legal nature of your potential job, but it's really just not all that big of a deal, and definitely not exclusive to jobs at elite law firms.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login