Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions Forum

A forum for applicants and admitted students to ask law students and graduates about law school and the practice of law.
Post Reply
User avatar
cantorb

Bronze
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 11:58 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by cantorb » Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:48 pm

radio1nowhere wrote:
Chuck Rhoades wrote:Thoughts on the HBX Credential of Readiness (CORe) course?
From talking to friends who did it: it's not going to be a resume-booster, but it does teach you the business fundamentals it advertises. That makes it potentially worth it if you want the skills, though you might be able to gain similar basic skills by taking one of those "Analytical Methods for Lawyers" courses that actually count for class credit and don't cost extra money. Perhaps if you aren't confident in business or basic quant skills you might prefer CORe, since it won't result in a grade for your transcript. But — assuming you're a 0L — doing CORe comes at the cost of diluting enjoyment of your last summer of life unburdened by the chains of The Law™.
Strongly disagree.

I did CORe as a 0L last summer, and was asked about it in nearly every 1L summer job interview. I believe it was a strong boost to my otherwise average resume, and helped me get multiple offers - including a V5 and a relatively selective government position.

Overall I thought it was a great learning platform and well worth the $300, but that might differ for econ/stat majors, or if you want to avoid the time commitment. PM for more details.

User avatar
slippin_jimmy

Gold
Posts: 1958
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 5:15 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by slippin_jimmy » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:44 pm

Is there any sort of consensus on whether to take Fed Courts as a 2L or a 3L? The only thing I've really heard is not to take it concurrently with Admin.

User avatar
Joscellin

Gold
Posts: 1515
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 1:40 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by Joscellin » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:59 pm

slippin_jimmy wrote:Is there any sort of consensus on whether to take Fed Courts as a 2L or a 3L? The only thing I've really heard is not to take it concurrently with Admin.
For what it's worth - currently taking it as a 2L and I wish I had waited )

User avatar
Nonconsecutive

Gold
Posts: 2398
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:58 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by Nonconsecutive » Tue Mar 21, 2017 5:17 pm

cantorb wrote:
radio1nowhere wrote:
Chuck Rhoades wrote:Thoughts on the HBX Credential of Readiness (CORe) course?
From talking to friends who did it: it's not going to be a resume-booster, but it does teach you the business fundamentals it advertises. That makes it potentially worth it if you want the skills, though you might be able to gain similar basic skills by taking one of those "Analytical Methods for Lawyers" courses that actually count for class credit and don't cost extra money. Perhaps if you aren't confident in business or basic quant skills you might prefer CORe, since it won't result in a grade for your transcript. But — assuming you're a 0L — doing CORe comes at the cost of diluting enjoyment of your last summer of life unburdened by the chains of The Law™.
Strongly disagree.

I did CORe as a 0L last summer, and was asked about it in nearly every 1L summer job interview. I believe it was a strong boost to my otherwise average resume, and helped me get multiple offers - including a V5 and a relatively selective government position.

Overall I thought it was a great learning platform and well worth the $300, but that might differ for econ/stat majors, or if you want to avoid the time commitment. PM for more details.
Counterpoint: It's never once came up in any interview I've had, ever. Either for internships, clerkships, or most recently for an actual job. I imagine a lot of this boils down to situational details though.

I was also in the pilot class and the technical issues made it pretty atrocious, but my guess is that they've fixed a lot of those by now.

tomwatts

Gold
Posts: 1710
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by tomwatts » Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:02 pm

Joscellin wrote:
slippin_jimmy wrote:Is there any sort of consensus on whether to take Fed Courts as a 2L or a 3L? The only thing I've really heard is not to take it concurrently with Admin.
For what it's worth - currently taking it as a 2L and I wish I had waited )
Was strongly recommended by profs not to take it as a 2L, took it as a 3L, was happy with waiting.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


User avatar
slippin_jimmy

Gold
Posts: 1958
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 5:15 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by slippin_jimmy » Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:13 pm

tomwatts wrote:
Joscellin wrote:
slippin_jimmy wrote:Is there any sort of consensus on whether to take Fed Courts as a 2L or a 3L? The only thing I've really heard is not to take it concurrently with Admin.
For what it's worth - currently taking it as a 2L and I wish I had waited )
Was strongly recommended by profs not to take it as a 2L, took it as a 3L, was happy with waiting.
Noted - thanks!

User avatar
Pneumonia

Gold
Posts: 2096
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by Pneumonia » Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:29 pm

slippin_jimmy wrote:Is there any sort of consensus on whether to take Fed Courts as a 2L or a 3L? The only thing I've really heard is not to take it concurrently with Admin.
Wait for 3L. It's a procedural class. But unlike Civ Pro, understanding the procedural issues very often requires a strong understanding the substantive law as well. Corporations, con law, employment, trusts, etc.—all of these things show up. The class is hard enough as it is without having to spend extra time deciphering the contours of shareholder derivative suits or strict scrutiny. It's also nice to take as a 3L when your other requirements are relatively light.

ETA — waiting for 3L also gives you the chance to take another procedurally oriented class like Conflicts or Crim Pro. Both of those help, too. They're not prereqs by any means, but if you're going to take them anyway, it makes sense to take them before Fed Courts rather than after. It's the same with the substantive courses.

User avatar
malleus discentium

Silver
Posts: 906
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 2:30 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by malleus discentium » Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:11 pm

Pneumonia wrote:
slippin_jimmy wrote:Is there any sort of consensus on whether to take Fed Courts as a 2L or a 3L? The only thing I've really heard is not to take it concurrently with Admin.
Wait for 3L. It's a procedural class. But unlike Civ Pro, understanding the procedural issues very often requires a strong understanding the substantive law as well. Corporations, con law, employment, trusts, etc.—all of these things show up. The class is hard enough as it is without having to spend extra time deciphering the contours of shareholder derivative suits or strict scrutiny. It's also nice to take as a 3L when your other requirements are relatively light.

ETA — waiting for 3L also gives you the chance to take another procedurally oriented class like Conflicts or Crim Pro. Both of those help, too. They're not prereqs by any means, but if you're going to take them anyway, it makes sense to take them before Fed Courts rather than after. It's the same with the substantive courses.
Just going to flag that Pneumonia's class as he describes it is unrecognizable to me (I'm taking it with Manning right now). It is in my experience only tangentially procedural, and I don't recall either corporations or trust law making an appearance. (I'm not even sure why it would--standing?) This only illustrates, though, the differences among the professors who teach it. In addition to echoing the suggestions to take it as 3L, I will add that taking it with a conservative professor like Manning (Goldsmith is also teaching it next year) is a good idea. I have a much greater appreciation for conservative legal thought having taken it with Manning, and I wouldn't have gotten that appreciation at HLS otherwise.

User avatar
Pneumonia

Gold
Posts: 2096
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by Pneumonia » Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:38 pm

malleus discentium wrote:
Pneumonia wrote:
slippin_jimmy wrote:Is there any sort of consensus on whether to take Fed Courts as a 2L or a 3L? The only thing I've really heard is not to take it concurrently with Admin.
Wait for 3L. It's a procedural class. But unlike Civ Pro, understanding the procedural issues very often requires a strong understanding the substantive law as well. Corporations, con law, employment, trusts, etc.—all of these things show up. The class is hard enough as it is without having to spend extra time deciphering the contours of shareholder derivative suits or strict scrutiny. It's also nice to take as a 3L when your other requirements are relatively light.

ETA — waiting for 3L also gives you the chance to take another procedurally oriented class like Conflicts or Crim Pro. Both of those help, too. They're not prereqs by any means, but if you're going to take them anyway, it makes sense to take them before Fed Courts rather than after. It's the same with the substantive courses.
Just going to flag that Pneumonia's class as he describes it is unrecognizable to me (I'm taking it with Manning right now). It is in my experience only tangentially procedural, and I don't recall either corporations or trust law making an appearance. (I'm not even sure why it would--standing?) This only illustrates, though, the differences among the professors who teach it. In addition to echoing the suggestions to take it as 3L, I will add that taking it with a conservative professor like Manning (Goldsmith is also teaching it next year) is a good idea. I have a much greater appreciation for conservative legal thought having taken it with Manning, and I wouldn't have gotten that appreciation at HLS otherwise.
Lol sounds like I should've taken it with Manning. I took Jackson fwiw.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Goldie

Bronze
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by Goldie » Tue Mar 21, 2017 11:44 pm

I took it as a 2L (with Fallon). It was a really tough class, and it might have been made tougher by me taking it in my 2L year. But it really came in handy for me during my 2L summer (both at my firm and at a state govt position where I did some habeas-related work) and it's been nice not to have to deal with it during 3L. So I'm not sure what I'd recommend. Like most things, I think there are pros and cons.

Prospect24

New
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 12:26 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by Prospect24 » Wed Mar 22, 2017 9:41 am

How competitive is it to get into clinics? I'm assuming the Supreme Court one is basically the top 10 in the class, but what about the USAO clinic or the government lawyer in DC clinic? What kind of grades are needed for those?

User avatar
jrf12886

Bronze
Posts: 283
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 11:52 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by jrf12886 » Wed Mar 22, 2017 10:16 am

I took Fed Courts with Field as a 3L. Very tough class, especially with her focus on habeas (which is very confusing in my view). But she's brilliant and I enjoyed the class a lot.

Goldie

Bronze
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by Goldie » Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:03 pm

Prospect24 wrote:How competitive is it to get into clinics? I'm assuming the Supreme Court one is basically the top 10 in the class, but what about the USAO clinic or the government lawyer in DC clinic? What kind of grades are needed for those?
Supreme Court clinic isn't top 10 in the class. At least some people get in with top-10%ish grades.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


User avatar
polareagle

Bronze
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by polareagle » Wed Mar 22, 2017 1:52 pm

Most clinics just require you to get selected during the "clinical round" of course selection by the computer algorithm. The two you mentioned (Supreme Court and USAO) both require applications. But, e.g., the other government lawyer clinic (State AG) is just done by the system.

tomwatts

Gold
Posts: 1710
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by tomwatts » Wed Mar 22, 2017 2:24 pm

Prospect24 wrote:the government lawyer in DC clinic?
I did this in 2015. The program grows modestly every year, and it was just hitting peak capacity, so there may be some level of selection at this point. At the time, though, it was basically open to anyone who had a plausible explanation of what they wanted to do. Grades were not a factor.

Person1111

Bronze
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 11:10 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by Person1111 » Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:51 pm

Pneumonia wrote:
slippin_jimmy wrote:Is there any sort of consensus on whether to take Fed Courts as a 2L or a 3L? The only thing I've really heard is not to take it concurrently with Admin.
Wait for 3L. It's a procedural class. But unlike Civ Pro, understanding the procedural issues very often requires a strong understanding the substantive law as well. Corporations, con law, employment, trusts, etc.—all of these things show up. The class is hard enough as it is without having to spend extra time deciphering the contours of shareholder derivative suits or strict scrutiny. It's also nice to take as a 3L when your other requirements are relatively light.

ETA — waiting for 3L also gives you the chance to take another procedurally oriented class like Conflicts or Crim Pro. Both of those help, too. They're not prereqs by any means, but if you're going to take them anyway, it makes sense to take them before Fed Courts rather than after. It's the same with the substantive courses.
I took it 2L spring (also with Jackson) and felt totally prepared. I liked her a lot. I had Manning for LegReg and also liked him. They're very different. You read a very high volume of cases in Jackson's class, for whatever that's worth.

I echo the suggestion not to take it at the same time as administrative law unless you have a death wish. You should take 14th Amendment first - much of the class won't make sense without it. Admin and 4th/5th/6th are also useful. By and large, though, you don't need to take other classes before it - the substantive law is basically just window dressing.

CenterFringe

Bronze
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by CenterFringe » Wed Mar 22, 2017 8:04 pm

Is taking Administrative Law as a 1L elective a bad idea? I want to work for a law firm doing energy regulation type work, so my thinking is that having it on my transcript in time for 2L SA Hiring would be a good idea, but I don't know how hard the class is.

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


User avatar
Pneumonia

Gold
Posts: 2096
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by Pneumonia » Wed Mar 22, 2017 8:30 pm

hlsperson1111 wrote: I took it 2L spring (also with Jackson) and felt totally prepared. I liked her a lot. I had Manning for LegReg and also liked him. They're very different. You read a very high volume of cases in Jackson's class, for whatever that's worth.

I echo the suggestion not to take it at the same time as administrative law unless you have a death wish. You should take 14th Amendment first - much of the class won't make sense without it. Admin and 4th/5th/6th are also useful. By and large, though, you don't need to take other classes before it - the substantive law is basically just window dressing.
I didn't mean to say that any course is needed prior to Fed Courts. What I was trying to say is that Fed Courts is unique in that other courses are helpful to have taken first. Those you mentioned are among them, as is conflicts. Absent a compelling need to take it 2L, it overall makes sense to take it after 14th etc. because the other courses are going to help you in Fed Courts, but Fed Courts isn't going to help you understand e.g. Corporations or Conflicts. That's not a strong argument for taking it 3L, but I think it's worth considering. There's a reason that most people take it 3L. It's a capstone course.

And I'll also 100% agree with everyone who's said that the course varies by professor. Field, for example, gives a three hour in class exam. Jackson assigns a ton of reading and expects you to understand the background substantive law (she said this a lot in my version of the class). Manning does his own thing. Idk what Fallon's course is like. Visiting professors sometimes teach it too. But for all of them, I think the scale tips toward taking 3L rather than 2L.

tomwatts

Gold
Posts: 1710
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by tomwatts » Wed Mar 22, 2017 10:02 pm

CenterFringe wrote:Is taking Administrative Law as a 1L elective a bad idea? I want to work for a law firm doing energy regulation type work, so my thinking is that having it on my transcript in time for 2L SA Hiring would be a good idea, but I don't know how hard the class is.
Admin is generally on the harder side. I took it fall 2L and was fine, but some people recommend not taking it even that early. And you've already got something relevant on your transcript from 1L Leg Reg, so it's hard to imagine that taking Admin would add all that much. If you could take something energy-related (I have no idea what that is at HLS) or just another blackletter class (Corporations, etc.), you'd probably be just as well served, if not more so.

User avatar
leslieknope

Silver
Posts: 1114
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:53 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by leslieknope » Wed Mar 22, 2017 11:43 pm

Wait Corporations is a helpful class for FedCourts? I was super hoping to just learn Corps for the bar.

Also, while I'm here: where is it most productive to list Cambridge apartments for subleasing?

tomwatts

Gold
Posts: 1710
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by tomwatts » Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:14 am

At least for Fallon's Fed Courts, Corps had essentially nothing to do with it (other than, I think, one very general principle of agency law — respondeat superior — that was mentioned almost in passing once).

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!


User avatar
Pneumonia

Gold
Posts: 2096
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:05 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by Pneumonia » Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:41 am

leslieknope wrote:Wait Corporations is a helpful class for FedCourts? I was super hoping to just learn Corps for the bar.
The original question was whether there was a consensus about taking Fed Courts 2L vs 3L. The consensus is 3L (I don't know of a single 2L in my class of 60 or so). I'm not trying to say that anyone needs to take any one course prior to FC. Instead, I'm suggesting that one of the reasons that everyone takes it as a 3L is that the course involves so many substantive concepts from other courses. Yes, you can pick those concepts up from the reading FC reading. No, none of the other classes are prerequisites (except 14th).

But if you're taking FC, you have to choose when to take it. Concepts from conflicts, bankruptcy, anti-trust, corps, crim pro, etc. all showed up in my FC class. For those that I had previous exposure to, that exposure made the cases easier to read. Exactly none of those classes would have been made easier by taking Fed Courts first. The benefit is marginal, but I think it's worth pointing out.

Admin is also a hard class, but there are plenty of 2Ls (and sometimes, 1Ls) who take it every year. FC is different. Maybe others have some good explanations as to why that is.

Also, for corps specifically, my FC dealt with shareholder derivative suits, fiduciary duty, and partnerships. I had taken corps, so I was able to read the cases without doing additional research. If I hadn't taken corps, then it would've taken me 15 or so extra minutes to figure out the background for each case. So, as I've been trying to say, a marginal benefit. But when you add up all the classes/concepts, and if you're looking for a reason to take FC 2L vs 3L, then I think this info suggests 3L.

So don't change your course selections. Just know that material from several of whichever black letter classes you do take is likely to reappear in FC. At least it was in mine. Which again, being with Jackson, had truckloads of reading.

User avatar
cantorb

Bronze
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 11:58 am

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by cantorb » Thu Mar 23, 2017 11:14 am

Are there usually changes to the multi-section options after the catalog is posted?

A bunch of professors are not listed as teaching their regular courses next year - e.g. Fallon 1st and 14th Amendment, Freeman and Vermeule Admin Law - does that mean they're not teaching them, or will they possibly be added later?

User avatar
radio1nowhere

Bronze
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:01 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by radio1nowhere » Thu Mar 23, 2017 12:46 pm

cantorb wrote:Are there usually changes to the multi-section options after the catalog is posted?

A bunch of professors are not listed as teaching their regular courses next year - e.g. Fallon 1st and 14th Amendment, Freeman and Vermeule Admin Law - does that mean they're not teaching them, or will they possibly be added later?
I'm pretty surprised (read: unhappy) they're not currently offering admin in the fall — hopefully they add it. Freeman isn't currently signed up to teach anything, as far as I can tell.

I doubt Fallon will add anything, since he usually only teaches two classes per year and he's already slated for two for 2017–2018.

CenterFringe

Bronze
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: Harvard Student(s) Answering Your Questions

Post by CenterFringe » Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:39 pm

tomwatts wrote:
CenterFringe wrote:Is taking Administrative Law as a 1L elective a bad idea? I want to work for a law firm doing energy regulation type work, so my thinking is that having it on my transcript in time for 2L SA Hiring would be a good idea, but I don't know how hard the class is.
Admin is generally on the harder side. I took it fall 2L and was fine, but some people recommend not taking it even that early. And you've already got something relevant on your transcript from 1L Leg Reg, so it's hard to imagine that taking Admin would add all that much. If you could take something energy-related (I have no idea what that is at HLS) or just another blackletter class (Corporations, etc.), you'd probably be just as well served, if not more so.
Thanks, maybe I will just wait until 2L. Depending on what's offered in the spring, there's an Energy and the Environment, Natural Resources, and Environmental Law as options. I'm just not sure if it sends the wrong message to not take a black letter class for 1L elective.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply

Return to “Ask a Law Student / Graduate”