Senioritis

In college and high school people often refer to a phenomenon known as "senioritis".  The phenomenon supposedly is manifested in the behavior by seniors in their particular institution no longer working and generally just acting differently than other students because they know they are months away from graduation.

I do not really think this applies to law school at all.  However, I do sense that as a third year, you find yourself looking around law school with a different perspective on things that are unique to the fact that you are a "3L".  I could make a laundry list, but here are a few that have occurred to me recently as things I can no longer tolerate and ask everyone not to do:

Those rolling briefcases:  Seriously.  You are ridiculous for owning one of these unless you are an older woman with back problems.  No self respecting person uses one of these unless they have an absolutely tremendous amount of stuff to carry around and a complete and utter lack of self respect.  If you have any pride at all you have been carrying around your requisite 50 pounds of casebooks and by third year you will enter the legal world with a back of steel that will allow you to eat marketing professionals for breakfast as they walk slowly in the airport under the weight of their palm pilots and croissants.  Either that or you will develop a dull and uncomfortable constant pain and a slight addiction to the pain reliever Advil.  Either way-- the rolling bag sucks.

Being openly competitive:  First year is over striver.  Nothing is worse than showing up in an elective class to over hear first semester second years who didn't make law review trying to overcompensate by announcing they plan to  give  everyone in class the snow job.  Relax.  First of all, most of us are in these electives because we have had the professors before and they know us and we know them.  The whole reason we are there is because we have likely gotten a B from them   before and we are hoping to get another B because we have to take something else that is hard or not interesting.  No one is even slightly impressed with your bold faced ambition and unbeknown to you there are probably about 4 quiet guys sitting in the back of the class room who the rest of us know are on law review/are brilliant/etc.  so do not bother shooting your mouth off.  Instead, lose the attitude and just enjoy the class.  You're finally in a elective where you can study something interesting without worrying about how other people in class are doing, so do not ruin it for me.

Complain about people in law school:  OK, so I used to be as guilty of this as anyone, but that is sooo 2004 now.  Also, I would like to think that my general complaints were about law school in general and it's competitive nature.  Complaining about how it is like high school or how people gossip is about as bad as being the same way you were in high school or gossiping.  Get used to the fact that people are like this everywhere.  On top of the everything else, realize that you in fact are a law student.  There are many types of people in law school who do in fact suck but open your eyes and recognize there is a diverse crowd of people here (including you) and they do not all suck.

Tell me not to make fun of people on Law Review: Even though Matt, plus a few casual acquaintances are on law review, this does not take away my GOD GIVEN RIGHT to mock them.  I am not bitter that I didn't make it at this point, but keep in mind that making fun of law review is like making fun of rich people- it's perfectly OK.  Part of being rich/being on law review is that you have certain perks in life that everyone else doesn't have, thus you have to bear the barbs of those who don't have these perks.  Hopefully if you are on law review you are smart enough to understand how this isn't such a bad deal.  Fascist.

Give me a hard time because I did something other than study this weekend:  Yes, I realize we probably all have to spend a few weekends studying every once and a while-- and most likely should be doing more than that.  However, do not under any circumstances try to make me feel guilty for doing something fun.  Hopefully you have realized at this point that I handle my own affairs and I do not need you being a study snob to me because you do not have any friends and I decided I needed more than an 8 hour period off from reading.

Comments

[Matt]

Word.

[Fitz]

People on Law Review suck.

[Wendy]

Found some excerpts from a dated critique on law reviews for Fitz's amusement:

“Professors have alleged that student editors are incompetent to judge academic contributions to an ever-more-complex field, and often rely on irrelevant "secondary" criteria, such as the reputation and/or background of the author, the prestige of his or her institution, or the number of prominent names the author can drop in an "acknowledgements" footnote. They have asserted that students are inherently conservative (or, alternatively, faddish) in their publication choices, preferring the familiar to the truly original. They have alleged that students at elite law schools in particular are unduly biased in favor of faculty at their own institutions. They have expressed resentment at having more or less to beg the editors of higher-ranking reviews for "expedited reads" of an article after it has been accepted elsewhere; they have publicly chafed under the burden of the short deadlines imposed by the understandably-nervous editors of law reviews extending offers.
An increasing number of professors have also complained about student editing of articles after selection. They have expressed concern that their manuscripts are not just reviewed for oversights but are substantively rewritten, often by rule-obsessed editors having a less-than- perfect sense of either literary style or the legal subject at hand. They have voiced their frustration with having to watch out for and correct the factual and grammatical errors that are frequently (if innocently) imported into their texts in this process. They have taken offense at how some law review editors have treated them: they have variously called the attitudes and practices of student editors "infuriating," "officious," and arrogant, and some have called for the creation of formal codes of ethics to govern editor-author relationships no longer defined by student deference and respect.”
“The plethora of manuscripts, the amount of work consequently demanded of today's student editors and the virtually-complete independence of those editors from law faculty have together given rise to a fourth cause of contemporary law review criticism: doubts about the traditionally- assumed pedagogical value of law review service. Doubts about the educational benefits of law review have, however, also been raised by law students themselves. In 1988, a recently graduated Notes editor of the Georgetown Law Journal concluded that "the law review's academic and creative value is overstated. Many students leave law review with little more to show for their two-year membership than bluebook proficiency." In 1990, a disaffected senior articles editor from the Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics bemoaned a more general and even more pedagogically-awkward problem: "I've barely opened my casebooks because the journal takes too much time; I've skipped classes because the journal takes so much time." In other words, law review was actually interfering with this editor's education.”

[fitz]

Wendy, If you could find an article that portrays those who shop at the Spardellos clothing store in a negative light, then you'll pretty much sum up my feelings on people in general (present company excluded of course).

[Wendy]

Fitz- Found this on some talk radio sight. Although, it's not gramatically wonderful, it sheds light on your suspicions though it's regarding the owner and not the store's clientele:

May 29 Re: Rep.Coogan, hangin with the Gangsters. 5/27/03

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My goodness, Representative Coogan has allot of explaining to do. What in Holy God`s name is a member of the House doing, out on the town, with a multiple convicted felon? I went to RI COURTS.com. I checked on John Broccoli, the owner of Spardellos Clothiers. He has been convicted of many felonies! He was given a sentence of 40yrs to serve. Violent crime , Habitual criminal statue. How did he get out in 10 yrs???The record shows Judge Williams let Broccoli out in 96, WHY?? Maybe Judge Williams would like him to run the Traffic Court.. I guess in R.I. crime pays. We have a man in the Legislature who conducts himself in a manner NOT becoming his office. Hangs around with a multiple convicted felon. Are the people of R.I. really this blind? My best to you John, C. Cohen.

[J.P.]

There's a representative Coogan!!!??

[Fitz]

It doesn't express my extreme hatred for anyone who can watch one of those stupid commercials (4 foot fat guy in a 2000 dollar suit with 2 six foot models on his arm helping him take his jacket off before groping him while he plays pool....Arghhhh...I'm getting pissed off just thinking about it)and still shop at that store, but its gets to the source of the problem and highlights just what's wrong with society. I'm telling you, if I had any motivation at all, I could draft an essay that would convincingly blame that store for the downfall of all humanity.

[Matt]

You all think about law review too much.