https://www.overlawyered.com/2012/07/more-reactions-abolish-law-schools/ Chronicling the high cost of our legal system Sat, 14 Jul 2012 18:12:52 +0000 hourly 1 https://www.overlawyered.com/2012/07/more-reactions-abolish-law-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-168980 Sat, 14 Jul 2012 18:12:52 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=31212#comment-168980 Actually, we’ve done that comparison. While it varies a bit by firm, on average lawyers (or, at least, associates) who were on law review are NOT better attorneys than those that are not.

]]> https://www.overlawyered.com/2012/07/more-reactions-abolish-law-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-168166 Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:04:52 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=31212#comment-168166 John, I don’t now that being on law review is a benefit only out of continued ignorance. I don’t think hiring lawyers or judges would want to put a ton of emphasis on it. But, look, if you were to line up all of the lawyers who are on law review and those who were not, I think the ones on law review statistically are better lawyers. So it is some indication of a good student although I agree, it is hardly the be all end all.

]]> https://www.overlawyered.com/2012/07/more-reactions-abolish-law-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-168138 Tue, 10 Jul 2012 14:47:08 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=31212#comment-168138 I wanted to add one point that may have already been made in response to your article: by and large, the older partners and judges still believe that being on a law review signifies a high class rank. A few years back, one of my students did a poll to see who in the legal profession knows how law review memberships work these days. The older the lawyer or judge, the more inaccurate the response. So being on law review still confers something of a benefit to the students (i.e., a presumption of top class rank), if only because of continued ignorance.

]]>