Meathook Reality

Ok, I’m going to give in and talk about Mrs. Shiavo. She has appeared in our Con. Law class, and even in our Civil Procedure class. There’s nothing like hurrying to school and hearing a soundbite of your Constitutional Law professor on the radio. I suppose it is unlikely that we’ll discuss her in Contracts or Property.

Anyway, for those of you who’ve been hiding under a rock for the last month or so, I suggest you read Obsidian Wings’s writeup which goes into some pretty good detail. Actually, it is suggested reading in general.

I personally feel that the constitutional law issues are pretty well settled: people have a right to determine their own medical treatment, and if Terry’s choice was not to be kept alive artificially while in a persistent vegetative state, then who am I, or anyone else, to meddle. It appears that the state-level legal issues are relatively straightforward as well: the husband went to the courts seeking an order and presented evidence that this was Terry’s wish. Her parents disagreed. The court sided with her husband, and even after all the appeals and threats, that’s the way it stands.

Procedure-wise, here’s a great article. It discusses what went wrong at the end, and what possibly could’ve been done to take advantage of the ridiculous last-minute day in federal court that the family was granted. I’m not sure if would’ve helped in the end, however.

Last semester, while I was far from confident, I felt as though I had at least a little bit of a handle on things. Sure, I hated Civ Pro. and was confused about exactly where Crim. Law was going to end up, but I had some outlines, and I could at least explain what was going on.

This semester? Not so much. I feel that like my professor, I could blather for hours about the finer points of Constitutional Law – so I certainly hope that’s what we’re going to have for the exam. Contracts last semester was all about consideration: spotting it and knocking it down (even if the test turned out to be all about remedies). This semester we’ve got all kinds of interpretation, parol evidence rule, miscommunication, unilateral, and other exciting things. It doesn’t really seem to have gelled as well. Property? This is the one that currently makes a lot of sense to me, but I’ve heard that the professor writes tests guarenteed to leave you breathlessly wondering who let that LSD-crazed moose into the room and where your pants went in the meantime.

Anyway. The books call. And I’ve still got no summer job, so I’m not sure how the rent will get paid.

For various reasons, I’m actually spending a bit of time on window-dressing around here. I borrowed a little CSS-enabled index.php and it’s associated scheme, and I’m working it up a little.

I’m going to just say no.

I’ll be the first to admit that I’m not a lawyer. I won’t even be 1/3 of a lawyer by the time summer rolls around. But I’m not going to work for free for anyone who is making money. I’ll consider doing nonprofit charity work. I can understand that some of the public interest jobs are uncompensated.

But law firms make money. Companies make money. If I’m going to be giving them some time, I’m going to need some compensation. Even the students in my class who didn’t quit $70k/year jobs in order to go to law school have at least an undergraduate degree, and can provide at least some useful function.

First, I’m not technically Generation Y. They tend to be defined by having their first game console system be a Nintendo. Mine was an Atari. I’m right between X and Y.

Anyway, it appears that BIGLAW is complaining that they are no longer getting associates willing to give up their lives for the firm:

http://biz.yahoo.com/law/050302/56638ee5cf6eae0ec228a15610e3da6a_1.html

Attorneys from Generation Y – those born in 1978 or later – are plenty smart and generally well educated, say firm leaders and industry experts. But these young attorneys also are lacking in loyalty, initiative and energy, so the criticism goes.

I especially like the closing line:

In addition, the group has a greater degree of cynicism than in generations past, she said, stemming from the dot-com failure and 9/11 terrorist attacks. The result is diminished long-term loyalty to their employers.

“They’re saying, ‘I’ve looked at the world and there’s no such thing as job security,’” she said.

Guess what, kids, there really has never been job security, and while the dotcom failure should’ve told you that, 9/11 has absolutely nothing to do with it. It was in your contract all along.

Not sure what it means, but I might as well.