Re: LL.M degree will not get you bar admission

More | Report Post

Finally someone admitted an accredited ABA JD degree
is a superior legal education to a degree from a
law school operated out of a guy's house !!

On 9/12/08, twallstbroker wrote:
> Enough about the "ABA JD" vs. "Distance Learning Degree" debate
>
> I'm tired reading the rants and tirades on both sides.
>
> Neither side will capitulate....that's a given truth.
>
> The "ABA JD" route is not the only route to a career in the field of law. It doesn't matter what
> the "superior" degree is educationally or if some dimwit wants to have a useless debate on TV on the
> merits of what a purported legal education should be. It only matters what the State Committee of Bar
> Examiners allows in the State of California. They set the educational requirements ......PERIOD.
>
> If an ABA JD graduate is jealous that a person with can further themselves with an either an online,
> distance learning or correspondence degree in law, then so be it. Let them eat cake! It isn't even
> worth debating what a 3rd person "feels" or "wants". Those are phantom issues. The State of California
> has approved distance learning and that is the end of the argument....PERIOD.
>
> P.S. If you don't believe me...go to the State Bar website & see 14 different online registered schools
> authorized to provide legal education in the State of CA.
>
> I make no comparisons on the quality of an ABA vs. Distance learning degree. There is no debate. Anyone
> that possibly could choose & attend an ABA school should go there. An ABA JD is a more sound investment
> and will no doubt provide a better legal education than distance learning (as it should be).....PERIOD.
>
> P.S. You have to get something for dropping six figures on it!
>
> However, that is not an option for all students of law & nor should there be a monopoly to discourage
> otherwise. If a person decides to pursue an available, cost-efficient, legal method to enter & practice
> the field of law than so be it.....PERIOD.
>
> Let's move on to bigger and better issues
>
> Non-ABA JD Graduate
> twallstbroker
>
> (FYLSE passed 1st attempt, MPRE passed 1st attempt, Bar Candidate 09)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9/12/08, Go ABA Go wrote:
>> Depends on that ABA school you go to.
>>
>> ABA is still by far the superior way
>> to go. Regionally accredited, ABA accredited,
>> accepted as gold standard in all 50 states.
>>
>> You can go to medical school in carribean
>> or some run down school in 3rd world country
>> or you can go to U.S. medical school which
>> is gold standard.
>>
>> Sorry I support the gold standard.....cant
>> go wrong accepted everywhere.
>>
>> On 9/12/08, Crown Prince wrote:
>>> That depends. If you have no wife/husband or kids, live close to an ABA law school, and like to
>>> be in six figure debt by the time you graduate, go for it.
>>>
>>> For other intelligent people, CA DL law schools are an option.
>>>
>>> Take it from someone who spent six weeks at a tier 3 ABA---they are not all they cracked up to be.
>>> My crim law professor opined about how serial rapists should not be put to death. I disagreed, and
>>> didn't want to listen to that hogwash. You can have the ABA and their professors, who according to
>>> www.lawschool.com, support Obama 20 to 1. I am not in a race to be a community organizer. Thanks
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>>
>>> Crown Prince
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/12/08, GO ABA GO wrote:
>>>> There are a number of ABA law schools
>>>> with part time evening programs.
>>>>
>>>> ABA is best choice, the degree is regionally accredited
>>>> in most cases, and it is ABA accredited J.D. therefore can be
>>>> use automatically in all 50 states.
>>>>
>>>> Some California ABA part time programs are priced reasonable.
>>>>
>>>> On 9/12/08, Crown Prince wrote:
>>>>> Your key words being "probably" and "appears." The only way to know is to write and ask the bar.
>>>>>
>>>>> Truthfully, its better and cheaper to just take the CA DL route at West Coast or Concord or
>>>>> anywhere else, depending on what you want and what you can afford. However, to each their own, I
>>>>> always say.
>>>>>
>>>>> Crown Prince
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/11/08, steve wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Crown Prince,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If one has an advanced graduate route UK LLB, the CA Bar will probably require the candidate
>>>>>> to study at an ABA or CA accredited law school for two years in order to qualify for the CA
>>>>>> bar exam.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/05/08, Crown Prince wrote:
>>>>>>> Well said. There is no "easy" way. There is only one loophole that will allow you to finish
>>>>>>> faster than the four year correspondence law route in California (3, if timed correctly).
>>>>>>> Though I have certainly not seen anyone do this, from the California rules it appears that
>>>>>>> you can get an LLB from London External under the advanced graduate route. The LLB will then
>>>>>>> take you two years. You can then get an LLM from St. Thomas or another school which offers
>>>>>> an
>>>>>>> ABA LLM. Anything short of this will not work. In fact, I am not even sure it will work. I
>>>>>> do
>>>>>>> not reccomend this for a few reasons. First of all, the external LLB does not cover all of
>>>>>>> the California subjects. Second, I don't know anyone who has done this. Maybe I am wrong in
>>>>>>> my idea, and welcome someone to tell me I am wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree with the previous poster that unless he/she/whatever they are can produce a written,
>>>>>>> signed document from someone of authority at the D.C. bar, then this is really all just
>>>>>>> wasted time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no easy way to become a lawyer. There are non-traditional ways, but no easy ways.
>>>>>>> Take it from someone who has faced an uphill battle: it is very possible to become a lawyer,
>>>>>>> but it is no easy feat (I am saying that, and I am only halfway there).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If something seems too good to be true...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Crown Prince
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/05/08, -- wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 9/05/08, steve wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The followings were the question I asked DC and the response I got:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Non-ABA-approved law school J.D. + 26 semester hours in tested subjects from
>>>>>>>>> ABA-approved law school
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To Whom It May Concern:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I understand that the above combination can qualify one to sit for the DC Bar. And
>>>>>>>>> under Rule 46 (b) (8) (iii), it seems like the tax law subjects are now qualify.
>>>>>>>>> So let's say I have a J.D. from a non-ABA law school. And if I complete a ABA-approved
>>>>>>>>> LL.M. in taxation and only with 26 units of tax classes, can I qualify to sit for the DC
>>>>>>>>> Bar?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No. You need to have 26 semester hours in tested subjects as provided for by our
>>>>>>>>> Rules. While a basic tax course will likely be accepted, the bar examination does not
>>>>>>>>> test on advanced tax matters. You need to have a combination of subjects that are
>>>>>>>>> tested in the examination.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The DC 26 credit policy exception is primarily aimed at ABA students that completed their
>>>>>>>> first year then dropped out. It is a very generous second chance for them to finish at a
>>>>>>>> non-ABA school and sit for the bar in DC. Unfortunately, awhile back a few misguided
>>>>>>>> posters on this board tried to turn it into a loop-hole for DL graduates. It is exactly
>>>>>>>> what the response says it is. Thank you for writing the DC bar and sharing the above
>>>>>>>> response.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Like it or not -- except for CA there is no way around an ABA JD for first time bar exam
>>>>>>>> applicants.