Your Paralegal Has a Better Job than You Do

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 20:41:49 GMT

Sounds strange, but it’s true, according a new comprehensive ranking of jobs by JobsRated.com. Five different criteria were used in the rankings: Stress Work Environment Physical Demands Income Outlook Although lawyers made more money than paralegals, other job factors brought lawyers way down on the list. Debra Cassens Weiss of the ABA Journal explains, Lawyers and stockbrokers, ranked 84th, both did poorly, and the [...]

Sounds strange, but it’s true, according a new comprehensive ranking of jobs by JobsRated.com.

Five different criteria were used in the rankings:

Stress
Work Environment
Physical Demands
Income
Outlook

Although lawyers made more money than paralegals, other job factors brought lawyers way down on the list.

Debra Cassens Weiss of the ABA Journal explains,

Lawyers and stockbrokers, ranked 84th, both did poorly, and the reason is stress, the editors say. “Attorneys and stockbrokers may earn considerably more than bookbinders or telephone repair technicians [ranked 83rd and 81st respectively], but these high-powered careers are hurt by anxiety, as both rank among the 20 most stressful jobs on our list.”

So once you’ve finally paid off your law school debts, you might want to start searching for a new job - as a paralegal.

The “Art” of the Cross-Examination

Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:03:06 GMT

Peter Small of The Star has a great article today on cross-examinations. He interviews several lawyers for tips that can be useful for any aspiring litigator. He also provides these 10 tips by Irving Younger: 10 COMMANDMENTS OF THE CROSS Be brief. Use short questions, plain words. Always ask leading questions. Don’t ask a question to which you do not know [...]

Peter Small of The Star has a great article today on cross-examinations. He interviews several lawyers for tips that can be useful for any aspiring litigator.

He also provides these 10 tips by Irving Younger:

10 COMMANDMENTS OF THE CROSS

Be brief.
Use short questions, plain words.
Always ask leading questions.
Don’t ask a question to which you do not know the answer.
Listen to the witness’s answers.
Don’t quarrel with the witness.
Don’t allow the witness to repeat his or her direct testimony.
Don’t permit the witness to explain his or her answers.
Don’t ask the “one question too many.”
Save the ultimate point of your cross for summation.

10 Things You Won’t Learn in Law School

Sat, 27 Dec 2008 04:24:53 GMT

Gideon at a public defender, a popular Connecticut criminal law blog, told me recently, Whatever your professor tells you, do the opposite. I thought the statement was slightly extreme, but I did ask him what the best way to learn was and he said, “through osmosis.” I did find this post he pointed me to somewhat interesting: Look, [...]

Gideon at a public defender, a popular Connecticut criminal law blog, told me recently,

Whatever your professor tells you, do the opposite.

I thought the statement was slightly extreme, but I did ask him what the best way to learn was and he said, “through osmosis.” I did find this post he pointed me to somewhat interesting:

Look, law school taught me a fair bit. I won’t lie. It taught me that even grown-ups can get drunk and get in fights at local bars. It taught me that my fellow lawyer isn’t much smarter than me and will one day become really famous. It taught me that you can fake your way through almost anything.

But here are ten things it didn’t teach me:

Nobody ever uses the phrase “black letter law“. Seriously. Lawyers who do use the phrase “black letter law” are usually laughed at by cliques of other lawyers. This is an invention of professors, I’m sure, meant to intimidate and harass poor first year students. Black letter law? Is that some Rules of Court book?
That you will forever be haunted by names of cases, but not remember a damn thing about the case itself. Who here can tell me about Helicopteros or International Shoe or Pennoyer or Dudley and Stephens? (Okay, that last one is really cool - it’s about cannibalism). Wasn’t there a Vana White case?
How to pick a jury.
There is no box. Law school professors keep telling you to think outside the box. What they don’t tell you is that there is no box.
That law review leads to document review. If you want to do real work, take a clinic or something.
Your clients will hate you. They will think they are smarter than you. They will try to tell you what to do.
How to deal with #6 above.
Most judges haven’t practiced in a while, so forgive them if they make stuff up as they go along.
Caselaw and precedent may or may not mean much until you get to an appellate court. And even then…
Finally, no matter how long you practice or what you do, there will always be more to learn and ways to better yourself.

Mitch Kowalski, Man to Watch in Tough Legal Times

Wed, 24 Dec 2008 01:37:52 GMT

Last week I met with Mitch Kowalski of the Legal Post. He mentioned our conversation earlier today on the site, which is the kick in the butt I needed to do my own write-up on it during our break from school. Mitch is an alumn from my school, Western Law, but has chosen a career path [...]

Mitch is an alumn from my school, Western Law, but has chosen a career path unique from most. After practicing for many years on Bay St. he decided to open a writing center, first at Yorkville, and then moving to a more central location on Bloor West.

And just like those television infomercials, Mitch not only runs the place, but he’s a client too.

Mitch’s column on the Legal Post (RSS) has become a popular one among many lawyers and law students wary of these tough economic times.

Mitch forecasts that current graduates (2009) will probably have it the worst because nobody really knows what to expect. Canadian law school grads might just be fighting for shifts at Tim Horton’s for a few years. They should probably be looking at other careers such as NGOs or trying their hands at magic. In any case, it’s probably still better than doing porn.

Major law firms continue to be in denial in a scenario scarier than Halloween. Most of these firms have come into existence well after the Great Depression, and their size has never been tested by a serious and prolonged recession.

The problem is that lawyers don’t have a lot of work during a recession.

Some of the potential growth areas such as labour and employment, IP, and even bankruptcy and insolvency, won’t make up for shortages in major corporate work that employs massive numbers of lawyers within the major firms.

With every economic threat there are also opportunities, and Mitch thinks this is an opportunity to transform the legal profession. The very nature of law firms may change, with some even incorporating other professionals like accountants into their partnership structure, and others even going public.

Cost-saving may force firms to look overseas, instead of using inexpensive articling students (who get paid just over twice minimum wage in some firms when salary/hours is calculated).

The days of sending armies of students to the law library to photocopy into the wee hours of the morning may be ending, because these students still cost too much resources for their office space, workstations and training. Overhead from downtown rent continues to be one of the major costs after salaries in most large law firms. Associate turnover due to burnout and mismanagement is completely ignored and accepted as the price of doing business.

The billable hour also attracts considerable wrath from Mitch’s scrutiny.

Naysayers might shun worrying over the ’sky is falling’ rhetoric. New grads might feel like they’ve been slipped a mickey by the legal industry. But those who want it raw and are entering the brave new economic world willing to turn to the blogs for advice, Mitch’s column is a good place to start for a translation of things to come.

The Legal Post is also up for an ABA Award, and you can vote for them here to help make Canadian blogs a prominent landmark in the legal blogosphere.

Cross-posted to Slaw

US Lawyers Predict the Future, in a Recession

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:18:40 GMT

We previously mentioned the ABA survey on the economy. Well here are the results from the almost 1,500 lawyers who responded.

We previously mentioned the ABA survey on the economy.

Well here are the results from the almost 1,500 lawyers who responded.

Tip: Don’t Use Fake Degree to Apply to Law School

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 14:20:22 GMT

Okay all you eager undergrads who read our site faithfully, here is the best tip we could ever give you regarding your law school applications. Do not, under any circumstances, try to use a fake degree to apply to law school. Chances are it will catch up with you eventually. Quami Frederick made it all the way [...]

Okay all you eager undergrads who read our site faithfully, here is the best tip we could ever give you regarding your law school applications.

Do not, under any circumstances, try to use a fake degree to apply to law school. Chances are it will catch up with you eventually.

Quami Frederick made it all the way to her third year in Osgoode Hall before the Toronto Star found her out. She was even scheduled to article at Wilboer Dellelcce next year, the firm that has no billable hours, their own building, and a gym inside the office.

She had applied to Osgoode with a B.Sc. in Business Administration from St. George’s University in Grenada. The university exists, her degree does not.

She was one of the 290 students accepted from the 2,500 that applied that year. But when your degree is fake, grade inflation probably isn’t a major issue.

Fredrick is one of many people The Star uncovered as using a degree from a diploma mill, where a fake degree is forged from a real university, or an entirely fake university is created. (No Steyn, that’s not an option for you either)

Chances are Fredrick won’t be able to finish her law degree this year given her admission was premised on a false academic background. She also probably fails to meet the values expressed on her firm’s website,

Our firm’s greatest strengths are its people and the environment of care and mutual respect that they have created for one another. It goes without saying that to be a success in the Bay Street legal world, you must possess intelligence, integrity, dedication, some common sense and you must work very hard.

The upside is that Wilboer Dellelcce probably has an opening right now if you’re your third year and looking for a place to article in Toronto. Try contacting Kevin Fritz at 416 361 2933 or James Brown at 416 361 2934.

Sleep Your Way Through Law School

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 03:11:41 GMT

From the people who brought you Speed Read Your Way Through Law School, we bring you - nap time. A new study found that napping boosts sophisticated memory. It also helps you to see the big picture. These 10 Tips can help you sleep better. They recommend more eating, doing your work in your sleep, and “lucid” [...]

From the people who brought you Speed Read Your Way Through Law School, we bring you - nap time.

A new study found that napping boosts sophisticated memory. It also helps you to see the big picture.

These 10 Tips can help you sleep better. They recommend more eating, doing your work in your sleep, and “lucid” dreams (smile). Hey, law school wouldn’t be so bad like this:

10. Reduce Screen Time Before Bed

9. Exercise to Enhance Sleep

8. Eat to Enhance Sleep

7. Master the Power Nap6. Avoid the Soul-Shattering Alarm Buzzer

5. Solve Problems in Your Sleep

4. Beat Insomnia with Visualization

3. Shortcut a Long Nap with the Clattering Spoon

2. Take a Caffeine Power Nap

1. Teach Yourself to Lucid Dream

Before you get too concerned, keep in mind that nap rooms in law firms have been discussed before.

Though there are probably too many lucid thoughts running around law firms as it is, without the installation of places to “sleep.”

h/t Martha Sperry of Advantage Advocates in Boston

Med Students Think They’re Isolated? Hah, Pansies!

Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:26:33 GMT

A study a couple months ago indicated that medical students are socially segregated from each other. The reasons included: High workloads school located outside the main campus High numbers of contact hours, outside the university This seems to indicate that contact, inside the university, would alleviate the problem. They should learn a lesson from law student and quickly discover otherwise. The [...]

A study a couple months ago indicated that medical students are socially segregated from each other.

The reasons included:

High workloads
school located outside the main campus
High numbers of contact hours, outside the university

This seems to indicate that contact, inside the university, would alleviate the problem. They should learn a lesson from law student and quickly discover otherwise.

The drawbacks of this supposed isolation included:

Being a member of a cohesive in-group can increase an individuals feelings of self-worth and lead to perceived superiority over, and prejudice and discrimination towards, members of out-groups
It lessens integration with clients, who come from a broad section of society
They usually have to work within other professionals
Communication is an important skill for dealing with members of the out-group

The sense of superiority in law often leads to a self-selection of dealing with certain members of society, which is probably why pro bono goes the wayside far too quickly.

The CBC reported recently that we should improve medical students’ learning environment by providing sleep breaks. Well, law firms already encountered and overcome that hurdle.

As for working with others and communication, well, all of that is overrated by too many law firms.

Remember this?

Experienced lawyers work with clients. Young lawyers work with paper. You like working with paper, right?

Professional Conduct and Free Speech concerns

Fri, 05 Dec 2008 16:07:56 GMT

One of my strongest memories of my entering canada were that the moment I switched on the TV, I saw an advertisement of a personal injury law firm. A few minutes after that I saw the advertisement of a firm specialising in family law and divorce. Needless to say I was amused. But on a more [...]

But on a more serious note, I started pondering as to the present state of the common law practice of being a lawyer. There used to be a time when lawyers were considered as professionals at par with doctors. This included the fact that lawyers (barristers and solicitors) could not advertise in public fora and at all times were to remain as ‘gentlemen and officers of the court’. The reasons given for this rule were the nobility of the legal profession and the fact that the power that a lawyer can give to his client, and conversely take away from a person who is not represented, is enormous. As a display of ethics, lawyers were not to be driven by concerns for money but by the manner in which they treated their clients and conduct in the courtroom. In time, this ban was lifted in England for solicitors but Barristers were still strictly bound by it. Such practice extends to other common law jurisdictions like India where even today law firms and lawyers are not allowed to advertise publicly. The rules even state that a lawyer in India cannot give his visiting card away without someone asking for it.

For all concerns of free speech and that the right to advertising is a part of free speech, there is still a plausible case as to why law firms should atleast maintain a strict protocol as to the manner of their advertising. The starting point of this analysis would be a suit brought somewhere in the US by a wife stating that the lawfirm’s advertising was responsible for the fact that her husband now wants to divorce her. The facts that I am somewhat aware of are that after strenously advertising in the television, the firm hired a marriage counsellor for the husband at its expense to tell him that his marriage wasn’t working and that he should divorce. Ridiculous as it may sound, it is true. This has later been dramatised in an episode in the TV show Boston Legal.

But let us fathom as to what we get out of this case. If we acknowledge that a lawyer has a great ability to influence his client, can the nobility of the legal profession and ethical concerns be downplayed by the idea of free speech? Is there still a belief in the nobility of the legal profession ? Gone are the days when barristers in common law countries would wear wigs and Queens Counsel would be appointed with special robes given to them. But splitting for common law practice in that manner cannot justify the manner in which advertising is taken up in Canada and the US. What happens when officers of the court and players in the justice system overtly employ tactics to destroy the institution of marriage, when personal injury lawyers are available at the dial of a single number displayed on TV to reduce the defendant, who may even be your relative to penury?

With this single instance in mind, I do not advocate for a ban in advertising but surely believe in the fact that some standards must exist to do so.I personally believe in the integrity and dignity attached to the legal profession and that such actions destroy it.

what I have written above is with a background of the Common law tradition of being a lawyer and not with any Ontario or Canadian legal provision in mind. If there do exists any standards to that effect, I’d be glad to know.

Cross posted from The Social Blog .

10 Things You Shouldn’t Put in an E-mail

Wed, 03 Dec 2008 01:28:09 GMT

Roger Mathus of Death by Email quotes Elizabeth Charnock, CEO of Cataphora on 10 things you should probably never write in an e-mail: “I could get into trouble for telling you this, but…” “Delete this email immediately.” “I really shouldn’t put this in writing.” “Don’t tell So-and-So.” Or, “Don’t send this to So-and-So.” “She/He/They will never find out.” “We’re going to [...]

Roger Mathus of Death by Email quotes Elizabeth Charnock, CEO of Cataphora on 10 things you should probably never write in an e-mail:

“I could get into trouble for telling you this, but…”
“Delete this email immediately.”
“I really shouldn’t put this in writing.”
“Don’t tell So-and-So.” Or, “Don’t send this to So-and-So.”
“She/He/They will never find out.”
“We’re going to do this differently than normal.”
“I don’t think I am supposed to know this, but…”
“I don’t want to discuss this in e-mail. Please give me a call.”
“Don’t ask. You don’t want to know.”
“Is this actually legal?”

He suggests that if you find yourself writing this, you probably shouldn’t do it to begin with.

h/t to Anne Reed, who adds “do not forward,” Walter Olson, and Pete Warden.

7 Ways To Lose An Argument Before It’s Started

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:51:31 GMT

Jonathan Fields provides 7 things you don’t want to do if you want to win an argument. For most advocates, that’s usually an important thing: Don’t Attack Don’t fail to acknowledge and validate another person’s right to believe what they believe Don’t fail to anticipate and address objections Don’t skip building rapport, trust, credibility Don’t forget to to adequate research Don’t [...]

Jonathan Fields provides 7 things you don’t want to do if you want to win an argument. For most advocates, that’s usually an important thing:

Don’t Attack
Don’t fail to acknowledge and validate another person’s right to believe what they believe
Don’t fail to anticipate and address objections
Don’t skip building rapport, trust, credibility
Don’t forget to to adequate research
Don’t shut yourself down to being persuaded yourself
Don’t say don’t

Life Beyond OCI - Not the Only Option

Sun, 16 Nov 2008 03:09:20 GMT

On Nov. 14, the Career Services office at UWO Law held a session On Campus Interviews - Not the Only Option. Some of our contributors attended and provided their notes from the event below. There are some general concerns about the economic climate, which has translated into a job shortage in some sectors. But generally Western students [...]

On Nov. 14, the Career Services office at UWO Law held a session On Campus Interviews - Not the Only Option.

Some of our contributors attended and provided their notes from the event below.

There are some general concerns about the economic climate, which has translated into a job shortage in some sectors. But generally Western students performed well in job searches, better especially in comparison to other law schools, despite what some law school rankings might say.

Students should not panic if they did not get a summer job for second year through the OCI process. There are about 300 other law firms they can apply to. It’s also an opportunity to do some self-reflection and career planning, to be sure you know where you want to go in law.

Students can seek out options to improve their candidacy. They can build their resume, or try to improve their grades. They can network at free events, or even with upper year students.

Areas of self-reflection include what went right, but also where they can improve. Students should ask themselves what do they want in life, and if their career aspirations are realistic.

Things to consider include the location of a firm, its size, practice areas, lifestyle and work environment. There are lots of options for barristers in smaller towns.

Alternative ways to find jobs include looking for job postings, mail outs and cold calling, and networking generally.

Potential employers they may not have considered are other firms, large and small; government, such as the Department of Justice (DoJ) and Ministry of the Attorney General (MAG); businesses and corporations; non-profit organizations like Legal Aid Ontario and NGOs like PSLawNet; and educational institutions or universities.

The articling and clerking recuitment deadlines are slightly different and should be kept in mind. Clerking deadlines are in December/january, and articling deadlines are May/July.

Resume building can be accomplished through volunteering, clinics, publications, internships and exchanges, clubs, extra-curricular activities, and advocacy competitions.

Some final words of advice were to stay positive, be proactive, and think outside of the box.

Meeting the Man Behind “Lawyers are Rats”

Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:09:40 GMT

After gaining a hard-earned acceptance to law school, there’s nothing like walking into your first day and having your future existence branded as being on a par with that of malign, dirty rodents. Last summer, negative public perceptions of the legal profession were amplified by the release of the book Lawyers Gone Bad: Sex, Money and [...]

After gaining a hard-earned acceptance to law school, there’s nothing like walking into your first day and having your future existence branded as being on a par with that of malign, dirty rodents.

Last summer, negative public perceptions of the legal profession were amplified by the release of the book Lawyers Gone Bad: Sex, Money and Madness in Canada’s Legal Profession and its accompanying Maclean’s article Lawyers Are Rats. Students at the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Law invited the lawyer credited for these works — retired law professor and ex-Bay Street partner Philip Slayton.

Mr. Slayton’s preamble to the talk, akin to the statement on the first page of his book, was that he did not believe that his book’s contents are representative of the legal profession. Instead, his compilation was meant to be an “intriguing and interesting collection of stories about human folly”, about lawyers in the face of moral quandaries.

But no page in his book unnerved members of the legal world more than his interview with Maclean’s magazine. Having arrived at newsstands with its sensational blanket title, the article roused an outraged Canadian legal community. While Mr. Slayton denied responsibility for the title, he admitted to being satisfied with it — “who’s actually going read an article with a title ‘A Small, Minute Subset of Lawyers Are Rats’?”.

The article has been since criticized by the Canadian Bar Association:

By cherry-picking the worst cases of lawyer misconduct, the article has tarnished the reputation of thousands of professionals who are honest, hard-working, and community-minded people.

Former CBA President J. Parker MacCarthy, Q.C. underscored what is of focal concern:

The unspoken assumption that lies behind the cover and article: that you can say anything you want about lawyers — no matter how unfair, cruel, or false — and you’ll be rewarded… Lawyers are one of the last groups in this country that people feel they can publicly insult with impunity.

The Breeding Ground?
Past the barrage of criticisms, Mr. Slayton emphasized three problems inherent in the Canadian legal profession which underlie the occasional “human follies” of some lawyers:

The duality of student opinion at the talk mirrored the Slayton-CBA tension: a fair number responded to his views with much concurrence — self-identified closeted law students (you know, the ones who have become too ashamed to own up to their legal affiliation in front the rest of the world) expressed concern that Lawyers are Rats would be a self-fulfilling career prophecy for most of their peers, if not for themselves.

The others, like many in the legal community, recognized that while Mr. Slayton’s message was important and warranted attention, his medium was borderline reprehensible. And no one’s giving him a run for his money - no one ever writes about lawyers gone good.

- - -
The Slayton Talk was part of a Speaker Series held by Ottawa Law Students Aren’t Rats (OLSAR), a UofO-based community service organization created to reverse the perception of lawyers which Slayton’s book and article have left in the public eye.

Great Reasons Why Every Law Student Should Blog

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 04:21:10 GMT

To follow-up on our previous post about the benefits of legal writing - and blogging in particular - I found this rather timely post over at The Frugal Law Student. Brett McKay writes: Blogging has definitely helped my legal writing. When you write for a blog, your audience consists of internet users who have the attention span [...]

To follow-up on our previous post about the benefits of legal writing - and blogging in particular - I found this rather timely post over at The Frugal Law Student.

Brett McKay writes:

Blogging has definitely helped my legal writing. When you write for a blog, your audience consists of internet users who have the attention span of a gnat. You have to capture their attention and maintain it through good solid writing. When you write on a blog, you want to use short sentences and paragraphs; you want to tell a story that draws people in; and you want organize your writing with headings that make it easier for the reader follow.

Do these tips sound familiar? It’s the exact same thing you’re supposed to do in legal writing! By blogging consistently, you can improve your legal writing immensely.

Obama Win might be a Boon for Law Firms

Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:56:41 GMT

Carolyn Elefant thinks that some law firms are going to see a major increase in business as a result of this week’s election. Obama is expected to increase regulation in a number of areas, including health and banking, and might provide incentives for green technologies. Larry Bodine and Zack Needles identify several of growth: regulatory law and enforcement [...]

Carolyn Elefant thinks that some law firms are going to see a major increase in business as a result of this week’s election.

Obama is expected to increase regulation in a number of areas, including health and banking, and might provide incentives for green technologies.

Larry Bodine and Zack Needles identify several of growth:

regulatory law and enforcement work
litigation,
“green” law
real estate
labour law
bankruptcy
government contracts

Lawyers with expertise in these areas can expect an increase in work.

Economic Downturns Might Mean Less Summer Hires

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 00:02:23 GMT

Here’s a tip today for OCIs (on campus interviews) from Dan Slater of WSJ Law Blog. If a firm offers you a position, take it up ASAP. There might not be many to go around. Susan Guindi, assistant dean for career services at Michigan law, said, When firms came out here to recruit, most of [...]

Here’s a tip today for OCIs (on campus interviews) from Dan Slater of WSJ Law Blog. If a firm offers you a position, take it up ASAP. There might not be many to go around.

Susan Guindi, assistant dean for career services at Michigan law, said,

When firms came out here to recruit, most of them predicted similar size summer programs as last year. No one was looking at really reducing by any big number. But then of course the bottom dropped several weeks after, so to some extent there’s a wait-and-see going on. We won’t see the full effects until later in the fall.

Career services at Michigan have sent letters to their students, strongly advising them to accept offers immediately. Few people have had had offers rescinded, but it can happen.

There’s no reason to expect that similar economic fears in Canada could have Canadian law firms downsizing too, even if we are doing better than the U.S.

Ontario students might have it the worst. Most current 2Ls graduated from the double-cohort in high school, which doubled the number of university applicants. Presumably this affected law school admissions, and competitiveness within law schools, but no figures on this have been provided.

Jobs for Law Grads

Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:35:32 GMT

US law students are worried about jobs after the best job market in 20 years starts heading down. Should we be too?

And the Layoffs Continue…

Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:39:13 GMT

Jules Melnitzer comments on the Legal Post on the mass firings of lawyers in the U.S. Will it come to Canada if our economy goes their way too?

Jules Melnitzer comments on the Legal Post on the mass firings of lawyers in the U.S.

Will it come to Canada if our economy goes their way too?

Osgoode Looking to Undergo Makeover

Fri, 17 Oct 2008 06:00:33 GMT

“I was practically embarrassed to see such a horrible looking building,” [business leader and philanthropist, Ignat Kaneff, said] of his visit to the school where his daughter, Kristina, is a student. “It was awful.” Many who know Osgoode Hall law school would echo this sentiment. Indeed, my anonymous friend at the school [...]

“I was practically embarrassed to see such a horrible looking building,” [business leader and philanthropist, Ignat Kaneff, said] of his visit to the school where his daughter, Kristina, is a student. “It was awful.”

Many who know Osgoode Hall law school would echo this sentiment. Indeed, my anonymous friend at the school had this to say about the building: “like a bunker, but with fewer windows.”

Even the school’s website sports few photos of the building, probably for this very reason.

However, Osgoode’s Advancement Office has embarked on a campaign to remedy the situation.

The Building Osgoode campaign is trying to raise $25 million to add an impressive new wing to the law school. The wing will include a rare books library, a lounge, and a new cafeteria. All of this will be centered around an expansive glass atrium.

According to the campaign’s website,

The Building Osgoode Campaign, however, is not strictly about bricks and mortar. It is about creating a centre for legal education that will equip young lawyers to face the challenge of constant change in the years ahead. Today’s law graduates must be able to navigate a legal system that is ever shifting, increasingly global in nature, and continually giving rise to new ethical and professional questions. Imparting this knowledge takes more than outstanding faculty, it requires physical facilities that match the ambition of the education provided. The Building Osgoode Campaign will give us the tools we need to fully engage a demanding future.

I got in touch with Anita Herrmann, Osgoode’s Office of Advancement Director. Ms. Hermann’s office is in charge of the Building Osgoode campaign. She explains:

We’re in the final planning stages so I can’t offer any specifics on what will happen, but I can say that it will be a spectacular transformation that will focus on student space and improving the student experience. We are planning to break ground next May.

Ignatt Kaneff has generously donated $2.5 million towards the project. Other notable donors include Canada Law Book, Goodmans LLP, and Ogilvy Renault.

Construction is expected to take two years to complete.

Rae: Canada Has Its Own Voice on the International Scene

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:34:15 GMT

Hon. Bob Rae spoke this morning at the University of Western Ontario Law School on A Changing World: New Directions for Canadian Foreign Policy. What follows are notes (not a transcript) from his talk. Law Students and Public Policy Rae said that Canadian foreign policy as an issue that is a significant one in the politics of [...]

Hon. Bob Rae spoke this morning at the University of Western Ontario Law School on A Changing World: New Directions for Canadian Foreign Policy. What follows are notes (not a transcript) from his talk.

Law Students and Public Policy

Rae said that Canadian foreign policy as an issue that is a significant one in the politics of the country. As soon to be lawyers, the issue of Canada’s role in the world is a critical concern to all of us, and one that has tremendous opportunities as law students.

There is no clearer area of public policy where the ideological contrast between parties can be demonstrated. Western has produced some of the great legal minds of our time. Justice Rand, a former Dean of the school, made considerable contributions to the foreign policy of this country.

What is Canada’s Role?

Rae asked whether Is Canada’s role in the world is to essentially ally itself with the U.S. in terms of American foreign policy and position in the world. Or is Canada’s voice in the world one of greater independence - one in which we look to Canada’ expressing strong support for multilateralism, international law, and support for multilateral institutions in relation to trade relationships.

It seems over the past 50 years there has been an implicit debate in the country over these issues, and that Harper has now made this debate explicit. His view in the world is quite simple: Canada is a country whose values and interests are tied up with the U.S., who is our most important trade partner. Our primary role is therefore to be an ally and supporter of the U.S. Other areas of foreign policy are all subordinate to that. That is the key relationship, the driving force between Canada’s role in the world.

This is a view that puts a great deal of emphasis on military power, and expects that Canada has to play a much stronger role in the military side of the equation. It downplays Canada’s traditional role at UN in supporting international institutions. Our efforts against land mines and in support of the International Criminal Court are examples of this.

War in Iraq

Rae pointed to two speeches of by Howard Hampton and Stephen Harper at time of Iraq war. His point was made by a choice made by Chretien at the time - Canada was not willing to participate in invasion of Iraq. Harper saying yes we will. Interesting enough, the words he used were borrowed from President of Australia.

Canada’s decision not to participate in the Iraq war was a defining moment, and was based on two major factors:

The existence of WMDs
An imminent threat

The Canadian government did not believe Saddam had WMDs, or that the evidence supporting assertion was in any way adequate. The U.S. relying on secret information, but the information provided from Hans Blix could not justify assertion.

If Canada didn’t have that information, it would still have to establish some other idea as to why it is justified as act of outside invasion. Canada’s position was clear - but the U.S. and U.K. was emphatically on the other side that whether or not there were WMDs, the risk justified invasion.

It took courage for Chretien and Graham to explain to Canadians why we were not joining our two closest allies. Now people say it’s a no-brainer - because we look at it retrospectively at the mess it created. It was controversial at time, and the criticism came mostly from Harper, who bought Bush/Blair doctrine. Harper insisted that was where Canada’s interests lay, where our values should take us.

Economic Relations

When it comes to trade relations it was Mulroney, following Royal Commission Report, that took the great leap towards negotitiations on free trade that eventually became NAFTA. Mulroney believed that if we could get from out underneath the U.S. trade umbrella and trade harrassment it would be a great deal for Canada. We would benefit from coming firmly within an America economic framework, and at the same time free ourselves from trade harassment.

By way of contrast, many people believe our long term protection is not in bliateral protection but with many countries that include the Americans. The history of our free trade is well-known, and we are going to experience its full effects in the next major while.

And we have not been able to free ourselves from trade harassment. The U.S. Senate is based on states where less than 20 percent of population control 50 percent of Senate, and is therefore dominated by agriculture and natural resource interests. The U.S likes to portray itself as supportive of free trade, but it actually relies far less on free trade than any of its trading partners.

This is just another example of where our decisions to make a special deal has actually proved short sighted.

A Foreign Policy that is Our Own Voice

Whether it is on the economic or political side, do we want to have a foreign policy where we find our own voice, or do we see ourselves as essentially being the junior partners in the American enterprise?

In recent days that choice has become very clear and sharp, and a clear example of that is the case of Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen. He grew up in Afghanistan and was eventually captured and charged in the efforts to kill an American soldier, and has since been incarcerated in Guanatanamo Bay for that last few years.

We have to try to understand what this issue means for Canada. It’s not just about the politics of do we like what he did or was accused of doing. There are two major issues:

What do we do with child soldiers?
What do we do with Canadians in these situations?

There have been enormous procedural delays in his trial, with the head of the military tribunal recently being replaced. There have been two recent Supreme Court cases in the U.S. critical of Guantanamo, and how it is being administered by the American government.

They stated that the law of habeas corpus does apply, and that it is not simply possible to incarcerate people without letting them know what htey have been charged with. These are fundamental principles of our justice system. The second case is worth reading simply to review the very basics of habeas corpus and its role in the legal system.

Canada is a signatory to the international treaty aimed at rehabilitating child soldiers. It’s fundamental to get these people out to rehabilitate them to let them continue on with their lives.

Sri Lanka has an issue with this on the rebel side, where people can be recruited as young as 12 and sent into battle by the age of 14 or 15. If you capture them, what do you do? Do you treat them as a soldier, as a child, or as a child soldier?

There are protocols that have to be followed. The U.S. military tribunal has said we are not interested in this, and it does not pertain to the treatment of Omar Khadr.

The Question for Canada

The question for Canada is that we’ve gone along for a long time to see what kind of justice people like Omar Khadr can get. We said, let’s hold judgment until we see what kind of treatment he gets.

And frankly, we’ve seen quite enough.

Senator Obama and McCain have both said they would close Guantanamo, and find another method to try people that are there.

We can also look at the issue of members of the Uighur community of Xinjiang in Western China, which has long issues with the extent of which it is being ruled and human rights issues. How do we respond as a country when dealing with the possibility of courts where we disagree with their approach to a legal system?

In the case of Guantanamo, it puts us in a ridiculous position where the only person thinking Omar Khadr should stay in the U.S. and would get a fair trial in the U.S. is Stephen Harper.

Again, even McCain says it should be closed. This is an absurd position for Canada to be in.

Differing with America is not Anti-Americanism

Mr. Rae also distinguished the mission in Afghanistan from that in Iraq. The U.N. agreed to the mission. contrary to Iraq. We believed we were going there to help set up a new government and support them.

The Liberals would like to change the focus to reflect this interest, away from military activities to training the Afghan army and politically helping the government create a more stable arrangement. The 2011 withdrawal date was what was initially agreed upon by parliament, and when all countries said the mission would come to an end.

These are the principles we should try to apply: that we intervene when we believe it is lawful to do so, and when it is justified by international law.

Canada is not a superpower. It is not an empire, and we do not have imperial ambitions. All we want to do is participate in a stable international world order.

That is why we’ve been such strong supporters of the U.N. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was drafted by a Canadian after all.

Our interests as a small country, a relatively small power, are different from that of our neighbours. It means we will agree and disagree from time to time. It does not mean we are anti-American, it just means we have different interests.

Get Involved as Law Students

There are many ways you can be involved and engaged in this world.

Your generation has more opportunity to see more, to do more, to be more engaged than any generation in hum history.

Try to make a difference. Find out what gives you passion, and take those ideals and interests wherever you may go.

Recent Articles tagged law career from LexMonitor