This may seem odd at first since Super Lawyers is not in the business of rating law schools. We rate lawyers. The process we use is “sophisticated, comprehensive and complex” in the words of Judge Robert Fall, the Special Master appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court to study and report on our selection methodology.

We thought, however, it would be interesting to take a snapshot of all the lawyers we selected for Super Lawyers in 2009 and see what law schools produced this cream-of-the-crop 5 percent. One thing that is lacking from other law school rankings is any indication of what type of lawyers are ultimately produced by the schools on the lists.

Our methodology is quite simple: We count the number of graduates from each school on our list and rank the schools accordingly. We don’t look at LSAT scores or bar passage rates or the number of books in the library. In fact, we don’t look at the schools at all. The only thing we focus on is the end product — the practicing attorney.

I’ll announce the rankings here next week. You may find a few surprises.

Thanks for reading this cool post that I found from the super lawyers blog.  Please visit our Ocean County NJ bail bonds site again!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

As I mentioned in my last post, Dean David Van Zandt of the Northwestern University School of Law came up with his own ranking of law schools based on the number of graduates named to Super Lawyers adjusted to reflect class size (using 1999 enrollment figures).

Now Brian Leiter’s Law School Report blog takes a crack at it. His ranking is also based on the number of graduates named to Super Lawyers plus some sort of weighted average formula which I frankly don’t understand. What both rankings have in common is that they make adjustments based on class size. But they reach very different results.

For example, Leiter’s top ten list is missing three schools that were in Van Zandt’s top ten. Texas, number 3 according to Leiter, isn’t even in Van Zandt’s top 14 (why 14? I have no idea. That’s where his ranking ends on the ABL post)

The point is that simply applying a weighted average based on class size doesn’t magically produce a “more valid ranking.”  I’ve seen three weighted average rankings adjusted for class size so far (including the test we ran prior to publishing our list) and the results have been all over the board.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

It’s a good day for consumers and lawyers in New Jersey as the rules now bring the state into step with the rest of the country.

The rule and comments call for common sense disclosures of the name of the rating service and a reference to where the selection methodology can be found. And of course, the rules prohibit pay-to-play accolades.

None of this affects how we publish. We’ve always included a detailed description of the Super Lawyers selection process where ever we publish our lists. We want people to understand exactly what we go through in selecting lawyers.

The only shortcoming with the rules is the required disclaimer, “No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey.” As is the case with most disclaimers of this type, you’re left to wonder what purpose is served? Is there any evidence at all that without such language consumers would be misled? And if there is no such evidence, why require the disclaimer?

What consumers really need is information and not disclaimers. Nevertheless, we feel the court has otherwise taken a sound approach in updating its rules.

Thank you for reading our Ocean County bail bonds site!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

When in her confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court Sonia Sotamayor discussed the influence of Perry Mason on her career, it got us thinking, what do the lawyers named to Super Lawyers think of the TV lawyer icon? Turns out they think a lot. Here are just a handful of the many comments about the TV lawyer that have made it into the pages of Super Lawyers.

Deryck Palmer of Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft:
“If I had to trace the origins [of my fascination] with law, it goes back to when I was a young child. You may laugh, but I watched Perry Mason and I was very impressed. Raymond Burr did an excellent job of capturing the impact lawyers can have.”

(From “The Eagle Scout,” published in New York Super Lawyers 2008 — September 2008)

Thomas Salerno of Squire Sanders:
“[I wanted to become a lawyer] from watching trial shows on TV such as Perry Mason. I come from a working-class background, and the idea of wearing a suit to work intrigued me. I was also intrigued by the power that lawyers seem to have in their spheres.”

(From “Q&A with Tom Salerno,” published in Southwest Super Lawyers 2009 — May 2009)

Michele Coleman Mayes, General Counsel of Allstate:
“I think I can attribute [my interest in law] to Perry Mason. It was on TV at the time and he always won.”

(From “In Good Hands,” published in Super Lawyers — Corporate Counsel Edition – May 2009 — May 2009)

W. Henry Jernigan of Dinsmore & Shohl:
“The one I saw the most growing up was Perry Mason. Looking back, I always find, with great amusement, that Perry never had to look at a law book and always had someone stand up and plead guilty in the back of the courtroom. I’m still waiting for that to happen.”

(From “Q&A with W. Henry Jernigan,” published in Virginia Super Lawyers 2009 — July 2009)

Robert Dawson of DawsonBrown:
“I really think it was mainly TV [that influenced him to become a lawyer.]. In those days it was the show Perry Mason. Didn’t you love how you always knew who was guilty: It was the person who got on the stand the last five minutes of the show. But think of that show: Every week, Hamilton Burger was trying an innocent person for murder, and nobody seemed to care.”
(From “Q&A with Robert K. Dawson,” published in Washington Super Lawyers 2009 — June 2009)

And finally,

Lonnie Williams:
“To this day I am an absolute fan of Perry Mason. And I still believe today that the legal profession would be much better off if we resorted back to trying cases the way Perry Mason did. Forget about the discovery; forget about spending all this time in pretrial. Let’s just go out and learn the facts, put the witnesses on the stand and try cases. I love examining witnesses who have not been deposed. Most lawyers would think that’s crazy but I think that is a much purer form of the art.”
(From “Q&A with Lonnie Williams, Quarles & Brady, Phoenix,” published in Southwest Super Lawyers 2008 — June 2008)

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Criminal Court Process
By Jon Dykstra

If you’ve been charged with a crime in British Columbia, chances are during the arrest and aftermath nobody told you what to expect. Probably all you learned was the date you’re to show up to court. And that’s if you were released from the police.

Upon arrest, there’s 2 immediate outcomes:

i. You’re released with a court date; or

ii. You’re detained for a bail hearing. Your bail hearing will result in either being released on bail or kept in jail until the outcome of your trial.

Regardless whether you’re released or not, the criminal process is similar.

What’s Next?

1. 1st Appearance

The next step is either you or your lawyer goes to court on the date you were given upon release (or if in jail, the date set by the court). The 1st appearance serves 2 purposes:

i. You receive the particulars of your case from the prosecutor; and

ii. a date is set for your arraignment hearing.

Note that sometimes the prosecutor won’t have the particulars ready for your first appearance. In that case, you or your lawyer will need to attend again before your arraignment hearing.

2. The Particulars

The particulars is the paperwork setting out the prosecutor’s case against you. You or your lawyer can’t build your defence until you review the particulars. The particulars include the charges against you, the police notes, the report to crown counsel (the prosecutor), any technical data (such as breathalyzer results) and any other evidence the prosecutor will rely on.

3. The Arraignment Hearing

The arraignment hearing is held in the court where your case proceeds. This hearing is where you, the accused, enter a plea (not guilty if defending). Then your trial and perhaps preliminary hearing (see below) are scheduled.

4. Preliminary Inquiry

If the prosecutor is listing your charge(s) as indictable (more serious offences), then you are entitled to a preliminary inquiry. If your case is going by summary charge, then you aren’t entitled to a preliminary hearing.

A preliminary inquiry is an opportunity for you or your lawyer to ask questions of the prosecutor’s witnesses – usually the investigating police officers. This is an opportunity to learn more about the case against you. This hearing is held in a court and the testimony of all the witnesses is under oath.

5. Pre-Trial Conference

Before your trial, you or your lawyer must attend a pre-trial conference (PTC). This is usually held 1 to 1.5 months before your trial and is also held in the court. At the PTC, any outstanding issues are resolved. Otherwise, you (or your lawyer) and the prosecutor confirm with the court that both sides are ready for trial.

6. The Trial

Finally, you the accused, get your day in court. Sometimes a judge will decide the matter that day. Other times, the judge will hold off making a decision. If the judge holds off making a decision, you’ll get a date to return to court at which time the judge will issue her or his decision.

If a jury heard your case, then the jury will be instructed to decide your matter right away. You’ll learn the outcome upon the jury making its decision.

If you’re found not guilty, you’re free to go. If you’re found guilty, then you’ll be scheduled a sentencing date (sometimes sentencing may occur right away after the decision). If the sentencing hearing is scheduled in the future, either you’re held in jail until then or released until then. This primarily depends on the seriousness of the conviction and whether jail will be likely sentence. For example, if you’re found guilty of a first DUI, then you won’t be held in jail. If you’re found guilty of 1st degree murder, you’ll most likely be held in jail.

7. The Sentencing Hearing

You hope your matter doesn’t come to a sentencing hearing. However, sometimes it does. The process at a sentencing hearing is that both sides will make submissions for a particular type of sentence (i.e. jail length, probation terms, licence restrictions, etc. – depending on the nature of the conviction). The judge then decides and orders your sentence.

In a nutshell, that’s the criminal process in British Columbia.

To learn more about hiring a criminal defence lawyer in British Columbia, check out Dykstra & Company who are BC criminal defence lawyers. Dykstra & Company represents people charged with DUI and traffic offences, assault charges, and drug charges with law offices in Abbotsford and Surrey, BC.

Jon Dykstra

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Jon_Dykstra
http://EzineArticles.com/?Criminal-Court-Process&id=2744251

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.