McDermott, Will & Emery (Ownership Society)
| Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | slap-happy beady-eyed whorehouse elastic band | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | slap-happy beady-eyed whorehouse elastic band | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | passionate community account mood | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | soul-stirring yellow jap | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Narrow-minded native regret | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | Wonderful Coiffed Shitlib | 08/27/05 | | Narrow-minded native regret | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Ultramarine magical idiot liquid oxygen | 08/27/05 | | Charismatic autistic masturbator | 08/27/05 | | Diverse overrated ladyboy | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | Diverse overrated ladyboy | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Dashing federal corner cuckoldry | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | smoky appetizing area | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Wonderful Coiffed Shitlib | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Wonderful Coiffed Shitlib | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Wonderful Coiffed Shitlib | 08/27/05 | | purple bawdyhouse feces | 08/27/05 | | bossy kitchen | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | bossy kitchen | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | bossy kitchen | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | Diverse overrated ladyboy | 08/27/05 | | judgmental property | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | multi-colored ticket booth french chef | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | multi-colored ticket booth french chef | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | multi-colored ticket booth french chef | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | multi-colored ticket booth french chef | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | multi-colored ticket booth french chef | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | Chocolate sanctuary | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Chocolate sanctuary | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | Chocolate sanctuary | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | soggy aphrodisiac location | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | judgmental property | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | judgmental property | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | purple bawdyhouse feces | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | purple bawdyhouse feces | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | purple bawdyhouse feces | 08/27/05 | | judgmental property | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | purple bawdyhouse feces | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | Diverse overrated ladyboy | 08/27/05 | | emerald locale | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | soggy aphrodisiac location | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | soggy aphrodisiac location | 08/27/05 | | Charismatic autistic masturbator | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | emerald locale | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | Bateful box office | 08/27/05 | | fishy lettuce | 08/27/05 | | Ultramarine magical idiot liquid oxygen | 08/27/05 | | vivacious trump supporter | 08/27/05 | | Fragrant church building | 08/27/05 | | Narrow-minded native regret | 08/27/05 | | peach deranged milk | 08/27/05 | | ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap | 08/27/05 | | abusive nursing home | 08/27/05 | | peach deranged milk | 08/27/05 | | passionate community account mood | 08/27/05 | | abusive nursing home | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | Stubborn chartreuse institution | 08/27/05 | | jet deep theater legend | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | peach deranged milk | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | aquamarine fanboi center | 08/27/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/27/05 | | electric generalized bond | 08/27/05 | | heady field | 08/29/05 | | Low-t site keepsake machete | 08/29/05 | | mind-boggling wagecucks | 08/29/05 | | onyx reading party hominid | 08/29/05 | | Stirring tank water buffalo | 08/29/05 | | abusive nursing home | 08/29/05 | | onyx reading party hominid | 08/29/05 | | odious home hissy fit | 09/09/06 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: August 27th, 2005 12:58 AM Author: Low-t site keepsake machete
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686573) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:02 AM Author: smoky appetizing area
Yeah, I definitely will. Care to share where you got the info?
Did you just get a callback there (and is this an attempt to screw up their yield?)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686628) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:32 AM Author: slap-happy beady-eyed whorehouse elastic band
So on NALP it says that they hired 5 summers in 2004, considered 2 and made offers to 2.
Shitty?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687740) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:14 AM Author: heady field
Ok, bear with me. I'm not trying to prod you, I'm just trying to understand. How is making offers tied to professional development? To me, hiring a bunch of summers and then having them sit in the corner doing nothing would be a violation of a firm's obligation. But if they give the summers high quality training and just chose to look elsewhere for their full-time hires, how is that a violation of the firm's committment to developing lawyers? Presumably, each summer learned a good bit. The lack of an offer doesnt cause their memory to be erased and what they leanred will serve the legal community...just at another firm. I agree 100% that 2Ls should be wary of firms that don't make many offers to summers, but that's purely because we're looking out for ourselves.
Is it your opinion that a firm has an obligation to make offers to the vast majority of their summers?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686762) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:18 AM Author: soul-stirring yellow jap
Yes. 2Ls summer at a firm expecting to work there after law school unless something goes wrong. It is common and widely expected practice for firms to hire all the 2L summers who do not fuck up. If the 2Ls hold up their end of the bargain and do their jobs properly, it's bullshit for the firm to suddenly decide not to make offers anyway.
Also, as others have pointed out, no offer is effectively a blackball.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686802) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:27 AM Author: jet deep theater legend
Firms will know what happened, but will still wonder about that person, especially if the firm did hire SOME people
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686880)
|
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:30 AM Author: Dashing federal corner cuckoldry
You still have to answer the question of why you're interviewing again, so it's not the greatest situation.
I think I'd prefer a well publicized financial disaster at a firm resulting in no offer to a cold offer.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686907) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:31 AM Author: jet deep theater legend
What's even worse is what Wilson Sonsini did like 6 years ago. They notified their entire incoming class in the middle of 3L year that they were not welcome and to seek other employment. It was too late for them to go to OCI at that point. That's an assrapong.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686923)
|
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:47 AM Author: ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap
You file to get them to settle. No firm wants to deal with the publicity of such a lawsuit.
If this story is true, I would have banded the other summers together and sued immediately. Then I would have contacted every law magazine in the United States about the lawsuit. Then I would have contacted SV media sources. Of course GA would find out about it.
Then you go to every law school's career services department and tell them about the lawsuit. Ask them to send e-mails to students about it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687085) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:32 AM Author: heady field
Is it bad practice to sort of fudge the answer to the 'why are you interviewing again' question? I mean, is it really unethical not to disclose "because i didnt get a real offer"? Couldnt you just say "My interest is in a firm with a stronger [whatever] practice?" Or, "I'm more interested in New York than Chicago" or something?
(I'm asking because I have no idea)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686931) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:16 AM Author: Wonderful Coiffed Shitlib
what reason(s) did they give?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686779) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:21 AM Author: Narrow-minded native regret
What's interesting is that when I interviewed with them last year, they made a point of discussing their financial stability, how no partner has no more than something like 2% of the clientele, or something like that....seemed odd. I don't know anything about this though. What do the greedy boards say?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686824) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:26 AM Author: Low-t site keepsake machete
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686875) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:28 AM Author: Diverse overrated ladyboy
No offer or soft offer?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3686897) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:40 AM Author: heady field
This is probably a stupid question: Is it bad form to ask about this during the OCI interview? Obviously, in a indirect way. But something like "What kind of committment does MWE have to bringing back their summers?" I'd be interested to see if they would be honest about what went on last year, though I imagine they'd fudge their answer and asking them "what happened last year" would be too confrontational.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687023) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:41 AM Author: odious home hissy fit
Wow, that's horrible.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687026) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 1:55 AM Author: ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap
So I have a question. Do firms like this generally have a pre-OCI reception for scheduled interviewees? I think it would be nice to spend about $1,000 on drinks.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687135) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 2:09 AM Author: bossy kitchen
Ownership, what's your email addy? I'd like some more specific info.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687256) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 2:13 AM Author: heady field
Hey Ownership, out of curiousity, was this tactic isolated to a single office or did it happen nationwide?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687292) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 2:18 AM Author: heady field
No bad news from the DC office that you know of?
(That's where I'm interviewing)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687329) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 2:26 AM Author: Low-t site keepsake machete
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687381) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 2:59 AM Author: fishy lettuce
its obvious you have improper motives. i hope no one takes you seriously. i should forwarded this post to them and they will sue you for libel i hope. if i were you i'd delete the infringing comments and apologize before they see it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687581) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:04 AM Author: fishy lettuce
wrong. you can sue but you wont win idiot. you, like most other daft law students focus on the trees and not the forest. you want to prevent lawsuits not win them.
hes going to have to prove that its true... and hes said a lot of negative "facts" so hed better pray his sources are telling the truth since he has no first hand knowledge
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687608) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:07 AM Author: fishy lettuce
again, a tree.
they can show their reputation is damaged here, a place where future lawyers are getting their info... especially because its about business practices- in a lot of jxns daamges are presumed. libel per se
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687621) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:11 AM Author: multi-colored ticket booth french chef
Just wanted to make sure that's what you wanted to say.
Speaks for itself.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687645) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:08 AM Author: heady field
Actually, the burden is on the firm to prove its false, you fucking douchebag. Not to mention mere falsehood doesn't get you to a win. You have to prove reckless or intentional lies were told.
But on one point, you are correct. You can *sue* for anything. You just won't win. And may be compelled to pay costs for filing a frivilous libel suit against someone who made truthful statements. So I should have said "you realize that you WIN A LIBEL SUIT when someone writes something that is true, right?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687631) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:22 AM Author: fishy lettuce
he also gave a physical description and location of the recruiter who he said tried to seduce a potential employee.
who cares if the statement wasn't made to the general public? LMAO! is that what you think the "publication" requirement means? LMAO! i think you are confused... maybe you are thinking of "false light"
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687693) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:31 AM Author: fishy lettuce
lmao! what does the fact that the comments were made on a message board have to do with q-p fs?
if i post "john doe the recruiter for xyz firm is a murderer. he killed jane doe" is he a q-p f because i wrote it on a message board? um no
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687738) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:29 AM Author: fishy lettuce
who said its true?
and you are missing the point. we are talking about at what stage of the proceedings falsity comes into play.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687731) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:37 AM Author: fishy lettuce
paying all d's legal costs when you lose almost never happens. another typical law student error
its not frivilous b/c who knows if they are true... he has no firsthand knowledge about their truth and he is still telling everyone about it like its the truth.
my point is that they can make his life hell if they want. you and your gang keep saying "no they can't because it's true" and thats simply not the case. even if he would eventually win, theres a lot of negative reprocussions in it for him.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687761) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:41 AM Author: heady field
"its not frivilous b/c who knows if they are true"
MWE would know. If they sue knowing that the statements are true, its frivilous. And if they did that, and they lost on SJ, there is a very good chance they would pay costs. That remedy is only enforced when the plaintiff has acted in a particularly egregious fashion. Suing someone for libel when the facts they stated are true and you know it would fit the bill. And its not like these facts are ambiguous. Either a handful of Michigan 2L summers at MWE were given no-offers via phon message or they weren't. Its not a subjective thing.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687772) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:55 AM Author: fishy lettuce
and who is to say whether the number of summers who didnt get offers qualifies as those things that os said about their hiring practice- he said they didn't hire a "significant" number of summers for shady reasons... dont forget the part about their "dubious" reasons.
and again thats only one of many negative "facts" is has said aboutthe firm
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687821) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:57 AM Author: fishy lettuce
translation: ive just been pwn3d and cant respond substantively
yeah i was going to because i have a busy day tomorrow but i felt the need to respond. bye.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687833) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:48 AM Author: heady field
It was you who said that they would sue even if they didnt think they could win. I responded to that hypothetical and now you're blasting me for running with it. You're an idiot and you've been pwn3d about 25 times by about 7 different posters in under 30 minutes. Well done.
But if you think you're still right, I invite you to respond to this post by summarizing your stance on how this suit would go. Who has the burden of proving the statements true? Would the lawyers in question have a claim to sue for libel when they weren't named, and most weren't identified by descripitive characterisics? Are these lawyers private, public, or quasi public figures in their roles as employers in a law firm? Etc. The only point I concede to you is that they can sue even if they don't think they can win. So don't repeat that 6 times. I'm asking how MWE could win.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687791) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:19 AM Author: fishy lettuce
he has referred to individuals. the recruiter person he referred to is clearly a private figure. the partner is as well... they are not public persons.
anyway in order for what he said to be true it would have to be a public matter as well- and its not- which you dont seem to be contesting.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687684) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 4:21 AM Author: soggy aphrodisiac location
Actually, falsity is not an element of defamation of a private individual. In order to prove defamation of a privte individual, you must show: 1) publication, 2) of a defamatory statement, 3) of or concerning the plaintiff, 4) damages (which are presumed in the case of libel and slander per se). (Truth is an affirmative defense)
If the issue is of public concern, then the plaintiff must show also 5)falsity and 6) fault (malice if public figure and negligence if private figure).
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687900) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:25 AM Author: fishy lettuce
"i appreciate the information. i obviously wouldn't do oci with a firm that screws people over."
this quote will be helpful to mwe if it decides to pursue its case
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687711) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:25 AM Author: ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap
By the way, it's clear that the OP need not delete the "infringing comments." The OP can just state clearly that the information is secondhand and in *his opinion* it is credible. I think this is clear enough from the original post.
I don't know who you are, but if you represent the firm, you represent it poorly.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687708) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 11:06 AM Author: ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap
I think you're wrong, and if you're right, the consequences to society would be so detrimental that the law would quickly be changed.
"A defense recognized in most jurisdictions is 'opinion.' If the person makes a statement of opinion as opposed to fact, the statement may not support a cause of action for defamation. Whether a statement is viewed as an expression of fact or opinion can depend upon context - that is, whether or not the person making the statement would be perceived by the community as being in a position to know whether or not it is true. If your employer calls you a pathological liar, it is far less likely to be regarded as opinion than if such a statement is made by somebody you just met. Some jurisdictions have eliminated the distinction between fact and opinion, and instead hold that any statement that suggests a factual basis can support a cause of action for defamation."
http://www.expertlaw.com/library/personal_injury/defamation.html
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3688265) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 2:44 PM Author: Charismatic autistic masturbator
"i have forwarded this post to them and they will sue you for libel i hope."
Ooooh! Only two supoenas away!
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3689047) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:31 AM Author: Low-t site keepsake machete
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687739) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:42 AM Author: fishy lettuce
i need to go to sleep. i am through with the mediocre law students on this thread and this thread.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687777) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 4:32 AM Author: Fragrant church building
So, are you saying I shouldnt feel too bad about not applying?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3687923) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 2:30 PM Author: Narrow-minded native regret
You know, the more I look at this thread, the more I have to believe that the OP got a ding after being a summer associate there. I can definitely see passing along financial trouble/firms that don't give offers to summers...I can see anecdotes like attys making passes at people, even if that stuff speaks less to the firm as a whole.
But the OP seems really motivated to make sure as many people as possible get the idea that this firm is both financially and ethically shaky. The only way I could picture myself this upset at a firm is if they personally slighted me, i.e. gave me the no-offer blackball for a pretty crappy reason.
Until I hear something similar from another source, I would tend to disregard or at least downplay the significance of this information.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3688992) |
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 2:57 PM Author: ocher vigorous pistol mad-dog skullcap
That's true. But if the information he's saying is true, the worst you can say about the OP is that he's (quite reasonably) avoiding outing himself. Someone said that FIVE Michigan students didn't get offers. If that's true, this firm seems to deserve the vitriol.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3689112)
|
 |
Date: August 27th, 2005 3:20 PM Author: abusive nursing home
We don't have any actual numbers do we? Also, whatever the number, I don't think they were all Michigan students. 5 was a number that was just used as an example.
EDIT: from the OP "MWE decided to not make offers to a significant number of summers this year"
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3689236) |
Date: August 27th, 2005 11:19 PM Author: electric generalized bond
I might have info on another firm who dinged for no reason. I'll post about it if there's anything there.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3692564) |
Date: August 29th, 2005 8:18 PM Author: heady field
FWIW, the people at the McDermott reception tonight said they made offers to "95% of all summer associates". So, if they hosed people at the Chicago office, its very isolated.
They also gave a whole spiel about how they love Michigan students. For the comedic value of it, I kind of wished Ownership Society/Veritas jumped out from under some table at that moment and went on a tirade.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3701224) |
Date: August 29th, 2005 9:14 PM Author: Stirring tank water buffalo
THE REAL STORY:
McDermott realized what a TTT Michigan has become b/c all of the summers from there were fucking idiots. They cut their losses. Sorry losers!
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=247539&forum_id=2#3701651) |
|
|