His name is M
And he is demoted from Not-Gay Boyfriend. He is simply M. A friend.
Oh, one of those days
I Heart New York
Random shit in my head right now
Well, you know absence makes the heart grow fonder, so I am expecting major fireworks on Tuesday. When I saw him today, I thought, "oh it's [hk]'s dude."
Honestly, I have a good feeling about this. I think he saw your pic in the [school paper], and thought to himself, “Self, not only is this chick hot, but she is also a do – gooder. Must up my meds and ask her out.”
February Blues
Not-Gay Boyfriend Resurfaces
Mental health day
Up and unhappy about it
Catch-up catch-all
I came to [this legal services clinic] in part because I liked employment law and in part because A. Park, Crimson ’05, spoke very warmly about her experience working in the employment discrimination division with Mark [the employment discrimination supervisor]. A. and I met, funny enough, not at law school but at a law firm recruiting lunch in New York in the fall, and discovered we had similar interests in employment, particularly employment discrimination and implicit bias. She encouraged me to do the clinical and pursue my interests academically, and in a sense I feel like I am following in her footsteps; yesterday I found several documents that bore her name in various client files.
This is my second day at LSC. Mark has assigned two employment discrimination cases to me, both of which are in federal court. We were supposed to have met with a possibly new client this morning, but she did not show. (Mark apologetically warned me that this was not an unusual occurrence; I told him at I’d worked in a legal services office this summer, so I was not in the least perturbed.) If she had come to the office, Mark would have done the introduction and legal advice parts of our intake interview, and I would have talked with the client about the facts of her case. The thought of doing that made me a bit nervous, despite having done intake at least five or six times in two different offices since I started law school. I’m always worried that I won’t ask an obvious and important question. It’s a good anxiety to have, but should be alleviated by the fact that I can always call with follow-up questions. Being new at something means I will make mistakes – there’s just no getting around that. I can almost accept it.
The first case involves someone who was fired after being suspected of insurance fraud. Mark called this case a good law school exam – it involves a number of claims, including discrimination on the basis of mental disability, ERISA discrimination, and a couple of other non-discrimination-related theories. This case was filed in December 2004, and we are nearing the end of the discovery stage. There are a number of depositions coming up, and Mark says that he hopes I’ll be able to do some of them. Again, quite nervous about that, but I know it will be invaluable experience. I think I’ll be around long enough for the summary judgment decision.
The other case is much more straightforward: discrimination on the basis of a physical disability. This was just filed on Feb. 1, so I’ll be seeing the front end of a federal case here. Given that most of these trials – if we end up going to trial – take one to two years (in federal court – state court trials take much longer), I think I’ll be around long enough to see the beginning of the discovery stage, which would bookend the other case nicely.
My goals for this semester are to get a better grasp on employment law doctrine, as well as to get some experience working on actual cases. I’d like to figure out if employment law and/or litigation are areas I’d be interested in working in after graduation.
I’m also interested in learning about the problems specific to the state's approach to employment discrimination. Today Mark invited me to accompany him to a meeting of several employment law plaintiffs’ lawyers who were discussing ways to improve access to legal aid for low-income complainants, and how to improve the State Commission Against Discrimination (SCAD), which is widely regarded as a complete and utter mess. An attorney from SCAD showed up halfway through the meeting, and – probably to many people’s surprise – a productive discussion ensued, including the idea of getting an independent organization to audit SCAD and suggest improvements. The next meeting will be in about 4-6 weeks, and I hope I’ll be able to attend again. Today’s meeting was a wonderful opportunity to see how legal services lawyers can also (hopefully) effect systemic change.
Oh, that crazy dean of students!
Wednesday, February 8, 2006
From: Dean of Students
To: Students
RE: Wellness Wednesdays
Our attempts to promote wellness at the law school through programming have failed. Students report that they are too stressed, too tired, or too overbooked to attend sessions on stress, sleep or nutrition.
So here is Plan B - Wellness Wednesdays.
Every other Wednesday this semester, the Wellness Committee and our office will be tabling in the [Student Center] from 12 to 2 (there will be some shameless promotion so it will be hard to miss). We will have guest experts on hand to answer questions or give demonstrations.
Come and pick up some literature, ask questions, or get some free food and giveaways.
The topics and dates are below. We are open to other suggestions. You can email us at wellness@[crimsonlaw].edu.
February 8--Nutrition
February 22nd--Sleep
March 8th--Safety
March 22nd--Alcohol
April 5th--Fitness
April 19th--Stress
Dissatisfaction and Avoidance
So should I go be a litigator now, or what?
Sigh
Amusante
A full, busy day