I know I will regret this, but what heck.  Go for it.

Disclaimer:  Questions that require significant research will be disregarded.  Questions I deem asinine will be disregarded, unless also humorous.  No attorney-client relationship is established hereby, and no duty of confidentiality applies.  I reserve the right to answer questions in whichever order I please, on any timeline I please, or not at all, for any or no reason.  I make no representations regarding the accuracy of any response, and response recipients are not entitled to rely upon any such response as legal advice.  Solicitation for questions may be terminated at any time without notice.  All rights reserved.

Skillet42565 wrote: Why are all of you guys going to Hell?

Because that's where the party is, and lawyers love to party.

Ghost-Rider wrote: Why are lawyers jewish?

The operation is performed during the second semester of the second year of law school.  Right after the soulectomy.

youm0nt wrote: what is your salary?

I don't have a salary.  So - $0.

Ghost-Rider wrote: Are you eating pancakes right now? or bacon?

No.  No.

But that's a good idea, because both are delicious.

In a separate note, I dislike the spam filter.

Da Hui wrote: Is OJ guilty. Also, if your at a public park and some of your friends are found drinking there. Your given a breathalizer and have B.A.C. of 0. Cop tells you not to go back to that park, and you do. It that breaking a law?

1.  I am between 51% and 95% certain that OJ is guilty.

2.  May depend on other facts and circumstances.  But, generally speaking, police officers are not judges, and cannot prohibit otherwise legal behavior outside of an enforcement/investigatory context.  So - probably not breaking a law.

Silent wrote: What do you mean you don't have a salary?

I am a partner in a law firm.  I am not an emplyee.  Emplyees get salaries/wages.  I get a piece of whatever is left.

Da Hui wrote: Should I go get some breakfast?

Breakfast is the most important meal of the day.

If a client of yours is guilty of the charges being pressed on them, how hard is it to build a case if the other party probably has deciding evidence?

A man comes home and there is a strange car parked behind his wife.  He comes in screaming, "Where is he, where is he?" checking ther closets in their home.  Shes pleading with him to "leave him alone" and upon opening the last closet, he finds a man hiding.  The husband flips the man out of the closet and punches him, getting about 10 punches in and the other man gets about one.  The husband leaves the home, and proceeds life on his own.  Is there a lawful fault in this story?

An adolescent kid is riding their dirtbike around in the fields of his neighborhood.  One of his neighbors shoves a 2x4 through his spokes, sending him flying and ending up with a broken nose among other scrapes, brusies, etc..  Years later, while maintaining a solid case with his active lawyer, he keeps being told that he cannot get the money he deserves because the old neighbor owns a business and he puts a high percentage of the money he earns back into the business.  Is this true that he cannot in fact get the money?

Ghost-Rider wrote: I just finished some left over mexican food at 11:00 AM ......whats your thoughts on this ? Edit :Could i sue? Edit 2: sure wish it had bacon with it.

Some foods are good and safe as leftovers.  Mexican is not one of those.

You can always sue.  You would lose, though.  Assumption of risk by eating old food.

Everything is better with bacon.  Better yet - wrap your food in the bacon.

reifidom wrote: Can I be charged with Disorderly Conduct for yelling obscenities at a drive-thru speaker? Earlier this week I was led to believe so by a police officer.

Depends on whether you were being disorderly.  But potentially yes.  Basically, if you are "disturbing the peace" (for instance, by yelling loudly in public), that could be disorderly conduct.

Yomillio wrote: If a client of yours is guilty of the charges being pressed on them, how hard is it to build a case if the other party probably has deciding evidence?

My clients don't have charges pressed, and I don't build cases, but I will make up an answer anyway.

If a case is truly a slam-dunk against you, you don't go to trial.  You settle/plea-bargain, or just plead guilty and bring up mitigating factors in your defense.  A trial where all the evidence is against you will just prejudice the judge when it comes to the penalty phase.

A man comes home and there is a strange car parked behind his wife.  He comes in screaming, "Where is he, where is he?" checking ther closets in their home.  Shes pleading with him to "leave him alone" and upon opening the last closet, he finds a man hiding.  The husband flips the man out of the closet and punches him, getting about 10 punches in and the other man gets about one.  The husband leaves the home, and proceeds life on his own.  Is there a lawful fault in this story?

Several.  Adultery is illegal in several states, although those statutes are probably unconstitutional.  Assault and battery was almost certainly committed by the husband (although he could attempt a lame "I thought it was a burglar" defense).  Both the adultery and the battery will come into play during the divorce proceedings, and may affect alimony and child custody decisions.

An adolescent kid is riding their dirtbike around in the fields of his neighborhood.  One of his neighbors shoves a 2x4 through his spokes, sending him flying and ending up with a broken nose among other scrapes, brusies, etc..  Years later, while maintaining a solid case with his active lawyer, he keeps being told that he cannot get the money he deserves because the old neighbor owns a business and he puts a high percentage of the money he earns back into the business.  Is this true that he cannot in fact get the money?

The 2x4 thrower clearly committed both a tort and a crime (except maybe in Texas, where you can often shoot trespassers if you feel like it).  Unless there are other facts, probably a slam-dunk lawsuit.

Collectability is more complicated.  Assuming a jury award of X dollars, which is more than the defendant has in the bank, the judge can force a variety of remedies.  In this case, the judge might force the defendant to transfer part (or full) ownership of the defendant's business to the plaintiff, or order the sale of the business, or order a certain percentage of future income to be handed over (the OJ solution), etc., etc. 

Bankruptcy makes it more complicated yet - the rules governing what types of legal obligations survive bankruptcy are complex.

And then there is insurance, of course.  Many people with a fair amount of assets carry personal liability insurance specifically to cover this type of thing.

Short version - it can get messy, but simply putting money back into the business does not get the defendant off the hook.

Skillet42565 wrote: Do you ever make Procarbinefreak do random useless tasks for fun?

Of course.  I tell Dick (PCF's boss) that I need a bunch of boxes moved from here to there and back, and I suggest to Dick that this would be a perfect job for the guy with all the funny faces.

procarbinefreak wrote: Also, shouldn't you be working?

Multitasking, baby - I am on the phone with a client right now, and drafting a presentation proposal as well.

This is activity number 3 or 4 for me at the moment.

EDIT - besides, I own this place.  I'll work when I feel like it.   :P

Da Hui wrote: Is having an erection in public a illegal or punishable offense? What if your wearing a bathing suit or speedo?

Excellent question.  I have to have a junior associate research that.

Where should I send the bill?

Evil Elvis wrote: How much cash would it take to get you to snap pictures of Procarbinefreak doing humiliating clerk tasks? And posting them all over the interwebz?

Hmm...

*makes Montgomery Burns face*

procarbinefreak wrote: do you have one of those sweet giant wireless headsets for your phone that I see a lot of other attorneys wearing?  and if so do you walk aimlessly around your office and sometimes into the hallway and often times make people walking in the hall think that you might be talking to them.

Yes, yes, and yes.

And, unbeknownst to people on the other end, I occasionally go to the bathroom while on the phone.

Those things have awesome range.

Da Hui wrote: In Florida, it is against the law for minors to purchase and carry ciggarrettes, but not for them to smoke them. Why is that?

If you are smoking a cigarette, aren't you pretty much by definition also carrying it?

But more generally:  state legislators are not the brightest bulbs in the closet.

Hysteria wrote: How bad would I hate my life were I to become a Patent Lawyer?  I mean c'mon, all day every day dealing with Patents?  No horribly stressful, movie-esque murder cases that eventually lead my wife and I to a messy divorce?  No having the option to impregnate my sister so that my father, the Devil, will rule the world?  Where is the fun in that!?

Depends on what you mean by "patent lawyer". 

The guys that prosecute patents (i.e., obtain patents) live pretty sad-sack lives, but they do make decent cash.  Most large firms pay higher salaries for associates that are admitted to the patent bar.

But then there are the patent litigators.  These are the guys that handle the Smart Parts litigation, for instance, or the lawsuits between RIM and that other company.  Sexy stuff, lots of money, and the chicks dig it (or so I hear).

There are other varieties of "patent lawyer" as well.  The main thing if you plan on patent law is to get a technical degree in college - otherwise you won't be eligible for the patent bar.

procarbinefreak wrote: I have noticed that you enjoy skittles... how many bags do you go through a day?  Is it dependent on your work load?  Is there a specific flavor of skittle that you find most beneficial to your productivity?

My Skittles consumption varies quite a bit.  Usually I will buy a couple of bags, suck them down, then make myself hold off for a while.

My preferred variety are the Wild Berry Skittles, but they are all good.  I keep regular Skittles in my dispenser, since that seems to be the most popular among most people.

Currently I am boycotting Skittles, however, as they have contaminated all the bags with an awful test flavor - Carnival Candy Apple.

and finally, are you as mad as I am that the soda machine price was raised 5 cents?

Yes, but only because of the obnoxious change result.  35 cents made for an awkward situation where you coldn't quite get 3 cans for a buck, and you got all different kinds of coins in change.  That was annoying.  Now, at 40 cents, it's actually worse, because it requires 3 or 4 coins to get pop.  Very messy in the change drawer.

I would almost rather they had gone to 50 cents - 2 quarters, easy change.  Of course, it would be nice if they had gone to 25 cents, like the Chicago office.

But hey - at least they finally added Mountain Dew.

Da Hui wrote: Is there a way to legally punish a turd burglar?

Isn't the crime its own punishment?

Also, about how hard is law school on a scale of 1-10?

Stress level: 8

Work level:  8

Difficulty in actually graduating:  1

A trained monkey can graduate from law school, unless it gets too stressed and just quits.

And what made you choose to be an Lawyer?

I'm a greedy bastage.

Savage93fvss wrote: If you throw a dead oppossum on a teachers car off school property, at 11pm while driving, can a principal suspend you? And can a police officer charge you of reckless driving, disturbing the peace, and littering?

No (although it won't stop them from trying).

Yes.

Evil Elvis wrote: what are your state's laws on Luchador vigilante mobs? and your personal views on roving bands of avenging luchadores?

Chapter 993 of the Wisconsin Statues are the criminal laws.  I quote Wis.Stats. 993.24:

"(a) Luchadores and ninjas are excempt from all criminal penalties set forth in this Chapter 993, for they are awesome.

(b) In order to maintain eligibility for excemption under clause (a) above, all luchadores are required to participate in no less than three (3) roving bands of avenging luchadores in any given six-month period." 

I figure the law got it about right.

Evil Elvis wrote: On a serious note. Would you defend someone knowing that they have indeed comited a horrible crime? Say a brutal murder of someone helpless?

Part of the reason I decided not to go into criminal law was specifically to avoid moral dilemmas like that...

IMO, to be a good defense lawyer (or DA, for that matter) you either have to either be completely callous, or be completely and thoroughly on board with the constitutional principles (everybody is entitled to a defense, etc).  I don't see how you could live with yourself otherwise.

That said, there are middle grounds.  You might agree to represent a heinous criminal on the understanding that you will not pursue an aquittal, but merely assist with sentencing.  This becomes easier, morally speaking.

But actually trying to get Jeffrey Dahmer aquitted, assuming I thought him guilty?  That would be a tough one.  Don't know if I could do it.

Hitman wrote: Should it be legalized?

LOL MARY JANE!

oreomann33 wrote: If a cop wants to search my car, can I say no?

You can always say no.  Whether the cop has the right to search the car anyway is much more complicated.  But if you say yes, then whatever he finds is fair game.

Hitman wrote: Should it be legalized?

As a libertarian, I say yes.  Nobody's business but yours.

As a utilitarian, I say yes.  Putting pot-smokers in jail is an unnecesary expense.

As a free-marketeer, I say yes.  Let the market decide.

As a law-and-order type, I say yes.  Legalizing pot (and other drugs) would severely undercut the main source of income for criminal gangs, which would severely reduce the influx of illegal guns, which would severely reduce gun crime and generally make the streets safer.  There might be an increase in petty theft and similar crimes, but that is a small price to pay for slowing down the gangs.

Man Bites Dog wrote: Would you be willing to talk to a certain writer for a college paper whenever he needs a source who knows about your specific area of law?

Any time.

Snipa69 wrote: What kind of hours can I expect through law school as far as work load is concerned? What exactly is it that makes passing a bar so difficult (obviuosly a general answer is expected, as each state has it's own bar) and how long did it take you to pass the bar?

Law school is complicated to explain.  Most schools are on the same basic system:  Heavy daily readings, obnoxious in-class interrogations, no exams or papers until the end of the semester, when each class has a comprehensive exam that sets the grade. 

How much work it is really depends on your personality and your goals.  Like I said earlier, it is pretty easy to skate through law school and survive.  If you want good grades (which you should, if you want a good job, which you should - lots of unemployed or underpaid JDs out there) then you have to put in more effort.

I remember completely freaking out when I saw the reading requirement for the first class (i.e. the 300 pages of small print I was supposed to read and understand in the two days after I bought the book, before the first class).

Some people meticulously read everything assigned, and annotate each case.  Others work in study groups to share notes/annotations.  Others skip all the reading and cram for the exam.  Others rely heavily on Gilberts (CliffNotes for law students).

The main problem is that unlike college, there are no true requirements until the final.  So it really depends on how you can/want to pace yourself.

I usually averaged doing about half of the assigned readings, catching up before finals.  During the first two years, this was pretty much a full-time job, but I still managed to play basketball/whatever almost every day for several hours.  If you manage your time, you can study and do well in school and still have time for fun.

It all depends on how anal/stressed you are.  Several of my classmates practically studied 24/7.  Many of those dropped out.  One of my classmates dropped out AFTER taking the exams, before the grades came in.  She just freaked out and left.

It looks overwhelming when you first show up, but it manageable when you get going.  You just have to realize that you chose a profession that involves tons and tons of reading and writing. 

Bar exam - not as difficult as people make it out to be.  In some states (CA, NY) they do try to make it harder, but frankly most of the people that fail didn't prepare or just aren't that smart.  It can happen to anybody (I barely passed one of my sections), but it is really about the preparation.  You MUST take BAR-BRI or other bar exam prep course.  Trying to study for the bar on your own is suicide.  With BAR-BRI and a few practice exams, the multi-state portion is fairly straight-forward.  The state portion is trickier, and varies from state to state.  But here again the trick is to take a review course.

If you go to work for a large firm, they will send you to a review course, and often have their own in-house course as well.  If not, pay the couple grand fee yourself.  Taking a prep course is not optional.

sporx wrote: what's you most strangest case?

Don't do cases.

I haven't been to court since I got sworn in.

(except traffic court, that is...)

Evil Elvis wrote: are you a regular coffee kinda guy or some Latte/Mocha/Expresso Starbucks guy?

I'm a Mountain Dew kinda guy.  But if I were a coffee guy, I would probably go for quality regular coffee.  I can barely stand to set foot in Starbucks and other self-absorbed coffee shops.

I don't understand how people managed to become arrogant about their coffee preferences.  Good lord.

(That said, I must admit that the grande non-fat easy milk extra chai chai my wife gets is pretty tasty, even if I feel like a total tool ordering it)

choopie911 wrote: Did you get my email?

I did.  I responded to your girlfriend.

That's right, I'm having personal email exchanges with your girlfriend...   BAM!

Hades wrote: Ah, here is one. My place of work is currently trying to enact a policy where employees that drive a minimum of one day a per week

As in drive for the job, or just drive to work?

Rambino wrote: The operation is performed during the second semester of the second year of law school.  Right after the soulectomy.

Was the soulectomy painful?  What is the exact procedure?  (I’ve been considering one after I complete my business degree.)  On a related note, do you know if anyone offers package deals on soulectomys and consciencectomys?

Da Hui wrote: Is having an erection in public a illegal or punishable offense? What if your wearing a bathing suit or speedo?

Rambino wrote: . . . unbeknownst to people on the other end, I occasionally go to the bathroom while on the phone.

procarbinefreak wrote: I don't know what I would do if I walked into the bathroom and heard someone talking to themselves in the stall.

Hades wrote: Drive one day for the job, but also applies to personal driving on lunch hour.

All right.

1.  General rule:  Any employer can fire any person at any time for any or no reason, unless there is an employment agreement.  In the US, all employment is basically employment at will.

2.  Giant exception:  No employer can fire an employee because this employee is in a "protected class".  Protected classes are race, gender, disability, military service, religious beliefs, age, etc.  You can fire somebody because you don't like them, but not because they are black.

3.  More exception:  If your reason for firing people is a "proxy" for a protected class, you also can't fire.  You can't suddenly fire everybody who listens to rap, for instance - not because rap-listeners are protected, but because rap-listening is probably a proxy for blackness.  So you can fire people you don't like, but if it turns out all the people you don't like are black, then you have a problem.

4.  Poor drivers are not a protected class.  Any employee could fire you for being a poor driver, whether your job involved driving or not.

5.  In some states, however, people with a criminal record are a protected class - you can't fire somebody just because they have a criminal record, generally speaking, unless that criminal record relates directly to the job.  I don't know that this is the case in Cali, but I expect that it is, since Cali is about as pro-employee as it gets.

6.  So, in your case, they could just fire you if they felt like it.  If they want to fire you because of your traffic tickets, however, they may have a problem.  Tickets for tinting, for instance, should not (one would think) relate to your ability to do the job-related driving.  Tickets for moving violations, on the other hand, relate to driving, and might therefore allow them to fire you.

7.  As to the looking up of the DMV records:  Criminal records are public.  In most states, they are online (I tried to search your records, but the LA County records are not searchable by name - bummer).  Generally speaking, anybody can look anybody up.  In most states, DMV tickets count as "criminal" convictions, and are in that public database, available to anybody.  Therefore, generally speaking, your employer is free to look up your (or anybody else's) criminal records at any time.

8.  BUT - companies that to background checks on people for a fee are subject to regulation.  If your employer hired somebody else to do their searching, then this consultant has to follow some rules, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act.  The FCRA requires that you be notified that they are about to search your record, and that you get a chance to clear your name if you think they found something incorrect (but you do not get a chance to defend yourself if you really did it).  All of this only applies if your employer hires somebody else to do their searches.

tl;dr = You are probably SOL, unless they want to fire you for having tinted windows.

Brian Fellows wrote: How often do you have to drink the blood of the innocent in order to stay alive?

Where exactly do you think we would find these "innocents" of which you speak?  We have to get by on tainted blood these days.

BB wrote: What is love?

A second-hand emotion.

Mack wrote: Was the soulectomy painful?  What is the exact procedure?  (I’ve been considering one after I complete my business degree.)  On a related note, do you know if anyone offers package deals on soulectomys and consciencectomys?

Painful?  Once it is done, you can't feel a thing.  As best as I can recall, the procedure consisted mainly of severely tightening a necktie while repeatedly shouting "OBJECTION!" very loudly.  That, and the human sacrifice.

I think it is included with the tuition for most accredited JD and MBA programs.  The consciencectomy is not required if you go for the full soulectomy.

Mack wrote: Da Hui wrote: Is having an erection in public a illegal or punishable offense? What if your wearing a bathing suit or speedo? Rambino, can I sue Da Hui for the mental trauma/anguish related to the visualization caused by this post?  What about a class action suit on behalf of all other forumers who were cruelly subjected to this?  Want to represent us?

This clearly qualifies as intentional infliction of emotional distress.  All we need is for somebody to show physical manifestation of the emotional distress, like failure to sleep, or inability to perform their job.

Then just call your local ambulance chaser.  They'll do a better job than me for less.

Da Hui wrote: How would I go about looking up somebodys Criminal records online. For free.

http://www.google.com/ - www.google.com .  Enter "criminal records [state]".  Choose the site that looks like the "official" site.  Search away. 

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLF,GGLF:1969-53,GGLF:en&q=wisconsin+criminal+records+online - Here is what I got for Wisconsin .  The official site is the second one.

Evil Elvis wrote: Who is your favorite TV Judge?

I can't stand any of them. 

Even cop/lawyer shows annoy me.  I like watching Law & Order because they stay pretty close to lawyerly reality, but stuff like Matlock just has me slapping my forehead every three seconds.

And is there like a Lawyer Hiarchy? Wich type of lawyer ranks on top and wich are like the subhuman bottom feeders?

There is absolutely a lawyer hierarchy.  At the very top you will find ... whatever kind of lawyer you are talking to at the moment.  The one thing we all share is momumental arrogance.  We all know we are the best kind of lawyer.

Da Hui wrote: In a car, what is the fastest speed to which you have driven?

125.  That's when the governor kicks in.  Actually, that was in the van, but whatever.  I don't think I've taken the car above 115 or so, for whatever reason.

Jim Paint!  No time no see.

This one will take a little bit.  Will get back.

Jim Paint wrote: Asbestos is in the linoleum under a leaky sink.  insurance company is contacted to remove the linoleum with exposed asbestos, they bring in a company to remove this.  little boy and girl are playing in the basement and find piles of dust that had fallen through the cracks of the kitchen floor.  company comes to remove again, and They seal off all the rooms from the kitchen to do this, however leave the vents open and the air conditioner pulls the dust throughout the house.  house is deemed uninhabitable by the state.  what happens now?

All right.

First, asbestos is serious business, as if you didn't know that.  Nobody should go anywhere near that house until the problem is remediated.  Which it can be.

Second, you shouldn't have to do anything.  Sounds like the state and the insurance company is already involved, and they should be able to sort stuff out.  Once the asbestos has been discovered, federal law requires that it be remediated, and failure to do so can lead to criminal penalties.  The contractor should be all over fixing this.

If, for some reason, nothing is happening, call the insurance company, the contractor, your state DNR, and anybody else you can think of.  Make it clear that there is a pile of freakin' asbestos on the floor.

Once the dust settles, so to speak, you may have civil claims against some people.  Certainly the contractor that screwed it up.  Homeowner's insurance should also cover a lot.  Basically, you should be able to recover temporary lodging costs and other direct costs.  That should be pretty automatic.

As to a larger claim regarding health issues, there would not be a claim until there is a health problem.  So it is unfortunate that the kids were playing in a pile of asbestos, but unless one of them starts coughing or something there is no claim.

So - get the house fixed.  Get reimbursed for costs.  Get the kids screened for everything on a regular basis, and make sure the doctor knows about the asbestos incident.

Good luck.

Question 1: I'm 16 and been arrested once and that was in missouri, so is their a public site or w/e where people can view my record even though I am a minor?

Question 2: My neighbors cat came into my own property and attacked my cat on a number of occasions, I've tried talking with the cats owners with nothing ever happening and my cat still gets attacked by the neighbors cat, can I legally (in missouri) kill the neighbors cat as protection of my own personal property? and if not, what else can I do?

Question 3: would you like a cookie?

__sneaky__ wrote: Question 1: I'm 16 and been arrested once and that was in missouri, so is their a public site or w/e where people can view my record even though I am a minor?

Dunno.  Google is your friend.

I suspect not, however.  Juvenile records are generally not public.

Question 2: My neighbors cat came into my own property and attacked my cat on a number of occasions, I've tried talking with the cats owners with nothing ever happening and my cat still gets attacked by the neighbors cat, can I legally (in missouri) kill the neighbors cat as protection of my own personal property? and if not, what else can I do?

Frankly, I don't know the first thing about pet law.  My guess is that shooting the other cat for bullying yours is a bad idea.  If you kill the cat while it is about to kill yours you may have a defense, but pre-emptive killing is probably a no-no.

My suggestion would be to call the police, the DNR, and the Humane Society, and see what they think.

Question 3: would you like a cookie?

I love cookies.  Oatmeal raisin and white chocolate chunk are preferred.

Snake6 wrote: How would I find what cases a lawyer has done, and a transcript of such cases?

No easy way.

Most lawyers will be happy to throw a couple of references at you, but those are of course only the good references.  I am not aware of any official/public review system in any jurisdiction.

Lawyers, much like doctors, are selected almost completely by referral.

Snipa69 wrote: ^^I know that Microsoft Encyclopedia has corpious ammounts of cases.

Appellate cases (and some federal trial cases) are published, in paper and online, and they do list counsel, but those are only the cases that go to appeal, which is not a good sample.  Most cases do not go to appeal.

Searching can also be difficult without access to expensive legal research services.

What exactly does the Bar Exam entail? Written and Oral examination or just written?

I do not believe that any state has an oral component.  When I took the bar there were about 500 of us, and that was in Wisconsin.  I imagine thousands upon thousands take the bar each semester in CA or NY.  Having an oral component would be prohibitively expensive.

The bar exam in (I think) every state consists of two parts:  The Multi-State and the State portion.  The Multi-State is a standardized multiple-choice exam with questions that have the same answer regardless of state.  Questions are the same across the country, but the passing level varies.  It covers a wide variety of legal areas.  One full day for this portion.

The State portion is usually essay, sometimes multiple choice, and generally focuses on legal elements that are specific to the given state.  One or two days for this this portion.

Some states also require a separate ethics exam.  When required, it is usually a standardized multi-state test.

Da Hui wrote: Whats for dinner?

Stonefire Pizza.  Basically a cross between Chuck E. Cheese and Dave and Buster's.  Mediocre food surrounded by loud families.

cdacda13 wrote: What do you Major in during College?

I tripled.  Psychology, Philosophy, and Mathematics.

What would you recommend a kid who wants to be a lawyer to major in during college?

If you plan on doing patent law you need a technical degree, like science or engineering.  Otherwise it doesn't really matter much.  English, History, and PolySci are the pre-law classics, but you can really do anything.

Regardless of your major, I would recommend that you at least try to take classes that require structured thinking, like science/math/philosophy.  That will be very helpful after law school.  Unless you plan on doing criminal law, I would highly recommend an accounting class and an econ class (wish I had done that).

A pre-law class or government structures class can make law school easier, but won't make a difference after law school.

But, frankly, I suspect that having a non-standard major will help you get in to a good school.  All the better schools are looking for resume diversity, and they must get bored with the endless stream of history majors.

How hard are the LSATS?

The LSAT is a strange creature.  Along with the GMAT, it is the only grad school test that requires ZERO knowledge.  It is basically a souped-up ACT.  If you did well on the ACT, you will find the LSAT familiar.

And, just like the ACT, preparation is key.  If you go in unprepared for the LSAT you will get killed.  The time is short, and you don't have time to sit there and try to figure out how the questions work.

But with preparation, it is a very manageable test.  Even though the questions vary, the question categories are pretty stable.  Once you are familiar with the various categories, and have practiced those categories, you will be fine.

Buy every LSAT book you can find.  All of them.  Then order all of the old practice tests you can get your hands on (you can get old real tests from the testing people).  This is not something to skimp on.  The LSAT will count as much as your GPA for your law school admission.  You spent four years and a small fortune on your GPA - take the LSAT just as seriously.

Study for the LSAT, and practice practice practice.  I started studying about a year before the test, and for the last few months I was doing a full timed practice test every day.

And since the LSAT is overwhelmingly logic riddles of various kinds, those structured thinking classes you took will be of great assistance as well.