Ultra Vires Vol 14 Issue 4: 2012 January

First Edition January 30, 2012 Vol. XIV, No. IV ultravires.ca

EDITORIAL

2 | January 30, 2013

ultravires.ca who’s read Richard Thaler’s book Nudge knows that making things a little bit more accessible can make a big difference.

For a few hundred dollars, it’s worth trying once.

Ditch Examsoft If you’re talking to someone from one of Ontario’s other law schools and there’s a lull in the conversation, bond over your shared experiences with Examsoft. It slows down, glitches, and then crashes on a few students every year. Everyone has seen this happen to someone, and each set of exams we just pray it won’t be us.

I mean Christ, how hard is it to write functioning word processing software? We’re not asking for high end graphics or even a more intuitive interface. Just not freezing and crashing would be great.

We should be allowed to use MS Word, and just sign an honour code pledging not to cheat. It doesn’t bode well for a self-regulating profession if they can’t trust us enough for this option to work.

Later Law Library Hours Bora is packed during the last month of each term when we all actually do the work we’re supposed to have been working on all semester.

The library is open an extra few hours during this peak period, but it still closes earlier than many other libraries on campus.

Miscellaneous Ideas Editor-in-Chief, Patrick Hartford, and Layout Editor, Alyssa Howes, review the January issue of Ultra Vires.

patrick hartford editor- in - chief (3l)

Flu Shot Day The SLS sits on a giant pile of money that grows every year. What if we used a tiny portion of that money for something useful? (Not that an open bar at Law Ball isn’t useful…)

Everyone knows they should get a flu shot (well, not some crunchy granola hippies, but fuck them). But we’re busy and it’s easy to forget.

Flu season and paper season start up around

the same time. If there’s a group that will show up sick at school to work, it’s us.

Getting the flu is bad enough, but being out of commission when you have to write papers and exams is really painful. Most of us just hope for the best as we share the school with those special people who wipe their noses on their hands and then touch all the doorknobs.

The SLS should pay for a ‘Flu Shot Day’ at the law school each November. The shots themselves are free, and for $115 an hour you can pay a nurse to give them out at school (TLC Alert Nursing & Home Care Services offers this service).

Sceptics will say that people should just get the flu shot elsewhere on campus, but anyone

Aren’t we supposed to be poorly adjusted workaholics? How much could it possibly cost to pay someone to keep the library open a couple extra hours during the last few weeks of exams? At the very least, the library shouldn’t close the night before papers are due at 10 a.m. the next morning. Who could pay for this? SLS surplus, I’m looking at you.

A Business Law Clinic Laura McGee has been championing this cause and everyone should sign her petition.

We all know that our school has a strong focus on business, and we’re not fooling anyone by pretending otherwise.

Providing low cost business law advice is extremely helpful for entrepreneurs with good ideas and no capital. We’re all learning corporate law anyway. Helping people who can’t afford $500/ hour for a corporate lawyer would be a step in the right direction.

Cover Photo by Cary Ferguson

Ultra Vires is an editorially independent publication. We are open to contributions which reflect diverse points of view, and our contents do not necessarily reflect the views of the Faculty of Law, the Students’ Law Society, or the editorial board.

Editor-in-Chief Editor-in-Chief, Emeritus News Editors Features Editors Opinion Editors Diversions Editors Special Content Editors 1L Editors Photographer VP Finance Web Editor Layout Editor

Patrick Hartford Matt Brown Josh Stark , Luke Gill & Lee Webb Emilie Lahaie & Jacquie Richards Michael Portner Gartke & Josh Mandryk Emily Debono & Rebeka Lauks Bhuvana Sankaranarayanan & Katherine Georgious Paloma van Groll & Marita Zouravlioff Cary Ferguson Daanish Samadmoten Kevin Siu Alyssa Howes

Errors

If you find any errors in Ultra Vires, please email ultra.vires@utoronto.ca

Advertising

Advertising inquiries should be sent to vp Finance Daanish Samadmoten at ultra.vires@utoronto.ca.

Submissions

If you have an article submission or a tip for us, please contact us at ultra.vires@utoronto.ca.

Ultra Vires reserves the right to edit submissions for brevity and clarity.

EDITORIAL/NEWS

ultravires.ca

Report From a Coupla Guinea Pigs

January 30, 2013 | 3

What it’s like to be graded on the new system

marita zouraviloff

S

o, results are in. We have official been graded using Ps and Hs. How does it feel? We’re not really sure.

We have no feelings attached to P or to H, whereas we had a kind of sense of what A-B-C-D meant.

Perhaps this is because we learned the correct order of the alphabet at a young and tender age.

Or because we have been graded using that kind of scale since time immemorial.

One professor explained the distribution system, indicating that roughly 50% of the class will get a P, 30% will get an H, and 15% HH. So when we tried to explain the system to outsiders (ie to those curious non-law friends and family), we put it this way: P seems like it’s “fine,” H is probably “good,” and HH seems like it’s “really good.”

We also kind of figured that P is like a B, H is like a B+ and HH is like an A.

josh stark

O

(3l)

(1l) & paloma

However, a different professor indicated the equivalent percentages of the letters. He said that a P is a 70-72%, H is 74-76%, and HH is 78% +.

This seems to indicate our H = B+ idea is a fallacy, as at least from undergrad, we recall that a B was 70-75%, a B+ was 75-80%, A- was 80-85% and an A was 85% or above.

If getting the good grades is supposed to be a matter of putting the work in, it’s hard to know where the payoff is or if the extra hours at the library are worth it. It feels as though the P category casts such a wide net that you’re not sure what’s needed to launch you into the land of Hs (or HHs).

For instance, you could work at your 60% capacity range and get a P, but it’s quite plausible that you could work at 80% and still get a P or maybe an H. Simplifying the grading system into these broader categories seems to create a disincentive to working hard.

van groll

(1l)

If you compare our system to Harvard and Yale (which is the whole point, right?) the difference is that those schools don’t have the “HH” category.

This Harvard/Yale system makes it seem much more plausible that a P is what the “smart average student” would get, and that the H is that higher level. Putting an HH in the mix as we do just puts the P category down farther than it’s “supposed” to be (the U of T Faculty of Law website stresses that P is “the most frequently given grade”). So if we’re going to adopt this Harvard/Yale system— why add this higher category? It seems like it defeats the purpose. These new letters are meant to emphasize our performance as within a group of smart people. Now, we don't get clarity of the more nuanced system (with different tiers of success that ideally correlate to how hard you work) and yet also don't get the benefits of the Good/ Excellent Harvard/Yale system. Instead we’re left with “meh,” “slightly better meh” and “YAY YOU ARE AMAZING.”

It may be a bit early to fully judge how much of a success the new grading system is but at this point it’d be lucky to get an LP. According to the faculty, the aims of the new system are (1) to provide more informative feedback to students, and (2) to enhance the information value of our transcripts for employers, courts and graduate schools. These objectives are striking because… the opposite seems to have come true. We are confused. Employers are confused. And most importantly, our egos are confused.

Chris Alexander Speaks on Canadian Economy, Global Conflict, and Humanitarian Careers U of T Law Conservatives host star Conservative MP

n Monday, January 14th the U of T a business is easy and corporate tax rates are low.” Chamberlain. The small conflicts of the world be told about why AQ has survived in Pakistan” Law Conservatives hosted Chris do add up to big issues” Alexander, Member of Parliament “It’s hard to measure, but I think there is an “Will we all stand idly by, while a state of 160 for Ajax-Pickering. Appointed as exceptional robustness to the Canadian Justice In particular, he identified South Asia and the million people quietly provides safe haven for Canada’s Ambassador to Afghanistan when he system. We have the soundest banks in the Middle East as areas of significant future conflict the largest terrorist organizations in the world? was only 34, Alexander is considered by many world, the most resilient financial system in the —regions which feature major unresolved bor- That is the hypocrisy of the international system, to be a rising star in the Conservative Party. His world. This is the one country in the world der issues. He had particularly strong words on of the UN Security Council, of which Pakistan talk at the law school ranged widely from praising where… it’s not popular to be a banker, but it’s Pakistan’s relationship with terrorist groups in is a member, and the hypocrisy of international the strengths of the Canadian economy, current still respectable” South Asia. law, and its the hypocrisy of us all.” challenges facing the international political system, and the value of seeking a career in humanitar- Turning to international relations, Chris argued “If anyone doubts that al-Qaeda is really an Chris ended his talk by asking students to work ian law. that strong action against rogue states can be institution, connected to government agencies on humanitarian issues, in humanitarian law. a necessary tool to prevent larger conflicts. in all kinds of uncharted ways, if anyone doubts Chris began by offering a glowing assessment how rooted they are in Pakistan, in their poli- “There is no faster way for us as concerned citizens of Canada’s economic fundamentals.

“There are about 5-6 wwii histories out there, tics… go and see Zero Dark Thirty. The movie to get traction on issues around the world than and every one of those diagnoses of the causes struck me as extraordinary… [the characters in through human rights and a humanitarian “I’m very uncomfortable bragging about our of wwii says that it could have been much less the film] are trying to convince themselves that presence. I don’t think the UN in Afghanistan country. We’re not known as braggarts. But we serious if there had been concerted action against this was happening in isolation from what their would have been worth anything if we had not do have a story to tell. There’s a dynamism to our Mussolini, if there had been much stronger partners in the ISI [Pakistani Intelligence] were had a first-rate human rights staff” job market… we’re seen as the place where it is response from the Allies against Hitler, if there doing… My prediction is that when all is said most likely to have a business succeed. Starting had been someone with more backbone than and done, there will be a very depressing truth to

NEWS

Martha Hall Findlay Fireside Chat 4 | January 30, 2013

cary ferguson

ultravires.ca

(3l)

O

n Monday, January 14th, former Bay Street lawyer Martha Hall Findlay (and Osgoode grad) sat down in the Faculty Lounge to discuss her candidacy for the Liberal Party of Canada.

Hall Findlay began by discussing the Liberal Party’s current position in the political landscape.

A leader, Hall Findlay said, should be someone Canadians could trust based on their experience.

Any potential leader would have to understand what Canadians were going through. Having run for the Party’s leadership in 2006, Hall Findlay saw the Liberals making many of the same mistakes now as they had then, as it is still unclear how the Liberals stand on many important issues.

To succeed in the next election, the next Liberal leader needs new ideas.

Speaking on ideas, Hall Findlay refused to define herself according to a left/right dichotomy. She is pro-trade, pro-marijuana, and more typically left-wing on social and aboriginal issues.

When asked how she would approach Idle No More and Aboriginal leaders, Hall Findlay answered that she thought the movement arose from Aboriginal frustrations with the Prime Minister and his treatment of the Kelowna Accord. While the Prime Minister’s apology to First Nations peoples had been an inspiring moment, she said, the attitude of respect and cooperation forged under the Kelowna Accord has been lost.

Asked about law reform, Hall Findlay said that the current length of time it takes to access the justice system was hurting both people and the system. She also criticized the government’s handling of Omar Khadr, saying that he was a hard person to fight for, but that he should have been brought back to Canada sooner.

Turning from domestic issues to foreign affairs, Hall Findlay was upset over how the Prime Minister had turned the Israeli-Palestinian conflict into a divisive domestic issue. She supports a two-

Above: Martha Hall Findlay (left) and event organizer Joanna Langille (right).

Below: Audience members await Liberal Party of Canada leadership candidate Martha Hall Findlay

state solution, and more generally supports multi-lateral solutions to international problems.

Onthe Responsibility to Protect doctrine, Hall Findlay said that Canada should not go into Mali without first discussing how and why. She criticized the government’s acquisition of F-35s, saying that she could not see a compelling Foreign Affairs reason for buying them. She was, however, in favour of more naval spending.

Canada’s Next Law School? bhuvana sankaranarayanan

(2l)

whether the covenant is inconsistent with federal or provincial law, and examine its potentially discriminatory nature. Expanding the scope of the Federation might mean limiting the options of law students that want unconventional educations. But limiting such options may be more consistent with the nature of law as a self-regulating profession.

Trinity Western University, a private Christian university in Langley, BC. Image © Stuart Miller

M

ost law schools now worry about placing their graduates amidst the growing reality of fewer job prospects. Over the last two years, Lakehead University (ON) and Thompson Rivers University (BC) welcomed students to Canada’s newest law schools with the promise of little more than an uncertain future. The creation of two new law schools during an articling crisis, however, does not appear to have been enough to satiate the appetite of every would-be law school. Trinity Western University, a private Christian university, applied in 2012 to have Canada’s newest accredited law school and British Columbia’s fourth.

Creating a law school is not a light decision and

poses many hurdles. The Federation of Law Societies of Canada must approve the program and confirm that its graduates would be qualified to enter into an articling program. The government must approve the request for the university itself to have a law program.

Although its status as a private Christian university gives credence to the idea that TWU would be providing a unique service, this status also brings controversy. In a recently-publicised letter, Bill Flanagan, President of the Canadian Council of Law Deans (CCLD), strongly condemned the application to the Federation of Canadian Law Societies, stating that the community covenant that all TWU students are required to sign was “a

matter of great concern for all the members of the CCLD.” He singled out the provision that requires abstinence “from sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman,” stating that it “specifically contemplates that gay, lesbian or bisexual students may be subject to disciplinary measures including exclusion.”

The Federation of Law Societies refuses to comment on the status of applications before a decision is released, but notes that their mandate is only to assess whether a law program meets the national requirements, rather than to investigate admissions-based policies. As a result, it is not necessarily a part of this mandate to accommodate Mr. Flanagan’s request that the Federation investigate

This is not the first time that TWU has been embroiled in a licensing debate due to its Christian mandate. In 2001, the Supreme Court of Canada released a decision confirming that the university should be allowed to open a teacher’s college, based on their right to freedom of conscience and religion.

TRU would set many precedents if its application were approved. As the first private institution in Canada to have a law school as well as the first religious one to do so, it might even inspire more applications. But in light of the Federation’s limited mandate and the unusual nature of the case, the truly precedential event might be for the Federation not to approve TWU’s application on the grounds that Mr. Flanagan suggests. And during a time of limited job opportunity, the students who will actually absorb the impact of dozens of new recruits continue to have the least say.

Bored to Death ultravires.ca

NEWS

American Law Schools Experiment with 3L Curriculums

Moreover, there are those who question whether this addresses the root problem: the soaring cost of law school tuition.

According to a January 18, 2013 op-ed in the New York Times, the real issue is whether there should be a 3L at all. As tuition continues to rise, it becomes more and more difficult to justify law students subsidizing legal academia. In a now well-known 2010 statement, former Stanford Dean Larry Kramer said that “One of the wellknown facts about law school is it never took three years to do what we are doing; it took maybe two years at most, maybe a year-and-a-half.”

luke gill

T

There is some momentum to addressing this issue head on. Northwestern University, for example, allows students to pursue a fast-tracked JD in which students complete three years of work in two.

While no doubt difficult, this option saves students one year of tuition and the opportunity cost of being in school rather than working for a year.

(3l)

he old saying goes that 3L will bore you to death, but that might not be the case for long—not in the US. A handful of major American law schools have recently made changes to their 3L curriculums in the hopes that 3L will be considered worth its lofty price tag.

In the fall NYU Law officially shifted away from simply offering conventional 3L elective courses to offering a range of opportunities outside of the classroom. The new 3L curriculum focuses on studying abroad, externships with governmental agencies and the option to pursue a concentration in a particular area of law. Stanford Law had already made changes in a similar spirit, placing an emphasis on joint degrees. Washington and Lee took a more aggressive approach in scrapping the 3L curriculum entirely and replacing it with clinical and internship opportunities.

It is unlikely that many of these changes would impress a student at U of T Law. After all, students are already able to pursue full-time clinical positions and go on exchange for a full semester.

January 30, 2013 | 5

SLS Seeks Input on Transition Space, Bora's head students’ law society

M

oving into a new apartment can be stressful and complicated by decisions regarding where to place certain furniture or how best to setup your bedroom. Moving an entire school can be even more complicated.

This year, the SLS has been consulting with the faculty and administration regarding the new building and the transition space of Victoria College. The Building Consultation Committee consists of members from the administration, both sides of the SLS (Social Affairs and Student Affairs and Governance) as well as representatives from the Graduate Law Students’ Association (GLSA).

On January 18, 2013, NYU Law hosted a discussion amongst leaders of the New York bar, judges and law school faculty that goes a step further than what has been done at Northwestern.

The proposed rule change would allow students to write the bar and practice after only two years of study. Such students would not be awarded a JD, as the American Bar Association requires three years of study in order to obtain a law degree. That said, this would cut the cost of attending law school significantly—this could mean greater access to a legal education at a top law school and more leeway for students to pursue lower-paying public interest work. If New York adopts this model, it would not be surprising to see other states follow suit.

The Committee has been meeting every few weeks since last summer, and has discussed everything from where students are going to get coffee and how many plugs per room are the right number to what a Moot Court Room should look like and how much room the Journals need for their offices.

No Canadian entity, whether a law school or provincial bar, has any similar plans in mind— at least not publicly. As Canadian law school tuition continues to creep higher, however, the American debate over the relevance of 3L is sure to spread north of the border.

What rooms in the transition space would be best used as a lounge or as a study room?

Through all of our meetings, one message has been clear: we have a say in what’s going to happen.

The administration wants, and needs, student feedback about how the transitional space will be used and about what is needed in the new building. At this stage of the “big move”, there are many decisions about tradeoffs that will need to be made about the transition space. For instance:

Then there are important logistical questions: How many law students will it take to move Bora’s Head?

How will we keep other university students from stealing Mayo’s Muffins at Muffin Madness?

The answers to these questions are sometimes quite easy (clearly, Professor Alarie can move Bora’s head by himself, and we’ll just ID everyone at Muffin Madness). Sometimes the questions are harder, and the answers more difficult.

In all seriousness, your law school community experience depends on us identifying what makes it count for you—so we can do our best to find adequate alternatives while we all go through the transition years. We are doing our best to answer as many questions as we can, but we can’t do it alone.

To this end, from Wednesday, January 30 until Friday, February 5, the Building Consultation Committee will be administering a survey to gain some insight into student needs and wants.

The survey will be administered both online (you will receive a listserv message) as well as in person in the Rowell room during lunch hour.

Take a moment this week to fill out the survey and give us your thoughts.

If you have any questions or concerns, or would the SLS at law.sls@utoronto.ca.

How should we set up the reading space in the reading room: large desks alone or should we add some study carrels?

Birge Carnegie: The Awkward Years alanna tevel

T

(1l) & marita

zouravlioff

(1l)

he theme of the new faculty building is to make the spirit soar—what happens to our spirit while it’s in limbo?

collection will be accessible here. Obscure book lovers, you might have to find another hobby… we highly recommend The Internet.

Attendance was rather sparse at the January 16th meeting about the ‘accommodations’ for next year, so for your convenience we bring you a brief about what life is going to be like during the big reno. This way you can send your requests to the SLS or have something to say when the Building Consultation Survey comes out (see the SLS article above). 3Ls, you can stop reading now and continue enjoying your carefree lives. For the rest of the student body, read on for the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Classrooms: Gone are the days that everything will be housed under the same roof. Via SLS: “Classrooms will be in a combination of Vic rooms (in Northrop Frye), Falconer and possibly some Flavelle rooms. The Faculty is doing their utmost to ensure that there will be sufficient plug capability”…this is where it gets ugly. Get ready to duke it out with your classmates for outlets.

On the upside we have the satisfaction of knowing MCR’s days are numbered.

The Home base: Birge-Carnegie across the street will be where all the hangouts go down.

They’re knocking down a few walls to make one large chill space to serve as a faux Rowell Room.

We can only speculate as to whether it will be complete with rodent. The bad news: there’s no Pit to clique out in.

Bora who: Birge will also house the library and librarians and the most used parts of the

Food and Stuff: The legendary Wymilwood Café will be a considerable upgrade in the food department. There will also be a kitchen on both sides of Queen’s Park for those packed lunches we in debt are so fond of.

decent running shoes, or perhaps a Segway. And get used to that Museum station walk-through.

(Our answer: go younger—start scoping those undergrads).

Youths: Hopefully we’re all good at sharing, and tolerating the wily ways of youngins. Probably one of the biggest drawbacks to the interim time is that we will be sharing buildings with undergraduate students. And we all know their zest for life and fun can be obnoxious.

Option B: If there just isn't enough room, it’s only fair that, because the first years will get the benefit of the new building, they should get the shaft with lockers and classroom locations next year. They won’t know any better any way. How about we assign three 1Ls to a locker and we each get our own? Do the numbers work out okay there?

Office Space: It looks like the faculty and administration offices are staying put. This could lead to a downturn in office hours attendance. Wait… who are we kidding. Nothing can keep a law student from their prof ‘n’ me time.

There’s some great accommodating being done here, but we think that there could be more accommodations to accommodate us (of course we do!).

Here are a few concerns to get the ball rolling:

Book keeping: Best effort is being placed on Flavelle High: everyone being under one roof locating all the lockers across the road. Unfor- should be a huge priority. Law students love to tunately, it’s looking like some people will still hang. We’ve got to preserve that high school have to return to good ol’ Flavelle to grab their feeling. Plus, in the words of a good friend of ours, books. Advice to those people: invest in some "How am I gonna scope all the hot first years?"

Option C: If we’re all going to get the shaft, CAN WE GET A DISCOUNT ON OUR TUITION? WE KNOW YOU HAVE AT LEAST $10 MILLION DOLLARS IN THE BANK AT THIS POINT. In conclusion, although our current space may need a face lift, we’re going to miss our current set up and the few amenities we have. If you have any requests or ideas for the Birge, speak up now with what’s important to you.

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

How to Have a Pretend Girlfriend 6 | January 30, 2013

anonymous

W

hen you’ve got a busy schedule filled have thought of and implemented it before. say, a whole lot of college footballs to This option, of course, is to simply make up a throw around, finding the time to find pretend girlfriend. and maintain a “real” girlfriend can be pretty difficult. If you have the additional misfortune But wait, you say, won’t that mean this woman of being a pallid, quivering, Bora Laskin Library “does not, like, actually exist?” survivor with a backlog of terrible jokes that involve the phrase “patently unreasonable” Yes! I reply, but who cares? If one pays close and how hard it is to have a shared locker, then attention to those members of the law school it may very well be completely impossible. community lucky enough to date someone who does not in fact also go here (or who more However, never fear. There is another perfectly proactively has thought of this “lying” strategy legal (I think?) option for solving your romantic already), one may note that neither we nor they woes in time for Valentine’s Day. This solution have seen said person in at least 6 months. As is so obvious and so utterly foolproof that, aside such, why not create a soul mate in your beautiful from (technically) entirely defeating the “real” mind who likes your Bora tan and thinks your purpose of relationships and being completely, “networking events” are as awesome and important bizarrely dishonest (minor caveats!), there is no as you do? Imagination land is f*cking smiles good reason why all law students should not sex and rainbows!

Valentine’s What?

The holiday of indifference ashvin singh

Here’s how to do it.

I

Do be realistic.

Since you are at the point of literally making up someone who cares about your comings and goings, your standards for real life people have definitely previously been too high. As such, it needs to be said that your fake girlfriend has to be within the standard deviation of people you can reasonably, actually be expected to convince to go out with you. A Harvard educated Swedish Model/dancer turned senatorial candidate with a big taste for philanthropy and college football and a great sense of humour is probably not also interested in your 140 page L’Heureux Dube dissent poetry slam. In fact, so far, no one has been.

2

Do not use someone you or anyone else may know as a “reference woman” For ideal photographic proof of your relationship, look for an undergraduate exchange student at another university, or perhaps for a particularly classily dressed mail order bride. Classmates, former or current, may take note of your claims and blow your cover by pointing out that they’re not actually going out with you.

3

Do Use Social Media Carefully.

Facebook and Twitter accounts, combined with a well-placed Craigslist casual encounters ad, can essentially replace all “real” human connection, and it already does for most of your classmates. Your girlfriend having said account, as such, is ~50% of what’s necessary to make her exist. To do it well, remember that less is more. She should write on your wall and like your photos occasionally, but not constantly.

Moreover, she should appear to have interests separate from you even though, in "real life", she’ll never need them .You’re everything she ever dreamed of.

4

Do take trips together Even though you never actually need to spend time with your fake girlfriend (she’s so laid back!), you do need to occasionally disappear from the critical eye of your friends and family lest they notice that you’re never with the wonderful woman you pulled out of your a**.

I recommend fake romantic jaunts to Hawaii.

It’s nice at this time of year.

5

Do let her down easy, and be discreet There may come a time when you need to get rid of your fake girlfriend, either because you’ve caught the eye of a flesh and blood person (unlikely) or because you are concerned that a major New York firm may consider your nonexistent woman’s web presence to be evidence that you have other, vaguely B type priorities and are thus unemployable. The good news is that breaking up with your fake girlfriend is actually relatively easy—she doesn’t have much say in the matter, and can be done without ever actually talking to her. The management of this breakup to your friends and family, however, can be tricky. While they have never in fact seen your fake girlfriend, they may notice your breakup on Facebook or ask why you’ve stopped taking trips to Hawaii and started awkwardly hitting on undergrads at the Dance Cave again.

You can avoid this hassle with a little bit of care and discretion. You should frame your breakup as amicable or slightly your fault—you felt you were going a different way with things, she agreed, she wasn’t good enough for your high standards, etc. You should, if at all possible, avoid tying up loose ends too tightly, for instance by claiming that she died of leukemia before spending an entire evening constructing an internet shrine to her memory. While respectful, this kind of thing tends to end terribly, specifically when the likeness of said woman is seen walking down the street a few weeks later, very much alive.

Just saying.

(2l)

W

hile I personally have never made much of Valentine’s Day, the editorial board of UV asked me to lend a singles perspective to the annual anniversary of teddy bears, chocolate and inorganic romance.

While the celebration of love on any day of the year is hardly something controversial, the holiday in theory is at odds with popular practice. The lead up to February 14th is inevitably met with unnatural pressure to express and share an emotion that is intended to be organic. Popular culture mandates expensive evenings of romantic elation, perfected by commercial acquisitions and Kodak moments that embody long lasting memories. Hallmark’s secret, of course, is that not every couple undergoes a marriage proposal on top of the Empire State Building every February 14th. The consequence is that many people— whether single or attached—emerge with feelings of disappointment and dissonance.

The happiest people I know around Valentine’s Day are those who manage their expectations.

Busy couples who treat the holiday as an opportune reminder to spend some much needed time together rarely sport a frown on February 15th.

Those of us who are single and happy are happy to point out that the holiday is manufactured, but rarely practice what we preach. Every sitcom on HBO tells us that February 14th is the time of year to pop out a bottle of wine, inhale huge quantities of Haagen Daas and start browsing OkCupid, but it is just as easy to be happy about who we are and raise a toast to our affectionate friends on their special night. After all, until we find the right person, being single is its own reward.

Someday we too will be scrambling to line the pockets of predatory retailers constructing the perfect nuit d’amour.

So to all the couples out there, enjoy the roses and chocolate, but don’t let the holiday cause more stress than it diffuses. A happy Festivus to the rest of us.

U of T Law Fashion File Five Simple Rules for Stylish Suiting

brendan stevens

(2l)

“I thought your husband was gay because he dresses so chic.”

My mother’s hairdresser—who also happens to be my father’s hairdresser—recently uttered these wonderfully welcome words upon realizing my father was married to a woman. My mother instantly called me to share the good news.

My father’s sense of style has been an ongoing project of mine since I was a young boy. Putting aside the issues associated with gender and sexuality stereotypes for a minute, the hairdresser’s assessment pleased me greatly for two reasons: first, the fact that a Calgarian used the word chic in everyday conversation is, well, so chic; and second, I took this statement as a sign that perhaps my fashion advice to my father was paying off.

My increased self-confidence in my fashion sensibilities, as a result of the above story (or what my father describes as “The Incident”), lead me to accept Ms. Lahaie’s generous request for me to write a guest post on men’s fashion this week.

Because men’s fashion is such a broad topic, I decided to focus on formal attire. As men, we have less fashion options than our female colleagues; therefore, the line separating drab from fab is much more subtle. The devil is in the details.

Without further ado (and there certainly was a lot of it), here are my Five Simple Rules for Stylish Suiting:

1

4

2

5

Fit is King—There are few things more visually appealing than a man in a well-tailored suit.

Slim tailoring is in. The blazer should come close to touching the small of your back, frame your shoulders and nip in at the sides (creating a triangle shape with your upper body). The back hem of your pants should generally be about ¼ inch off the ground when you are standing straight and not wearing any shoes.

Recently, we have seen a trend toward shorter pants, allowing for flashes of funky socks to be shown when walking.

Sleek Shoes—Shoes are something many gentleman struggle with. Unfortunately, ugly shoes can ruin an excellent suit. The colour of your shoes should match your belt, but let’s progress beyond the realm of the obvious.

Shape is another important feature to keep in mind when it comes to shoes. Dress shoes should be sleek. If your shoes resemble a dinner role, this is not sleek. Go to www.ferragamo.com to see some excellent examples of sleek dress shoes.

3

Blue and Grey Come First—The first suit you buy should probably be either blue or grey, with the second suit being whichever of the two colours you didn’t go with in the first instance. Black should probably come third, as black suits are generally too formal for day-to-day use. After you have these three staple suits, look to invest in some suits with pattern (both stripes and checks).

Mix and Match—Colour, texture and pattern are your paintbrushes, and the shirt, tie, pocket square and socks are your canvas. Generally, only experiment with one or two of these three dimensions (colour, texture and pattern) at once.

For example, if you combine disparate patterns (e.g. matching a polka dot tie with a checked shirt and paisley pocket square), keep the colour pallet unified. In-store mannequins can provide great inspiration for those unsure how to mix and match.

Proportional Tie—Much like the final stage of an Oakes analysis, my last rule concerns proportionality. That is, the width of your tie should be proportional to your stature. A tie that is too wide for your stature will create the illusion that you are smaller than you actually are.

Sticking to these five simple rules will help you dress to impress. Beyond the national chains like Holt Renfrew and Harry Rosen, here are my top picks for the best place to buy a suit in Toronto: Gotstyle, Tom’s Place and Theodore 1922.

Thank you Emilie for allowing me to contribute to your great column!

FEATURES/OPINIONS

Better Know a Legal Clinic

ultravires.ca

January 30, 2013 | 7

ISAC

lee webb

(3l)

This UV continuing series looks at different legal clinics in Ontario. Legal clinics are a central pillar of access to justice in Ontario. Mary Marrone, the Director of Advocacy and Legal Services at the Income Security Advocacy Centre (ISAC) spoke with UV about the services that her clinic provides and why it is great to work on appellate-level human rights cases.

I

SAC is a specialty clinic that works to improve Ontario’s income security regime. Ontario Works, the Ontario Disability Support Program and Employment insurance make up the social safety net for those who aren’t able to fully support themselves through employment.

They work primarily at the appellate level but more and more of this work is being done at the Human Rights Tribunal or through constitutional and Charter cases. The cases that they normally look for are any that will likely result in a systemic remedy.

Who works at the clinic?

ISAC has three lawyers and a paralegal on staff.

In addition to their litigation work, ISAC is also deeply involved in grassroots advocacy and the organization employs a research and policy analyst, and a provincial organizer to make sure low income voices are heard on the topic of social assistance reform.

Most of their cases come to them via other legal clinics. By partnering with ISAC the local clinic can continue to provide in-person service to the client, while ISAC is able to focus on the legal arguments on appeal.

The social advocacy program recently won a victory. Just before the winter holiday the Province reinvested $42 million dollars into municipalities to partially restore funding lost when the community start-up benefit was eliminated. This is money which helps people get and maintain housing. This action, the government said, was in part a result of ISAC’s advocacy.

Who do they serve?

Articling?

ISAC takes cases from all over Ontario and the results from decisions they receive set precedents more often than not. Recently they have worked to secure parental benefits for migrant workers and to increase access to the allowance ODSP recipients get if they need a special diet. This latter case was effectively a class action involving 180 claimants. This decision forces the government to fully fund the costs of special diets based on medical evidence and has led to an extra investment of over nineteen million dollars in the program over two years.

There is no typical articling experience at ISAC. What makes the experience valuable is that students work directly with senior counsel on complex appellate litigation. Although much of the work is high level, articling students also can have the chance of arguing in front of the Human Rights Tribunal

One of the remarkable things about ISAC is that they have a government mandate, and government money, to challenge the government.

In the process of developing their cases, they have also developed significant expertise in human rights law.

While ISAC does not have consistent funding for articling students they are developing their student program and they welcome law student volunteers. ISAC is constantly working on how to enhance the experience their students get and to ensure that their contribution is valuable.

Why is ISAC a great place to work?

Ms. Marrone says that “it is incredibly rewarding to have a direct impact on large numbers of people” through doing work that has system-wide

impact. While ISAC lawyers don’t get to serve individual clients or go through files quickly, like other clinic lawyers can, their victories apply to a lot of people at a time.

everything they would like to respond to. This situation won’t change any time soon because Legal Aid Ontario, like other organizations, is not projecting much revenue growth.

In response to this challenge, clinics are proactively looking for ways to save while protecting the services and work they engage in.

This search has led legal clinics to start province-wide strategic planning to determine how to work more effectively as a system. ISAC is actively engaged in this process because so much of their work is already tied up with the work of other clinics and their partnership with local clinics will continue to be critical. Some of this provincial planning and coordination is already being done through networks like the Steering Committee on Social Assistance, which pulls together the experience at the front lines with ISAC’s expertise to determine the key issues that require attention for legal, political and bureaucratic action.

What should University of Toronto law students know about ISAC?

Images courtesy of ISAC

The other reason why it is great to practice law at ISAC is that ISAC does interesting, high quality work that gives voice to those who typically don’t have a voice with government.

Challenges?

The challenge with doing clinic work is that there are never the resources to respond to

ISAC works on social assistance, which affects a huge number of people and is at the core of what general legal clinics do. ISAC shares an office with the Advocacy Centre for Tenants Ontario, and the Association of Community Legal Clinics of Ontario creating great opportunities for working together.

Even though the law they do is very deep level stuff, they remain connected to the people they serve. One third of their Board of Directors is made up of people who identify as low income and another third are legal aid case workers from around the province. ISAC also lends its space to low income groups on a regular basis.

1L December Exams Do(n’t) Matter paloma van groll

I

(1l)

don’t think marks are the be all and end all of success in law school. If you know of a job or career path that you are determined to follow, your marks may matter some, but there are plenty of ways to get where you’re going (see “schmoozing” below). That being said, our marks generally still matter to us in 1L.

So, do our December exam marks actually “matter”? It probably makes sense to start with a definition of “matter,” but that may just be where the problem lies. Do marks matter—for our overall grades? Not necessarily. For getting jobs? Maybe. For our self-esteem? Come on, we’re better than that.

All throughout the fall term, profs kept telling us not to worry too much about our December exams. To a certain extent, this was well founded.

December exams are fail-safe, so if you do better on your final exams, your December marks don’t count. The pressure’s completely off, right?

Not exactly. December exams DO matter in some respects. First off, for the small subset of

people who want to work at a firm this summer, getting decent December grades is fairly important (although I’ve heard schmoozing—or “networking” as some call it—can make up for a bad grade or two). Same goes for a handful of other 1L jobs that are mostly merit based.

Applicable to a larger subset of the student body (not only those who are already chomping at the Bay Street bit), December exam marks are also an indicator of how well your approach to law school is working. Did you think your studying methods were rock solid, yet were you shocked by the plethora of Ps on your exams?

Did you “wing it” and still come out on top of the HHill? Either way, how well you did might make you re-think and re-tool the way you’re working, or reaffirm that you’re right on track. In this respect, your December marks might matter in that it will likely affect how you approach your second term of 1L (the “important” term, as we’re led to believe).

Do the marks matter? Do they not matter?

Does this question really matter at all?

While I may be over-generalizing, I am fairly confident in saying that the reality is most 1Ls

work hard, sometimes really hard, to try and do well on these exams.

It would be better if professors didn’t brush them off and downplay their importance. Yes, December exams may not leave a lasting impression on our letter-grades, but if profs placed more of an emphasis on how to do well, and less of an emphasis on ignoring their existence, it would be beneficial in the long term.

Brushing off the importance of these exams just procrastinates dealing with student stress to the spring. If professors paid more attention to these exams and focused more time on strategies to prepare for them, we would be better equipped to deal with how to write them, and how to deal with the stress when we come face-to-face with April exams and the threat of permanent marks.

The most helpful thing professors could is outline

what they’re looking for on their exams. This is especially important as different professors like varying types and styles of answers. I had a few professors who did this and it made a world of difference when studying for their exams.

My aim here is not to scare people into thinking the first marks they got in law school are the beall end-all. Not at all. I just wish professors would take the December exams as seriously as their students do, and help us prepare for them with the long-view goal in mind: April.

OPINIONS

8 | January 30, 2013

How Your Tuition is Spent

ultravires.ca

And Why Wacky Left-Wingers Are Right to Question it daanish samadmoten

(2l)

I

know what you’re thinking: another left-wing nut writing about how tuition fees are too high (no offence intended, fellow left-leaners).

Actually, I have serious reservations about writing this article. This is just the next in a series of pieces written by professors and students on tuition fees over the last 10 years—many of which seem to have unfortunately fallen on deaf ears.

And I’m not really naïve enough to believe this article will have an immediate impact but if I help start an informed debate, I think it’ll be worth it.

than 50% of our spending for a little while—at least until 2004 (the oldest year I could get data on). However, while the percentage of the pie spent on faculty has gone up 5% since 2004, the percentage spent on every other expenditure has been on a downward trend. That is, even as the pie has increased in size with higher tuition, the focus of the administration has been to spend proportionally more on faculty salaries, rather than spreading the money evenly throughout expenditures.

From what I can gather, the first set of tuition increases (from 1998 to 2001) was met with moderate but not extreme resistance, as it seems to have been motivated to a fair extent by reasons other than professor salary increases. The plan was to lower the faculty-student ratio, offer new courses, renovate classrooms and offices, better fund student services (especially DLS), increase the number of foreign placements from IHRP, launch PBSC, and increase staff at the CDO. All of this seems to have been accomplished.

Like many students, before I did the research for this article, I was of the opinion that our high tuition is probably justified. After all, UofT is consistently ranked the top law school in Canada and our entrance stats are essentially equivalent to UC Berkley’s law school, which is ranked seventh in the US and has a yearly tuition of $50,000. We’re getting a deal then, aren’t we?

We pay almost half that! That is one way to look at it but I would argue a better way is to see if we actually need to pay half in order to be the Canadian equivalent of UC Berkley.

The 5% increase in faculty salaries since 2004 translates to an increase of more than $3.5 million in just 7 years. With the assumption that professors likely take home most of this pay increase (though not all of it), it averages out to roughly $55,000 extra per professor*. For a professor hired in 2004 at the standard faculty starting salary of $100,000 a year, this would be a 55% salary increase over a 7 year period. Additionally, during the 3 years prior to that, each professor received an average of roughly $15,000 extra in salary, for a total 70% increase in salary over the 10 year period (2001 to 2010)**. Whether or not you think that is too much is up to you but I

The second and third set of tuition increases (2001 to 2006 & 2006 to the present) were met with more resistance, as different reasoning for increased tuition was stated—primarily, to increase in faculty salaries. Increased salaries were meant to retain and attract the best professors so that we could become one of the “leading law schools of the world”, to quote former Dean Daniels. The argument was that if we don’t pay our professors similar salaries, they will take jobs at top ranked American schools or in the private sector and we won’t be able to recruit scholars away from those same entities. Essentially, former Dean Daniels wanted us to become the Harvard of Canada.

So, how does the school spend our tuition?

Faculty Salaries & Research Support = $10,931,957 (56%)

think the more important question is: what was the reasoning behind the salary increases?

Student Services & Academic Program Support = $4,156,502 (19%)

The salary increases were not the result of normal course of business raises that occurred regularly.

Before I explain the reasoning given, let’s just review a little history. The movement to increase tuition (and salaries) started after the Ontario government deregulated tuition for professional programs in 1998. Our Dean at the time, Ron Daniels, immediately pushed for a raise of tuition from $3808 to $12,000 by 2001. Dean Daniels then pushed for a $10,000 increase in tuition over a 5 year period, to $22,000 in 2006.

Since then, first year tuition under Dean Moran’s tenure has increased by 8% per year consistently to the $28,595 it is now***.

Library = $2,288,294 (12%) Other (Admin, Plant) = $2,038,144 (9%) Alumni, Development & External Relations = $849,296 (4%) The first thing you’ll notice is that faculty salaries and research support make up most of the spending. I think that makes sense to most people. Faculty salaries have made up more

On its face, former Dean Daniels’ argument makes sense. Most of our professors could easily double their salaries on Bay Street or make more money at an American law school. However, I believe there is a lot of evidence to cast suspicion on that logic. First, in the 10 years before the second set of tuition increases (which were primarily focused on increasing professor salaries), we lost only three professors to American schools.

Second, even as professor salaries increased 55% after tuition hikes, we lost the same number of professors to American schools (plus one, if you count Dean Daniels). Dean Daniels, who warned that higher American salaries would attract our faculty, left UofT for a higher American salary (former psych majors can speculate if he was simply projecting his own insecurities). Third, while we lose twice as many professors to other Canadian schools than to American schools, the faculty explanation is always that those professors were not leaving for money but rather found a better “fit”—this makes sense since most other Canadian law schools pay less on average. Fourth, the professors generally accepted as making us the top ranked school in Canada— Waddams, Trebilcock, Weinrib, Stewart, Roach, Shaffer, Macklin, Rogerson, Oosterhoff, etc— have all been here since before the major salary increases (and most since long before). Lastly, as argued by professors Shaffer and Phillips 10 years ago when they opposed the tuition increases, though professors can certainly make more money on Bay Street, they chose to be professors and “get the incalculable benefits of a life of teaching and research, a life without the demands of clients and the need to bill every 10 minutes of their time.” In fact, many of our professors choose never to practice at a firm because being a professor is likely a calling they desire.

To me, all of the above evidence casts a lot of doubt on the need to have professor salaries that rival those of Bay Street or Harvard. If we lost almost the same number of professors to American

schools before and after the salary increases, they do not seem to have done much. Of course, it’s possible that we were able to retain many professors by offering them the higher salaries (i.e. it stopped the floodgates from opening).

Moreover, it’s possible that a generational shift in attitudes toward work flexibility means that younger professors require competitive salaries to stay at our school. However, I personally believe that since more professors leave for better fit at other (generally lower paying) Canadian schools, our “top professors” have all been here since before the salary increases, and many professors find their calling in academia, competitive salaries are unnecessary to retain faculty. Nonetheless, this is not something I can argue with absolute certainty. I do believe that the question of whether competitive salaries are effective needs to be asked though and that those “on the left” are right to do so.

It is entirely possible that the strategy of making UofT into the Harvard of Canada will work in the long-term. We may one day attract as many prominent American and international academics as former Dean Daniels hoped we would. And this may propel UofT to become one of the world’s leading law schools. And we may need higher tuition to pay the higher salaries. But it is also entirely possible that the result will instead just be higher professor salaries and a student body populated by the wealthy and those willing to take the risk of paying over $40,000 in first year tuition (which is scheduled to occur in the 2017/2018 academic year at current rates).

The administration has offered little to prove the first situation is more likely—our hire rate is falling, we still lose professors to American and Canadian schools, the number of distinguished visiting faculty has decreased, and we have yet to attract many new prominent legal scholars away from other schools.

It is our job as current students to question the faculty and make them prove that higher tuition will, in fact, lead to a better school. Will we really attract enough new prominent professors to raise our reputation to that of Harvard or will the professors who were already here continue to be our beacon? Will financial aid keep up with tuition or will it continue to grow 20% slower?

Will many students go elsewhere because they cannot afford UofT? Will our students feel pressured to go to Bay Street instead of the public sector because of higher tuition? Do we really need to compare ourselves to American schools?

Is raising tuition and professor salaries the best way to become a world leading law school? I am certainly not automatically against tuition increases but before these questions and others are answered, I do not believe they should be blindly accepted as justified. *[$3,561,668—assumed $206,668 for research support salary increases] / estimated 61 professors = $55,000 per professor **Martha Shaffer & Jim Phillips’s calculation that each professor would get a $30,000 increase from 2001 to 2006, subtracting the amount already incorporated in the above calculation for 2004-2010 ***Including incidental/ancillary fees

ultravires.ca

Less Muffins, Less Madness

OPINIONS

How Crippling Tuition Fees Make the Administration's Health and Wellness Initiative Seem Hollow leo elias

(3l)

I

n March 2012, Dean Moran formed the Health and Wellness Student Advisory Committee ( hwsac) in an effort to help students have a healthy and balanced experience at law school. While, of course, awareness and demystification of mental health issues are important goals and should be lauded, the fact remains that without addressing the consistently rising tuition cost of attending law school, the hwsac is missing a major factor affecting students.

The thesis of this article is simple: law school is stressful because rapidly rising tuition rates obligate the students to make a massive economic investment in an uncertain future that depends entirely on their ability to give written summary legal advice in a three-hour long session. Which, of course, they don’t know how to do.

No wonder student mental health is in trouble.

Band-Aid Solutions The administration does not want to address this root concern. When the hwsac was confronted with the issues of steadily rising tuition costs and 100% exams, the administration consistently stated that those matters are not on the table.

When it is clear that students are terrified that their $100,000 investment in their education could result in little job prospects, Doggy Days, yoga and smoothies offer little solace. The first step in fixing a problem is admitting that there is a problem.

Whither Rising Tuition: What Mischief Is Being Combatted?

Former Dean Ron Daniels created a vision for U of T’s Faculty of Law when tuition for law

school was deregulated in the mid 1990's. He imagined a world class law school—a “Harvard of the North”—with a world-class tuition rate to match. Since that decision, tuition fees have increased from approximately $4,000 to the current rate of $27,420, constituting an almost 600% percent increase. At its expected rate of an 8% increase each year, tuition fees will have reached 1000% of the 1997 rates by 2017.

When Dean Daniels implemented this change, he warned that UofT Law’s professors may leave our school for more lucrative options on Bay Street or American law schools. Despite consistent increases in tuition fees, Professor Sujit Choudry nevertheless left U of T to teach at NYU. In addition to one other professor, the only other professor to leave U of T was Ron Daniels himself.

Sadly, his own initiative was not enough to keep him from becoming the President of John Hopkins University in Baltimore.

Given that professors are leaving anyway, one must ask what mischief is being combatted by consistently raising tuition fees. Are we really worried that U of T Law’s greatest minds like Michael Trebilcock, Stephen Waddams, Ernie Weinrib are going to move to New York in order to make $100,000 more a year? Or is this just a convenient fiction to justify increasing the bottom line for whatever end as it comes up?

(Say, perhaps, a redundant new building when modest renovations would have sufficed?) More importantly, is whatever benefit that is obtained from increasing tuition fees really worth the added stress and depression in students.

Students don’t have access to the administration’s budget. We don’t know whether our tuition fees are being funnelled into the new building. We don’t know whether there is a yearly surplus or

January 30, 2013 | 9

deficit. Absent that information, students are not able to submit a reasonable alternative. Assuming, however, that the accounts are in order and there is not a massive surplus (as this writer supposes), I submit that professors should not be paid Bay Street hours on the backs of law students.

What Do We Do About It? The administration’s insistence that tuition rates are not on the table shows that any initiative to improve health and wellness is hollow at best.

Through ignoring the root cause of the problem, the administration’s responses of food and puppies are nothing more than platitudes. Sadly, students choose to have little social capital.

The nature of law school prevents any institutional memory—and thus any effective student organization—from developing. 1Ls focus on getting good marks, 2Ls focus on getting a job, and 3Ls are either too exhausted or too indifferent to combat any issue.

When strikes, boycotts or protests seem fanciful, what options are left? I submit that the best option to demand change is to withhold future donations to the school. When asked in a few years’ time if we would like to donate, we should ask what is being done on the part of the administration to lower tuition rates. We should ask whether the accounts of the school are transparent for the students. We should ask if the administration is even considering the effect of high tuition on its students.

We should make it clear that even though we cannot help ourselves, we want to make sure that law school remains affordable for middle class students in the future.

10 | January 30, 2013

FEATURES

ultravires.ca

ultravires.ca

FEATURES

January 30, 2013 | 11

Left: Law gams team EARNS that spirit award honourable mention.

Above: Steve Aylward poses with Bob Rae. Below: On the chairs (from left to right): James Rendell and Christine Lowe (conference Co-Chair, Osgoode).

Standing (left to right): Cassandra Stefanucci, Carolyn Lambert, Bruce McRae, Nashila Addetia (Conference Co-Chair, Uof T) William Wu (Conference Co-Chair, Uof T), Lisa Tan and Danara Dourdoussova.

The Fall Recruitment Process Is Bullshit 12 | January 30, 2013

anonymous

OPINIONS

(2l)

T

o reduce any perception of bias, I’ll start by saying that I’m one of the lucky ones who got a job through the 2012 fall recruitment process. I say “lucky” because it really is just luck. There’s little merit behind the current interviewing process that exists at most law firms. It doesn’t work for either the firms or the candidates. It is bullshit and arbitrary.

Let’s look at it from the perspectives of the firms first. How do they decide who to hire? Essentially, it comes down to who the interviewers like; the interviews have no substantive questions or even questions designed to test traits needed for the job. So, is there a chance for bias when hiring who you like? Of course, since you are more likely to like people who are similar to you. Thus, there’s an obvious chance of an ethnic and gender bias, given that most firms are run by old white guys. Some firms have realized that the systemic bias exists within the current process and are moving toward behavioural interviews —namely, McCarthy Tetrault and McMillan (the only two I am aware of that use such an interview style for part of their interviews)—in an attempt to use fairer hiring practices.

And in what context does a firm decide whether they like you? A 10 to 20 minute interview filled with nonsense questions like “How do you like law school?” and “Tell me something about you not on your resume.” Sure, there’s the argument that law is a service industry so firms gauge how well you would be able to interact with and bring in clients based on how good you are at interviewing (i.e. how good you are at repeating canned answers and pre-rehearsed anecdotes).

Fine, that might work in weeding in/out the 20 to 25% of applicants who are extremely charming and friendly and those who are not. But for the 75 to 80% of applicants in the middle who are all fairly likeable, conversational, and friendly, it doesn’t make sense. When it comes to distinguishing between those people, it will come down to completely arbitrary metrics like a similar sense of humour, similar interests, cheerfulness, enthusiasm, etc… There’s no standard metric because it changes based on every interviewer’s biases. Case in point: many of us have had that OCI we thought went really well and yet we didn’t get an in-firm (or an OCI that we thought went poorly and yet we got the in-firm). Why is that? The choice is arbitrary; what one interviewer might think is a great interview, another will think was a bad one.

Next, let’s look at it from the perspective of the students. In the last issue of UV and over the past couple of months, I read and have heard comments to the effect of “the process really works, after the first day or two you really do find out which firm is for you.” Don’t get me wrong, I said that same bullshit answer to interviewers who asked me how the process was working but let’s be real, the process doesn’t work.

Yes, during the process, you will probably get a feeling about whether you like the people who

are interviewing you or not—though, like for interviewers, it will be difficult to distinguish most people, they will seem likeable enough.

Does this mean the process works? Not really.

You maybe met 10 people over the 3 days of interviewing, are they necessarily reflective of everyone that works at the firm? Or the people you will work most closely with at the firm? Or the firm culture as a whole? Not really. Just like you are trying to sell the firm on hiring you, they are trying to sell you on working for them —they will try to put their friendliest and most charming people up front and those people will try to be as friendly or charming as they possibly can. Nobody at an in-firm interview will tell you about the times they had to stay until 3am or come in on the weekend to finish an assignment or how their schedules aren’t 100% certain enough to firmly commit to attending parties or their kid’s soccer game. You’re using an awful sampling technique if you extrapolate 10 short 20 minute interviews and a meal with people who are trying to sell you something to be the personality of a firm of 50 to 3800 people. It’s roughly equivalent to chatting up a stranger at a party and then deciding you’d be great friends with all of their friends.

I’m certainly not blaming students for extrapolating in the ridiculous ways stated above because the process is so flawed, it’s one of our only ways to judge. But let’s be honest with ourselves, it’s not a good way to judge. Picking a place to work for possibly your entire career based on whether the people who interviewed you were funny or friendly, could keep good conversation, were interesting and engaging, seemed happy, had similar interests to you, or spoke highly of the firm culture is a pretty awful way to do it. And none of this is to say that you won’t end up working at a place where you like the people and the firm culture but that likely has more to do with almost all firms having similar cultures and likeable people than your firm-picking ability.

I would suggest a new way of doing things now that I’ve highlighted the flaws with the current interviewing process but, given space constraints, I’ll leave that as the subject of another article.

Until then, the firms need to have an honest conversation amongst themselves about the method in which they choose their future colleagues and whether it’s really working for anyone.

ultravires.ca

Talk Has Failed

Act to Stop the Gap between Tuition and Financial Aid dan bertrand (alumnus

2012)

I

talked and wrote a lot while I was at U of T about our Law School’s tuition. In retrospect, I’m not so proud of this. Why? Because all I did was write and talk, and that wasn’t enough.

In this article, I’m not going to throw any more statistics at you about how tuition and faculty salaries have increased over the years, while financial aid and the diversity in the student body have not. Ask your SLS representatives for the quantitative information on this. Ask your peers or those who have recently graduated about their debts. These stories shouldn’t be dismissed as anecdotal evidence; they’re about our lives.

To see the effects of high tuition, look around the Rowell Room, and then go to Hart House or Osgoode Hall and look around. The mere visual difference between our student bodies is appalling and unjustifiable. Meanwhile our law school claims to be of an “international” calibre, and it is located in Canada’s most diverse city.

Last year, Ultra Vires ran a contest to find the most White Anglo Saxon Protestant (WASP) student at our school. Through institutionally self-deprecating jokes like this, we acknowledge the elephant in the room, and who’s been left out. The fact that many of us only feel comfortable addressing the issue through humour demonstrates that it is an issue that deserves to be openly discussed. We feel uncomfortable about the situation because we know that it’s wrong; therefore, we should talk about changing it.

High tuition presents barriers to different groups of people which aren’t perceived as mere lines on a balance sheet; as a friend of mine put it: if no one in your family has made more than $25,000 in a year, then spending that much to get only a year’s instruction at law school is almost inconceivable.

Barriers to getting into law school are also barriers to entering the legal profession. On the first day of law school you were told that your classmates will be leaders in law, politics and business; we will interpret the law, create it, and will make the business transactions that drive the economy. By making law school financially inaccessible, we are making access to this kind of power inaccessible, and this inaccessibility will exacerbate the exclusions faced by historically disadvantaged groups of people.

In addition to front end-inaccessibility, high tuition also results in back-end inaccessibility to entering certain fields of the profession. In first year, a friend of mine talked about the financial pressure she already felt to accept a few years in “slavery on Bay street” so that she would be able to pay off her debt. She works there now at what is considered to be a reputable firm. Her story is so far from unique at U of T it sounds like a cliché. Unfortunately, this sort of pressure which steers people into certain fields of the profession doesn’t only have an individual effect, it also has social effects. As put by Noam Chomsky on March 19, 2012, when asked for his thought on the Quebec student movement: High tuition is not an economic necessity, as is easy to show, but a debt trap is a good technique of indoctrination and control. And resisting this makes good sense.

U of T prides itself in leading the country’s common law schools on several fronts. However, little is said about how it is also the leader in a trend across the country of increasing the gap between tuition and financial aid. U of T will hold a greater share of responsibility for the exclusions to the legal profession that arise from this trend it is leading.

If all you're ever willing to do is write on a subject, you'll never do anything. This is a tough pill for people in the legal profession to swallow, but it’s true. I don’t think we appreciate it as we can rely on our clients to do things and put themselves on the line for us. It's people like Rodriquez, Roncarelli, or those working at InSite in Vancouver’s Downtown East-Side who push the law. We advocate for them, but the risk is theirs.

Matters of the legal profession are different.

There are no clients who will champion our cause.

We are a self-regulating profession. Therefore, lawyers of the current generation hold significant power over who will make up the next generation.

Likewise, only the current generation of law students at U of T can act to ensure accessibility for the next.

When I was an SLS representative, I thought we could convince the UTSU to fight this battle for us. I also thought we could convince the Dean through patient discussion and reasoned analysis that she should stop increasing the gap between tuition and financial aid. I was naïve. Meanwhile, the SLS kept our fight internal. This was ineffective.

In order to move the Dean and Faculty Council, we have to engage with this issue strongly, loudly and publicly. The Dean and Faculty Council will respond when the students of U of T publicly call the buck on the school’s increasing inaccessibility.

Here are two things you can do now with or without the assistance of the SLS:

I

Start a public petition to be signed by current law students, alumni, and members of the community protesting financial inaccessibility at U of T;

2

Engage in a one day strike action. Grading is done on a curve. If no one goes to class, then no one falls behind the pack when it comes to being prepared for final examinations. If you’re concerned about missing a class you paid hundreds of dollars for, you should be even more concerned about the fact that in a few years it may cost hundreds more. If you’re worried that some students will get the upper hand on you by attending class, I urge you to think about the more important things at stake.

Doing either would: educate, draw attention, apply pressure, and would be fun.

Students in Quebec helped topple a government over the issue of tuition. If you’re more than $10,000 in debt right now for following a dream about justice, you should be furious. In being here, you’ve already proven that you’re brilliant, and that you have the potential to lead this profession.

Be a leader now. My only regret from U of T is that I wasn’t when I should have been one. Now, go grab some casseroles dishes and do something about this.

ultravires.ca

OPINIONS

The Wright Man An Evangelical Law School Has no Place in Canada louis tsilivis

(2l)

to justice and to a lack of lawyers in smaller communities, the problem is not that we do not have enough lawyers; the problem is that we are doing a poor job of connecting our graduates to positions where they are needed. The articling crisis and the low hiring numbers are proof that we are producing too many law graduates. Any new application for a law school should be rejected.

T

rinity Western University (TWU)—a private, evangelical Christian university in Langley, British Columbia—has submitted its proposal to open a new law school. Accrediting a law school invariably makes that school a key part of the legal establishment in this country.

TWU’s character and policies are discriminatory towards gays and non-Christians. Such policies are anathema to the legal profession. TWU’s application should be unequivocally denied.

It should be said—as every Wright Man column does within the first two paragraphs—that there are far too many law students as it is. While it is true that there are issues relating to access

More importantly, TWU should have its proposal denied because its admissions policy requires students to sign a “covenant” that promises they will refrain from, inter alia, “sexual sins including... homosexual behaviour”—with the school maintaining the right to discipline or expel students for breach of this agreement. This is repugnant beyond belief. While TWU points to the Supreme Court’s 2001 ruling in Trinity Western v College of Teachers to point to the legality of its covenant for a teaching college, it is certainly fair (1) to question whether this case would be decided similarly today and (2) to say that we should demand a higher standard for the accreditation of the legal profession.

Bill Flanagan, dean of the Queen’s Faculty of Law and president of the Council of Canadian Law School Deans, recently slammed TWU’s proposal.

In response, Jonathan Kay of the National Post sneered, “If Mr. Flanagan is truly bothered by TWU’s pro-Christian “covenant”, he is free to

draft an anti-Christian covenant for his own school.” Encouraging secular schools, such as Mr. Flanagan’s Queen’s, to bar evangelicals is foolish. Instead of setting up barriers as to who can study at which recognized law school, we should ensure that no groups are targeted for exclusion at any school.

Attempting to further kick sand in the eyes of his National Post faithful, Mr. Kay writes that “[t]he world will not stop spinning on its axis if the country gains a new school that happens to be animated

by English Canada’s founding Christian creed.”

This is a gross mischaracterization of the controversy.

In true libertarian fashion, Mr. Kay sets up an absurdly high barrier for state action—essentially requiring the world to stop spinning or some other societal collapse in order to justify denying TWU’s conscience rights. But we are not infringing on the freedom of TWU’s students and staff to practice their religion; we are deciding whether to grant state accreditation to another law school.

Considering that we have no need for another law school and that this proposal would create an avenue to practicing law that is unavailable to gays and non-evangelicals, we can and should deny the proposal on the grounds that it is not good policy.

January 30, 2013 | 13 Furthermore, this controversy is being cast as a culture war; it is implied that to deny accreditation on the basis of TWU’s anti-gay policies is to deny the core faith rights of Protestant Christians. It is unfair and simply untrue to cast homophobia as a central tenet of Protestantism.

The two largest Protestant churches in Canada, the United Church and the Anglican Church, have parishes that allow for same-sex marriages and the blessing of same-sex relationships, respectively. TWU itself belongs to the Evangelical Free Church of Canada, which was established in 1917 in the southern Alberta hamlet of Enchant, just outside of Medicine Hat. While the Evangelical Free Church maintains its opposition to gay relationships, these views are but one particular conception of Protestantism.

People in this country can believe in whatever religious or spiritual worldview they choose.

This includes the right of Christians to believe that homosexuality is a sin based on a single line of the Bible (Leviticus 18:22), while simultaneously ignoring the rules that anyone “who curseth his father or mother must be killed” (Leviticus 20:9), that “[p]eople who have flat noses, who are blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God” (Leviticus 21:17-18), and that crop rotation and wearing clothes made of more than one fibre are forbidden (Leviticus 19:19). Denying TWU a law school infringes neither its faculty’s nor its current university students’ freedom to profess their beliefs.

Everyone has the right to practice their faith freely, provided they are not harming anyone else. This does not entitle them the right to demand state accreditation for a law school under the purview of a discriminatory religious community.

We need a legal profession that is accessible to all, not one that carves up and shuts off opportunities for access on the basis of sexual orientation or the choice to exercise their conscience rights in a manner inconsistent with evangelical Christianity.

OPINIONS

14 | January 30, 2013

Word on the Street michael portner gartke

Do you believe in soulmates?

Andrew Mihalik (1L) Absolutely.

My parents are a perfect example.

ultravires.ca

Lisa Wilder (2L) Yes, as much as I believe in leprechauns.

Which is a lot.

Ash-Lei Lewandoski (2L)

Laura Spaner (2L)

No. The idea is depressing because if you don’t find them you’re screwed for the rest of your life.

My soulmates are people who write memes on the Internet.

(3l)

What are your plans for V-Day?

Paloma van Groll (1L)

Jesse Boretsky (1L)

When is that, right before Reading Week?

Working on admin and small group papers.

Flying back to Montreal to surprise my girlfriend. Not sure if it will be a surprise anymore though.

Robbie Santia (2L)

Daanish Robbie Hares (3L) Samadmoten (2L) I’m supposed to I asked my girlfriend Throw another have a non-romantic if she wanted to depressing singles dinner with an do something big party with Cary ex-boyfriend… but she said I Ferguson. And Not sure how that don’t know, which invite everyone. will end up. she always says.

I told her to make a decision and it turned into a huge fight.

Who’s your favourite Internet Meme character?

Lane Krainyk (3L)

Christine Wadsworth (3L)

Not at all.

Not Mischevious Mike. His stream of terrible memes forced me to unsubscribe from his Facebook newsfeed updates.

And from Robbie Santia’s updates.

Peter Flynn (2L)

Kyle Gerow (1L)

Lazy College Senior. Because I actually know the bar where the picture was taken and I drank there in undergrad.

Actual Advice Mallard. It’s the most practical one for daily life.

Brendan Stevens (2)

Louis Tsilivis (3L)

Oh my god I love Literal Lisa! [Peter Flynn, in the background: I take full credit for this meme!]

Philosoraptor.

Because his depth of Kantian philosophy combined with an utter lack of common sense hits a little too close to home.

ultravires.ca

OPINIONS

Point | Counterpoint

January 30, 2013 | 15

Online Dating: Yes or Never?

point : michael portner gartke (3l) & robbie mac counterpoint : emilie lahaie (2 l)

POINT

There’s a comedian who has a great bit about a garbage man trying to pick up women on the street…

FROM HIS GARBAGE TRUCK. The refuse collector’s justification for his unusual behaviour is that there must be someone out there who enjoys having sex on garbage—he just needs to find that girl. However, assuming he doesn’t run into the female Robbie Santia right away, this will be a very time consuming (and potentially humiliating) process. He needs online dating.

responses roll in. Ambiguous profile pictures are your ally (unless you’re one of those rare people who look great in photos but meh in real life… in which case online dating is also the way to go).

Emilie has never online dated. Nor does she plan to—she’s dating the effing intramural football quarterback. She is in no position to comment on Internet love!

Fine, some online dating can be unsafe. But, like, Online dating can streamline your search for don’t meet dudes wearing ski masks in their that special man, woman or other. On the Internet, profile pics in the alley behind Sneaky Dee’s at you can weed out all the guys who don’t have an 1:00 am for your first date. And stealing shoes? “athletic” build or are below Level 33 battle-mages Please. We’ve seen those 4-inchers Emilie’s roomin Elder Scrolls [Ed: wtf mate struts around in. Any is this]. What’s more, if thief would be doing her you use a pay-to-use site, poor heels a favour.

On the Internet, you can you can avoid the scrutiweed out all the guys who Sure, it would be great if ny of your peers, who will only be able to find we all worked for Pizza don’t have an “athletic” your profile if they also Nova, delivering meat build or are below Level 33 lovers to lonely suburban pay, in which case they will be in no position to battle-mages in Elder Scrolls housewives—we’d pick hate. up like crazy. But we’re all at law school for a reaOnline dating is also great for people who have son: to test those 50/50 articling hireback/fireno game in real life. I’m not talking about football back odds. Until we’ve run that gauntlet, we game—Manti Te’o had plenty of that—I’m talking should make use of all the resources the Interabout people who, in spite of their other talents, net has to offer us. only have one line: “let’s get drunk and see what happens.” Actually that one works pretty well (take So let’s be realistic—we’re not all as talkative as it from Robbie Mac).

Antonin Scalia. Some of us are Clarence Thomas— masters of textual intercourse. We are the FaceAnother tip (for dudes): post a pic of yourself book chat generation—time to find our Matches. standing next to Alex Condon and watch the

Online dating is all the fun of regular dating, minus pesky things like touching and eye contact.

(2l)

COUNTERPOINT

don’t want to go into a first date already knowing what “five things they can’t live without” or “how they’d spend a typical Friday night.”

Someone once described online dating to me as like being in a bar where everyone is single and Also, who are these people you’re meeting onlooking. I don’t know about you, but that image line?? An unnamed JD/MBA who may or may is creepy, weird and stressful. I would compare not be my roommate has fears of meeting a foot online dating to the ViaDesktop portal. You spend fetishist online who steals all her shoes... This is half your summer crafting the perfect description not an irrational fear! of why you’re such a unique snowflake, only to have it picked apart by anonymous readers online.

When Michael Rafferty was on trial last year, If you’re deemed worthy, you MIGHT get to do you know who they put on the stand? Women meet said readers, in which case, you spend he met on Plenty of Fish! I don’t gamble, and all your free time leading up to the meeting even if I did, those odds don’t seem that great. practicing witty conversation and your answers It’s all well and good for Robin and MPG to to any and all anticipated queries. I don’t know meet up with perfect strangers; they can protect about you, but at this point, my resume has been themselves if she turns scrutinized enough and out to be more Ted Bundy I’m tired of being “the than Victoria Secret Angel.

BEST version of myself.”

I don’t want to carry I, on the other hand, am pepper spray on dates.

5 foot nothing and have a I may be dating the law hard time keeping my feet school quarterback, but I It sends the wrong on the ground on blustery had to kiss a lot of frogs message and is just days. Plus, I don’t want to before I found the right lily pad to settle on. awkward to fit in a clutch. carry pepper spray on dates. It sends the wrong That’s because, at the message and is just awkend of the day, I really ward to fit in a clutch. don’t know what I want in a partner, and chances are, you don’t either.

Instead of perfecting their profiles in the library, MPG and Robin should be checking out the Take my quarterback for instance. If he’d been profiles of the ladies sitting 10 feet away from stuck on J-date instead of making conversation them. And seriously guys, why would you ever with the mysterious brunette in the library he’d even need pick-up lines? You’re gonna be lawnever have realized that all he ever wanted was a musically inclined shiksa like me. Conversely, yers for godsakes! Nothing makes the panties drop faster than a JD on your tastefully thick, I’d never have discovered my love for Gefilte off-white business card. fish and football. The unknown is exciting! I

Find romance the old fashioned way, via awkward interactions in the library

She Doesn’t Even Go Here!

16 | January 30, 2013

nick charleton

DIVERSIONS

(2l)

I

have a confession to make. This is not easy for me to admit. It is something I have lived with for years and I simply cannot bear to carry this burden in silence any longer. I, Nicholas Edmond Charleton III, watch the Bachelor.

Nay, I am hopelessly addicted to the show. I know it seems out of character for someone who cultivates such a tough, masculine image, but it is the honest truth. It all began with a few ironic viewings with a group of friends—we would watch and make jokes about the idiotic contestants and the foolish underlying premise of the show.

Soon, however, I found myself pulled in to the intense drama. Contestants seemed so desperately in love after only a few moments with the prized Bachelor/Bachelorette that they were willing to lie, cheat, and backstab in order to get a rose at the end of the week (and move one step closer to “true love”). I was hooked. Just like the poor, lonely souls on the show, I had fallen head over heels for something that initially seemed so farfetched and I simply could not resist coming back, week after week.

Why am I telling you all of this? Why would I be so willing to expose one of my deepest and darkest secrets to each of the seven readers of Ultra Vires? It is not just because the first step to recovery is admission (I have no plans for rehabilitation any time soon, considering a new season just kicked off). I am coming forward because there has been an injustice that has

been weighing on my mind since I became aware of it late last year and I may be the only person in the world who is able to right this wrong. I may be the only one with the requisite combination of garbage TV knowledge, law school-induced cynicism, and a distinct inability to get over a grudge. Trust me; the Venn diagram of those things has very little overlap.

So, here goes nothing.

On the last season of the Bachelor Canada, there were 25 attractive young women who, for whatever reason, had chosen to take their search for love to the next, most humiliating level.

Among these lovely ladies, there was a contestant named Gabrielle who quickly emerged as the ‘flirtatious and evil’ one (a standard character archetype, if you are familiar with essentially any reality TV—or reality, for that matter).

Gabrielle pretty much fit the bill for the show— early 20s, attractive, relatively fun—but one thing that really set her apart from the rest of the bunch was her bright future as a lawyer. Gabrielle proudly listed her occupation as “Law Student” on the Bachelor website and she was never shy about sharing this tidbit with the rest of the cast, including Brad Smith, the eponymous Bachelor.

Generally, a sassy law student with questionable morals would definitely garner my support. I was especially excited when I heard that this particular sassy law student was currently attending

our own University of Toronto law school! But alas, something was amiss.

I would never pretend to know every student currently attending the law school—I barely know the people currently living in my apartment ( Justin McLarty). Still, I have been told that I am reasonably gregarious and, as I have just confessed, I have a secret passion for the Bachelor series; a secret passion that burns with the white-hot intensity of a thousand suns. Thus, you can imagine my surprise when I saw her bio yet had heard nothing about this minor celebrity walking the warped halls of Flavelle.

I began my search.

I combed through Stalkerbook and even Googled, but turned up no records of Gabrielle’s attendance at our beloved institute. Nothing that would suggest that she had shared awkward experience of getting to a space in the middle of the Moot Court Room, no evidence that she had ever had the displeasure of sitting in one of the squeaky seats in BLH, not even a shred that showed her attendance at one of the meetings of the “Let’s Play Board Games” club. I eventually came to the sad realization that Gabrielle had lied.

Now, let’s get one thing straight: I am not necessarily against lying. I am okay with the kind of small-to-medium-sized fibs and fabrications that keep you out of an argument with your loved one or keep your parents from knowing that you slept in a bank; everyone has stretched the truth on a resume to get a job or on a first date to get a second one. In fact, I am probably more pro-lying than most responsible citizens ought to be. Nevertheless, what I find truly unacceptable is a bad lie. The kind of lie that is so easily uncovered yet is broadcast to literally dozens of people on Canadian television.

This lie was of the special sort that could mislead an impressionable (hypothetical) young man watching at home, deceiving him into falling

ultravires.ca head-over-heels for a sultry law student (hypothetically). Indeed, a tale this tall could single-handedly shatter a nation’s perceptions of the wholesome morality of a show centred around 25 women who are simultaneously dating a man and having their every movement tracked for the voyeuristic enjoyment of viewers at home in order to find true love. True love.

What’s more, Gabrielle’s lie was so woefully misguided that I am not actually sure whether it enrages me or depresses me. Any person that has spent a moment in law school—especially at U of T—should know that being a law student does anything but make you an attractive potential life partner. We are a soulless, dour, and cynical bunch (if you do not agree, please note that you are reading a 1000-word diatribe in our school’s newspaper haranguing a woman for lying on reality television). Plus, when we graduate we will either be too consumed by articling to give the former Bachelor/Bachelorette, and current lovesof-our-lives, the attention they surely deserve, or we will be unemployed and much too debtridden to live lavishly on the meagre salary of a CFL player or children’s hospital event planner (real jobs). I have it on good authority that Gabrielle could not have chosen a less attractive fake occupation. As someone who regularly pretends to be a forest fire fighter and/or a professional skydiver, I can attest that even people who worked their tails off to earn the honour of going to U of T law refuse to publicly admit what they do with their days. We are all very impressed with ourselves for getting here but we are all also smart enough to realize that we are probably the only ones who are.

While Manti Te'o or Lance Armstrong may go down in many books as this year’s most heinous liar, Gabrielle Dipersico will stand out for me.

Ms. Dipersico was able to pull off something somehow more improbable than finding love on television. In a single line on her biography, this young lady sullied the only 3 things I still hold dear in this world: the Bachelor, law school, and lying.

Use your smartphone’s camera and the free ScanLife app to scan the barcode. You can get the free ScanLife app at www.2dscan.com.

TORONTO • NEW YORK • CALGARY

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

January 30, 2013 | 17

Top 10 Meme Characters

I

michael portner gartke

(3l) & andrew clark (3l)

nternet memes have become hugely popular lately, but not everyone knows what they are. In fact, they are surprisingly difficult to explain, so we’re not going to bother. Instead we’ve created a top 10 list of popular meme characters. Each meme character has a standard joke premise that is exploited using the top and bottom captions.

10

Scumbag Steve is a huge jerk who exploits his personal relationships (especially those with his roommates). He will borrow your shit and either break it, lose it, or tell you how bad it is.

9

College Freshman is an 18 -year-old kid who thinks he knows how to live/is living the cool student lifestyle. His ignorance and inexperience are always painfully exposed.

We have made memes for each, some of which involve family law or secured transactions.

[Ed: I fucking hate memes]

2

Success Kid is in some ways the opposite of Bad Luck Brian. Whereas good situations turn terrible for BLB, awkward situations always work out for Success Kid. Readers might be interested to note that the subject of this photo is actually eating sand, not fist pumping.

6

Overly Attached Girlfriend is very needy and creepy. Her memes frequently involve her expressing inappropriate desires to physically control her bf or to kill her bf’s family (esp his mom) so that he will only love her. She also interrogates him every time he receives a text message from somebody else.

3

Bad Luck Brian is an awkward kid beset by terrible luck. Often times good things will appear to happen to him (top caption), but something always goes horribly wrong (bottom caption).

1

Good Guy Greg is a pothead with a heart of gold.

He’s a loyal friend, an amazing wingman, and always knows what not to say.

8

Forever Alone has no friends. This is actually a really mean meme—every joke is about this poor rock-like character being ugly or never experiencing human contact.

5

The Most Interesting Man in the World started out as a beer pitchman. He doesn’t always drink beer, but when he does, he prefers Dos Equis. In the Meme-verse, there are thousands of other things he doesn’t always do, but does in a particular way when he does them.

4 7

Karate Kyle used to be the target of bullies.

He has since learned karate and now gets back at everyone who bullied him, usually in grossly disproportionate fashion.

First World Problems girl is easily upset, usually because one of her privileges is interfering with her enjoyment of another privilege. Multiple First World Problem memes involve iPhone complications.

© 2012–2013 Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP. All rights reserved.

416 869 5300

Cassels Brock 2012/2013 season

Ultra Vires student ad “Yellow - Coffee” quarter page portrait, b&w

Contact: Heather Murray hmurray@casselsbrock.com 416 869 5782 - fax 416 642 7137

Please PRINT a hard copy of the file and either FAX it or SCAN and EMAIL it back to me, thanks!

DIVERSIONS

Ask Dr. Valencia 18 | January 30, 2013

Dr. Valencia has a PhD in Relationship Studies from the University of Rangoon. He has been given the annual Dr. Ruth prize for achievement in relationship counselling seven times in his six year career.

He is recently divorced.

If you want to try for both, you’ll need two hotel rooms on the opposite side of the same floor, and simultaneous reservations at restaurants next to each other. It will take a considerable amount of juggling, as instead of running to the bathroom, you’ll be running to the other restaurant or hotel room all night while pretending to be hitting the head. Thus you’ll need significant others with extreme patience and a willingness to fuck a partner that may very well erupt. Ironically, it is very difficult to actually find bathroom time while running this type of operation, so bring an empty flask.

Good luck and let us know how it turns out!

Best, Dr. V Dear Dr. V, I hate Valentine’s Day. What can I do on February 14 to make sure I don’t run into any obnoxious happy couples sucking face?

Dear Dr. V, My law school boyfriend and my non-law school boyfriend are both expecting to spend Valentine’s Day with me!! You’ve been known to have as many as 70 women (/men) on the go at once- how do you do it?

-Wannabe Playa Hi Wannabe, That is a tough scenario you’ve got there, but certainly not insurmountable. While there are a few approaches, one is the most effective and has two variations. It is called the Taco Time Double. I must warn you, it may not be the most savory of approaches as you’ll need to fake having extreme diarrhea, and as my father Don Julio once said, “Nothing kills the romance like feces.” It starts with a simple text message to your sweeties on the afternoon of the 14th, “Hey love.

At Taco Time now. Can’t stop thinking about tonight." This is the foundation for the work to come.

Next you need to figure out whether you want to hook up with both or only one of your dates.

If only one, your task is considerably easier. You simply make your reservation for the soon-tobe-ditched date at 7:00, and 9:15 at a restaurant

on the other side of town for the one you’ll be spending the night with. You show up to the first reservation bright-eyed and bushy tailed, bringing your best to make sure you can secure later nights out. However, right before your main course comes, suck your gut in hard while simultaneously doubling over letting out an “ooohhhhh”. Make eye-contact across the table with the clear expression of a pending gastrointestinal mushroom-cloud. Then immediately bolt to the nearest shitter.

Upon arrival at the john, text the 9:15 date sweet nothings. Splash water on your face and the rim of your hairline and return to the table.

Once back to your table, try and nibble on the food, but don’t eat. You’ll need space in your belly for a full meal at 9:15 and don’t want to be in a food coma when the time comes to bring your best George Michael. After the meal, repeat process, but this time call a cab, and on your way back to the table leave the waiter some cash or one of your cards. Give a quick “sorry babe, I gotta run. Goddamn Taco Time. Love you, call you soon,” and bounce. Head to the 9:15 date across town.

Once at the 9:15 date, you just play it cool, and hope you don’t get busted. So take a table at the back of the restaurant with your back to the door.

ultravires.ca Hi V for Virgin, I must start by saying that I’m a bit confused by your banana comment. I also have only put a condom on a banana, as I’m pretty sure that is the only legitimate purpose for condoms—freshness.

Listen, some of the best advice I’ve received over the years came from a fella in my Ma’s whorehouse, who was telling me about a knife fight with a circus bear in Istanbul he was in in the mid 1960’s. This guy was not someone you’d expect to win a knife fight with a bear. He said, “Act like you’ve been there before son, and chances are, you’ll perform like a seasoned veteran.” He then boned my mom.

That gringo’s advice is as pertinent now as it was then. Turns out, it was his first time too, and while tackling mi madre was slightly less daunting as wrestling a bear, he performed like Peter North.

So come out swinging kid, and if you go down early, dust your shoulders off (wipe her belly off) and go back in like it was all part of the plan.

-Forever Alone Dear Alone, The answer to your problem is super easy. You need to go to the Eaton Center that afternoon, and expose yourself to the customers at Williams & Sonoma. You’ll certainly spend the night in jail. However, instead of avoiding happy couples sucking face, you’ll be forced into ass-to-mouth with one of your own kind, which can be cool if you’re open to it. Just to be clear however, it’ll be your ass and your mouth.

Good luck with that, Dr. V

You can always just watch some porn as a primer, cause we all know that what happens in San Fernando Valley studios is exactly like it goes down in Southern Ontario bedrooms.

Make Daddy proud, Dr. V Dear Dr. =V, In light of upcoming Valentine’s day, where is the best place to have sex in the library?

- Curious Cupid Hi Curious Cupid,

Dr. V, The girl I’ve been seeing says she’s got something ‘special’ planned for vday… you know what that means. Only thing is that I haven’t really gotten around much. As in, the most I’ve done with a condom is put it on a banana. Do I tell her she’s my first, or just go for it and hope I’m naturally skilled?

-V for Virgin

I’d say the Law Review office, but by the lack of publications over the last three years, it seems like nothing gets done in that office! But in all seriousness, it’s the room right next to that with the copy machine. Just make sure you lock the door, kill the lights, and bump uglies on the ground right in front of the door so you’re out of the range of any passerby’s gaze.

Have fun, Dr. V

Excerpts from Law School: The Porno luke gill

(3l)

Scene 1: Financial Aid Office [Student approaches Intern at Financial Aid Office front desk.]

S: Excuse me, sir. Are you in charge of financial aid?

I: I'm the new intern. How can I assist you?

S: I have a problem. I got a smaller bursary than last year, and now I just don't know if I can handle such a big, hard line of credit with such a tiny little bursary.

I: I understand—not everyone can handle such a massive debt load.

S: Is there anything you can do?

I: Well, maybe I can set you up with our back-end debt relief program.

S: What's that?

I: It's for students with small bursaries who have taken big loads on the front-end, and just can't take anymore. With our program you'll find it much easier to deal with a giant load from the back-end.

S: Mmmm, sounds wonderful. Can you show me how it works... in the back end?

[CENSORED]

Scene 2: Doggy Day in Rowell Room [Two students in Rowell room surrounded by dogs] S1: I’m feeling really stressed.

S2: Well, it is... Doggy Day. S1: You mean if I just stroke this little guy I’ll feel better?

[Student 1 begins stroking.]

S2: Ooooo, I like watching you stroke it.

S1: It feels so soft and so good.

S2: Can I try now?

S1: Yeaaah. Yeah, just like that.

S2: What if I stroke yours and you stroke mine?

[CENSORED]

Scene 3: Bora's Head [Two students standing near bust outside library] S1: Nice bust.

S2: Yeah, it curves in all the right places.

S1: Can I... touch it?

S2: Sure, just be gentle.

[Student 1 gentle brushes hand across bust.]

S1: It’s so firm, and with such prominent features.

S2: It’s magnificent, but I can show you a better ... [winks] … head.

[CENSORED]

Scene 4: UV Office in the basement of Falconer [UV Editor with another law student] UV: See the new table?

S: Uh, yeah, I see the table.

UV: Pretty rad, huh? It’s custom-made.

S: Wow. Cool.

UV: So, like, did you read my diversions article in the last issue?

S: Sure did. [Checks phone, pretends there are messages there.]

UV: Yeah... we used to have a couch down here. You know... to get dowwwwn.

[Winks at student.]

S: Oh, yeah? That’s crazy. You UV editors are sooo wild. [Continues to look at phone.]

UV: So, like, you and I could, like...

S: Yeah, that’s not happening.

UV: Oh. S: That was never a thing that could possibly happen.

Intra Vires

DIVERSIONS

ultravires.ca

DEAN MAYO MORAN EXPOSED AS INTERNATIONAL CON ARTIST Absconds with Millions in Faculty Money magnus jerusalem

(3l)

Students and staff were stunned earlier this week when it was revealed that Dean Mayo Moran—who was thought to be taking the semester off—is in fact an international con artist, and has fled the country.

Faculty began to be suspicious when the school’s bank accounts, containing millions of donor contributions, were emptied in a few hours. “All that money for the new building. All gone!” said a distressed Alexis Archbold. “And when we opened the safe deposit boxes, they were empty… except for a voluminous auburn wig and a single muffin” As was soon discovered, the woman we knew as “Mayo Moran” was in fact a con artist named Handsome Jill Stevens. Born in Hepburn, Ohio in 1959, Jill got her start working for a bookie at the local tracks. But she soon graduated to more lucrative ventures—petty theft, mail fraud, and eventually—confidence scams.

“She was just always so nice” said Megan Harris, a schoolteacher in Columbus. Megan

was a teacher at the elementary school where a 17 year old Jill Stevens conned her way into the Principal’s office with her trademark combination of disarming charm and baked goods.

“We all thought she was so young… but every time we started to have doubts, a tray of muffins would appear! And who will question power when your mouth is full of muffin-top?”

bobbing his hotdog up and down as though it were alive. “Mustard McGee needs money for his hotdog school! Are you going to give him some moneeeey?” said the Officer in a stupid voice, while pressing the sides of the bun together as though they were lips, a cruel pantomime of human speech.

ignored for years: the trust fund kids. With our changes to the Boundless campaign, we want to send the message to the offspring of the 1% that their futures aren’t limited to sex tapes, reality TV shows, and futile attempts at a music career. We want them to know that they too can become Wall Street lawyers; that they too are boundless.”

But pretending to be Dean of a law school—for 7 years—would seem to require a much more elaborate plan. How was “Mayo” able to fool us all for so long?

FACULTY TO TARGET SOCIALITES WITH “BOUNDLESS” CAMPAIGN

Intra Vires reporters were sceptical at the announcement, believing that the move was made purely for the school’s financial gain.

When asked about this, the University was unusually forthright. “Well, we are in a bit of a mess,” admitted a Faculty spokesperson. “It turns out, to give people financial aid, you actually need someone to put money into the financial aid pot. And apparently, continually increasing tuition fees at 8% while Bay Street jobs dry up o n l y aggravates this problem…. But on the bright side, did I mention that we have Back End Debt Relief? Because, we totally do. And Osgoode doesn’t. Just saying.”

“As it turns out, being Dean is just pretty easy” said Officer Bradley Cooper. “It doesn’t take a genius to go around shaking hands, smiling, and telling already arrogant students how smart they are. And what did she teach, Torts?

That doesn’t sound very difficult” “Teaching torts is not difficult” confirmed Prof.

Arthur Ripstein. “Just don’t fuck with other people’s shit. How complicated could that possibly be?

Now, the school must move on, and take a hard look at the hiring and accountability practices that allowed such deception to take place.

“Frankly, we’re surprised that no one figured this out sooner” said Officer Cooper. “She told you her name was “Mayo Moran” and you morons believed her? Ha! Well let me introduce you to my friend, Mustard McGee” said the officer,

Crossword daniella murynka

(2l)

January 30, 2013 | 19

katherine georgious

(2l)

In an unusual turn of events, the University of Toronto recently announced that it will be focusing its “Boundless” campaign at trying to convince the children of Wall Street partners and other multi-millionaires to enrol at the University’s Faculty of Law. “We used to put all of our effort into trying to assure middle class undergraduates that $80 000 of tuition was not a barrier to our law school,” explained a spokesperson for the Financial Aid Office. “But for some reason, students kept griping that our emphatic repetition of ‘Back End Debt Relief!’ was not an adequate response to their needs. So, we’ve basically given up on trying to please them.”

“Instead, we’re focusing on the needs of a whole subset of potential students that have been

The Faculty denied that these changes to the Boundless campaign would only further marginalize future lower class students at the school. “Let me be clear,” a Faculty spokesperson told Intra Vires. “This campaign should in no way send the message that lower and middle income students are unwelcome at this school. I mean, even if we do get one of the Kardashians here, we still need 3 other students to run the Isaac Diversity Moot.”

Across

Down

1. Liability more severe if the accused committed theft while ______ (Code s. 344).

1. Bane of 1L second semester.

2. Harshest sentence.

4. Meet me at ______ head.

3. How looking at your first B makes you feel.

7. A kind of equitable or beneficial interest in land.

8. Examples: "Equity will not complete an imperfect gift"; "Equity delights in equality"; "Equity will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy".

4. Affidavit evidence based on _____ must state the source of that _____ (Rule 39.01(4)).

5. Slang term for trashy paper; e.g. "UV used to be such a ___."

6. Niqab ruling was a _____ decision.

9. _____ Aid. 10. Change this on facebook before OCIs. 11. Suffered by UofT at Law Games.

14. Kind of negligence that isn't gross.

15. Best bait for lunchtime law seminars.

18. Flash of light; often used incorrectly instead of the word "glean", even in judgments.

12. Opposite of modesty; see also: debater affliction.

13. Orgasm, apex, pre-denouement.

(Did you know it is illegal to sell vibrators in Alabama, but not viagra?)

14. Inspiration for the "twinkie defense"; see also: cavity precedent.

16. Doctrine; etymologically (Greek): "that which one thinks is true".

20. Perjury.

21. Much ___ about nothing; see also: fussing over 1L December grades.

22. Enjoy oneself with puppies, massages, and smoothies.

23. Million-dollar punctuation mark.

17. Soviet ____; ____ Quebecois; ____ Party (Mercury's in Retrograde!).

19. Unagi. (Incidentally, not a single, reported Canadian judgement has ever used the word "unagi.")

UV Cooks 20 | January 30, 2013

DIVERSIONS

The Perfect Valentine’s Day Platter georgia brown

(3l)

V

ultravires.ca

alentine’s Day always springs out of nowhere, amiright??? All of a sudden, it’s 5pm on February 14th and we find ourselves frantically searching for availability at an establishment at least one step above the traditional date night fare of pho/burritos/McDonalds takeout. Often, however, we find ourselves settling for something less than what we feel our significant other deserves.

Securing a table at such dingy establishments never bodes well in our quest to dazzle and impress our romantic interest on the annual celebration of love. Thankfully, there is an alternative to this stressful and underwhelming prospect. Below, you will find a formula for how to create a spectacular intimate dinner for two, which- lucky for you!- requires very little advance preparation, culinary talent or independent creativity. ***Note that HRH, the Queen of Modern Home Cooking, Deb Perleman, recently posted a genius recipe that puts any leftover cheese to excellent use. Deb’s crazy-simple but delicious recipe for “Fromage Fort” can be accessed by visiting the following link: http://smittenkitchen.com/blog/2012/12/fromage-fort/.

3-4 types of cheese, varying in textures and f lavours 150g of pancetta, prosciutto or other type of cured meat Generous helping of mixed olives, roasted red peppers or artichoke hearts 1-2 firm, crisp apples or pears, sliced thinly 1 baguette, sliced (optionally, toasted) 1 package of sturdy crackers 1-2 preserves ( for example, plum jam, fig spread, mango chutney, spicy mustard) Optional Ingredients: 1 onion, caramelized 1 bunch of grapes

1.

2.

3.

Image by Andrew McCaul. Recipe loosely adapted from http://www.realsimple.com/food-recipes/ shopping-storing/food/perfect-cheese-platter-10000001580273/index.html

4.

When selecting your cheeses, ensure that you have a wide sampling of fresh, washed rind, creamy, semi-soft, hard, aged and/or blue cheeses. Try to feature cheeses made from different types of milk (cow, goat and sheep) to ensure a more full and complex range of flavours. Some workable combinations include: a) Aged (Applewood Smoked Cheddar); Soft (Camembert); Firm (Parmigiano-Reggiano); Blue (Gorgonzola) b) Aged (Gouda); Soft (Brie); Firm (Gruyere); Blue (Cambozola) c) Aged (Oka); Soft (Boursin); Firm (Manchego); Blue (Roquefort) When arranging your platter, it is perfectly acceptable to place strong-smelling cheeses on a separate plate so that they do not overpower the more delicate ones. Ensure that each type of cheese has a separate and slicing-appropriate knife (whether it is a butter knife, a paring knife or a cheese plane). Make sure to remove cheese from the refrigerator at least one hour prior to intended consumption to allow the flavours to sing.

Arrange the accompaniments (cured meat and vegetables, fruit, bread and spreads) around or beside the cheese platter and ensure that there is cutlery accessible, if required (for example, small tongs or forks for the cured vegetables, a spreading knife for each spread, etc.).

Enjoy the meal with your loved one and a glass (or three) of chilled white wine.