Upper Year Courses

[Dussy]

Hello everyone

As the title suggests, I am looking for some guidance on what upper year courses I should take (at Queens). Right now, I am interested in working at a full service firm, likely in corporate. However, I am open to litigation as well.

Essentially, I am wondering if there are any courses that I should definitely or definitely not take, for whatever reason. I know there was a thread about this on LS before it closed, so hopefully this can pick up where it left off.

Thanks

[QMT20]

For corporate, I would recommend anything taught by Professor Yalden. He teaches one of the two business associations sections and also structuring business transactions and corporate governance. Some people are bored by his lectures but he's very knowledgeable (former co-chair of Osler's national M&A practice) and genuinely cares about his students. He also hires student RAs every year. Securities and tax are generally thought to be important courses. Whether you'll enjoy securities or not is going to depend a lot on who they bring in to teach the course this year. The only full-time faculty that's taught it is Gail Henderson and I heard good things about her course. The last two-years we had adjuncts and people had mixed to negative reviews for the course. If you want to actually learn tax, I would not recommend taking Lahey's tax class. I've heard mixed reviews about Cockfield's tax and corporate tax courses but you probably have a better bet with him (if you want to learn tax, if you just want tax on your transcript then Lahey is very nice). 

For litigation, evidence is obviously very important. This year it was taught by Weisbord in the fall and Kelly in the winter. Both are really good, in my opinion, but the course is taught with a crim-heavy focus. Trial ad is also a good course to take. I'd recommend the course taught by the partners from McCarthy's if you can get in (it's generally full by the time registration opens for second-years). I'd also recommend administrative law generally because it's good to have some knowledge about judicial review of administrative action (in contrast to general civil litigation) and I'd say Grey and Weinrib are both great options for that course. Sometimes the course is taught by Aiken but if you have Grey or Weinrib as an alternative option, I'd recommend taking it with one of them. I also thought Pratt's remedies course was pretty useful because it forces you to think about the pecuniary objectives of an action rather than tunneling on the narrow legal questions which determine whether liability is established. For example, remedies is useful in helping you think about whether you want to bring an action for breach of contract or negligent misrepresentation on a given set of facts based on the principles which determine what type of compensation you can get for your client. 

[Dussy]

7 minutes ago, QMT20 said:

For corporate, I would recommend anything taught by Professor Yalden. He teaches one of the two business associations sections and also structuring business transactions and corporate governance. Some people are bored by his lectures but he's very knowledgeable (former co-chair of Osler's national M&A practice) and genuinely cares about his students. He also hires student RAs every year. Securities and tax are generally thought to be important courses. Whether you'll enjoy securities or not is going to depend a lot on who they bring in to teach the course this year. The only full-time faculty that's taught it is Gail Henderson and I heard good things about her course. The last two-years we had adjuncts and people had mixed to negative reviews for the course. If you want to actually learn tax, I would not recommend taking Lahey's tax class. I've heard mixed reviews about Cockfield's tax and corporate tax courses but you probably have a better bet with him (if you want to learn tax, if you just want tax on your transcript then Lahey is very nice). 

For litigation, evidence is obviously very important. This year it was taught by Weisbord in the fall and Kelly in the winter. Both are really good, in my opinion, but the course is taught with a crim-heavy focus. Trial ad is also a good course to take. I'd recommend the course taught by the partners from McCarthy's if you can get in (it's generally full by the time registration opens for second-years). I'd also recommend administrative law generally because it's good to have some knowledge about judicial review of administrative action (in contrast to general civil litigation) and I'd say Grey and Weinrib are both great options for that course. Sometimes the course is taught by Aiken but if you have Grey or Weinrib as an alternative option, I'd recommend taking it with one of them. I also thought Pratt's remedies course was pretty useful because it forces you to think about the pecuniary objectives of an action rather than tunneling on the narrow legal questions which determine whether liability is established. For example, remedies is useful in helping you think about whether you want to bring an action for breach of contract or negligent misrepresentation on a given set of facts based on the principles which determine what type of compensation you can get for your client. 

Thank you so much! This is very helpful, I really appreciate it.

[Abella Swan]

I also think taking a course you can do your substantial term paper for in 2L is a good idea so it leaves you with more flexibility in 3L, especially if you want to go on exchange.