Law Guy: Josh (Joshua?) de Groot/2L

Name/Year: Josh (Joshua?) de Groot/2L

What did you do for reading week? I went to my childhood hometown of Fruitvale, BC. That’s right; I grew up in a place called Fruitvale. Laugh it up!

Plans for the summer yet? No plans yet. Although my answer for what I would do if I wasn’t in law is looking pretty good right now.

Advice for 1L’s looking for classes – exam-based or paper based? In general, don’t worry so much about the whole process. Every semester, you should take one or two required courses, one or two interesting classes and one or two that you think will be useful. Since we have so many required courses, firms won’t be worrying too much about which courses you’re taking. As for exam vs. paper? Definitely exam. You think it’ll be nice to have that class out of the way by exam time, but papers are way more work. I call this the Gareth Pugh Principle.

What is the funniest thing that has ever happened to you? Nothing funny has ever happened to me. Ever.

What is your favourite movie? Pan’s Labyrinth.

Favourite breakfast food? I’ve eaten Honey Nut Cheerios almost every morning for over 20 years. It’s my Tiger Blood.

What is something not a lot of people know about you but that you wish more people did know? During my undergrad, I was briefly in a country-folk band called the Wise Uncles. We played one terrible gig at Dewey’s to about 20 people before we broke up.

Would you be offended if I brought my own snacks to the movie theatre? Theatres have it coming to them. Just make sure you brought enough for the whole class.

Stolen from Yahoo Answers: If I reach the daily limit for withdrawals on my debit card can I still get cash back at Wal-Mart? This question is too practical for Yahoo Answers. I go there to find out “how are babies formed?”

iPhone, Blackberry, or Android? Blackberry; although that Angry Birds game could make me an iPhone guy…

What fictional character would you want to hang out with? Greg Plester. Everyone seems to think he is real, but no real person is that amazing.

If you weren’t in law, what would you be doing? I would most likely be living in a small town in New Mexico on a ranch, working as a cowboy by day and a poet by night. Yes, that describes Val Kilmer’s life, but it was my dream first!

What’s your (G-rated) guilty pleasure? Socks that don’t work with whatever I’m wearing and girls that hang out in the Fine Arts Building.

What is something you are really, really bad at? I am almost entirely incapable of giving compliments. True story: I was trying to talk up a friend to some girls once and my best compliment was “He’ll grow on you”. I guess I’m terrible at giving compliments and at being a wingman…

Law Girl: Katie Clackson

Name/Year: Katie Clackson/2L

What did you do for reading week? Hung out with friends, worked on some SLS stuff, watched movies, relaxed…and considered doing homework.

Plans for the summer yet? Work: SLS. Play: Camping, going to Vancouver, getting rid of my winter tan.

Advice for 1L’s looking for classes – exam-based or paper based? I would say recognize your strengths. If you know you’re a strong paper writer, take paper courses. If you’re good at exams, take exam-based courses. If you’re good at both, you don’t need any advice.

What is the funniest thing that has ever happened to you? I can’t swim (which is funny in itself) and in high school we had to do a two-week swimming unit for phys-ed. I spent that two weeks wearing a purple floaty belt and “swimming” in the shallow end. Did I mention this class was co-ed?

What is your favourite movie? It’s so hard to pick a favourite – I love movies. Revolutionary Road, Love Actually, and 500 Days of Summer are up there.

Favourite breakfast food? Cereal, toast with peanut butter and sliced banana, pancakes…I love it all. Breakfast is my favourite meal!

What is something not a lot of people know about you but that you wish more people did know? I’m five feet tall. I don’t need you to tell me I’m short. I figured it out long before I came to school in flats and you noticed it.

Would you be offended if I brought my own snacks to the movie theatre? Not at all! Movie snacks are so expensive. I would even do the fake cough so you could open your pop without being noticed.

Stolen from Yahoo Answers: If I reach the daily limit for withdrawals on my debit card can I still get cash back at Wal-Mart? I hope not. I don’t believe in Wal-Mart. And I really don’t believe in the bank of Wal-Mart.

iPhone, Blackberry, or Android? I probably should not have an opinion on this since I still rock a first generation LG Shine, but Blackberry.

What fictional character would you want to hang out with? Rainbow Brite. She’s cute and sweet and has star sprinkles.

If you weren’t in law, what would you be doing? Everyone tells me I should have been a kindergarten teacher, but I think I would have gone to grad school.

What’s your (G-rated) guilty pleasure? Candy – except I don’t feel that guilty about it.

What is something you are really, really bad at? Being a salesperson. I don’t know how I’m ever going to get clients.

Pets Do’s and Don’ts

Imane Semaine, 2L

I don’t own any pets. I can barely take care of myself. I consider Fruitloops an acceptable dinner and walking to HUB mall rigorous exercise. I by no means feel I should drag some innocent creature into this mess. Despite this, over the years I have noticed a few “do’s” and “don’ts” of pet ownership that I would like to share with you.

For starters, DO post pictures of your pets doing cute and crazy things on Facebook. That’s fine. But, DO NOT, for the love of God, customize your sweaters, totes or t-shirts with pictures of your cat(s). I’m not sure if this problem exists elsewhere, or if it’s just endemic to Edmonton, but it’s very unsettling.
If you’re a single lady DO NOT own more than 3 cats. I know it’s harsh, but I say this because I care. The world isn’t ready for you. You know the names you’ll be called behind your back. I’m sorry but its better you hear it now before it’s too late.

Likewise, if you’re a large, muscular man (read: meathead) DO NOT own a Chihuahua. I’ve actually witnessed this in real life, and I’m not just talking about watching Micky Rourke charming the world with his eccentricities. I realize confessing my discomfort at this isn’t exactly ‘progressive,’ but I feel compelled to call it out. Frankly, even Chihuahuas don’t want to be owned by meatheads. In fact, I am convinced Chihuahuas were put on Earth for the sole purpose of being carried around in women’s purses. The last I heard, fossilized remains of an early prehistoric Chihuahua were recently found in what appears to be in a primitive rock Gucci clutch. Meatheads everywhere offend fashion rules daily with their shocking array of wife beaters, and bedazzled jeans, but ownership of Chihuahuas goes too far and constitutes a crime against fashion-humanity. My advice to meatheads: man-up and put the Chihuahua down.

If you own a dog, DO NOT let it sleep in your bed, lick your face, or help you eat your ice cream cones. This is unhygienic. I recently watched an episode of “House” in which a patient contracted the black plague from her dog. A little Google research confirmed that there were two reported cases of black plague in the United States last year. How did it happen? Was it bioterrorism or Al Qaeda? Nope, it was the family dog.

Finally, DO pick up after your dog if you take it for a walk. The last I checked, the ‘fairies’ that pick up after your doggie ‘gifts’ only exist in Narnia. And, by the way, frozen feces don’t miraculously evaporate by spring.

Despite everything I’ve just said, if you have the time, resources, love, and patience for a pet, DO go and adopt one, especially from the local Humane Society where the animals are in need of good homes. Although they are a lot of work (work which I myself cannot commit to) I know they are worth the effort.

Take Care of Yourself First

Not a Zoo, 2L

It is tempting to many to stave off loneliness with the companionship of an adorable dog/cat/snake/piranha. And I understand the appeal. Having something else living in your apartment, that depends on you and cuddles with you (although not so much in the case of the piranha) is an opportunity that’s hard to pass up. The problem is that people tend to act before they think when it comes to animals. With even a millisecond’s logical thought, it’s clear that adopting a pet is a bad idea.

Dogs and/or cats are the first obvious choice. Dogs, in my opinion, are slightly more work. They will actually be upset when you’re not around and you have to take them for walks. Every day. I suppose you could tether your dog to a treadmill like Cesar Milan makes those fat dogs do on “The Dog Whisperer”…but seriously. SERIOUSLY. And how exciting does a -250 walk with an excitable furry friend, where you have to wait for, and cart around its poop, sound?

Cats are slightly more manageable. Really, as long as you provide a cat with some food, love, and a clean litter box, they are happy. And you will be rewarded with itchy, sneezy cat hairs hiding on every surface and peppering all of your suits. When you bring home an adorable kitten no one mentions the fortune you will spend on lint removers and vacuum filters. And I’m not sure how many of you have heard of toxoplasmosis. Google that s*&%.

Naïve pet-owner wannabes will often turn to animals they see as being “low maintenance” – fish, reptiles, rodents. They will be sadly disappointed upon realizing “low maintenance” means that you now have an animal that sits around, doesn’t give a hoot about your existence, AND, unless you want a foggy, nasty fish aquarium or the smell of rodent urine permeating your apartment, you have to clean its cage and feed it on a weekly basis. Don’t be misled by online forums for exotic pet owners. A “clean” pet that can be “litter trained” MAY still REALLY enjoy pooping on the run, on a wheel in its cage – which now has to be cleaned every day. Just a warning.

New exotic pet owners are often surprised by the problem of live food. Squeamishness aside, something often overlooked is the care and maintenance of your pet’s food. I am thinking specifically of crickets. They need food. And water. You have to buy them at least every couple of weeks, unless you want to start breeding them yourself. And if you thought the sound of crickets chirping all night long would be romantic, I assure you, it’s NOT.

I can’t even fit all my reasons for not owning a pet within my word limit. The bottom line: pets are a lot of work. In some cases for little reward. They live a long time, and once you have one, if you’re a decent person, you’re stuck with it. Give it some thought.

THAT WAS ABSOLUTELY TERRIFYING: Reflections of a First Year Moot

Jeff O’Brien, 1L

Well Jeff, your Bachelor of Classical Studies can’t save you here, was the first thing that went through my head as I approached the podium to address the bench. All of a sudden it did not matter how much preparation I had done, how many cases I had read, how many times I had gone through my notes, which questions I could predict; I had no experience that could prepare me for it. It’s hard to believe that I could ever find myself so ill-equipped for anything.

How did this all start? Well I guess it began with writing the factum. Even though the moot was only worth a fraction of the factum on my final mark (30% vs. 5%), the written document did not cause me any distress. When writing papers in my undergrad days, I never let not knowing what I was talking about get in my way, and I wasn’t about to start. I always have a great final written product. Mooting is just something that I felt completely unequipped to do.

After I served my factum I had the privilege of hearing the Honourable Justice Costigan speak about oral advocacy. One of his pearls of wisdom was that the oral argument is much less important than the factum. So much so, he said, that counsel sometimes agrees to forego the in-court portion of appeals entirely. This put me at ease. I know I’m a good writer (good enough for Canons, anyway), but I have no idea if I’m a good litigator.

The next day I read an article about oral advocacy by Justice Cromwell. According to him, the oral argument is far more important to an appeal than the factum. Once again I panicked. My writing skills would not help me. Is there no relief from the stress of a moot?

The only release was getting it done. And despite everything I’ve said, I really truly enjoyed it. There’s nothing like it. Yes, it was terrifying, and I did blunder some of my questions, but I’m pretty sure I did a good job with my rebuttal. That’s how the moot goes; there’s good, there’s bad, there’s contradictory advice from highly respected figures. All that matters is that the judges gave great feedback, so now I know what I’m good at and where I need to improve. I cannot put value on that experience.

My judges told me that I exuded confidence, so I’d like to finish by saying what inspired me. Perhaps future generations of 1Ls can learn from this. When Caesar, a man regarded as one of the best orators ever, began his march on Rome for the purpose of taking over, Marc Antony rode up next to him and said “you look very calm, considering what you’re about to do.” Caesar deadpanned, “hmm, I’m glad I appear so.”

Perhaps my undergrad degree helped a little bit after all.

The ZZ-Crew: a Profile

McG, 2L

It is believed to be a myth, a bogeyman story, but underground puzzling is a movement that is taking hold of our best and brightest. While most law students look for escape in loose women, alcohol, and costume parties, some choose to use their leisure time for much graver pursuits.

This reporter was able to get a glimpse of the elusive and secretive underworld that many of us have only fantasized about in our darkest hours. I was granted access to watch one of these Saturday evening puzzling events with three of the movement’s most prolific members. Below are some of my observations.

The evening began as most Saturday evenings do, with the three men discussing bath and hair products, comparing prices of face wash, and planning their next hot yoga class. However, the mood quickly turned morose.

During the puzzling there was very little conversation. Most of the discussion consisted of accusations and arguments. I was able to identify the four most common sources of dispute:

1. Easy Part: This was the most common accusation. When one member would celebrate a victory by filling in an area of the puzzle, the other members would argue that he was doing an ‘easy part’ and point out how much more difficult their area of the puzzle was.

2. Banditry: This type of accusation came about when the puzzle was almost complete. A certain member was accused of puzzle banditry, even though he was absent at the event. Once the supposed ‘stolen piece’ was found, the accuser would generally refuse to apologize or acknowledge that he was wrong.

3. Forcing: One member was berated for putting the pieces in the wrong places, and in his defense would claim “it feels like it fits.” After repeated failed attempts, in a desperate attempt to avoid the shame and humiliation that would come with such a blunder, he complained about the lighting and angle of his position relative to the puzzle.

4. Pocketing: This type of accusation also came about when the puzzle was almost complete. Another puzzler was accused of pocketing pieces so he would be the member to put the last piece in place. The glory that came with being the last piece holder was so tempting for the members that it was worth the incrimination and the guilt that comes along with it.

It is important to note that there were also moments of teamwork and camaraderie. One member was on a hot streak and got a lot of high fives as if the entire group were celebrating one man’s triumph.

All three members, when the puzzle was almost finished, helped to organize pieces into ‘prong’ categories. When asked why they organize them this way, they explained that they “think in prongs, not holes.” For those of you that do not understand the distinction, you are not alone; there is an entire vernacular in underground puzzling that most of us will never understand.

Who are the Radvocates? An Interview.

By: Annie Ominous

Author’s Note: In no way did this sit-down actually happen. All quotes have been fabricated.

In the 2010 Fall Intramural season, the co-ed Volleyball league was rocked by the appearance of a new team. The girls hit as hard as the boys, they had a male setter, they came, they played, they spun it and won it. But from where did these super athletes come? The RADVOCATES© came from the Faculty of Law.

It has been a road plagued by controversy, hang-overs, and Canucks games, but over the past year these seven individuals have become a team. The best damn team ever. Last week we all sat down for an intimate and candid interview. I was joined by 3Ls: Andrea Piercy, Molly St. Arnaud, Adam Kaukas; 2Ls: Jason Kully and Barely Loutit, and 1L Niall Nazarko. It looked like 2L Brittney Tetz wasn’t going to make it but she showed up at the last possible minute.

I first tred to find out a bit about the individual players. Kaukas stepped into the role as setter and team leader on the court easily. Piercy will hit around any block. St. Arnaud is the team’s best defender; she’s always in the right place at the right time. Kully is pure intimidation on the court. In fact, his teammates sometimes implore him to stop blocking whatever poor soul is across from him at the net. Tetz hits the ball so hard she was invited to the men’s post game team steam (which she did not attend). Loutit, the team’s alternate, does things … alternatively, like only passing a ball that someone else has called. However, St. Arnaud admits, “he is a good natured and pointless addition to the team.” Nazarko, the team’s leggiest player, also has the best serve receive, belying surprising coordination for such a gangly guy.

I next attempt to find out who was the founding member, but this proved to be an impossible inquiry. After the “elitest” controversy it seems no one is willing to take responsibility for creating the team. Piercy says it was Kully, Kully says it was St. Arnaud, and Loutit says it was him – which, of course, no one believes. In the end I find out that Raj Deol is, in fact, responsible for the creation of the Radvocates. In 2010 only one co-ed volleyball team was registered which resulted in too many players and not enough playing time, so the sports enthusiasts decided to take matters into their own hands. So then why the controversy? The team claims there shouldn’t have been any. But then, to quote Piercy, “I don’t think many law students participated in sports past kindergarten, so maybe they still think everyone gets equal playing time and a participant’s ribbon.”

Once surrounded by controversy, they are now surrounded by tee shirts. With only one loss on their record (when Kaukas went to a Canucks game and Tetz had a shoulder injury and Molly was MIA) the Radvocates put their money where their mouth is. Big time. When I ask if it’s true that the Radvocates were raised to celebrity status at the 2011 Law Games, Tetz said, “yes.” Piercy said, “being the best volleyball player du monde = free drinks.” In fact, the tournament rule – boys can’t block girls – was eventually changed to allow other teams to (try to) block Piercy, St. Arnaud and Tetz. And while the other teams played 5 boys and 1 girl, the Radvocates kept their 3 and 3 rotation. Not out of principle or anything, Kully says it was “just because they’re the best.” The team’s “easy button” victories brought home the volleyball banner.

While the team’s future is uncertain with the departure of the 3Ls, the team stays focussed on short term goals. Such as winning this semester’s intramural competition. Does anyone know where the easy button is?

Faculty of Law Foodies’ Reviews

Chantel Cabaj & Elyse Van Spronsen, 2Ls

Chantel and Elyse …. Law students by day, winos by night. They’re committed to balancing the delights of HUB with more refined culinary selections. Most importantly, they’re willing to share their finds with you!

D’Lish Urban Kitchen and Wine Bar – 10418-124 St

Nestled on trendy 124 Street, the newly renovated D’Lish provides an atmosphere intimate enough for a date but comfortable enough for a group outing. Our first experience with D’Lish was a positive one, accompanied by good friends and great service. Highlights from the night included an array of tasty bites and large wine selection. Two of our favourite tapas were the “Schrooms,” a mushroom cream sauce served with focaccia bread, and the mouth-watering beef brisket Sliders. The staff eagerly helped us find the perfect vintage for our budget, and for those looking to quickly broaden their palette, D’Lish offers the option of a 2 oz serving size. All in all, D’Lish is a great spot, and with tapas priced around the $12 mark, it’s an affordable way to mix up your usual weekend plans.

Tzin Wine & Tapas Bar – 10115 104 St NW

For the after work crowd, Tzin on 104th is a sophisticated little wine and tapas bar – and we do mean little. We grabbed a seat of the bar and were comfortably squished between our fellow diners. Tzin is a great place to go if you’re looking to strike up a conversation—we found both the bartender and our seatmates to be equally willing to share a story or two. The staff at Tzin is well versed in wine and wine pairings. While the price points are a bit higher than tapas at D’Lish, the food is fantastic and the atmosphere cultured but approachable. Tzin offers more than 20 wines by the glass and if you like what you taste, much of their wine is sourced from deVine right next door. For tapas, we especially enjoyed the Sirloin & Rosemary Crostinis. We’d suggest making a reso online before stopping by: no one wants to be turned away when desperately seeking their 5’oclock wine fix.

Hurry (Hard) and Sign up for the Lawyer’s Curling League

Nicole Patterson, 2L

With the Law School Curling Tournament and the Brier Final taking place earlier this month, it is a good time to make a pitch for joining the Lawyer’s Curling League. For those of you who are unaware, it is a league of judges and lawyers who curl every Wednesday night at the Granite Club and have made room for a few student teams each year. I can easily say that curling Wednesday nights has been one of my favorite experiences in Law School, and I’m sure Team Savard would agree.

What I have enjoyed most about the League is how friendly and welcoming everyone is, and how it was quite accurately advertised as: “NO experience necessary”. On my first day out last year, I had never curled and had zero idea what the rules were. Before long, I had a woman crush on Cheryl Bernard, and at least partially knew what was expected of me when our skip signaled to play the tap, a hit and roll, do a takeout, draw to the button, or the freeze. After being introduced to a broom, a slider, and throwing my first rock – which inevitably eliminated any doubt that I was a rookie – Justice Marceau and the rest of his team very kindly took the time to show us the ropes. One year later, he informed me that he regretted some of those tips, as our first win was against Team Marceau.

It has also been really fun playing our number one challenger, Team Savard. While our claim to fame is beating them last week (though I missed it and can’t take any credit), they definitely are winning this rivalry overall. Perhaps this can be partially attributed to the fact that Dollansky and the rest of their crew had the lingo down in no time. I soon learned that for the simple words of “sweep” or “don’t sweep”, you have other options to shout that are way more fun, such as: “Hurry Haaaaard”, “Gotta go”, “WHOA”, “RIGHT OFF”, “line’s good…line’s real good”, “It’s gotta cuuuuurrrrl”, among others. We have also all learned that the beauty of curling is how easily you can avoid blame for your lack of skills. Obviously a missed shot is not your fault if “it just took off”, the ice is faster or slower than usual, the skip gave you too much or too little ice, it should’ve been swept sooner, or my personal favorite, that “it must’ve hit something”.

It has also been great meeting some of the practicing and retired lawyers and judges in Edmonton. Great conversations take place both during the game and over some beers and popcorn afterwards—some of the judges have been curling for more than 40 years in this league. While there are limited spots, I would strongly urge you to get involved in this “sport” and answer any questions you may have about the league. Games begin each Wednesday night at 5:00 pm. The entry fee includes a full-day Bonspiel in February, which is also a great time.

The Most Supreme Court

Molly St. Arnaud, 3L

It’s that time again. Time for another self-congratulatory commentary on how awesome we are. (I attribute Ted DeCoste’s Foundations course, circa 2009, with planting this nugget of truth in my head.)

The Faculty of Law has surprised everyone but themselves with their superlative performance on the hardwood in recent intramural competition. Just prior to Reading Week, both the men’s and women’s 3-on-3 teams swept the championship and claimed the highly coveted t-shirts (which, this season, are a lovely burnt sienna/vomit colour). The men’s championship match was a close one, but members of Team Asadi – Adam Kaukas (3L), Jason Buttuls (2L), Arvin Asadi (2L) and Aron Balakrishnan (1L) – kept their composure and secured the victory with some clutch outside shooting. The ladies’ contingent, comprised of Chantel Cabaj (2L), Eman Joumaa (2L), Erica Lind (1L), Jill Gamez (3L) and yours truly, cruised to a somewhat easier victory after going 9-0 against a wide range of competition and beating their rivals handily in a low-scoring and fairly scrappy final.

After a restful and contemplative Reading Week, these champions have diverged to form two competitive teams in the Co-Rec Tournament, Bearristers Basketball and Court of Appeal. While both teams have suffered losses at the hands of the BURJ team, which is helmed by a former Golden Bear, matches thus far have been close and the real contest will come on March 16th when the two Law teams go head to head. While many speculate that Court of Appeal’s Balakrishnan’s superstardom will be too much for the Bearristers to contain, the author is confident that the presence of his teammates, Raji Deol (3L) and/or Dhruv Gupta (1L), will counteract Balakrishnan’s awesomeness and result in numerous turnovers and all-round buffoonery. Meanwhile, it is expected that Kaukas will play his part and sway the refs by politely thanking them every time they make a call. And thankfully, the Bearristers’ Cabaj and St. Arnaud are on the same team, so odds for broken noses and/or concussions go way down. Either way, expect a thrilling and likely extremely violent matchup!

Why are the law students excelling? Is it our ability to keep calm and composed in situations of intense pressure and emotion? Is it our innate drive to win at all costs and argue every call using rational, well-organized logic? Is it – gasp – our older than average age and added experience when playing against fresh-faced impetuous undergrads who fast break until they’re blue in the face?

I don’t actually have the answer. I just know that as the sun sets on my glorious law school intramural career, it can unequivocally and triumphantly be described by the word du jour… WINNING. And also T-shirt Time. But mostly Winning.

*Addendum: The author’s predictions were confirmed on all counts as the Bearristers topped Court of Appeal in a well-fought 49-34 match.

Next Page »