Tuesday, October 31, 2006

We're number one!!

I received this in an email. In three of the last four years, our school was tops in the state when it came to bar passage rates. That says much about the teaching here.

The results of the July Michigan Bar exam were received today. I am very pleased to announce that 25 of 26 members of the Ave Maria School of Law Class of 2006 passed the Michigan Bar, which is a pass rate of 96%. Please join me in congratulating these graduates for their outstanding performance.

Listed below for your review are the results of all Michigan law schools on the July exam. This is the third time in the last four years in which our graduates have earned top honors among Michigan law schools on the Michigan bar exam.

First-Time Takers

Ave Maria School of Law: 96% Pass

Michigan State University: 94% Pass

University of Michigan: 93% Pass

Wayne State University: 93% Pass

University of Detroit Mercy: 92% Pass

Thomas M. Cooley: 80% Pass

All First-Time Takers in State: 91% Pass


Earnest Frank said...

The Michigan Judge Who Went Easy on a Pedophile Priest: She's a candidate for the Michigan Court of Appeals.

Details at http://rejectjudgehathaway.blogspot.com/

RKG said...

I have to tell you that I am concerned about the usefulness of a law school that a)advocates a philosophical/substantive position as it educates students in the law and b)trains its' students to pass the bar exam. I've actively participated in the "discussion" of issues on this forum with you and, as time passed, was perplexed that you were a law student and yet so partisanly narrow in your appreciation of broader, more important, constituional issues. Finding out that you attend Ave Maria explains a great deal, and frankly, I find that sad. I think there is tremendous honor in the study of law and believe that a more thorough and complete understanding of our constitutional underpinnings necessarily leads one to a more reasoned appreciation of the issues of the day. I wondered when I'd see that in your comments. Things just aren't so cut and dry and partisan when you understand how we got to this point. It's harder to advocate locking up those bastard terrorists and throwing away the key if you truly have studied and understand the concept and significance of due process. It's easy to advocate the outlaw of abortion until you study the line of cases that led to Roe -v- Wade. I just never saw any evidence in your partisanship that made me believe that you really were a student of the law and, in all seriousness, I find that sad. Once you get your bar card you're as much an attorney as anyone and can practice along side those of us with a more traditional training in the law. Good for you. But in reality, I think our society will be less well off because I believe your undertanding of your roll and your relationship to the law will be limited and will yield, therefore, a less valuable contribution to society. Hopefully time will help you better understand where I'm coming from and you will have the courage to repect the law enough to check your partisanship and I don't really expect my comments to resonate with you today.

Republican Michigander said...

Most of my judicial posts came before I started school. My views don't come from my still in process Ave Maria background but a philosophy and political background (Mix of Madison/Jefferson/Jackson/Lincoln). I'm currently a first year student there (which explains the fewer posts), and first year courses as you know are mostly "meat and potatoes" stuff. Contracts, Torts, Civil Procedure, and Property. I haven't taken Con Law yet The only area there even close to controversial is some aspects of torts and some jurisdiction matters in Civ Pro. We are not to the famous Erie case yet.

I am well aware the precedent is worshipped which is both good and bad. Judges hate to be reversed more than anything else, and most fall back to previous cases by their rulings.

As for Roe V Wade and the lesser known Doe v Bolton (which was worse), it'll take me about 20 pages to write out my full arguments on that and it's predecessor (Griswold expansion) and successors (Stenburg, Casey, and Lawrence v Texas). Those are and should be state issues, not federal questions.

I'm much better at arguing this type of thing over a beer than in front of a computer .

Me said...

A great place to find out everything you ever wanted to know about DETROIT AND MICHIGAN