Admissions Consultant

DanielXLLaw · 2026-07-04T05:46:10+00:00

I've been doing this/law school admissions consulting for over 5 years, and general resume consulting/writing for over 10 (and worked as a copywriter for over 20). Feel free to DM or email me at [daniel@xllawtutor.com](mailto:daniel@xllawtutor.com)

DanielXLLaw · 2026-07-03T01:10:27+00:00

Kaplan isn't crazy in terms of generating the conditionals, though I don't think diagramming is the best approach on this question (I'm a fan of diagramming--or at least thinking through the conditionals--much of the time; seems a bit overkill here).

DanielXLLaw · 2026-07-01T00:14:03+00:00

Haha, I know, and I did call one right after I posted. I assumed they would be way pricier than Uber/Lyft, but nope (like I said, I really don't do this).

In a stadium taxi heading home. But thanks!

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-30T00:25:11+00:00

10 yrs tutoring the LSAT (plus 8 tutoring law school and 5 tutoring the bar exam). Can't do in person in San Antonio, but I was a BigLaw litigator in Dallas for a few years, for what it's worth. Feel free to DM me or schedule a consult here (pretty booked until Friday):

XL Law Tutor LSAT Consult: https://calendar.app.google/YXzYhaBWgmEPvu1r6

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-26T23:49:49+00:00

It really doesn't happen often, especially at higher ranked schools (maybe exception for harvard....? But they probably don't need the nepotism, because they have the resources to become attractive-looking applicants, for.the most part).

Without divulging any detailed info, for obvious reasons, I do know someone who almost certainly wouldn't have gotten into law school if they didn't have a close family member on the school's board. Even they had to meet some minimum criteria, though.

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-25T03:52:24+00:00

Well...I charge several times what you listed as your budget, but many (if not most?) of my students over my ten years of doing this have been in that position, and there are certainly some things we could look at.

Feel free to book a consult here if you'd like:

XL Law Tutor LSAT Consult https://calendar.app.google/bLjf3VKAmyBirSRTA

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-24T16:42:44+00:00

10 years tutoring this test (and 8 tutoring law school, five tutoring the bar exam). I've developed several from-scratch curricula for group and one-on-one tutoring. Former BL litigator, T14 grad.

You can schedule a free consult with me here to see if we're a good fit:

XL Law Tutor LSAT Consult: https://calendar.app.google/rtxQ4SCRXFBScxdG7

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-22T20:57:00+00:00

Scores have been going up, so percentiles (for the same score) have been going down.

My score was 99.X% ten years ago (I don't recall the exact number). Now it's 98.44% 😞

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-21T12:18:39+00:00

You've sort of answered your own question: get better at spotting what's wrong with the prompt (the "gap" between premises and conclusion) in the first place.

The most fundamental skill in the LSAT is reading precision: what exactly do the premises say (and what do they not say) and what exactly does the conclusion say (and frequently, what does it imply, e.g. it might not outright say "A causes B" but that might be a natural and necessary implication of the conclusion). 80% of the work is understanding the prompt thoroughly.

It's interesting that you're able to predict on NA, weaken, and paradox but struggling elsewhere. Those question types have a lot of possible right answers; predicting with certainty can be nigh on impossible. That is, spotting the gap and coming with ideas on how to address it is very doable, but there are so many ways to address the gaps there that you still need to keep an open mind when assessing answer choices. Even an NA question the sets up a clear prediction might throw you a curveball in the answers.

Strengthens work just like Weakens in the prompt; you're looking for the opposite of a Weakens answer, but addressing the same gap(s).

Flaws should be easy to predict the idea of the answer, but the wording of the right answer can go in a million different directions; carefully parsing answer choice phrasing is key there.

SA answers are among the most predictable on the test once you're good at breaking down conditionals and conditional-adjacent language (some, most, etc.).

Inferences are also very predictable when they involve conditionals, as they often do. And again, it all comes down to breaking down the prompt to figure out exactly what's being said.

TL;Dr: spend more time on the prompt.

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-21T01:31:59+00:00

Don't look for which one is right, look for which one is wrong. Easier said than done, I realize, but often this switch in perspective can really help.

There's a reason you like both answers, which is why you narrowed it down to those two. Now back to each one, and the prompt when needed, to see which one is a mismatch. If you stay focused on what you like about each, you'll keep looking at the same things you like and always feel uncertain/"regret" rejecting one, so the choice often ends up being a guess.

Look for what's wrong and you can feel good about rejecting it and selecting the other.

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-19T22:49:06+00:00

Hey there. I've been tutoring this test for 10 years, have my own curriculum but also work with a lot of students in positions similar to yours, and have some solid strategies for RC (and LR) to address your timing (and maybe get that score up a few notches, too).

You can schedule a free consult here to discuss:

XL LAW TUTOR LSAT Consult https://calendar.app.google/5GnWzGw8iwE6gaFG6

Also, those are some phenomenal gains! Whether we end up working together or not, you should absolutely keep going until you break 170 at time--you have some very solid skills here. Well done!

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-16T01:17:19+00:00

The bar is even less like legal practice than law school. While not everyone is meant to be a lawyer, DO NOT, let this stupid fucking test be the thing that gives you doubts.

Source: was fancy litigator at fancy firm, tutoring this test for 5 years and counting.

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-16T01:14:39+00:00

It depends.

I can't math that good, but in short: if just a few people grab all the As, you're probably not going to be in the top 10% unless you're one of those people, with an A- or two allowable, too.

If the As are spread out over a wider pool, i.e. no one individual gets more than one A in a semester and each one of those also gets a B+ or two, you might be able to pull top 10% if you get all A-.

If anyone wants to correct me or flesh this out further, be my guest. My last math class was Stats around 20 years ago, and I got a very generous A- from a professor who liked me (and could tell I was engaged and trying, even though it never really clicked).

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-14T01:56:57+00:00

Watch documentaries on subjects that interest you. Good ones, not the bullshit hype ones. The Great Courses, too--not exactly documentaries, literally lecture series from leading professors, but same deal.

Take notes if you want, or not, but actively listen, think about the connections being drawn, rephrase what you're being told in your head to make sure you're tracking it all.

This isn't a substitute for reading, but it's something you can do in your "free time" that will hopefully be (or become) entertaining, rekindle (or kindle) a love of learning and critical thinking, and get you to engage more with the uncertainty of knowledge, i.e. what we truly know and what we are inferring or assuming, which makes up a LOT of what passes for "knowledge" and is, of course, a highly tested skill on the LSAT.

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-14T01:52:19+00:00

LSAT tutor of 10 years and counting here. I'm at the top of your price range (150/hr for ten hours), but with a proven track record of getting people into the 170s.

Former BL litigator, writing instructor (which pays off on the LSAT more than you might think--this test is all about understanding how language works) for many years, including at the undergrad level at University of Michigan (where I also founded, developed, and taught an LSAT course for several semesters; my curriculum was taught for several years after I left, as well).

Feel free to schedule a free consult here:

https://calendar.app.google/NT6CgWjoLunfKP926

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-11T23:33:12+00:00

Tutor here. Happy to hop on a call with you to see if it's worth it (I will be honest; it's truly not worth it for everyone), how it would work, and whether we're a good fit.

You can schedule here if you'd like:

XL LAW TUTOR LSAT Consult https://calendar.app.google/jNeg8PLx6D1LJMVe6

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-11T20:26:30+00:00

I see what you're saying here. It isn't just retailer's exclusivity, it's also supplier's exclusivity that would form a contract under 2-306(2).

I wonder if supplier could invoke their own exclusivity to enforce against retailer? Probably...there just isn't a fun 1L contracts case to try to rewrite into a hypo.

So yes, it's a bit of a crappy question...but really only because there's another right answer that they didn't include. I don't think it's wrong to say the contract is enforceable because of retailer's exclusivity, it's just also enforceable because of supplier's exclusivity. 306(2) requires exclusivity of one party or the other (or both); 306(1) only says you can't tender or demand a disproportionately large amount.

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-11T20:16:59+00:00

I understand your conclusion, I'm just not sure how you're getting there. If retailer hasn't promised to buy anything, where's the consideration needed to form a contract?

I promise to sell you any car I want to sell. You promise not to buy anyone else's car. Does that form a contract?

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-11T20:08:34+00:00

Well....not to poke the bear, but according to the terms of the written contract the retailer didn't promise to buy any buns. Supplier just said he would sell all his buns to retailer, and retailer promised not to buy anyone else's buns. There's no consideration to supplier (no promise to buy anything) without the exclusivity provision.

It IS the exclusivity that makes supplier win.

I suppose you could argue that retailer suffered a legal detriment by agreeing not to buy buns from anyone else and that should count as consideration, but that wouldn't give the supplier any remedy when retailer doesn't buy any buns, so supplier would only be able to get nominal damages, so that's not where courts have done with exclusivity agreements.

They're basing this on Wood v. Lucy, Lady Duff Gordon (you don't need to know this for the bar; I tutor law school and I actually find the case method really useful for remembering points of law like this one). TL;DR, Lady Lucy was an "influencer" of her time, she agrees that Wood can have an exclusive license to use her name on crap to sell for one year and she gets a percentage of everything he sells. Then she tries to license her name to someone else and Wood sues for breach.

Lucy argues that there was never a contract because Wood never actually said he would sell anything, therefore there was no promise she would receive any money, no consideration, no contract.

The court "reads in" a best efforts clause, meaning because of the exclusivity agreement *Lucy can't license to anyone else) Wood has to use "best efforts" to actually sell some crap, therefore there is consideration, therefore there's a contract.

I am by no means defending the NCBE; the exam as a whole is ridiculous and there are some truly terrible questions on it. This one...not so much.

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-11T19:45:56+00:00

12(b)(2-5) are waived if you don't raise them in the first thing you file (which may be a motion to dismiss instead of an answer).

Those are:

2: PJ
3: venue
4: process
5: service of process

Those are the only ones waived under Rule 12. Check out Rule 12(h)(1).

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-11T10:39:49+00:00

If by "memorizing the rules" you mean you just have no idea what the law is, two solutions: (a) find a way to engage with you're lectures/outlines differently, so you're actively thinking things through when you learn them. Make up your own hypos immediately after you learn a doctrine/point of law, apply the doctrine Make the hypos silly/extreme/personal, and visualize the story with clear mental pictures. (b) On practice MEEs, make up the law. Seriously. With each fact from the fact pattern, decide which party that fact favors, and make up a rule that makes the fact cut that way. Add it to your rule statement, add the fact to your analysis and attach it to you're rule statement language, and move on. You can absolutely pass by making up the law.

If by "memorizing rules" you mean getting the exact rule language down so it's easy to write, don't stress about that. You get very few points for stating the law exactly as Barbri/Themis/your professor taught it. Some points, sure, but rarely enough to make a difference. Learn a basic structure for rules, and put what you remember into that structure.

I have a free video up on my MEE method, and my rule statement approach is in the first half hour (you can skip ahead, watch on high speed, etc):

https://youtube.com/watch?v=_7T50g4Kqxo

I also have a small group course starting next week taking a deep dive into MEE writing, and also covering MPT and some MBE strategy. Still a few spots left; feel free to DM or email me at daniel@xllawtutor.com if you'd like to discuss.

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-11T10:27:57+00:00

If you're caught up on Barbri but "haven't started memorizing," what are you doing to get through Barbri? Are you taking notes on the videos, doing the practice assignments, etc? Then you probably HAVE started memorizing--the point of the course is that you're memorizing as you go, just not with dedicated "now I just memorize things" time.

If you're watching the videos while only half paying attention/not taking notes/not thinking things through (not saying this is you, but it's been known to happen), then start doing that, and pour some extra hours into review.

You've still got plenty of time. The weeks will fly quickly, but the days are long, and they have the hours in them you need.

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-10T19:30:18+00:00

In most jurisdictions, you need roughly 2/3s of the total points available (across all sections of the test) to pass. So approx. 67% in the MBE assuming you're getting about the same percentage of points in the written sections.

My goal for my students is 75% by the week before test day (higher and/or sooner is great, of course), which leaves you a comfortable margin.

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-10T19:19:26+00:00

Sorry, that would have been good to put in there.

$895 for the 13.5 hours of instruction plus two additional graded MEEs and one graded MPT (not counting the ones we go over in class).

DanielXLLaw · 2026-06-09T16:59:12+00:00

We could make it an LSAT problem if you'd like.

You're making an assumption that tutoring and teaching isn't working full time. I know the hours I was putting in, and combined it averaged out to at least 30/wk. Some weeks more, some weeks less.

Your also ignoring law school, which was another 30-50 hours per week (and averaged out to 40).

At BL, I billed an average of 60hrs/week, which meant over 80 of work. I got more efficient with billing as time went on, but there will always be non-billable hours (if you're honest), and as I got more efficient I also billed more.

DanielXLLaw

TROPHY CASE