Law Review Orientation

In order to qualify for membership on the Law Review, students must:

1.  Have successfully completed the Candidates Program, which shall be offered exclusively in the summer of each year.  The Candidates Program is described in detail in The Law Review Member Selection Process document, which is incorporated in herein.

2.  In order to gain an invitation for membership on the Law Review, a qualifying candidate must:

• Submit an application form prior to or on Orientation Day or as otherwise determined by the Editor-in Chief.

• Have a minimum GPA of 3.15  or have a class rank in the top 33.33% (including spring semester grades).

• Receive at least an 80% on the mandatory Blue Book test.  Any student not receiving at least an 80% on his/her first attempt will have the opportunity to correct his/her mistakes and resubmit the test.

• Participate in the three week Write-On Competition to take place during the dates set forth on the Master Calendar, unless an extension has been approved by the Editor-In-Chief.

3).  Whether an individual Candidate receives an invitation for membership in Law Review shall be determined by the quality of his/her Write-On submission.

4).  The decision to invite a Candidate for membership in the Law Review shall be made by a majority vote of the incoming Editorial Board, unless the Editor-in-Chief, and the Faculty Advisor agree upon a different procedure and give notice to all Members of the Law Review and Candidates prior to the inititiation of that year's Write-On Competition.

5.  In order to qualify for membership in the Law Review, the Candidate's Write-On submission must demonstrate exceptional writing skills and analytical reasoning.  This includes, but is not limited to, clear organization, accurate grammar, synthesis of legal issues, concise reasoning, appropriate, and proper citations according The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citations.

6.  After accepting an invitation to join Law Review, new members will complete a Student Note of publishable quality, in compliance with the deadlines set forth on the Master Calendar.

Member Duties to be Eligible for Class Credit:

Member must complete a student note that meets the "publishable quality" standard.
Member must attend all meetings and symposia, unless receiving prior approval for
their absence from the Editor-in-Chief.
Member must complete at least 90 hours of subciting during the academic year.
This outline reflects the lengthier set of rules set forth in the Northern Kentucky Law Review ByLaws.

Advanced Writing Requirement

The Advanced Writing Requirement is a graduation requirement that does not generate any separate credit- hours. The requirement consists of a research component and a drafting component.  A Case Note or Comment written for law review may satisfy the research component.

Supervised Independent Study; or Law Review: See Chase College of Law Student Handbook - Academic Policies
A student who writes a research paper as a member of the Northern Kentucky Law Review may receive credit for AWR - Research under the supervision and approval of the Editor-in-Chief and then a full-time professor in consultation with a faculty advisor for the law review.

Requirements:
"To obtain AWR-Research credit, you will be required to submit a form to the Registrar's Office. Until you have submitted your final draft, this form will be maintained and stored by the Chief Editor. After you submit the final draft of your student note or comment, you will be required to have your paper reviewed by a professor.

Chase Registrar Website:
Advanced Writing Procedures for Law Review
Advanced Writing Requirement for Law Review [form]

As an Associate Editor, you will have three primary duties:  write an article of publishable quality, complete all sub-citing assignments, and attend all meetings and symposia unless excused by the Editor-in-Chief.  These duties are listed below for quick reference, and if anyone has any questions at any time, please don’t hesitate to contact myself or another member of the Editorial Board.

 _____ Attend all meetings/symposia unless excused by the Editor-in-Chief

 _____ Meet each and every deadline unless you have secured an extension from the appropriate editor.  These extensions will be given at the respective editor’s discretion and only for good cause and only if the request is made at least 48 hours prior to the scheduled deadline

 _____ Always submit a high quality work product (must make a good faith effort and seek assistance with any problems)

 _____ Submit an article of publishable quality by the assigned deadline

 _____ Meet with respective student articles editor at least once (unless excused by the student articles editor)

 _____ Complete at least 90 hours of sub-citing.

______ Publish at least one blog post on the Northern Kentucky Law Review Blog.

Technical Violation

A technical violation occurs when an Associate Editor misses a deadline without securing an extension from the appropriate editor or misses a meeting or symposia without the EIC’s permission.

• First Offense:  Verbal and Email Warning from respective Editor and EIC.
• Editor and EIC will inform the Associate Editor of the violation, explain the appropriate policy, and state that this is the first warning.
• An email will be sent to the Associate Editor noting their violation.
• Second Offense:  Written, Formal Warning from EIC and extra hours of subciting or appropriate training.
• Editor and EIC will inform the Associate Editor, in person and by formal letter, explain the appropriate policy, and state that is the second warning.
• A copy of this warning should be sent to the Law Review Faculty Advisors.
• Third Offense:  Dismissal from Law Review and a notation will be placed on the Associate Editor’s transcript regarding the reasoning for the associate editor’s dismissal.

Substantive Violation

A substantive violation occurs when an associate editor turns in an assignment that is of poor quality.  It must be of such a poor quality that the receiving editor believes that a good faith effort was not made.

• First Offense:  Verbal and Email Warning from respective Editor and EIC..
• Editor and EIC will inform the Associate Editor of the violation, explain the appropriate policy, and state that this is the first warning.
• An email will be sent to the Associate Editor noting their violation and sanctions.
• Second Offense:  Written, Formal Warning from EIC and 10 extra hours of subciting or appropriate training.
• Editor and EIC will inform the Associate Editor, in person and by formal letter, explain the appropriate policy, and state that is the second warning.
• A copy of this warning should be sent to the Law Review Faculty Advisor(s).
• Third Offense:  Dismissal from Law Review and a notation will be placed on the Associate Editor’s transcript regarding the reasoning for the associate editor’s dismissal.

NOTE:  Both substantive and technical violations are cumulative.  For example, if an Associate Editor receives a substantive violation, then commits a technical violation, the technical violation will be considered the Associate Editor’s second offense.