Specialty law schools Forum

[mrwarre85]

That's nuts to me. It is not crazy to go into a 100k debt if you can have a very reasonable chance at 60k a year for the next 35 years, doing exactly the kind of work you value.

If you can make 60k out of UG after a few years of work without having to go into any more debt, it sure is crazy.

If you think money is everything, you are crazy.

[Aqualibrium]

I've said this before in another thread, so I'll just copy/paste:

It's often said on TLS that you shouldn't go to a school because of XYZ program. I don't think it's ever really explained though. After going through the job hunt process, working at a firm, and seeing them call in professors to consult, I think I can explain it a bit.

The fact of the matter is, employers aren't coming to look for students at xyz school because of the great xyz program. Most firms won't care what programs the school has or what classes you take...that's just reality. Having a great XYZ program often indicates only that there are professors at the school who are regarded as among the best in their respective fields. Firms will seek out those professors to consult on various matters, but again, they won't be coming there to find students.

Generally, the only way you benefit from this is if you develop a relationship with that professor, and they call someone up on your behalf. I don't think I have to explain why it isn't a good idea to go to a school with the hope that some professor that is an expert in their field will take a liking to you and fast track your career. Do I?

Unless that speciality ranking is in trail advocacy, and you have a great moot court record and want to work in a DA's office. But, wha your post makes a lot of sense.

Still doesn't matter that much...Especially considering odds of you making the moot court or trial add team, odds of you being good enough for anyone to pay special attention to you, etc.. etc...

Going to a higher ranked school is a safer bet because its slightly less imporant that you stand out. Some places, maybe UT in Texas, are so well regarded that you could probably limp out and still work at any DA office in the state.

I think going at life with the attitude that you are going to be successful is generally a good thing though.

UT is not a school full of schmucks in case you haven't noticed.

I'm talking about going to "trial advocacy and moot court powerhouses" like the Florida Coastal's and Barry's of the world who routinely mop the floor with students from t25 schools in moot court and trial ad competitions. That stuff is a religion at those schools. If you go to Barry thinking you'll be a trial ad rockstar and get noticed by the local DA as a result, you are a fool.

[concurrent fork]

All this said, I do wonder whether there is a threshold at which it's not worth paying sticker at a particular school (say, anything in T3, T4, just to pick a random line in the sand).

HYSSCCN are worth it. That's about it.

+1 IMO
But this is really based on personal risk tolerance.

[paratactical]

That's nuts to me. It is not crazy to go into a 100k debt if you can have a very reasonable chance at 60k a year for the next 35 years, doing exactly the kind of work you value.

If you can make 60k out of UG after a few years of work without having to go into any more debt, it sure is crazy.

If you think money is everything, you are crazy.

If you think you have to go 100k in debt to change jobs, you're an idiot.

[Aqualibrium]

All this said, I do wonder whether there is a threshold at which it's not worth paying sticker at a particular school (say, anything in T3, T4, just to pick a random line in the sand).

HYSSCCN are worth it. That's about it.

+1 IMO
But this is really based on personal risk tolerance.

There is more to it than that I think. Sticker at Alabama puts you something like 55k in debt with in state tuition. If you want to work in the South, 55k in is not a bad deal at all. Generally though, you're right, it's crazy to pay sticker if it puts you in 100k+ of debt at a school where anything less than 60% of the students get biglaw/clerkships/PI.

[mrwarre85]

That's nuts to me. It is not crazy to go into a 100k debt if you can have a very reasonable chance at 60k a year for the next 35 years, doing exactly the kind of work you value.

If you can make 60k out of UG after a few years of work without having to go into any more debt, it sure is crazy.

If you think money is everything, you are crazy.

If you think you have to go 100k in debt to change jobs, you're an idiot.

No see they wouldn't change jobs, because unlike some who only want big saleries and have no idea what it means to serve others, they will like being an attorney and feel lucky to make 50k a year, helping people, sending off those loan checks once a month.

It isn't like the school won't work with you on a debt plan, and most americans living with debt is an accepted part of their reality.

Unless of course I am wrong, and you can speak for everyone because you share everyones priorities.

[paratactical]

If you think you have to go 100k in debt to change jobs, you're an idiot.

No see they wouldn't change jobs, because unlike some who only want big saleries and have no idea what it means to serve others, they will like being an attorney and feel lucky to make 50k a year, helping people, sending off those loan checks once a month.

It isn't like the school won't work with you on a debt plan, and most americans living with debt is an accepted part of their reality.

Unless of course I am wrong, and you can speak for everyone because you share everyones priorities.

WTF are you talking about? Also, you're an idiot if you think I'm all about the money, so maybe you should check yo'self.

[Aqualibrium]

If you think you have to go 100k in debt to change jobs, you're an idiot.

No see they wouldn't change jobs, because unlike some who only want big saleries and have no idea what it means to serve others, they will like being an attorney and feel lucky to make 50k a year, helping people, sending off those loan checks once a month.

It isn't like the school won't work with you on a debt plan, and most americans living with debt is an accepted part of their reality.

Unless of course I am wrong, and you can speak for everyone because you share everyones priorities.

WTF are you talking about? Also, you're an idiot if you think I'm all about the money, so maybe you should check yo'self.

[mrwarre85]

UT is not a school full of schmucks in case you haven't noticed.

I'm talking about going to "trial advocacy and moot court powerhouses" like the Florida Coastal's and Barry's of the world who routinely mop the floor with students from t25 schools in moot court and trial ad competitions. That stuff is a religion at those schools. If you go to Barry thinking you'll be a trial ad rockstar and get noticed by the local DA as a result, you are a fool.[/quote]


I live in Austin, my roommate goes to UT law, and they are not smucks. However, you absolutly can go to Baylor (fourth ranked LS in texas but with great trial advocacy rep) and find super placement outside of BigLaw (doing something meaningful, important) because everyone around here knows Baylor grads who did well in criminal law/ moot court have been throurougly vetted and are a potential great asset.

I think baylor is ranked 4th in trial advocacy.

[concurrent fork]

There is more to it than that I think. Sticker at Alabama puts you something like 55k in debt with in state tuition. If you want to work in the South, 55k in is not a bad deal at all. Generally though, you're right, it's crazy to pay sticker if it puts you in 100k+ of debt at a school where anything less than 60% of the students get biglaw/clerkships/PI.

Should have clarified - since low in-state tuition is comparable to a decent scholly at a private school I don't consider that paying "sticker"

[Aqualibrium]

I live in Austin, my roommate goes to UT law, and they are not smucks. However, you absolutly can go to Baylor (fourth ranked LS in texas but with great trial advocacy rep) and find super placement outside of BigLaw (doing something meaningful, important) because everyone around here knows Baylor grads who did well in criminal law/ moot court have been throurougly vetted and are a potential great asset.

I think baylor is ranked 4th in trial advocacy.

Again, at Baylor, trial ad is a religion. If you go pay sticker at Baylor, or choose Baylor over UT because you think you're gonna be a Trial Ad rockstar, you're a dumb ass. Good luck even making the trial ad team at the most competitive (read cut throat) school in the country...

The topic of this thread is, choosing a law school based on specialties. The answer is, don't do it. If Baylor is your best option, go to Baylor. If you have other options, you're a fool to go to Baylor because you wan't to be a DA and they have a good trial program. The fact that a school has a good xyz program is not a consideration that should be higher on your list than location, job prospects, and debt load. EVER.

[mrwarre85]

If you think you have to go 100k in debt to change jobs, you're an idiot.

No see they wouldn't change jobs, because unlike some who only want big saleries and have no idea what it means to serve others, they will like being an attorney and feel lucky to make 50k a year, helping people, sending off those loan checks once a month.

It isn't like the school won't work with you on a debt plan, and most americans living with debt is an accepted part of their reality.

Unless of course I am wrong, and you can speak for everyone because you share everyones priorities.

WTF are you talking about? Also, you're an idiot if you think I'm all about the money, so maybe you should check yo'self.

Checked. Didn't mean to make you feel like I was making any assumptions about you. Point remains though: you are not automatically and "idiot" because you spent 100k to get a legal education outside of the top 14/6/whatever schools. Legal work is often cited (espically public advocacy) as one of the most rewarding professions available. 100k is not insurmountable debt when you will make 50k to 70k a year for a very long time. You won't be incredibly wealthy, and it might take you twenty years to pay off your debt even, but you can live comforably and do something you love.

[mrwarre85]

I live in Austin, my roommate goes to UT law, and they are not smucks. However, you absolutly can go to Baylor (fourth ranked LS in texas but with great trial advocacy rep) and find super placement outside of BigLaw (doing something meaningful, important) because everyone around here knows Baylor grads who did well in criminal law/ moot court have been throurougly vetted and are a potential great asset.

I think baylor is ranked 4th in trial advocacy.

Again, at Baylor, trial ad is a religion. If you go pay sticker at Baylor, or choose Baylor over UT because you think you're gonna be a Trial Ad rockstar, you're a dumb ass. Good luck even making the trial ad team at the most competitive (read cut throat) school in the country...

Nowhere did anyone mention an idea about going to baylor over UT. What is being defended is that you can make a good living and take advantage of some particularly good specialty programs. PS. a lot of what makes baylor good is the competitive atmosphere. Competition is a wonderful motivator.

[Aqualibrium]

I live in Austin, my roommate goes to UT law, and they are not smucks. However, you absolutly can go to Baylor (fourth ranked LS in texas but with great trial advocacy rep) and find super placement outside of BigLaw (doing something meaningful, important) because everyone around here knows Baylor grads who did well in criminal law/ moot court have been throurougly vetted and are a potential great asset.

I think baylor is ranked 4th in trial advocacy.

Again, at Baylor, trial ad is a religion. If you go pay sticker at Baylor, or choose Baylor over UT because you think you're gonna be a Trial Ad rockstar, you're a dumb ass. Good luck even making the trial ad team at the most competitive (read cut throat) school in the country...

Nowhere did anyone mention an idea about going to baylor over UT. What is being defended is that you can make a good living and take advantage of some particularly good specialty programs. PS. a lot of what makes baylor good is the competitive atmosphere. Competition is a wonderful motivator.

No where did anyone dispute that some Baylor graduates make a good living and take advantage of a particular specialty program. What has been said is you shouldn't pick a school because of it's specialty program. They are lagniappe...just extra stuff. In the grand scheme, the odds are heavily against xyz great specialty program enhancing your career prospects.

(Also, the competitive environment is probably what makes them good. That doesn't change the fact that you shouldn't go there thinking their number four trial ad program is gonna get you a job. Again, the odds of you making the team are heavily against you. Example, in this state, my school is well know for having a fantastic trial ad program. Every year, about 60% of the 2L class (100+ people) tries out just to make the competition class. From there, 25 are selected. From the class, 8-10 are selected to be on the actual team. Do you really want to select a school based on the dream that you'll be among the 10/180 students on the team, and of those ten you will be one of the few whose performance is so superb that employers take notice?)

[paratactical]

Checked. Didn't mean to make you feel like I was making any assumptions about you. Point remains though: you are not automatically and "idiot" because you spent 100k to get a legal education outside of the top 14/6/whatever schools. Legal work is often cited (espically public advocacy) as one of the most rewarding professions available. 100k is not insurmountable debt when you will make 50k to 70k a year for a very long time. You won't be incredibly wealthy, and it might take you twenty years to pay off your debt even, but you can live comforably and do something you love.

Cool. What I was trying to say is that you can get the education for less and if you have the opportunity to have another job that will work well enough for you for a while, you can really minimize your debt. I'm a paralegal and I know a lot of attorneys and I've seen the DAs who are happy and the DAs who are miserable. I think it's a serious gamble to go to a certain caliber of school without a certain caliber of financial aid and that it is silly to do.

[Grizz]

There is more to it than that I think. Sticker at Alabama puts you something like 55k in debt with in state tuition. If you want to work in the South, 55k in is not a bad deal at all. Generally though, you're right, it's crazy to pay sticker if it puts you in 100k+ of debt at a school where anything less than 60% of the students get biglaw/clerkships/PI.

Should have clarified - since low in-state tuition is comparable to a decent scholly at a private school I don't consider that paying "sticker"

Agreed. UF in-state for me at $13k per year isn't really "sticker."

[Grizz]

If you think you have to go 100k in debt to change jobs, you're an idiot.

No see they wouldn't change jobs, because unlike some who only want big saleries and have no idea what it means to serve others, they will like being an attorney and feel lucky to make 50k a year, helping people, sending off those loan checks once a month.

It isn't like the school won't work with you on a debt plan, and most americans living with debt is an accepted part of their reality.

Unless of course I am wrong, and you can speak for everyone because you share everyones priorities.

WTF are you talking about? Also, you're an idiot if you think I'm all about the money, so maybe you should check yo'self.

Checked. Didn't mean to make you feel like I was making any assumptions about you. Point remains though: you are not automatically and "idiot" because you spent 100k to get a legal education outside of the top 14/6/whatever schools. Legal work is often cited (espically public advocacy) as one of the most rewarding professions available. 100k is not insurmountable debt when you will make 50k to 70k a year for a very long time. You won't be incredibly wealthy, and it might take you twenty years to pay off your debt even, but you can live comforably and do something you love.

$50k? Paying off me $100k in loans. Yeah I'll be okay until I get married or my kids want to go to college. Lulz.

And a lot of legal work isn't the rewarding. I worked criminal defense, which was, but a lot of it is still cut and paste drivel. Seriously.

[DeeCee]

I'm in a similar position (grad school and work experience in the environmental field). When I first started researching schools, I naturally came across Pace, VT, and L&C. But after a relatively minimal amount of research, it became pretty clear that more doors would be open to me at a higher ranked school, with or without an e-law focus. In addition, I don't want to limit myself to the field of e-law, for several reasons (granted this may not be the case for you). One reason is that most of the jobs are not save-the-trees in nature (no pun intended), and another is that I want to go into LS with an entirely open mind and see what catches my attention. I was concerned that if I went to a specialty school, even if doing so DID help my job prospects (doubtful), I would be locked into a particular field. How much truth there is to that, I don't know, but those are a couple of my reasons.

All this said, I do wonder whether there is a threshold at which it's not worth paying sticker at a particular school (say, anything in T3, T4, just to pick a random line in the sand). In other words, if you know you're interested in e-law, is there a point below which having a slightly higher ranking won't make that much of a difference, so you might as well go with the specialty? Edit: Even if this were the case, I don't think it would apply for T30. L&C is the highest ranked of the e-law schools at 60-something.

I too would like to keep an open mind in law school, as I am also interested in Patent (have a Biology, Geography, and Geology background). I know well that a "good guys" job won't just land in my lap. But, I feel that I have been successful in my ventures and money is not the end result for me in law school. I care more about making my bills and doing something I enjoy, not BigLaw. I think that going to grad school really puts a perspective on things and allows you to focus and understand what you want to do.

[krad]

Do not go TT-TTTT for specialty. Period.

[AreJay711]

I'm in a similar position (grad school and work experience in the environmental field). When I first started researching schools, I naturally came across Pace, VT, and L&C. But after a relatively minimal amount of research, it became pretty clear that more doors would be open to me at a higher ranked school, with or without an e-law focus. In addition, I don't want to limit myself to the field of e-law, for several reasons (granted this may not be the case for you). One reason is that most of the jobs are not save-the-trees in nature (no pun intended), and another is that I want to go into LS with an entirely open mind and see what catches my attention. I was concerned that if I went to a specialty school, even if doing so DID help my job prospects (doubtful), I would be locked into a particular field. How much truth there is to that, I don't know, but those are a couple of my reasons.

All this said, I do wonder whether there is a threshold at which it's not worth paying sticker at a particular school (say, anything in T3, T4, just to pick a random line in the sand). In other words, if you know you're interested in e-law, is there a point below which having a slightly higher ranking won't make that much of a difference, so you might as well go with the specialty? Edit: Even if this were the case, I don't think it would apply for T30. L&C is the highest ranked of the e-law schools at 60-something.

I too would like to keep an open mind in law school, as I am also interested in Patent (have a Biology, Geography, and Geology background). I know well that a "good guys" job won't just land in my lap. But, I feel that I have been successful in my ventures and money is not the end result for me in law school. I care more about making my bills and doing something I enjoy, not BigLaw. I think that going to grad school really puts a perspective on things and allows you to focus and understand what you want to do.

I think being broke with no options and plenty of liabilities would change that focus and understanding but that is just my opinion.

[krad]

I think being broke with no options and plenty of liabilities would change that focus and understanding but that is just my opinion.

+1

[DeeCee]

I'm in a similar position (grad school and work experience in the environmental field). When I first started researching schools, I naturally came across Pace, VT, and L&C. But after a relatively minimal amount of research, it became pretty clear that more doors would be open to me at a higher ranked school, with or without an e-law focus. In addition, I don't want to limit myself to the field of e-law, for several reasons (granted this may not be the case for you). One reason is that most of the jobs are not save-the-trees in nature (no pun intended), and another is that I want to go into LS with an entirely open mind and see what catches my attention. I was concerned that if I went to a specialty school, even if doing so DID help my job prospects (doubtful), I would be locked into a particular field. How much truth there is to that, I don't know, but those are a couple of my reasons.

All this said, I do wonder whether there is a threshold at which it's not worth paying sticker at a particular school (say, anything in T3, T4, just to pick a random line in the sand). In other words, if you know you're interested in e-law, is there a point below which having a slightly higher ranking won't make that much of a difference, so you might as well go with the specialty? Edit: Even if this were the case, I don't think it would apply for T30. L&C is the highest ranked of the e-law schools at 60-something.

I too would like to keep an open mind in law school, as I am also interested in Patent (have a Biology, Geography, and Geology background). I know well that a "good guys" job won't just land in my lap. But, I feel that I have been successful in my ventures and money is not the end result for me in law school. I care more about making my bills and doing something I enjoy, not BigLaw. I think that going to grad school really puts a perspective on things and allows you to focus and understand what you want to do.

I think being broke with no options and plenty of liabilities would change that focus and understanding but that is just my opinion.

Just because you go to a T30 does not mean you are going to be broke the rest of your life! I mean come on, people who don't go into the top 6 don't get jobs?? That's absurd and I think the HYS mentality really gets blown out of proportion sometimes. It's not like I'm asking Cooley versus Michigan.

My original question was T30 versus T2 / T3 specialty, because I would get a full ride at the T2 / T3, and a small scholarship at a T30. If I went to the specialty school on a free ride I wouldn't be broke anyway; in fact I'd be more broke if I went to the T30. But the consensus was that the T30 is worth it.

[kalvano]

Nowhere did anyone mention an idea about going to baylor over UT. What is being defended is that you can make a good living and take advantage of some particularly good specialty programs. PS. a lot of what makes baylor good is the competitive atmosphere. Competition is a wonderful motivator.

Except for the fact that Baylor isn't good.

[Grizz]

Just because you go to a T30 does not mean you are going to be broke the rest of your life! I mean come on, people who don't go into the top 6 don't get jobs?? That's absurd and I think the HYS mentality really gets blown out of proportion sometimes. It's not like I'm asking Cooley versus Michigan.

My original question was T30 versus T2 / T3 specialty, because I would get a full ride at the T2 / T3, and a small scholarship at a T30. If I went to the specialty school on a free ride I wouldn't be broke anyway; in fact I'd be more broke if I went to the T30. But the consensus was that the T30 is worth it.

Depends what T30. T30 isn't really a meaningful category.

[AreJay711]

I'm in a similar position (grad school and work experience in the environmental field). When I first started researching schools, I naturally came across Pace, VT, and L&C. But after a relatively minimal amount of research, it became pretty clear that more doors would be open to me at a higher ranked school, with or without an e-law focus. In addition, I don't want to limit myself to the field of e-law, for several reasons (granted this may not be the case for you). One reason is that most of the jobs are not save-the-trees in nature (no pun intended), and another is that I want to go into LS with an entirely open mind and see what catches my attention. I was concerned that if I went to a specialty school, even if doing so DID help my job prospects (doubtful), I would be locked into a particular field. How much truth there is to that, I don't know, but those are a couple of my reasons.

All this said, I do wonder whether there is a threshold at which it's not worth paying sticker at a particular school (say, anything in T3, T4, just to pick a random line in the sand). In other words, if you know you're interested in e-law, is there a point below which having a slightly higher ranking won't make that much of a difference, so you might as well go with the specialty? Edit: Even if this were the case, I don't think it would apply for T30. L&C is the highest ranked of the e-law schools at 60-something.

I too would like to keep an open mind in law school, as I am also interested in Patent (have a Biology, Geography, and Geology background). I know well that a "good guys" job won't just land in my lap. But, I feel that I have been successful in my ventures and money is not the end result for me in law school. I care more about making my bills and doing something I enjoy, not BigLaw. I think that going to grad school really puts a perspective on things and allows you to focus and understand what you want to do.

I think being broke with no options and plenty of liabilities would change that focus and understanding but that is just my opinion.

Just because you go to a T30 does not mean you are going to be broke the rest of your life! I mean come on, people who don't go into the top 6 don't get jobs?? That's absurd and I think the HYS mentality really gets blown out of proportion sometimes. It's not like I'm asking Cooley versus Michigan.

My original question was T30 versus T2 / T3 specialty, because I would get a full ride at the T2 / T3, and a small scholarship at a T30. If I went to the specialty school on a free ride I wouldn't be broke anyway; in fact I'd be more broke if I went to the T30. But the consensus was that the T30 is worth it.

You still have cost of living loans you have to deal with. It certainly isn't much compared to sticker but throw in all the other expenses of life (mortage, car, blood sucking monsters children) and going to a t4 can very well make you broke. This ties into wanting to do a good guy job for not much $ because $ isn't important to you. From my experience not caring enough about money is naive. The real issue I have is that any good you could do with a law degree, you could probably do right now without one with much lower risk to yourself.

But I really do hope that you find a job doing do-gooder environmental work and hope it pays well

and only partially so some greedy multi-national corporation can hire me to find a loophole so burn down the rain forest using wale oil powered hummers