Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
artichoke
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:20 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby artichoke » Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:48 pm

Ragged wrote:
dextermorgan wrote:
lawyerwannabe wrote:So, you are pretty much saying no lower than the t-14.

Some people have been saying that GC only send approx. 30% of their class into BigLaw. Any percentage below that is not worth it?

Postulating like this is pointless, but if you were dead set on BigLaw then 1-14 give you a shot worth taking. UT for Texas BigLaw is a possibility. Vandy places alright, but by no means is a guarantee. If you want a guarantee then don't go below Yale.


ftfy


I wouldn't go below T-14 + UT. Tired of giving the same answer to the same question.


Then don't.

jarofsoup
Posts: 1951
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 2:41 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby jarofsoup » Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:55 pm

Students from every school in the Top-100 have some sort of presence in Big Law. Basically Top-14 or strong regional should do the trick.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18401
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby bk1 » Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:56 pm

jarofsoup wrote:Students from every school in the Top-100 have some sort of presence in Big Law. Basically Top-14 or strong regional should do the trick.


Strong regional and lower T14's still mean that you have a greater chance of ending up without biglaw than ending up with it.

ksimon2007
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:23 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby ksimon2007 » Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:07 pm

I think the question would probably be best answered by presupposing that the OP knows the T14 is where you ought to be...after that where must one stop before Biglaw becomes a stop relegated to only the very top students in a law class

User avatar
Bosque
Posts: 1585
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:14 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby Bosque » Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:20 pm

For most posters, I think the lowest they would go is about waist high.

imbored25
Posts: 361
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 8:58 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby imbored25 » Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:32 pm

anything underneath harvard is suicide

lawyerwannabe
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby lawyerwannabe » Thu Dec 23, 2010 4:19 pm

Would it be smarter to attend a lower t-14 (e.g. Duke, Cornell) or sit out a cycle and take another crack at the LSAT?

I mean, it can't be that bad can it? Someone placing in the top 40% at the lower t-14 still has to have a decent chance at some form of BigLaw...

User avatar
Ragged
Posts: 1509
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby Ragged » Thu Dec 23, 2010 4:27 pm

lawyerwannabe wrote:Would it be smarter to attend a lower t-14 (e.g. Duke, Cornell) or sit out a cycle and take another crack at the LSAT?


It all depends if you think you can do any better. I was in that situation last cycle and I decided to take a year off and retake. Not sure how much of a difference it will make in the long run.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby Grizz » Thu Dec 23, 2010 5:03 pm

bk1 wrote:@utlaw2007: I find it hard to believe that 55-60% of UT grads are currently getting biglaw. Heck those graduating in 2009, only about 37% managed the NLJ250. And even if we squeeze in some more firms who pay market but are not in the NLJ250, I don't see that getting anywhere near your rosy figure of 55-60%. And that was in 2009, for grads who did OCI prior to the recession. Things are looking a lot worse now.

You can get an exact list of which firms attend OCI at a given school directly from here: --LinkRemoved--

Maybe things were different for you, but now NY is the easiest market. You are correct that UT has having near exclusive access to TX as a huge plus, but the size of the cities don't necessarily correspond directly to the size of their legal market. They are decently sized, no doubt, but population isn't the best indicator of the number of SA spots in a given city.

UT is a great choice, but I don't see it being miles away better for an absolute shot at biglaw than Vandy. Slight edge? Maybe, but the difference is close to negligible. Choose UT because you want to work in TX, because right now at least it does not give you a huge edge over Vandy.


+1

User avatar
megaTTTron
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:26 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby megaTTTron » Thu Dec 23, 2010 7:11 pm

Ragged wrote:
lawyerwannabe wrote:Would it be smarter to attend a lower t-14 (e.g. Duke, Cornell) or sit out a cycle and take another crack at the LSAT?


It all depends if you think you can do any better. I was in that situation last cycle and I decided to take a year off and retake. Not sure how much of a difference it will make in the long run.


What did you do during the year off? Won't that make a difference, like, if you just studied and didn't gain any meaningful WE? (also did you do better on the LSAT???). It would be interesting to see how much better you did, and how that affects your cycle.

User avatar
20160810
Posts: 19648
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:18 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby 20160810 » Thu Dec 23, 2010 7:13 pm

Texas.

ksimon2007
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:23 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby ksimon2007 » Thu Dec 23, 2010 7:25 pm

SBL wrote:Texas.


You hate America. Vandy.

yanksbgood
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:27 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby yanksbgood » Thu Dec 23, 2010 7:46 pm

I wouldnt go below the T17. Maybe a very strong regional school like GW, BU, BC or Fordham if this was the only thing that would ever make me happy in life. But thats about it.

User avatar
lisjjen
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:19 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby lisjjen » Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:09 pm

bk1 wrote:@utlaw2007: I find it hard to believe that 55-60% of UT grads are currently getting biglaw. Heck those graduating in 2009, only about 37% managed the NLJ250. And even if we squeeze in some more firms who pay market but are not in the NLJ250, I don't see that getting anywhere near your rosy figure of 55-60%. And that was in 2009, for grads who did OCI prior to the recession. Things are looking a lot worse now.

You can get an exact list of which firms attend OCI at a given school directly from here: --LinkRemoved--

Maybe things were different for you, but now NY is the easiest market. You are correct that UT has having near exclusive access to TX as a huge plus, but the size of the cities don't necessarily correspond directly to the size of their legal market. They are decently sized, no doubt, but population isn't the best indicator of the number of SA spots in a given city.

UT is a great choice, but I don't see it being miles away better for an absolute shot at biglaw than Vandy. Slight edge? Maybe, but the difference is close to negligible. Choose UT because you want to work in TX, because right now at least it does not give you a huge edge over Vandy.


If you want to work in Texas, which isn't that bad of a prospect considering it's faired the recession better than a lot of other states.

I know I could probably handle TX better than Nashville. If I went to Vandy, I'd have to keep my "General Sherman is my homeboy" t-shirt at home.

ksimon2007
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:23 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby ksimon2007 » Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:12 pm

lisjjen wrote:
bk1 wrote:@utlaw2007: I find it hard to believe that 55-60% of UT grads are currently getting biglaw. Heck those graduating in 2009, only about 37% managed the NLJ250. And even if we squeeze in some more firms who pay market but are not in the NLJ250, I don't see that getting anywhere near your rosy figure of 55-60%. And that was in 2009, for grads who did OCI prior to the recession. Things are looking a lot worse now.

You can get an exact list of which firms attend OCI at a given school directly from here: --LinkRemoved--

Maybe things were different for you, but now NY is the easiest market. You are correct that UT has having near exclusive access to TX as a huge plus, but the size of the cities don't necessarily correspond directly to the size of their legal market. They are decently sized, no doubt, but population isn't the best indicator of the number of SA spots in a given city.

UT is a great choice, but I don't see it being miles away better for an absolute shot at biglaw than Vandy. Slight edge? Maybe, but the difference is close to negligible. Choose UT because you want to work in TX, because right now at least it does not give you a huge edge over Vandy.


If you want to work in Texas, which isn't that bad of a prospect considering it's faired the recession better than a lot of other states.

I know I could probably handle TX better than Nashville. If I went to Vandy, I'd have to keep my "General Sherman is my homeboy" t-shirt at home.


As a Texan I think you would be better off keeping that shirt home either way haha...Both Nashville and Austin are not emblematic of their respective state's political tendencies

User avatar
lisjjen
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:19 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby lisjjen » Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:15 pm

ksimon2007 wrote:
As a Texan I think you would be better off keeping that shirt home either way haha...Both Nashville and Austin are not emblematic of their respective state's political tendencies


How about my other shirt with "Lincoln is just alright with me"?

But seriously, those are still really great schools. I've seen a couple of different rankings that put them above GULC and Cornell. I know if it would cost me a dollar more to go to Cornell, I'd take Vandy. The weather's better.

ksimon2007
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:23 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby ksimon2007 » Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:20 pm

lisjjen wrote:
ksimon2007 wrote:
As a Texan I think you would be better off keeping that shirt home either way haha...Both Nashville and Austin are not emblematic of their respective state's political tendencies


How about my other shirt with "Lincoln is just alright with me"?


I am a black guy who loves country music and not just because of Darius Rucker haha...needless to say I find myself in discussions about the civil war and all that with friends at my southern liberal arts school...In Texas my friends were pretty liberal and didn't care...In Virginia it is pretty clear that the confederates were the chosen people...just wear a shirt that says Freedom is my friend and you'll be fine lol

utlaw2007
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby utlaw2007 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 12:21 am

@bk1. My figures come from when I was in school there from 04 to 07. The simple fact of the matter is that I have seen class rank gpa percentages. I have also been witness to what BigLaw has found to be acceptable. I don't know what the figures are now, but I must ask this because I have seen tons of misinformation on this forum about everything. Can you tell me, where these know it alls get there info when they have no firsthand experience with these schools they speak of? By the way, I'm just curious, what is your law school experience? Are you a 1L, a graduate, a lawyer, or someone who is merely in the application process?

As for the size of the Texas legal markets, do you honestly think that Nashville has a large legal market? Houston is very large. The Houston legal market is larger than the entire legal market of Tennessee by itself. It is home to the second most fortune 500 companies next to NYC. Tell me that is not a large legal market. Don't even get me started on the amount of money that is had by much smaller law firms in the city. I know several attorneys who either work for themselves or are partners at small firms and put what any associate/non partner at a large law firm makes financially to shame. My point is that, while I tend to agree that city size does not equate to legal market size (San Antonio is in the country's top ten in population size, but has a puny legal market), the same cannot be said of Houston.

utlaw2007
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby utlaw2007 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 12:35 am

The other point I must make to all prospective law students who are in love with the idea of going BigLaw. It's not all it's cracked up to be. A classmate of mine had two friends who worked at Vinson & Elkins which is one of the Texas BigLaw firms. She said they averaged a whopping 100 hour work weeks in their first two years. Now I understand that is probably an exagerration. However, Vinson & Elkins has been known to be a sweat shop. If one goes BigLaw, no matter the firm, they will work a crapload of hours. There is a reason why BigLaw salaries jumped about 30k-40k in just the three years I was in law school all across the country. Many young lawyers hate it. They work you to death. I have already had several law school classmates quit BigLaw to take much less paying gigs doing something else. They're still practicing law, of course. But just doing something else. I have some classmates that like their BigLaw jobs. My point is that, BigLaw wouldn't raise the salaries of first year associates so much if there wasn't much disdain for the BigLaw workload.

utlaw2007
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby utlaw2007 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 12:41 am

I will say that one year after I graduated, Texas saw about half of the OCI firms coming to OCI cut in half because of the economy. Again, that was after I graduated so I wouldn't know the details. The poor economy has made it bad for everyone. Even small firms require several years of experience before they hire anyone. That used to not be the case. It is now. So I do agree that the economy has been a drastic game changer with law firm hiring.

User avatar
2Serious4Numbers
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:14 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby 2Serious4Numbers » Fri Dec 24, 2010 12:57 am

imbored25 wrote:anything underneath harvard is suicide


...exactly why I'm glad I already got my acceptance to Princeton with $$$. Lifes good.

User avatar
hokie
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:32 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby hokie » Fri Dec 24, 2010 1:05 am

--LinkRemoved--

I would say Cooley; they are ranked 12th in 2008's Judging the Law Schools above Stanford, Chicago, and Penn so I would venture to say "if Cooley's what you're rockin', then BigLaw's a knockin'" 8)

Emma1
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby Emma1 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 1:06 am

I think I will do well with my acceptance to Williams College Law School

utlaw2007
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby utlaw2007 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 1:17 am

One must be careful to remember that most if not all of the country's oil and energy companies are based out of Houston. That fact alone, contributes greatly to our legal market. And it equates to many dollars for those lawyers involved. Oil and gas law is so prevalent in Texas, it's on our Texas Bar Exam.

ksimon2007
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:23 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby ksimon2007 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 1:18 am

Please welcome the funny crowd haha




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bns212, cavalier1138, WiltyMIZ and 5 guests