.

Fixed.

Sorry, it's a pet peeve of mine...please continue.

.

Yikes. You really need to decide where you want to practice after you graduate and choose a law school in that area. What is your GPA/LSAT? Are you married? Will your wife have a job that will cover cost of living expenses? What are the stipulations of your scholarships?

And although your "hours of research" may have shown you that there are lots of non-T14 grads in biglaw firms, these lawyers either graduated 5+ years ago or were at the top of their class. You will see a lot of people on TLS telling you not to take the "I'm a special snowflake and I will be great at whatever I do" approach to law school. Many people enter law school thinking this, and many are wrong. Just be careful when taking out tens of thousands of dollars in debt.

Ouch, I'm really sorry mate. Dammit! I did it again... But at least I bumped your thread, right?

But, to at least lend some relevant advice from a longtime TLS lurker. Firstly, I've spoken to a few partners at some big corporate firms recently about opening up practice post-law school, and each of them said that it would be a "very bad idea" if you have no experience with a firm first. The experience gained from a big firm that allows for rotations is invaluable, and the consensus among them was "7 years" at a big firm before a person would be close to being ready to open a firm (not sure why 7, but perhaps because that is around the time partnerships are handed down I suppose). But, either way, according to them it seems that BigLaw is the best place to get started, especially if you want to open your own practice in business/entertainment law (to make contacts/get the legal experience necessary so you can hit the ground running when you do open your doors). So, to relate this to you, it would be wisest to go to a school that opens up the most opportunity for you to gain firm experience (I doubt the law school curriculum will be enough to prepare you for practice). Based on my TLS lurking, it seems that the schools you've listed as being admitted to won't cut it --especially if you are going into debt for them (not sure what L&C's tuition is, though). I would say the best shots you have on your list are at Stanford/Michigan/Georgetown. I have heard good things from Hastings, though, from a regional standpoint (since it is in the heart of SF, probably similar to Fordham in NYC). You're family should be the most important thing to think about (both short term and long term). I have a family as well and I know that the financial situation (both short and long term) are the primary considerations for me. Choose based on two things: amount of debt coming out of school and chances that you will get a job that will pay off the debt/pay for your family as well.

My 2 cents. I hope it helps, if not, sorry to clutter the thread. But at least I bumped it

Best of luck!

.

Someone please explain to him all the things that are wrong with the above sentences.

.

Where do you want to practice? Where do you want to practice? Where do you want to practice?

Also, 3.79 GPA is solid. 154 LSAT is not. You should retake the LSAT and get better offers at better schools. It doesn't matter how good the business and entertainment classes are at certain schools, what matters is the school's ability to find you legal employment.

These are fucking ridiculous.



Texas Tech is the only halfway decent option out of here, and it's not great. 3.79 is a great GPA, any way to convince you of a retake?

Those stipulations on L&C and Whittier are pretty rough. If you lose that $$$ you are pretty screwed considering it seems the GI Bill won't cover those schools (not familiar with it just basing that on the schools you've listed that it covers). I would have to say that the better the school, the better prospects you have all around, obviously. So, even if you don't want BigLaw, you're prospects for PI/Small firms are going to be much better if you were to graduate from a T14. Another thing to keep in mind is that (and this should be confirmed by others) small/mid-sized firms probably like to hire experienced attorneys so as not to have to spend so much money on recruitment/training. You're GPA is pretty awesome from UG and the military experience is fantastic for softs. The only thing holding you back is that LSAT. In this case, retake is definitely warranted. If you can bump that into the mid 160s you are looking at much higher-caliber schools and perhaps even a T14 or two if you ED (UVA? NU?).

Either way, your military experience will more than likely be extremely valuable for you in law school. Not necessarily in a tangible way, but in a discipline way. I have heard that the most successful students are those either with WE or military experience.



Not sure how this is relevant to this particular thread, but you are probably right. This will definitely make an awesome personal statement topic! Not sure what you wrote your PS on but if you talk about this you are going to be golden. I come from a very unique background as well, and having written my PS on that made a big difference in my admissions I think. Several acceptance letters had hand-written mentions of my PS.

Hope this helps,
TLS_noobie

.

No offense, but if you can't sit still for 4 hours, law school might not be the right choice for you .

Jesus bro, that's unfortunate. Especially (if I am reading this right) you were able to get a 154 leaving 2 entire sections blank.

I would think about a different career path given the circumstances.

I am almost certain LSAC needs to accommodate you if it is a legitimate disability (which it sounds like it may be). Not sure what they can do, but they may be able to give you more time --which would be the only advantage you need since the LSAT's difficulty is derived from the time constraints. Maybe I am wrong, but it just doesn't seem right to me if they don't at least make some effort to make an accommodation for a genuine disability.

It doesn't sound to me like he needs more time on the actual test, but perhaps a break between sections. I'd look into that. Seems reasonable.

.

.

I understand the sentiment, but the reality is there is a likely chance you will end up never practicing law out of these schools. Less than 60% of law grads in '09 obtained full time JD required employment. Many of these schools are in saturated markets, place super regionally into small and insular markets, or you stand a huge chance at losing your scholarship.

If you must go, Texas Tech is your best bet. Stips on Lewis & Clark make it difficult to retain your scholarship. Syracuse is in a market with 15 other law schools. Tulsa isn't good. Whittier and McGeorge shouldn't even be law schools.

Tech has a relatively good reputation and good placement for its ranking if your content with living in Texas. I'd also blast UC Hastings with letters of continued interest and go there if your debt would be minimal.

You're truly in a unique situation and a tough spot. I hope some of this was helpful and I wish you luck.

This is rough. I think you are doing a disservice to yourself though if you settle for that LSAT score. I would say give it one more shot and see what happens. Study your arse off and see if you can improve your score even with your condition. If you can break 160 it will be even more likely you will accomplish your goal.

I certainly don't think you should give up though. And, based on what you've posted at least, it seems giving up just isn't an option. If your retake yields a lower/similar score then just take the school that gives you the most $$$ and is in the region you would like to practice. That is the best advice you are gonna get probably.

Additionally...it is a bad idea to go to a school with the intention of transferring. Transferring is a crap-shoot when you are going in as a 0L since you will need to be top 5% of your class to make transferring worth while from the schools you've listed and riding on that is just not a good idea. It is easier to score well on the LSAT (a learnable test that is predictable) than it is to transfer.

.

Not if you're content with being in Texas. L&C is one of those schools that seems to be respected in the region but its placement isn't that good, which is obviously contradictory. Also it's my understanding from what I've read here and elsewhere that the PNW is quite unfriendly to outsiders. So there's that, too.

Smooth Sail, you are my new hero, man. That's rough, but you sound very determined. I hope you get into the school of your choice and end up at your dream job. Going into private practice immediately out of law school can be tough, so you might have to start with biglaw. Here's a list of what firm recruiters think of schools:

Ranking by US News of what recruiters think about schools, and a year old, I believe, but still, should serve as a good reference. You said you don't care about the rankings, but there might be some truth to this since this is coming straight from the recruiters:

1. Harvard
2. Stanford
2. Yale
4. Columbia
4. Mich
6. NYU
6. UVA
8. Cornell
8. Duke
8. NW
8. Chicago
13. Gtown
13. Penn
15. Vandy
15. WUSTL
17. Texas
18. Bu
18. Emory
18. Wash and Lee
18. UCLA
18. UMN
18. ND
18. USC
25. BC
25. UNC
25. Iowa
28. Hastings
28. GW
28. Illinois
28. W & M
32. BYU
32. Fordham
32. IUB
32. Arizona.
32. U Wash
32. WIsconsin
38. OSU
38. Tulane
38. WF
41. SMU
41. Utah
43. AMerican
43. Davis
43. ASU
43. UF
43. ALabama
43. Georgia
43. Oklahoma
50. Baylor
50. Pepperdine
50. COlorado
50. Kansas
50. Kentucky
50. Miami
50. Oregon
50. Richmond
58. GMU
58. Gonzaga
58 Loyola-Chi
58. Marquette
58. PSU
58. Houston
58. Maryland
58. Mississippi
58. Mizzou
67. Catholic
67. Depaul
67. Drake
67. IU-Indy
67. Loyola-LA
67. Temple
67. ST Louis
67. Uconn
67. Denver
67 Louisville
67. USD
67. Nova
67. Dozo
81. Brooklyn
81. Case
81. Creighton
81. FSU
81 Hofstra
81. L&C
81. LSU
81. Loyola-NOLA
81. MSU
81. Samford
81. Cincy
81. Seattle
81. Nebraska
81 Pitt
81. SC
96. Chi-Kent
96. Santa Clara
96. Seton HAll
96. Cuse
96. Vermont
96. WVU

This is worthless. You think a recruiter from a firm in Oklahoma thinks higher and would rather recruit out of a school like UW than they do OU? This is national perception when it's regional perception that actually matters.

.