USCvUCLAvNYUvPennvUVA-Want to practice in socal Forum

[timbs4339]

Could you be happy in another kind of non-biglaw legal job? I'm not exactly sure what to 60-70% of the USC/UCLA class who do not get biglaw/AIII are doing. Maybe some are doing midlaw, like 5-10%, but I'm sure the rest are doing PI, gov't, or small firms.

You might have a lower chance of coming back to CA immediately after law school- although I'm sure top 1/3 at NYU could get a SA job in CA because that seemed to be the cutoff at CLS. But you'll have a better chance of working in biglaw and lateraling in 3-4 years by going to NYU.

[mh013]

I'm not committed to biglaw. Ideally I would get into biglaw, but if not I definitely want to stay in the private sector, at least for the first few years. I would rather have a lower but decent-paying job in CA than 160k elsewhere.

[Lasers]

the choice is easy, imo. i would take usc/ucla over nyu at sticker. $120k is huge; it cannot be overstated how good it is to be without debt (just imagine your first paycheck, sans the taxes of course, will be all yours). not only that, but the trade off is also marginal in your situation. if your desired location was anywhere but socal or CA in general, then NYU might be the choice, considering it has much greater national reach. but usc/ucla practically own the socal market and are very respected in all of CA, so you're really not losing a whole lot.

between usc and ucla, i would go to whichever school i prefer. i do think, however, that usc provides better job prospects ITE.

as i stated before in another thread: the likeliest reason usc outpaces ucla in big law placement is because firms consider the two schools to be peers. because of this, firms will hire roughly an equal amount of graduates from both schools, but since usc has about 100 students fewer than ucla does, it's placement percentage is much higher. additionally, usc's trojan network is definitively stronger than ucla's alumni network.

[Rahviveh]

Could you be happy in another kind of non-biglaw legal job? I'm not exactly sure what to 60-70% of the USC/UCLA class who do not get biglaw/AIII are doing. Maybe some are doing midlaw, like 5-10%, but I'm sure the rest are doing PI, gov't, or small firms.

You might have a lower chance of coming back to CA immediately after law school- although I'm sure top 1/3 at NYU could get a SA job in CA because that seemed to be the cutoff at CLS. But you'll have a better chance of working in biglaw and lateraling in 3-4 years by going to NYU.

Outside of top third at ccn = SOL in SoCal? (even with ties?)

[Lasers]

Could you be happy in another kind of non-biglaw legal job? I'm not exactly sure what to 60-70% of the USC/UCLA class who do not get biglaw/AIII are doing. Maybe some are doing midlaw, like 5-10%, but I'm sure the rest are doing PI, gov't, or small firms.

You might have a lower chance of coming back to CA immediately after law school- although I'm sure top 1/3 at NYU could get a SA job in CA because that seemed to be the cutoff at CLS. But you'll have a better chance of working in biglaw and lateraling in 3-4 years by going to NYU.

Outside of top third at ccn = SOL in SoCal? (even with ties?)

no, not definitively. but i don't think one's chances are good.

[timbs4339]

Could you be happy in another kind of non-biglaw legal job? I'm not exactly sure what to 60-70% of the USC/UCLA class who do not get biglaw/AIII are doing. Maybe some are doing midlaw, like 5-10%, but I'm sure the rest are doing PI, gov't, or small firms.

You might have a lower chance of coming back to CA immediately after law school- although I'm sure top 1/3 at NYU could get a SA job in CA because that seemed to be the cutoff at CLS. But you'll have a better chance of working in biglaw and lateraling in 3-4 years by going to NYU.

Outside of top third at ccn = SOL in SoCal? (even with ties?)

Not necessarily, but it would reduce chances enough to make me think about hedging by including NYC firms on my bidlist. I did know several medianish who got CA but others who struck out in the state.

[timbs4339]

I'm not committed to biglaw. Ideally I would get into biglaw, but if not I definitely want to stay in the private sector, at least for the first few years. I would rather have a lower but decent-paying job in CA than 160k elsewhere.

Unfortunately there are very few decently paying private sector jobs outside of biglaw.

[Rahviveh]

Thanks for the input guys

[twenty]

USC/UCLA (whichever you like more) > Another T14 scholarship offer > NYU.

[somewhatwayward]

I'm not committed to biglaw. Ideally I would get into biglaw, but if not I definitely want to stay in the private sector, at least for the first few years. I would rather have a lower but decent-paying job in CA than 160k elsewhere.

The issue is that there aren't many decent-paying non-big-law private sector jobs. Google bimodal salary distribution in the legal sector. Most jobs are 100K+ (with most of the ones in the lower 100s being big law in secondary and tertiary markets that don't pay 160K) or 50K or less. There are some decent small law jobs that pay in the 60K-80K range but they are pretty rare, and I don't think you can count on getting one. Certainly you have a better shot at big law than one of those coming from USC/UCLA. Would you consider 40K-50K to be decent-paying if you had no debt out of USC/UCLA?

the choice is easy, imo. i would take usc/ucla over nyu at sticker. $120k is huge; it cannot be overstated how good it is to be without debt (just imagine your first paycheck, sans the taxes of course, will be all yours). not only that, but the trade off is also marginal in your situation. if your desired location was anywhere but socal or CA in general, then NYU might be the choice, considering it has much greater national reach. but usc/ucla practically own the socal market and are very respected in all of CA, so you're really not losing a whole lot.

Because OP does not prefer a 160K job anywhere over a lower-paying job in CA, I agree that s/he should take USC/UCLA. However, I don't think the decision is easy on the basis of what you are describing. No doubt being massively in debt sucks (although OP's parents are picking up the tab so it sounds like there wouldn't be debt), and it sucks to see 3K of your 12K/month going toward loans. But you're also upping your chances of landing the 12K/month job by going to NYU. At USC/UCLA, you can't ignore the fact that more than half of the class is making less than six figures. LST has the 25th percentile of the 50% of the class that reported a salary at $72K for USC. Since people making a salary and, more relevantly, people making a good salary are more likely to report, it is pretty safe to assume that the 72K figure is about the 62nd percentile salary for the class as a whole - ie, more than 60% of the class is making less than that. It actually makes perfect sense with the big law and clerkship numbers because the 34% of the class going into big law is well over 100K, so the 68th percentile salary is probably still like 145K or maybe 130K or something. Then come a few people who were lucky enough to get the elusive mid-law or well-paying small-law gigs in the 80K-100K range. Maybe that gets us to the 65th percentile (yes, it is really that rare). Next would presumably come the people who have clerkships who typically get paid in the 60-70s, which explains why we have 72K as the 62nd percentile salary. BTW schools are also allowed to go track down the salary data of people who don't respond by searching online, so you can imagine that every six-figure salary gets reported because big law firms all have websites listing associates, and it is easy to find big law salary info. You can also imagine that schools don't try that hard to track down the salary info of the grads in lower-paying jobs. /tangent

Anyway, OP, given that you prefer any CA job over 160K elsewhere, USC/UCLA seems to be the right choice. I personally would take USC for its small class and its impressive big law/clerkship numbers. But recognize that if you miss the big law/clerkship boat, your fallback is not a cushy 80K mid/small-law gig. It is likely a 40-50K small law gig.

[mh013]

Is it absolutely ignorant to think that it is likely that I can make the top 1/3 with a lot of hard work? I'm considerably above the 75% for gpa and LSAT. I didn't try overly hard in undergrad and I am steadfastly hungry for success. Although I suppose a lot of people in law school think this way.

[mh013]

I'm referring to USC by the way ^^

[Ludo!]

Is it absolutely ignorant to think that it is likely that I can make the top 1/3 with a lot of hard work? I'm considerably above the 75% for gpa and LSAT. I didn't try overly hard in undergrad and I am steadfastly hungry for success. Although I suppose a lot of people in law school think this way.

Yes.

[dixon02]

Surprised nobody as asked yet, but what is the total COA of each (including UVA with your scholarship)? Working with rough figures, if I'm not mistaken I think the difference btwn UCLA with $120k and NYU at sticker is roughly $250k. If that's true and I'm not missing something, then I don't think this is even a question. Curious to see what the COA among UVA, UCLA, and USC is though.

[empyreanrrv]

Is it absolutely ignorant to think that it is likely that I can make the top 1/3 with a lot of hard work? I'm considerably above the 75% for gpa and LSAT. I didn't try overly hard in undergrad and I am steadfastly hungry for success. Although I suppose a lot of people in law school think this way.

Yes.

There is no guarantee he will make 1/3, but it isn't absolutely ignorant. There is data that shows that a student with the top LSAT/GPA will almost always be in the top quarter. Similarly a student at the bottom will almost always be in the bottom half. It isn't smart to gamble on being top third or top quarter when making a decision, but you can't totally ignore it the increased likelihood either.

[BerkeleyBear]

UCLA or USC if you only want southern california. USC has better job prospects. UCLA is located in a much, much, nicer area. Good luck OP.

[Rahviveh]

Surprised nobody as asked yet, but what is the total COA of each (including UVA with your scholarship)? Working with rough figures, if I'm not mistaken I think the difference btwn UCLA with $120k and NYU at sticker is roughly $250k. If that's true and I'm not missing something, then I don't think this is even a question. Curious to see what the COA among UVA, UCLA, and USC is though.

Don't know if this was a typo, but the difference is about 150k. COA at USC w/ interest/tuition hikes + that scholarship is 136k.

[dixiecupdrinking]

This comes down to what situation you'd rather be in if and when you don't get biglaw in L.A., because that is a contingency you need to plan for either way.

If you'd rather have any old legal job in California and/or risk unemployment than a high-paying job elsewhere (which it sounds like is true), then do USC/UCLA.

If you'd rather have biglaw elsewhere (i.e., NYC) than a low-paying job and/or risk unemployment in L.A., then NYU.

Frankly, if your parents are all set to drop six figures on your education then IMHO you should feel free to take the damn money, so I am discounting the cost issue substantially from if you were going to borrow the difference.

[star fox]

This comes down to what situation you'd rather be in if and when you don't get biglaw in L.A., because that is a contingency you need to plan for either way.

If you'd rather have any old legal job in California and/or risk unemployment than a high-paying job elsewhere (which it sounds like is true), then do USC/UCLA.

If you'd rather have biglaw elsewhere (i.e., NYC) than a low-paying job and/or risk unemployment in L.A., then NYU.

Frankly, if your parents are all set to drop six figures on your education then IMHO you should feel free to take the damn money, so I am discounting the cost issue substantially from if you were going to borrow the difference.

Unless your parents are super (and we're taking super) wealthy then I can't see how this is a good idea. Putting a financial strain on your parents is pretty irresponsible.

[052220151]

USC has about a ~10% advantage in Large Firm placement over UCLA, and their federal clerkship numbers are nearly identical. UCLA has a ~5% edge in PI. USC is also about 10k cheaper in total COA according to LST. USC has better football. The choice is clear; USC, take the money and run.

[Crowing]

This comes down to what situation you'd rather be in if and when you don't get biglaw in L.A., because that is a contingency you need to plan for either way.

If you'd rather have any old legal job in California and/or risk unemployment than a high-paying job elsewhere (which it sounds like is true), then do USC/UCLA.

If you'd rather have biglaw elsewhere (i.e., NYC) than a low-paying job and/or risk unemployment in L.A., then NYU.

Frankly, if your parents are all set to drop six figures on your education then IMHO you should feel free to take the damn money, so I am discounting the cost issue substantially from if you were going to borrow the difference.

Unless your parents are super (and we're taking super) wealthy then I can't see how this is a good idea. Putting a financial strain on your parents is pretty irresponsible.

What's your definition of super wealthy? I'm curious because I just don't feel like being able to not feel tangible effects from a difference of 200k necessarily implies "super wealthy" imo.

[dixiecupdrinking]

This comes down to what situation you'd rather be in if and when you don't get biglaw in L.A., because that is a contingency you need to plan for either way.

If you'd rather have any old legal job in California and/or risk unemployment than a high-paying job elsewhere (which it sounds like is true), then do USC/UCLA.

If you'd rather have biglaw elsewhere (i.e., NYC) than a low-paying job and/or risk unemployment in L.A., then NYU.

Frankly, if your parents are all set to drop six figures on your education then IMHO you should feel free to take the damn money, so I am discounting the cost issue substantially from if you were going to borrow the difference.

Unless your parents are super (and we're taking super) wealthy then I can't see how this is a good idea. Putting a financial strain on your parents is pretty irresponsible.

It's irresponsible of OP's parents, if it is a financial strain. Nobody can "put" them in that position but themselves. I'm going to assume in good faith that they wouldn't be offering if they weren't able to do it. Anyway, I just wanted to point out the assumptions I was incorporating in my advice. If it were all debt-financed then I'd lean much more heavily toward UCLA or USC.

[Tiago Splitter]

USC has about a ~10% advantage in Large Firm placement over UCLA, and their federal clerkship numbers are nearly identical.

This lead has existed for exactly one year. UCLA placed more people into large firms as recently as 2010.

[zman]

USC has about a ~10% advantage in Large Firm placement over UCLA, and their federal clerkship numbers are nearly identical.

This lead has existed for exactly one year. UCLA placed more people into large firms as recently as 2010.

USC does place more(usually) as a percentage of its class because it has a smaller class and more from UCLA go into PI. However 2012 UCLA will be a bounceback for UCLA and USC about the same.

What he can do is get more from UCLA by telling them he will go to USC or he can apply for the rothman at USC. WIll NYU give money eventually??

[052220151]

USC has about a ~10% advantage in Large Firm placement over UCLA, and their federal clerkship numbers are nearly identical.

This lead has existed for exactly one year. UCLA placed more people into large firms as recently as 2010.

Fair enough. Unless he negotiates more money out of either one of them, I'd still take USC. They still seem to be on even footing, and USC is 10k cheaper.