University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
giltzer14
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 7:20 pm

University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby giltzer14 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:00 pm

Need help deciding.....admitted to part-time programs at both:

Chapman Law [50% scholarship w/ 3.0 GPA to keep it, which is roughly top 33% - 40% each year]
University of San Diego Law [36% scholarship NON-Renewable]

This is a tough choice because there's always the chance that I would lose the $$$ at chapman if I don't hit a 3.0 GPA. If that happened, I'd probably regret not going to the higher ranked USD Law since both would be at sticker for the remaining years. I do receive partial tuition support from my employer but the remaining cost is still significant. Leaning towards San Diego but also tempted by the possibility of renewing my scholarship at Chapman!

Thanks for the help.
Last edited by giltzer14 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

redmessengerbag
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:57 am

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby redmessengerbag » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:26 pm

giltzer14 wrote:Need help deciding.....admitted to part-time programs at both:

Chapman Law [50% scholarship w/ 3.0 GPA to keep it, which is roughly top 36% - 40% each year]
University of San Diego Law [36% scholarship NON-Renewable]

This is a tough choice because there's always the chance that I would lose the $$$ at chapman if I don't hit a 3.0 GPA. If that happened, I'd probably regret not going to the higher ranked USD Law since both would be at sticker for the remaining years. I do receive partial tuition support from my employer but the remaining cost is still significant. Leaning towards San Diego but also tempted by the possibility of renewing my scholarship at Chapman!

Thanks for the help.


Don't bank on the Chapman scholarship after first year, 70 out of 107 people lose it. Chapman is struggling as evidenced by the recent drop in rankings, USD held steady and still has its stronghold in SD and for the foreseeable future...where do you live? How would the commute work?

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby rad lulz » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:39 pm

,
Last edited by rad lulz on Wed Oct 05, 2016 1:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

Ti Malice
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 2:55 am

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby Ti Malice » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:44 pm

Chapman is one of the worst law schools in the country. A maximum of 33% of 2012 grads had found FT/LT JD-required employment within nine months of graduation. Even a full ride with no stips -- which they don't offer -- would not justify attending that school.

USD at that cost is also pure madness. You have less than a coin flip's chance at getting a real lawyering job from there and a very small chance of actually getting a good job. Do you really think that's worth taking on $200+K in debt?

Retake or don't go to law school.

bananapeanutbutter
Posts: 351
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:12 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby bananapeanutbutter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:46 pm

Ti Malice wrote:Chapman is one of the worst law schools in the country. A maximum of 33% of 2012 grads had found FT/LT JD-required employment within nine months of graduation. Even a full ride with no stips -- which they don't offer -- would not justify attending that school.

USD at that cost is also pure madness. You have less than a coin flip's chance at getting a real lawyering job from there and a very small chance of actually getting a good job. Do you really think that's worth taking on $200+K in debt?

Retake or don't go to law school.

Stips aren't bad because if he wasn't top 33-40% shouldn't he drop out?

I agree about it not being worth the $ but I think everyone on this board is too hung up on stipulations when it comes to non-Top 14 schools because if you aren't good enough to keep the scholarship, law becomes not worth it. Even if they stripped it, if he's paying 50% and not top third he should drop out. Therefore, the stip isn't really changing this at all.

giltzer14
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 7:20 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby giltzer14 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:52 pm

redmessengerbag wrote:
giltzer14 wrote:Need help deciding.....admitted to part-time programs at both:

Chapman Law [50% scholarship w/ 3.0 GPA to keep it, which is roughly top 36% - 40% each year]
University of San Diego Law [36% scholarship NON-Renewable]

This is a tough choice because there's always the chance that I would lose the $$$ at chapman if I don't hit a 3.0 GPA. If that happened, I'd probably regret not going to the higher ranked USD Law since both would be at sticker for the remaining years. I do receive partial tuition support from my employer but the remaining cost is still significant. Leaning towards San Diego but also tempted by the possibility of renewing my scholarship at Chapman!

Thanks for the help.


Don't bank on the Chapman scholarship after first year, 70 out of 107 people lose it. Chapman is struggling as evidenced by the recent drop in rankings, USD held steady and still has its stronghold in SD and for the foreseeable future...where do you live? How would the commute work?


I agree, which is why i'm leaning towards USD. I live in Aliso Viejo, but am looking into transferring to my company's offices in San Diego. Definitely worth paying a seat deposit to see if this is possible....

rad lulz wrote:Both are rancid shitholes in terms of job prospects

The only way I'd go is if your employer will hire you as an attorney after

See http://www.lstscorereports.com/?r=ca


I agree that these schools are nothing compared to the T14...but I wouldn't go that far. And yes, I am looking into working with my company after graduation. It's a real possibility, but I do need to get it 100% figured out before I start.


Ti Malice wrote:Chapman is one of the worst law schools in the country. A maximum of 33% of 2012 grads had found FT/LT JD-required employment within nine months of graduation. Even a full ride with no stips -- which they don't offer -- would not justify attending that school.

USD at that cost is also pure madness. You have less than a coin flip's chance at getting a real lawyering job from there and a very small chance of actually getting a good job. Do you really think that's worth taking on $200+K in debt?

Retake or don't go to law school.


Is Chapman really considered one of the worst schools in the country? I agree their stipulations are brutal. At this point I really wish USD would have offered me the renewable scholarship because all you need is a 2.0. I don't know where you got the $200k + in debt figure, but I'm attending part-time, my employer is offering tuition assistance (up to 1/3 of part-time program cost annually), and I will be contributing part of my income since I will be working. I won't be ANYWHERE NEAR the debt # you posted.... that is ridiculous. I understand that some students actually do that, which is madness.

giltzer14
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2011 7:20 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby giltzer14 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:54 pm

bananapeanutbutter wrote:
Ti Malice wrote:Chapman is one of the worst law schools in the country. A maximum of 33% of 2012 grads had found FT/LT JD-required employment within nine months of graduation. Even a full ride with no stips -- which they don't offer -- would not justify attending that school.

USD at that cost is also pure madness. You have less than a coin flip's chance at getting a real lawyering job from there and a very small chance of actually getting a good job. Do you really think that's worth taking on $200+K in debt?

Retake or don't go to law school.

Stips aren't bad because if he wasn't top 33-40% shouldn't he drop out?

I agree about it not being worth the $ but I think everyone on this board is too hung up on stipulations when it comes to non-Top 14 schools because if you aren't good enough to keep the scholarship, law becomes not worth it. Even if they stripped it, if he's paying 50% and not top third he should drop out. Therefore, the stip isn't really changing this at all.



Are you suggesting USD or Chapman?

bananapeanutbutter
Posts: 351
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:12 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby bananapeanutbutter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:58 pm

giltzer14 wrote:
bananapeanutbutter wrote:
Ti Malice wrote:Chapman is one of the worst law schools in the country. A maximum of 33% of 2012 grads had found FT/LT JD-required employment within nine months of graduation. Even a full ride with no stips -- which they don't offer -- would not justify attending that school.

USD at that cost is also pure madness. You have less than a coin flip's chance at getting a real lawyering job from there and a very small chance of actually getting a good job. Do you really think that's worth taking on $200+K in debt?

Retake or don't go to law school.

Stips aren't bad because if he wasn't top 33-40% shouldn't he drop out?

I agree about it not being worth the $ but I think everyone on this board is too hung up on stipulations when it comes to non-Top 14 schools because if you aren't good enough to keep the scholarship, law becomes not worth it. Even if they stripped it, if he's paying 50% and not top third he should drop out. Therefore, the stip isn't really changing this at all.



Are you suggesting USD or Chapman?

Neither. USD essentially will force you to pay sticker 2L and 3L, which will leave you with an expensive degree and weak prospects. Chapman's scholarship isn't large enough, but I'd be more for a full ride requiring top 20% performance, which wouldn't necessarily be awful if you dropped out if you lost it) than a half ride requiring top 40%. I'm more against the amount of $ you're getting from them than the stipulation, because 50th percentile isn't going to get a good job from there regardless.

redmessengerbag
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:57 am

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby redmessengerbag » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:59 pm

I'm biased. I got a full ride for PT at Chapman with the 3.0 stips, and I got essentially half tuition at USD PT without any stips, I would go to USD without a question if I was only choosing between those two.

It's true that job prospects are bad for both schools, but keep in mind that we're talking part-time programs. Full time job w/ income, the COL is moot at that point, so tuition and fees are really what's gonna be costly. For me, I've got a good gig right now, once I'm done with law school, my career prospects (not aspired for BigLaw) will improve significantly.

User avatar
J-e-L-L-o
Posts: 418
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby J-e-L-L-o » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:02 pm

If your employer pays for it and you can go back to working for them in a legal capacity, then USD part time is a sound option. 10% of its grads do go back to their previous employer after law school. (That's one reason why I do not like SD as a school as this is an important metric to comprehend out of its employment stats).

It's the better school

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby timbs4339 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:03 pm

bananapeanutbutter wrote:
Ti Malice wrote:Chapman is one of the worst law schools in the country. A maximum of 33% of 2012 grads had found FT/LT JD-required employment within nine months of graduation. Even a full ride with no stips -- which they don't offer -- would not justify attending that school.

USD at that cost is also pure madness. You have less than a coin flip's chance at getting a real lawyering job from there and a very small chance of actually getting a good job. Do you really think that's worth taking on $200+K in debt?

Retake or don't go to law school.

Stips aren't bad because if he wasn't top 33-40% shouldn't he drop out?

I agree about it not being worth the $ but I think everyone on this board is too hung up on stipulations when it comes to non-Top 14 schools because if you aren't good enough to keep the scholarship, law becomes not worth it. Even if they stripped it, if he's paying 50% and not top third he should drop out. Therefore, the stip isn't really changing this at all.


That's how things work in rational actor lala land.

In the real world, students invest one year of their time, lose the scholly, and think 1) I might as well just finish the degree, 2) I don't want to be seen as a loser by family, friends, and people who will see me remove "School of Law" from my facebook profile, 3) I can get my grades up and get it back, 4) I've already taken out $X in COL and tuition, 5) I won't let them "beat" me. Basically, sunk cost fallacy kicks in. I used to work in consumer frauds for a bit and we saw for-profit tactics like this all the time.

It's actually a smart move by law schools. I wonder if it was what they were thinking when they thought up the stips or if they once had some legitimate purpose and just evolved into a way to manage numbers and get revenue back. Anyway, TLS advice about stips is good because you don't know if you'll be effected by cognitive bias when it comes time to make the dropout decision.

User avatar
J-e-L-L-o
Posts: 418
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby J-e-L-L-o » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:05 pm

IF you can go back to your employer make sure you get something in writing. How much of a pay bump will you get w/ a law degree?

bananapeanutbutter
Posts: 351
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:12 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby bananapeanutbutter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:08 pm

timbs4339 wrote:
bananapeanutbutter wrote:
Ti Malice wrote:Chapman is one of the worst law schools in the country. A maximum of 33% of 2012 grads had found FT/LT JD-required employment within nine months of graduation. Even a full ride with no stips -- which they don't offer -- would not justify attending that school.

USD at that cost is also pure madness. You have less than a coin flip's chance at getting a real lawyering job from there and a very small chance of actually getting a good job. Do you really think that's worth taking on $200+K in debt?

Retake or don't go to law school.

Stips aren't bad because if he wasn't top 33-40% shouldn't he drop out?

I agree about it not being worth the $ but I think everyone on this board is too hung up on stipulations when it comes to non-Top 14 schools because if you aren't good enough to keep the scholarship, law becomes not worth it. Even if they stripped it, if he's paying 50% and not top third he should drop out. Therefore, the stip isn't really changing this at all.


That's how things work in rational actor lala land.

In the real world, students invest one year of their time, lose the scholly, and think 1) I might as well just finish the degree, 2) I don't want to be seen as a loser by family, friends, and people who will see me remove "School of Law" from my facebook profile, 3) I can get my grades up and get it back, 4) I've already taken out $X in COL and tuition, 5) I won't let them "beat" me. Basically, sunk cost fallacy kicks in.

It's actually a smart move by law schools. I wonder if it was what they were thinking when they thought up the stips or if they once had some legitimate purpose and just evolved into a way to manage numbers and get revenue back. Anyway, TLS advice about stips is good because you don't know if you'll be effected by cognitive bias when it comes time to make the dropout decision.

If you're guided by how your childhood network perceives you then you shouldn't be in any leadership "aggressive" based market, whether it be law, business, management, etc.

I'm not saying people need to abandon their family to succeed, contrarily, they should love and respect their roots. However, this is a big boy-big girl field. One needs to be able to make their own decisions based off of objective data and analysis. Mommy and Daddy might be great at advising what boy or girl to date, but they are not the source for how to spend your money. Mommy and Daddy are the reason the economy is how it is, and their continuing influence on our beta passive-aggressive generation's cognitive dissonance is only further screwing up the economy.

Ti Malice
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 2:55 am

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby Ti Malice » Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:26 pm

giltzer14 wrote:
Ti Malice wrote:Chapman is one of the worst law schools in the country. A maximum of 33% of 2012 grads had found FT/LT JD-required employment within nine months of graduation. Even a full ride with no stips -- which they don't offer -- would not justify attending that school.

USD at that cost is also pure madness. You have less than a coin flip's chance at getting a real lawyering job from there and a very small chance of actually getting a good job. Do you really think that's worth taking on $200+K in debt?

Retake or don't go to law school.


Is Chapman really considered one of the worst schools in the country? I agree their stipulations are brutal. At this point I really wish USD would have offered me the renewable scholarship because all you need is a 2.0. I don't know where you got the $200k + in debt figure, but I'm attending part-time, my employer is offering tuition assistance (up to 1/3 of part-time program cost annually), and I will be contributing part of my income since I will be working. I won't be ANYWHERE NEAR the debt # you posted.... that is ridiculous. I understand that some students actually do that, which is madness.


Guilty of skimming your original post. But that's really still way too much money for USD, in my opinion. And please forget Chapman. It's horrible.

Lord Randolph McDuff
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:31 pm

bananapeanutbutter wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:
bananapeanutbutter wrote:
Ti Malice wrote:Chapman is one of the worst law schools in the country. A maximum of 33% of 2012 grads had found FT/LT JD-required employment within nine months of graduation. Even a full ride with no stips -- which they don't offer -- would not justify attending that school.

USD at that cost is also pure madness. You have less than a coin flip's chance at getting a real lawyering job from there and a very small chance of actually getting a good job. Do you really think that's worth taking on $200+K in debt?

Retake or don't go to law school.

Stips aren't bad because if he wasn't top 33-40% shouldn't he drop out?

I agree about it not being worth the $ but I think everyone on this board is too hung up on stipulations when it comes to non-Top 14 schools because if you aren't good enough to keep the scholarship, law becomes not worth it. Even if they stripped it, if he's paying 50% and not top third he should drop out. Therefore, the stip isn't really changing this at all.


That's how things work in rational actor lala land.

In the real world, students invest one year of their time, lose the scholly, and think 1) I might as well just finish the degree, 2) I don't want to be seen as a loser by family, friends, and people who will see me remove "School of Law" from my facebook profile, 3) I can get my grades up and get it back, 4) I've already taken out $X in COL and tuition, 5) I won't let them "beat" me. Basically, sunk cost fallacy kicks in.

It's actually a smart move by law schools. I wonder if it was what they were thinking when they thought up the stips or if they once had some legitimate purpose and just evolved into a way to manage numbers and get revenue back. Anyway, TLS advice about stips is good because you don't know if you'll be effected by cognitive bias when it comes time to make the dropout decision.

If you're guided by how your childhood network perceives you then you shouldn't be in any leadership "aggressive" based market, whether it be law, business, management, etc.

I'm not saying people need to abandon their family to succeed, contrarily, they should love and respect their roots. However, this is a big boy-big girl field. One needs to be able to make their own decisions based off of objective data and analysis. Mommy and Daddy might be great at advising what boy or girl to date, but they are not the source for how to spend your money. Mommy and Daddy are the reason the economy is how it is, and their continuing influence on our beta passive-aggressive generation's cognitive dissonance is only further screwing up the economy.


Omg you are so pathetic. I can't tell if you are a 0L or a troll account. Probably a troll because you've had your account for 3 days and already have that many posts. Enjoy being a lonely piece of shit your whole life.

So much wrong with your post I'm not even going to try. Also you said this a few days ago:


bananapeanutbutter wrote:this sounds terrible but unless i had children, i can never imagine myself voluntary throwing away 200k a year or career advancement over a woman, because she'd likely be easier to replace. i'm fine being faithful and respecting her and supporting her, but i'd never make her priority #1. that's why i'd like to learn the "tricks" big law lawyers who succeed in 1 marriage do to succeed. i understand i'm different from most men in that i'd rather make a million a year than be middle class and married to the hottest woman in the world, but i'd never love a woman more than money - it just isn't in my DNA. I can love, but i really love money.

bananapeanutbutter
Posts: 351
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:12 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby bananapeanutbutter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 5:50 pm

Oh, you seem pleasant.

I don't know what your gaping insecurity here is, brah. I don't care what law school you go to, but paying full price to a TT in an incredibly competitive legal market where the odds of a 100k+ plus job or a job that makes repayment + a decent QOL about 1:4/5 at best because you don't want to let down mommy and daddy doesn't seem smart.

If this sentiment makes you think I'm a prestige snob or an asshole, fine. However, why don't you just relax and just do some douching to get out whatever stinky meat you have inside you. It's all okay. Just relax brah.

User avatar
J-e-L-L-o
Posts: 418
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby J-e-L-L-o » Fri Apr 05, 2013 10:15 pm

Part time programs generally don't give scholarships. So half off tuition is not bad to become a lawyer.

1/2 off should be 100k. How is that expensive? And that's including COL. If you want more scholarship money, get a better LSAT.

dissonance1848
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:42 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby dissonance1848 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 10:33 pm

Neither law school is acceptable, unless its fullride with no stips and living stipend, and even then.....

Retake or don't go OP, really.

Ti Malice
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 2:55 am

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby Ti Malice » Fri Apr 05, 2013 10:53 pm

bananapeanutbutter wrote:Oh, you seem pleasant.

I don't know what your gaping insecurity here is, brah. I don't care what law school you go to, but paying full price to a TT in an incredibly competitive legal market where the odds of a 100k+ plus job or a job that makes repayment + a decent QOL about 1:4/5 at best because you don't want to let down mommy and daddy doesn't seem smart.

If this sentiment makes you think I'm a prestige snob or an asshole, fine. However, why don't you just relax and just do some douching to get out whatever stinky meat you have inside you. It's all okay. Just relax brah.


Your bizarre ranting is really beside the point. "Should" ain't got nothin' to do with this. Nor does "our beta passive-aggressive generation's cognitive dissonance." (WTF?) Timbs is highlighting cognitive biases/predispositions that are inherent to having a modern human brain. Everyone is affected by them to varying degrees, which makes perfectly "objective analysis" of data an unattainable ideal -- especially when we're making decisions for ourselves. And I wouldn't think it would need to be pointed out, but he's not describing conscious-level decision-making; these are shorthand descriptions of (at least partly) subconscious drives. Everyone wants to maintain face in their family and social networks. This is just of many concerns and biases that exert subconscious pressures on decision-making. Even when people think they've consciously dispensed with the concern, it's quite likely still exerting some influence in the background (even with oh-so-rugged alpha individualists).

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby Dr. Dre » Fri Apr 05, 2013 11:00 pm

Lord Randolph McDuff wrote: Also you said this a few days ago:


bananapeanutbutter wrote:this sounds terrible but unless i had children, i can never imagine myself voluntary throwing away 200k a year or career advancement over a woman, because she'd likely be easier to replace. i'm fine being faithful and respecting her and supporting her, but i'd never make her priority #1. that's why i'd like to learn the "tricks" big law lawyers who succeed in 1 marriage do to succeed. i understand i'm different from most men in that i'd rather make a million a year than be middle class and married to the hottest woman in the world, but i'd never love a woman more than money - it just isn't in my DNA. I can love, but i really love money.


I actually don't find anything wrong with his post. HE is extremely blunt and shallow—but this is what we need.

My cousin dedicated his entire life to the woman whom he thought was going to live with him forever. 3 years after marriage, she wants a divorce.

bananapeanutbutter
Posts: 351
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:12 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby bananapeanutbutter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 11:19 pm

Ti Malice wrote:
bananapeanutbutter wrote:Oh, you seem pleasant.

I don't know what your gaping insecurity here is, brah. I don't care what law school you go to, but paying full price to a TT in an incredibly competitive legal market where the odds of a 100k+ plus job or a job that makes repayment + a decent QOL about 1:4/5 at best because you don't want to let down mommy and daddy doesn't seem smart.

If this sentiment makes you think I'm a prestige snob or an asshole, fine. However, why don't you just relax and just do some douching to get out whatever stinky meat you have inside you. It's all okay. Just relax brah.


Your bizarre ranting is really beside the point. "Should" ain't got nothin' to do with this. Nor does "our beta passive-aggressive generation's cognitive dissonance." (WTF?) Timbs is highlighting cognitive biases/predispositions that are inherent to having a modern human brain. Everyone is affected by them to varying degrees, which makes perfectly "objective analysis" of data an unattainable ideal -- especially when we're making decisions for ourselves. And I wouldn't think it would need to be pointed out, but he's not describing conscious-level decision-making; these are shorthand descriptions of (at least partly) subconscious drives. Everyone wants to maintain face in their family and social networks. This is just of many concerns and biases that exert subconscious pressures on decision-making. Even when people think they've consciously dispensed with the concern, it's quite likely still exerting some influence in the background (even with oh-so-rugged alpha individualists).

Point taken.

But when you make a positives and negatives list or engage in any rational analysis consciously of what is a HUGE decision (stick with a career ambition, poor in more money, more of your good pre-mental and physical breakdown years) it seems dumb to write but what will my childhood neighbor, Debby think of me. This seems dumb.

It's one thing to base school choice or work choice based on being close to home if this is important to people, and I can see how this is quality of life is enhancing but what people will think of you if you quit is dumb. It is also counterproductive to reach these insecure goals, because if you really care what people think of you leaving law school to an extent you are willing to put yourselves in a 100k in additional debt with what will then be terrible career prospects (again, we're talking bad grades at a school with 50% legal hiring at all), then what happens when you're dirt poor and living with your parents into your 30s? Will Debbie be watering her lawn thinking, "Oh, look at that gleaming young whipper snapper. He's a lawyer. What a winner!"

bananapeanutbutter
Posts: 351
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:12 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby bananapeanutbutter » Fri Apr 05, 2013 11:25 pm

z
Last edited by bananapeanutbutter on Fri Apr 05, 2013 11:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

PRgradBYU
Posts: 1419
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:04 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby PRgradBYU » Fri Apr 05, 2013 11:46 pm

dissonance1848 wrote:Neither law school is acceptable, unless its fullride with no stips and living stipend, and even then.....

Retake or don't go OP, really.


+1. The emboldened portion of that post is the only reason OP should consider USD or Chapman (assuming he/she has guaranteed improved with a sizeable salary increase).

bananapeanutbutter
Posts: 351
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:12 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby bananapeanutbutter » Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:02 am

Dr. Dre wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote: Also you said this a few days ago:


bananapeanutbutter wrote:this sounds terrible but unless i had children, i can never imagine myself voluntary throwing away 200k a year or career advancement over a woman, because she'd likely be easier to replace. i'm fine being faithful and respecting her and supporting her, but i'd never make her priority #1. that's why i'd like to learn the "tricks" big law lawyers who succeed in 1 marriage do to succeed. i understand i'm different from most men in that i'd rather make a million a year than be middle class and married to the hottest woman in the world, but i'd never love a woman more than money - it just isn't in my DNA. I can love, but i really love money.


I actually don't find anything wrong with his post. HE is extremely blunt and shallow—but this is what we need.

My cousin dedicated his entire life to the woman whom he thought was going to live with him forever. 3 years after marriage, she wants a divorce.

Hey, I have nothing against marriage, but the nature of the profession and succeeding in big law requires longgggggg hours and commitments.

But dedicating his whole life? That seems extreme. Did she have some condition that required him to devote his life to her? There was something I read about giving your partner the gift of missing you from time to time even if you're not in big law. When I was a teenager, I did not realize this at all. Now, I predominately need to make reminders to never wait a week or two to follow up.

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: University of San Diego or Chapman Law School

Postby Dr. Dre » Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:18 am

bananapeanutbutter wrote:
Dr. Dre wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote: Also you said this a few days ago:


bananapeanutbutter wrote:this sounds terrible but unless i had children, i can never imagine myself voluntary throwing away 200k a year or career advancement over a woman, because she'd likely be easier to replace. i'm fine being faithful and respecting her and supporting her, but i'd never make her priority #1. that's why i'd like to learn the "tricks" big law lawyers who succeed in 1 marriage do to succeed. i understand i'm different from most men in that i'd rather make a million a year than be middle class and married to the hottest woman in the world, but i'd never love a woman more than money - it just isn't in my DNA. I can love, but i really love money.


I actually don't find anything wrong with his post. HE is extremely blunt and shallow—but this is what we need.

My cousin dedicated his entire life to the woman whom he thought was going to live with him forever. 3 years after marriage, she wants a divorce.

Hey, I have nothing against marriage, but the nature of the profession and succeeding in big law requires longgggggg hours and commitments.

But dedicating his whole life? That seems extreme. Did she have some condition that required him to devote his life to her? There was something I read about giving your partner the gift of missing you from time to time even if you're not in big law. When I was a teenager, I did not realize this at all. Now, I predominately need to make reminders to never wait a week or two to follow up.



Sorry I worded it a bit extreme. What I mean was he really loved her, now he is in depression.

But I get your point about big law, it's true.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], EncyclopediaOrange and 6 guests