Top Law Schools

[deleted]

WLd at B?

Yeah Cornell is the better school but UCLA is a better bet for the West Coast.

It should be retake/reapply >>>>> UCLA if you're staying west >> Cornell for NYC

I know you won't have debt, but you should try to save your savings here. You scored below your PT, you have a great GPA, and your savings shouldn't be blown at UCLA.

But out of the two, gun to the head, UCLA is your better bet.

.

Malarkey wrote:I'm risk-averse, so Cornell seems like a better bet. Then again, Cornell grads place predominantly into New York, and while I'm not opposed to working in New York, I'd rather be out west. Essentially, it seems like it comes down to job-security vs. geographical preference.

I'd pick Cornell which should give you better chances at biglaw (either in CA, or starting out in NY then doing a lateral back to CA after a couple of years). However, if one preferred a non-biglaw CA job over biglaw NY (and that doesn't seem to be the case for you), then UCLA might be the better choice.

Cornell is the better choice here, but the cost still worries me mainly because I'm pretty debt averse. The happiness factor will be negligible because you'll make great friends in law school at either place. Plus it's only three years away.

Cornell has national reach and can get you back to CA if you do well and have substantial ties. At different costs, UCLA comes into the conversation, but at equal cost, Cornell easily.

Retake is always an option to further bring down costs if you want to and have other options to put it off, but Cornell is right on the cusp of being worth it to me, particularly when you're talking about zero debt.

ETA: I also equate decimating savings with zero interest debt, so while you're not paying compounding interest on it, you're still selling off the farm for this opportunity (and if that's not selling the farm, you have really impressive savings).

Yeah, stick those savings in an index fund and retake.

Why do you want to be a lawyer?

If you're risk adverse, I'd go with Cornell. Although, I must disclose that I'm a 3L at Cornell. Obtaining biglaw is fairly easy here and I've actually been surprised how many of my die-hard California colleagues landed at least one CA offer.

If OP is open to retaking, then this is clearly the answer.

Disclaimer: went to Cornell for undergrad.

Ithaca is beautiful. Not a lot of nice shopping/things to do, but the natural beauty is unsurpassed -- even in winter, my walk home takes my breath away. Cornell Law in particular is gorgeous, and very small (which is what you want). The faculty I've met were incredibly helpful, even though I was only an undergrad! So I think you'll have a good time here.

Cornell punches way above its weight in terms of big law placement. ATL ranks it very near the top. If you graduate from Cornell, you can get a biglaw job. Why risk struggling to get a job as a UCLA grad when you can just go to Cornell, work at a great firm in NYC for a couple years, then transfer back to CA if you want? It seems to me the downside of going to Cornell (a few years in NYC, which isn't your top choice market) is much better than the UCLA downside (lower ranking/prestige, you've heard bad things, bad employment scores).

Ultimately, you're going to law school to get a job. Go to a school where you know you can get a job after graduation, even if the location is less than ideal. This doesn't seem like a tough choice at all to me.

So, I was in practically the same situation a few years ago and chose the west coast option just because I couldn't tell how much of Cornell's NY placement was self-selection, wanted to be near my family, and was of the personal belief that I could predict how I would perform.

I think it just comes down to whether you really want biglaw- in which case it is Cornell by a mile- or if working in CA is more important to you; obviously, a big part of this is how risk adverse you are as well

.

I'm saying don't blow your retirement and down payment on a house for law school.

You scored below your average. There's no hurry. You've only taken once. Your options aren't bad, but they're not as good as they could be. I think it's much more prudent to stick your money in an index fund, and retake a 4 hour test that could literally save you 100,000 dollars or more.

Malarkey wrote: I was expecting these suggestions (this is TLS after all) but I'm a bit surprised that a half-ride to a T-14 (or 13, whatever) is easily shrugged off. If I retook and scored the same or even marginally better, it's very possible that I might not receive a scholarship like this next time around.

Half-ride to Cornell isn't the same as a half-ride to CCN (ignoring HYS, because of the different financial aid structure). Yes, if you retook and scored the same, you probably wouldn't see a change. If you retook and scored 1-2 points higher, you could see an increase of tens of thousands of dollars in Cornell's offer and/or better offers from other schools. Once you close in on 170, a single point makes a massive difference in outcomes.

Dcc617 wrote:I'm saying don't blow your retirement and down payment on a house for law school.

You scored below your average. There's no hurry. You've only taken once. Your options aren't bad, but they're not as good as they could be. I think it's much more prudent to stick your money in an index fund, and retake a 4 hour test that could literally save you 100,000 dollars or more.

Yeah. This.

I'm not shrugging off your options; they are good. But you scored below your average on a test that can save you thousands of dollars and a slight increase in your score could save you a ton of money.

.

.

Malarkey wrote:

Ronan wrote:

Dcc617 wrote:I'm saying don't blow your retirement and down payment on a house for law school.

You scored below your average. There's no hurry. You've only taken once. Your options aren't bad, but they're not as good as they could be. I think it's much more prudent to stick your money in an index fund, and retake a 4 hour test that could literally save you 100,000 dollars or more.

Yeah. This.

I'm not shrugging off your options; they are good. But you scored below your average on a test that can save you thousands of dollars and a slight increase in your score could save you a ton of money.

For sure, that's fair. I totally get the retake a quick test and save tons of money agenda. My only worry is that according to MyLSN, I received a little over $20,000 more than others who had similar numbers. The average LSAT score that received my 90k offer was in between 169 and 170. Does this mean that I risk losing a potentially generous scholarship if I decide to retake? Would I have to score significantly higher than I was averaging on my PTs in order to get a better scholarship? Or am I putting to much faith in MyLSN's ability to predict scholarships?

Retaking would also possibly result in acceptances at other schools, which is certainly valuable.

Thanks again.

Is retaking and reapplying risk-free? Probably not. But nothing in life is, you've always got to play the percentages.

Malarkey wrote:

Trippel wrote:If you're risk adverse, I'd go with Cornell. Although, I must disclose that I'm a 3L at Cornell. Obtaining biglaw is fairly easy here and I've actually been surprised how many of my die-hard California colleagues landed at least one CA offer.

That's great to hear. Do those students have "ties" similar to mine? I'd also be happy with an offer from Denver or Seattle, as I mentioned earlier, although I don't have ties to those regions at all, so I'm not expecting anything.

Yes, most of the people I know with California offers have similar ties.

From what I've heard, you would have a hard time obtaining a biglaw SA in Denver and essentially zero chance in Seattle.

Feel free to pm me with any other questions. Good luck!

.

Malarkey wrote:It would also be great to hear from more people voting in the poll. There's a large silent majority pushing Cornell.

Cuz Cornell is a T14 and higher ranked broham

Who cares what random button clickers think? If they can't be bothered to click enough buttons to write an actual post then forget about them.

BigZuck wrote:

Malarkey wrote:It would also be great to hear from more people voting in the poll. There's a large silent majority pushing Cornell.

Cuz Cornell is a T14 and higher ranked broham

Who cares what random button clickers think? If they can't be bothered to click enough buttons to write an actual post then forget about them.

#hokum

Most of the people posting are also leaning Cornell if forced to choose between the two options presented in the poll; the reasons for opting for Cornell are pretty well covered if you're going to go for one or the other.

.

Yeah I'm also at Cornell and had several close friends who wanted CA get it during OCI (not with amazing grades). While I agree that trying for more money is always preferable, I think Cornell here is a solid option if you are: 1) set on Biglaw over any CA law job and 2) are willing to target NYC and CA (through hustling mass-mailing in addition to bidding) during AJF. There's a good shot you will get CA, but you need to be ready for NYC if Biglaw or bust is your goal. My personal anecdata is that the people with CA ties here (there aren't a ton, but it's not insignificant) are able to get CA biglaw jobs with slightly above median.

Disclaimer: Ucla 1L with a biglaw job already secured

You have much better odds of landing a biglaw position in California if you graduate from UCLA than from Cornell. Also, Cornell gets a lot of hate because the logical inference is that, if you chose Cornell, you didn't get into Harvard, penn, Chicago, Columbia, Yale etc.

UCLA is the best law school in LA and lots choose this place for the 'strong regional with money' thing