Top Law Schools

I might not be able to get into a T13 school, ucla, usc. Should I attend UC Irvine or UC Davis or is there another higher ranked school that would let me get a good job in the CA market?

What does a "good job" mean to you?

Other than UCLA/USC, I would think UCI/UCD would be the best bets. The lower in the rankings you go, the more regional it becomes along with lower probability of landing a good job (I'm thinking here a good job is $100k+). Other schools to consider would probably be LMU or Pepperdine-- decent alumni networks across southern california.

My advice, if you are deadset on getting a good job in CA ($140k+) and aren't going to retake, go to a T30 and sacrifice happiness for a school year then transfer to UCLA/USC. UCLA takes a lot of transfers.

Lehmanbro42O wrote: My advice, if you are deadset on getting a good job in CA ($140k+) and aren't going to retake, go to a T30 and sacrifice happiness for a school year then transfer to UCLA/USC. UCLA takes a lot of transfers.

This is bad advice.

Don't expect to go to a school and do well enough to transfer. This is hard to understand as a 0L (was for me, as well) but you will get a feel as to why once the 1L honeymoon phase is over.

The seven tiers of law schools

http://outsidethelawschoolscam.blogspot ... hools.html

Odds are you won't get decent law job.

taxman128 wrote:The seven tiers of law schools

http://outsidethelawschoolscam.blogspot ... hools.html

Odds are you won't get decent law job.

This list is also terrible for different reasons.

Any site that says Stanford will lead to bad outcomes should be flushed down the toilet, lol.

Stanford Non-Discounted Cost $359,521
Only 22.6% receive ≥ $25,405 discount (I assume per year)

Good luck paying this off as well as $3,000,000 for a single family house in Los Altos even with a $200,000 salary.

Sinatra wrote:

Lehmanbro42O wrote: My advice, if you are deadset on getting a good job in CA ($140k+) and aren't going to retake, go to a T30 and sacrifice happiness for a school year then transfer to UCLA/USC. UCLA takes a lot of transfers.

This is bad advice.

Don't expect to go to a school and do well enough to transfer. This is hard to understand as a 0L (was for me, as well) but you will get a feel as to why once the 1L honeymoon phase is over.

Is this bad advice? Because I didn’t emphasize the other side of the alternative? Yeah, if this person is actually willing to retake or choose another profession, sure, beating them over the head with that brutal recommendation is surely good boilerplate TLS advice. Otherwise, as is the case here, there has to be some other calculated, albeit risky, alternative. Go ahead and beat your outrageously played out tropes and unrealistically high standards to death. The fact of the matter is the vast majority of law applicants aren’t going to have 3.8+, 170+ stats.
Shooting for a transfer at a school you’re over the 75th lsat at is going to position you strongly, probabilistically speaking. Even if you don’t transfer, this mindset is probably your best bet at maximizing your potential to succeed. If you are absolutely dead set on going to law School with the stats you have implied, I do not think this is bad advice.
You are making a very risky decision. You should acknowledge that. But if you have your mind made up, it would behoove you to do so in a way that maximizes your possibility of succeeding. I think shooting for a transfer from the best T30 that gives you $$ is the best way to do that.

For LA, UCI/Loyola, maybe Pepperdine. For SF, Hastings and Davis.

I think the best way to interpret Sinatra’s post is as an example of an outcome you’re gambling with. You may do very well and transfer or get a Big Law LA job from a T30. You may also come up short and find a niche as the pessimistic TLS frequenter. Both are very real possibilities. Unfortunately, the latter is the more likely of the two, as I’m sure this person will repeatedly tell you.

taxman128 wrote:Stanford Non-Discounted Cost $359,521
Only 22.6% receive ≥ $25,405 discount (I assume per year)

Good luck paying this off as well as $3,000,000 for a single family house in Los Altos even with a $200,000 salary.

How does law school transparency calculate cost of attendance? That seems really high.

"How does law school transparency calculate cost of attendance?"

See how much it costs to finance a law degree with and without discounts--LST

see how much it costs to finance a law degree with and without discounts--LST

Moderator deletes my links for some reason. You can google the phrase above to take you to explanation of how cost is derived.

Lehmanbro42O wrote:

Sinatra wrote:

Lehmanbro42O wrote: My advice, if you are deadset on getting a good job in CA ($140k+) and aren't going to retake, go to a T30 and sacrifice happiness for a school year then transfer to UCLA/USC. UCLA takes a lot of transfers.

This is bad advice.

Don't expect to go to a school and do well enough to transfer. This is hard to understand as a 0L (was for me, as well) but you will get a feel as to why once the 1L honeymoon phase is over.

Is this bad advice? Because I didn’t emphasize the other side of the alternative?

yes. when you may near conclusory statements such as "go to a T30 and sacrifice happiness for a school year then transfer to UCLA/USC," I would say it is bad advice.

I have yet to go through 1L OCI so I have no idea if I will fit into any sort of "pessimistic TLS frequenter" in the future, but I know many people who knew the material better than I did who didn't perform as well, and vice versa. USC basically accepts no transfers, and there is likely mad competition to get into UCLA as a transfer.

to OP, best advice is retake if you want biglaw, manage expectations to fall in line with non-biglaw position if you chose another CA school, or consider other non-law options if you like neither of these. You are a big boy/girl though, so do you