Top Law Schools

stugots26 wrote: It took hard work, lots of studying, and dealing with a couple of wild-card professors, but with hard work and determination it's ENTIRELY POSSIBLE to keep a scholarship.

tfleming09 wrote:

stugots26 wrote:Okay, I'm back after my first year at John Marshall Chicago, and I wanted to bump up this post after all this time.

I took a risk, took the full ride scholarship with top third stipulation, and guess what? I kept the scholarship. It took hard work, lots of studying, and dealing with a couple of wild-card professors, but with hard work and determination it's ENTIRELY POSSIBLE to keep a scholarship. I know at least six other people (not everyone advertises that he or she is a scholarship student) with the same stipulation this year who have kept their scholarships. Those who may have lost their scholarship fully admit to slacking this semester.

I bought in to the fear about the section-stacking and pay-for-two-years-after-I-can't-keep-my-scholarship disaster scenarios, anecdotes that are shared on this forum about people losing their scholarships - to a point. I'm beginning to think, however, that people will blame and rationalize rather than accepting that they couldn't hack it. In the end, yes, it took a lot of hard work, but it is by no means impossible. The school wants us to graduate debt-free so we aren't forced to choose jobs based on our debt loads. I'm working a patent job for the summer, I'm taking the Patent Bar, and I'll have a bunch of interviews at the Patent Law Interview Program as a result of a combination of the PhD, my resume, and networking.

In short, the disaster scenarios spouted on this thread were the most irresponsible and untrue fear-mongering techniques I've ever seen. Completely ridiculous and contrary to reality. It's like people need to shoot down any route toward a successful law career that isn't at a top school with a crapload of debt.

Stipulations are entirely manageable and reasonable measures of accountability, and as I got closer and closer to keeping the scholarship, the humor of this thread, and those like it, hit me more and more. Well, I've said my piece. Let the flaming begin - but it's going to be kind of difficult to dispute hard evidence of success. I'll check back after a while and I've kept the scholarship for another semester.

I enjoy when someone displays the same sort of understanding of logic that causes them to get an LSAT score that makes them go to schools like this in the first place.

stugots26 wrote:This thread *does* continue to be entertaining. That's for sure. After talking to some friends, the figure is up to at least ten people with full rides this year who kept them for next year. So that's already much better odds than the powerball. But keep the blind rationalizations coming. Attack my credibility. It's just so ridiculous.

I love how this is a law school forum, and people chastised me for suggesting that someone not try to negotiate scholarship stipulations. They do still teach Contracts in your law schools, right? Does anyone remember the mirror-image rule? What happens when an offeree attempts to negotiate an offer? Doesn't that constitute a rejection and counter-offer?

You can poke fun at the school all you want, mock my competition, it's easy. But I'm not the one who generalized about the scholarship. I'm the one who proved that the generalization is a faulty presumption by empirical evidence, at least as far as John Marshall is concerned, and that the scholarship-stipulation "scam", whether it exists or not, can be attributed to students attempting to not hold themselves accountable for their own failures.

I'll still be laughing about this when I graduate debt-free and use my networking contacts to land a job in a firm in Chicago where I'm not killing myself to pay off my debt.

Kilpatrick wrote:
The logic here is mind boggling. The school didn't HAVE to offer him anything but they did because they're trying to sucker him into going there! The school is not going to "pull" their offer if he tries to negotiate. And they don't expect him to work for it. They expect that he'll probably lose it after the first year and they'll suck a couple hundred thousand dollars out of him. "Working hard" is not enough to do well in law school. Taking a scholarship at a school like this with that stipulation is a huge risk.

stugots26 wrote:

Kilpatrick wrote:
The logic here is mind boggling. The school didn't HAVE to offer him anything but they did because they're trying to sucker him into going there! The school is not going to "pull" their offer if he tries to negotiate. And they don't expect him to work for it. They expect that he'll probably lose it after the first year and they'll suck a couple hundred thousand dollars out of him. "Working hard" is not enough to do well in law school. Taking a scholarship at a school like this with that stipulation is a huge risk.

Talk about circular logic.

stugots26 wrote:This thread *does* continue to be entertaining. That's for sure. After talking to some friends, the figure is up to at least ten people with full rides this year who kept them for next year. So that's already much better odds than the powerball. But keep the blind rationalizations coming. Attack my credibility. It's just so ridiculous.

I love how this is a law school forum, and people chastised me for suggesting that someone not try to negotiate scholarship stipulations. They do still teach Contracts in your law schools, right? Does anyone remember the mirror-image rule? What happens when an offeree attempts to negotiate an offer? Doesn't that constitute a rejection and counter-offer?

You can poke fun at the school all you want, mock my competition, it's easy. But I'm not the one who generalized about the scholarship. I'm the one who proved that the generalization is a faulty presumption by empirical evidence, at least as far as John Marshall is concerned, and that the scholarship-stipulation "scam", whether it exists or not, can be attributed to students attempting to not hold themselves accountable for their own failures.

I'll still be laughing about this when I graduate debt-free and use my networking contacts to land a job in a firm in Chicago where I'm not killing myself to pay off my debt.

stugots26 wrote: I love how this is a law school forum, and people chastised me for suggesting that someone not try to negotiate scholarship stipulations. They do still teach Contracts in your law schools, right? Does anyone remember the mirror-image rule? What happens when an offeree attempts to negotiate an offer? Doesn't that constitute a rejection and counter-offer?

stugots26 wrote:
I love how this is a law school forum, and people chastised me for suggesting that someone not try to negotiate scholarship stipulations. They do still teach Contracts in your law schools, right? Does anyone remember the mirror-image rule? What happens when an offeree attempts to negotiate an offer? Doesn't that constitute a rejection and counter-offer?

beachbum wrote:So... attend John Marshall on scholarship because ~2/3 of the class is dumb and/or lazy as shit, and as long as you put in the time to actually learn the law, you won't have any problem out-scoring these neanderthals on exams?

stugots26 wrote:Hey all - bumping up this thread once again. That's right, I'm back.

Someone commented in this thread about sympathy for 0Ls who don't have scholarships. That's true. I do have sympathy for anyone who is misguided enough to enter a law school like JMLS in this economy not headed into patent law and without a full ride scholarship. The school may have a hand in perpetuating the myth of success after law school. However, that wasn't what this thread was about. What this thread, and this whole forum in fact, seems to be about is the old-school philosophy of T14-or-bust, and the vitriolic spite with which posters attack anyone who is successful at graduating a non-T14 without debt, and landiing a legal job, almost comically. You don't have to pay through the nose. You don't have to go to the best law school.

I'm two years down, I've kept my scholarship, I'm in a summer associate position with a prominent law firm, at which you have to *try* to not get a job offer, and which pays well over $100K starting salary. In fact, all of the other people with the same scholarship got similar positions this summer. Yes, even in this economy.

You can go on telling folks to negotiate away scholarship stipulations under the misguided notion that somehow, in this age of entitlement, a school's low rank is an indication of whether it should have the gaul to ask for some type of checks and balances on a very generous offer, or understand that there's risks in everything.

I'll check back in a year after I graduate, pass the bar, and start work, and have a good laugh at all the responses.

Cheers and thank you to all who sincerely congratulated me on my success.

stugots26 wrote:Hey all - bumping up this thread once again. That's right, I'm back.

Someone commented in this thread about sympathy for 0Ls who don't have scholarships. That's true. I do have sympathy for anyone who is misguided enough to enter a law school like JMLS in this economy not headed into patent law and without a full ride scholarship. The school may have a hand in perpetuating the myth of success after law school. However, that wasn't what this thread was about. What this thread, and this whole forum in fact, seems to be about is the old-school philosophy of T14-or-bust, and the vitriolic spite with which posters attack anyone who is successful at graduating a non-T14 without debt, and landiing a legal job, almost comically. You don't have to pay through the nose. You don't have to go to the best law school.

I'm two years down, I've kept my scholarship, I'm in a summer associate position with a prominent law firm, at which you have to *try* to not get a job offer, and which pays well over $100K starting salary. In fact, all of the other people with the same scholarship got similar positions this summer. Yes, even in this economy.

You can go on telling folks to negotiate away scholarship stipulations under the misguided notion that somehow, in this age of entitlement, a school's low rank is an indication of whether it should have the gaul to ask for some type of checks and balances on a very generous offer, or understand that there's risks in everything.

I'll check back in a year after I graduate, pass the bar, and start work, and have a good laugh at all the responses.

Cheers and thank you to all who sincerely congratulated me on my success.

stugots26 wrote:Hey all - bumping up this thread once again. That's right, I'm back.

Someone commented in this thread about sympathy for 0Ls who don't have scholarships. That's true. I do have sympathy for anyone who is misguided enough to enter a law school like JMLS in this economy not headed into patent law and without a full ride scholarship. The school may have a hand in perpetuating the myth of success after law school. However, that wasn't what this thread was about. What this thread, and this whole forum in fact, seems to be about is the old-school philosophy of T14-or-bust, and the vitriolic spite with which posters attack anyone who is successful at graduating a non-T14 without debt, and landiing a legal job, almost comically. You don't have to pay through the nose. You don't have to go to the best law school.

I'm two years down, I've kept my scholarship, I'm in a summer associate position with a prominent law firm, at which you have to *try* to not get a job offer, and which pays well over $100K starting salary. In fact, all of the other people with the same scholarship got similar positions this summer. Yes, even in this economy.

You can go on telling folks to negotiate away scholarship stipulations under the misguided notion that somehow, in this age of entitlement, a school's low rank is an indication of whether it should have the gaul to ask for some type of checks and balances on a very generous offer, or understand that there's risks in everything.

I'll check back in a year after I graduate, pass the bar, and start work, and have a good laugh at all the responses.

Cheers and thank you to all who sincerely congratulated me on my success.

rad lulz wrote:

stugots26 wrote:Hey all - bumping up this thread once again. That's right, I'm back.

Someone commented in this thread about sympathy for 0Ls who don't have scholarships. That's true. I do have sympathy for anyone who is misguided enough to enter a law school like JMLS in this economy not headed into patent law and without a full ride scholarship. The school may have a hand in perpetuating the myth of success after law school. However, that wasn't what this thread was about. What this thread, and this whole forum in fact, seems to be about is the old-school philosophy of T14-or-bust, and the vitriolic spite with which posters attack anyone who is successful at graduating a non-T14 without debt, and landiing a legal job, almost comically. You don't have to pay through the nose. You don't have to go to the best law school.

I'm two years down, I've kept my scholarship, I'm in a summer associate position with a prominent law firm, at which you have to *try* to not get a job offer, and which pays well over $100K starting salary. In fact, all of the other people with the same scholarship got similar positions this summer. Yes, even in this economy.

You can go on telling folks to negotiate away scholarship stipulations under the misguided notion that somehow, in this age of entitlement, a school's low rank is an indication of whether it should have the gaul to ask for some type of checks and balances on a very generous offer, or understand that there's risks in everything.

I'll check back in a year after I graduate, pass the bar, and start work, and have a good laugh at all the responses.

Cheers and thank you to all who sincerely congratulated me on my success.

Disclaimer: top 5% outcome

http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school= ... al-chicago

Bronte wrote:Gotta hand it to stugots26 for coming back two years in a row to vindicate himself. But the facts remain. Only 5% of John Marshal grads get a similar outcome according to LST. And, contrary to stugots repeated insistence, many law schools do provide full rides without stipulations, and negotiating scholarships is standard paractice at schools of whatever rank.