C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
Monochromatic Oeuvre
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Monochromatic Oeuvre » Tue Nov 05, 2013 9:06 am

BigZuck wrote:
scotth724 wrote:
BigZuck wrote:
Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:Worth noting that past UT/UCLA/USC/Vandy, employment statistics within a particular USNWR tier are better correlated with location than with markets. To the extent that applicants use employment statistics at all to make their decisions, you'll see a shift away from "small-town" schools not because applicants don't want to spend three years there (although they may not want to) but because Biglaw doesn't want to recruit there. A big part of why schools like BC and Fordham outperform their rankings is that there are a relatively greater number of interviews conducted there.

It isn't hard to see why. Suppose you are a NYC firm with targets of top 10% for a T1 school. And suppose about a third of that won't interview with you (for self-selection reasons). If you go to Fordham, you are talking about doing ~30 interviews--definitely a worthy endeavor when it's right down the street. If you go to W&L, this is what, eight or nine potential interviewees? The odds that you'll even make an offer to one of that group are probably below 50-50, much less that it will actually be accepted. Getting to Lexington is then a two-hour flight plus a three-hour car ride. That's a giant hassle for a very small likelihood someone from W&L is actually going to join your firm. Remember, this is all time someone could be billing. And so understandably, many don't bother. W&L students can still send resumes and whatnot, but of course the chances of actually getting hired when you interview are exponentially greater. A lot of firms are only going to take those long trips if it turns into 75 interviews or so (like in Charlottesville or Durham).


This is some pretty disgustingly virulent anti-Durham trolling. You know they have an airport there in Raleigh, right bro? The flight is only like an hour and a half tops and then maybe a half hour drive from the airport to Duke. I wouldn't say two hours is a "long trip"

NYC to Durham is a "long trip." Anyways, you're missing the point that this doesn't apply to the T14.


No, no, I got the point, typical Mono authoritative tone and all :)


Just a hop, skip and a jump from all DAT RALEIGH BIGLAW THO.

Ithaca would be a better example but I think Cornell does its OCI in Manhattan. (Side note: Do other schools do this? Wouldn't it be advantage for someone like UIUC to do OCI in Chicago, or UGA to do it in Atlanta?) None of the other T14 schools are in super-irrelevant locations, although I think we're getting to the point where Durham is a more relevant place than Ann Arbor for the first time in over 100 years. Durham is still quite a haul from any relevant legal market, though. But of course, T14 will be fine. The people really getting screwed job-wise are the Iowas of the world who LOOK LIKE they have a decent USNWR rank but are actually too small and isolated to attract any actual employers.

On another note, I'd argue W&L is the worst law school in the country when it comes to a combination of high tuition, bad job prospects, and potential to delude an applicant into thinking they're going to a good school. Anyone could see that Cooley and its ilk are awful by looking at USNWR. It's not all that unreasonable to go through the process thinking #26 was probably a pretty good school and...wow, you'd be lucky to even have a job out of there. The most dangerous schools are the ones that don't have the same laughable quality of the TTTs but are just as ruinous a life choice.

User avatar
Lavitz
Posts: 3098
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 1:39 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Lavitz » Tue Nov 05, 2013 9:33 am

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:Ithaca would be a better example but I think Cornell does its OCI in Manhattan.

We do.

User avatar
Crowing
Posts: 2636
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:20 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Crowing » Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:44 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:On another note, I'd argue W&L is the worst law school in the country when it comes to a combination of high tuition, bad job prospects, and potential to delude an applicant into thinking they're going to a good school. Anyone could see that Cooley and its ilk are awful by looking at USNWR. It's not all that unreasonable to go through the process thinking #26 was probably a pretty good school and...wow, you'd be lucky to even have a job out of there. The most dangerous schools are the ones that don't have the same laughable quality of the TTTs but are just as ruinous a life choice.


I think the word is getting out now, but 2 years ago American was probably the worst trap in the country.

pancho
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:05 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby pancho » Tue Nov 05, 2013 11:25 pm

Tiago Splitter wrote:
ohpobrecito wrote:
pancho wrote:Why has Michigan fallen so much over the last 30-40 years? It used to be solidly in the T5. Now it's clinging to the T10.

ETA: And, for that matter, what changed at Duke from the 90s to the 00s? Or is it a relative thing?


They haven't, really. They've held steady in the lower half of the top ten since they were previously ranked second with different criteria. Their employment stats are comparable to UVA when you factor in school-funded jerbs. It's a TLS myth.


I'm not sure it's a myth. You're right that in the old US News rankings from 1987 Michigan was top 3 and hasn't been that high since, but there is a consensus that back in the 60's Michigan was universally considered a top 5 law school, which is what the question seemed to be getting at.


Indeed.

cotiger wrote:
ohpobrecito wrote:
pancho wrote:Why has Michigan fallen so much over the last 30-40 years? It used to be solidly in the T5. Now it's clinging to the T10.

ETA: And, for that matter, what changed at Duke from the 90s to the 00s? Or is it a relative thing?


They haven't, really. They've held steady in the lower half of the top ten since they were previously ranked second with different criteria. Their employment stats are comparable to UVA when you factor in school-funded jerbs. It's a TLS myth.


Since 1990, Michigan has been on a consistent, though slow, slide down the USNWR from 6 to 9. Nothing too drastic, but you can definitely spot a trend.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... SlE&gid=45


Yes, and that downward trend is also evident in the Duke graph. From 1990-2001 it was never lower than 10th and it was as high as 7th. Since 2002 it has never been higher than 10th and it has been as low as 12th.

Is Duke really more of a peer to G than to MPVB as the DCNG tranche would suggest?

User avatar
cotiger
Posts: 1648
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby cotiger » Tue Nov 05, 2013 11:40 pm

pancho wrote:Yes, and that downward trend is also evident in the Duke graph. From 1990-2001 it was never lower than 10th and it was as high as 7th. Since 2002 it has never been higher than 10th and it has been as low as 12th.

Is Duke really more of a peer to G than to MPVB as the DCNG tranche would suggest?


There's really nothing in the employment data to support such a distinction between those two clusterings. MVBDNC are all pretty much the same (though Michigan's numbers are a bit lower, and note that Penn is not included). Georgetown is then below that in a class of its own.

BigZuck
Posts: 10880
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby BigZuck » Tue Nov 05, 2013 11:42 pm

pancho wrote:
Tiago Splitter wrote:
ohpobrecito wrote:
pancho wrote:Why has Michigan fallen so much over the last 30-40 years? It used to be solidly in the T5. Now it's clinging to the T10.

ETA: And, for that matter, what changed at Duke from the 90s to the 00s? Or is it a relative thing?


They haven't, really. They've held steady in the lower half of the top ten since they were previously ranked second with different criteria. Their employment stats are comparable to UVA when you factor in school-funded jerbs. It's a TLS myth.


I'm not sure it's a myth. You're right that in the old US News rankings from 1987 Michigan was top 3 and hasn't been that high since, but there is a consensus that back in the 60's Michigan was universally considered a top 5 law school, which is what the question seemed to be getting at.


Indeed.

cotiger wrote:
ohpobrecito wrote:
pancho wrote:Why has Michigan fallen so much over the last 30-40 years? It used to be solidly in the T5. Now it's clinging to the T10.

ETA: And, for that matter, what changed at Duke from the 90s to the 00s? Or is it a relative thing?


They haven't, really. They've held steady in the lower half of the top ten since they were previously ranked second with different criteria. Their employment stats are comparable to UVA when you factor in school-funded jerbs. It's a TLS myth.


Since 1990, Michigan has been on a consistent, though slow, slide down the USNWR from 6 to 9. Nothing too drastic, but you can definitely spot a trend.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... SlE&gid=45


Yes, and that downward trend is also evident in the Duke graph. From 1990-2001 it was never lower than 10th and it was as high as 7th. Since 2002 it has never been higher than 10th and it has been as low as 12th.

Is Duke really more of a peer to G than to MPVB as the DCNG tranche would suggest?


wat

Duke's employment numbers are better than Michigan's

#HYS
#CCNP
#VBDCN
#t124lyfe

But seriously, those tiers are based on admissions

User avatar
cotiger
Posts: 1648
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby cotiger » Tue Nov 05, 2013 11:46 pm

BigZuck wrote:#HYS
#CCNP
#VBDCN
#t124lyfe


But for reals.

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby stillwater » Tue Nov 05, 2013 11:58 pm

#HYS
#CC
#NP
#VBDCN
#t124lyfe

the new troof

pancho
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:05 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby pancho » Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:36 am

cotiger wrote:
pancho wrote:Yes, and that downward trend is also evident in the Duke graph. From 1990-2001 it was never lower than 10th and it was as high as 7th. Since 2002 it has never been higher than 10th and it has been as low as 12th.

Is Duke really more of a peer to G than to MPVB as the DCNG tranche would suggest?


There's really nothing in the employment data to support such a distinction between those two clusterings. MVBDNC are all pretty much the same (though Michigan's numbers are a bit lower, and note that Penn is not included). Georgetown is then below that in a class of its own.


What accounts for the underlined?

Does the data support Penn belonging with NYU or should we also consider them in classes of their own?

HYS
CC
N
P
MVBDNC

This 8-13 grouping you suggest seems to make a lot more sense than the MVB / DNC division.

User avatar
cotiger
Posts: 1648
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby cotiger » Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:53 am

pancho wrote:
cotiger wrote:
pancho wrote:Yes, and that downward trend is also evident in the Duke graph. From 1990-2001 it was never lower than 10th and it was as high as 7th. Since 2002 it has never been higher than 10th and it has been as low as 12th.

Is Duke really more of a peer to G than to MPVB as the DCNG tranche would suggest?


There's really nothing in the employment data to support such a distinction between those two clusterings. MVBDNC are all pretty much the same (though Michigan's numbers are a bit lower, and note that Penn is not included). Georgetown is then below that in a class of its own.


What accounts for the underlined?

Does the data support Penn belonging with NYU or should we also consider them in classes of their own?

HYS
CC
N
P
MVBDNC

This 8-13 grouping you suggest seems to make a lot more sense than the MVB / DNC division.


Michigan's biglaw+fedclerk percentages hover around 50%, while the others in that group are all within a couple of percentage points of each other around 55%-60%. On top of that, the kinds of firms that Michigan places to are typically a bit smaller than those other schools. However, their underemployment scores are on par with the others (or even slightly better), and it's at least trying to develop a reputation as a PI school, so that mostly mitigates the difference.

Yes, data supports Penn being on par with NYU. Actually has better numbers, although that fact has to be taken with a gigantic dollop of salt, as you're comparing the most PI-centric T14 to the least.

User avatar
sinfiery
Posts: 3308
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:55 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby sinfiery » Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:59 am

If P = N then P = CC too as you are likely using employment statistics as your basis for this assessment.

User avatar
cotiger
Posts: 1648
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby cotiger » Wed Nov 06, 2013 1:16 am

sinfiery wrote:If P = N then P = CC too as you are likely using employment statistics as your basis for this assessment.


Yeah, I agreed with BigZuck's CCNP grouping.

User avatar
LSATSCORES2012
Posts: 770
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 2:12 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby LSATSCORES2012 » Wed Nov 06, 2013 1:24 am

Image

because we all know it's HYSChi

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9651
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby jbagelboy » Wed Nov 06, 2013 1:25 am

LSATSCORES2012 wrote:Image

because we all know it's HYSChi

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9651
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby jbagelboy » Wed Nov 06, 2013 1:58 am

cotiger wrote:
sinfiery wrote:If P = N then P = CC too as you are likely using employment statistics as your basis for this assessment.


Yeah, I agreed with BigZuck's CCNP grouping.


3 yr Avg Fed Clerkship + Large Firm:

CHICAGO: 65.73%
COLUMBIA: 73.53%
NYU: 62.00% (much larger public interest faction)*
PENN: 71.03% (much smaller public interest faction)*

BigZuck
Posts: 10880
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby BigZuck » Wed Nov 06, 2013 2:22 am

jbagelboy wrote:
cotiger wrote:
sinfiery wrote:If P = N then P = CC too as you are likely using employment statistics as your basis for this assessment.


Yeah, I agreed with BigZuck's CCNP grouping.


3 yr Avg Fed Clerkship + Large Firm:

CHICAGO: 65.73%
COLUMBIA: 73.53%
NYU: 62.00% (much larger public interest faction)*
PENN: 71.03% (much smaller public interest faction)*


So:
CP
C
N

Did I do it right?

But seriously 0Ls, if you keep bashing Michigan and try to make CCNP a thing then the numbered Ls will get angry and start yelling at you.

User avatar
cotiger
Posts: 1648
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby cotiger » Wed Nov 06, 2013 9:34 am

BigZuck wrote:
jbagelboy wrote:3 yr Avg Fed Clerkship + Large Firm:

CHICAGO: 65.73%
COLUMBIA: 73.53%
NYU: 62.00% (much larger public interest faction)*
PENN: 71.03% (much smaller public interest faction)*


So:
CP
C
N

Did I do it right?

But seriously 0Ls, if you keep bashing Michigan and try to make CCNP a thing then the numbered Ls will get angry and start yelling at you.


No, you didn't do it right. Look, the whole grouping thing is mostly stupid/pointless. Which I know that you know, and I know that you're trying to mock.

However, to the extent that it does have some usefulness, it's to create a heuristic that makes it easier to quickly reference the possibilities or opportunities coming out certain schools. There's some stuff that's only really feasible coming out of a tippy-top school, so YHS makes sense. Then there are the schools where that tippy-top stuff is not nearly as likely but that still give you a reeeally good shot at biglaw and have very low underemployment rates (CCNP.. or not P, whatever makes you happy). Then there are the other schools that have a national profile and give you a good chance at biglaw (the lower T14). Then there's special snowflake Georgetown.

The point is not not to create a ranking system. Each school obviously has unique pluses and minuses that makes granulated ordering like CP>C>N meaningless. But those larger categories do have some usefulness for using as a shorthand.

User avatar
cotiger
Posts: 1648
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby cotiger » Wed Nov 06, 2013 10:03 am

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the reason that numbered Ls don't think Penn belongs in a group with CCN is that they don't place as well into the V-whatever firms.

Personally, that's one of those relatively minor pluses and minuses things. I think the much more relevant metrics for determining a broad category are "How easy will it be to repay my debts?" (biglaw+fedclerk) and "How likely am I to be totally screwed?" (underemployment).

On both of those, Penn fits into the ~70% biglaw+fedclerk and ~3% screwed categories along with CCN. The rest of the lower T14 hover around ~60% and ~10%. I think based on those numbers Penn without a doubt belongs with CCN rather than the lower T14.

There seems to be a larger (or at least similar) difference between Yale and Harvard/Stanford than there is between CCN and Penn, yet we still use the term YHS.

BigZuck
Posts: 10880
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby BigZuck » Wed Nov 06, 2013 10:40 am

Actually a lot of numbered Ls don't like CCNP because it removes P from MVPB. They would argue that Penn's placement ability is more aligned with MVB than CCN, it's just that Penn's big law placement is higher due largely to self-selection.

I'm inclined to look more at the raw numbers myself because, as a wise man once said, the data is shit but its all we've got. Still, my main point is that you 0Ls will be exposed to a whole world of butt hurt that you never never thought possible if you keep this up. God help you if the lounge ever gets wind of this thread.

pancho
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:05 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby pancho » Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:49 pm

BigZuck wrote:God help you if the lounge ever gets wind of this thread.


Yes, heard that's a pretty rough crowd.

californiauser
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 1:10 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby californiauser » Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:54 pm

BigZuck wrote:Actually a lot of numbered Ls don't like CCNP because it removes P from MVPB. They would argue that Penn's placement ability is more aligned with MVB than CCN, it's just that Penn's big law placement is higher due largely to self-selection.

I'm inclined to look more at the raw numbers myself because, as a wise man once said, the data is shit but its all we've got. Still, my main point is that you 0Ls will be exposed to a whole world of butt hurt that you never never thought possible if you keep this up. God help you if the lounge ever gets wind of this thread.


Penn OCI seems like a blood bath this year according to the OCI thread in the Emplyment Section. A regression to the mean perhaps.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15518
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby Tiago Splitter » Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:55 pm

californiauser wrote:Penn OCI seems like a blood bath this year according to the OCI thread in the Emplyment Section. A regression to the mean perhaps.

Those OCI threads always look ugly. Penn has had excellent biglaw placement going back at least to 2005.

User avatar
cotiger
Posts: 1648
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby cotiger » Wed Nov 06, 2013 5:19 pm

BigZuck wrote:Actually a lot of numbered Ls don't like CCNP because it removes P from MVPB. They would argue that Penn's placement ability is more aligned with MVB than CCN, it's just that Penn's big law placement is higher due largely to self-selection.

I'm inclined to look more at the raw numbers myself because, as a wise man once said, the data is shit but its all we've got. Still, my main point is that you 0Ls will be exposed to a whole world of butt hurt that you never never thought possible if you keep this up. God help you if the lounge ever gets wind of this thread.


I don't think the self-selection thing totally holds water. The rest of the lower T14 have unemployment/ST/PT scores that are 10+ (except for B at 8.3). Penn's is 3. I'm assuming people aren't self-selecting into underemployment. To be fair, last year was particularly good for Penn, but even taking a 3 year average it's Penn 6.7>Michigan 9.1>Berkeley 9.9>Cool fellowships, UVA. CCN, though, are significantly better at 3-4%.

If we just focus on placement power within firms (and federal clerkships), which takes away self-selection issues, and assign 1 point to 101-250, 3 points to 251-500, 10 points to 501+, and 10 points to federal clerkships (zero points to 100 and below), the average scores are Penn 7.8>UVA 7.4>Berkeley 7.3>Michigan 6.8. CChiN come in at 8.6, 7.6, 8.4.

Looking at it now, it does seem that Penn is closer to MVB than to CCN. Still, it's definitely inching up there, and I would hope that discussion of the relative placement of schools isn't such a sacred cow that we need to be careful about looking into it without incurring the wrath of said loungers.

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9651
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby jbagelboy » Wed Nov 06, 2013 6:14 pm

cotiger wrote:
BigZuck wrote:Actually a lot of numbered Ls don't like CCNP because it removes P from MVPB. They would argue that Penn's placement ability is more aligned with MVB than CCN, it's just that Penn's big law placement is higher due largely to self-selection.

I'm inclined to look more at the raw numbers myself because, as a wise man once said, the data is shit but its all we've got. Still, my main point is that you 0Ls will be exposed to a whole world of butt hurt that you never never thought possible if you keep this up. God help you if the lounge ever gets wind of this thread.


I don't think the self-selection thing totally holds water. The rest of the lower T14 have unemployment/ST/PT scores that are 10+ (except for B at 8.3). Penn's is 3. I'm assuming people aren't self-selecting into underemployment. To be fair, last year was particularly good for Penn, but even taking a 3 year average it's Penn 6.7>Michigan 9.1>Berkeley 9.9>Cool fellowships, UVA. CCN, though, are significantly better at 3-4%.

If we just focus on placement power within firms (and federal clerkships), which takes away self-selection issues, and assign 1 point to 101-250, 3 points to 251-500, 10 points to 501+, and 10 points to federal clerkships (zero points to 100 and below), the average scores are Penn 7.8>UVA 7.4>Berkeley 7.3>Michigan 6.8. CChiN come in at 8.6, 7.6, 8.4.

Looking at it now, it does seem that Penn is closer to MVB than to CCN. Still, it's definitely inching up there, and I would hope that discussion of the relative placement of schools isn't such a sacred cow that we need to be careful about looking into it without incurring the wrath of said loungers.


What is your rationale for the weights you assigned different firm sizes there? Just random?

User avatar
DrStudMuffin
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:54 pm

Re: C/O 2016 median lsat/gpa/class size

Postby DrStudMuffin » Wed Nov 06, 2013 6:24 pm

jbagelboy wrote:
cotiger wrote:
BigZuck wrote:Actually a lot of numbered Ls don't like CCNP because it removes P from MVPB. They would argue that Penn's placement ability is more aligned with MVB than CCN, it's just that Penn's big law placement is higher due largely to self-selection.

I'm inclined to look more at the raw numbers myself because, as a wise man once said, the data is shit but its all we've got. Still, my main point is that you 0Ls will be exposed to a whole world of butt hurt that you never never thought possible if you keep this up. God help you if the lounge ever gets wind of this thread.


I don't think the self-selection thing totally holds water. The rest of the lower T14 have unemployment/ST/PT scores that are 10+ (except for B at 8.3). Penn's is 3. I'm assuming people aren't self-selecting into underemployment. To be fair, last year was particularly good for Penn, but even taking a 3 year average it's Penn 6.7>Michigan 9.1>Berkeley 9.9>Cool fellowships, UVA. CCN, though, are significantly better at 3-4%.

If we just focus on placement power within firms (and federal clerkships), which takes away self-selection issues, and assign 1 point to 101-250, 3 points to 251-500, 10 points to 501+, and 10 points to federal clerkships (zero points to 100 and below), the average scores are Penn 7.8>UVA 7.4>Berkeley 7.3>Michigan 6.8. CChiN come in at 8.6, 7.6, 8.4.

Looking at it now, it does seem that Penn is closer to MVB than to CCN. Still, it's definitely inching up there, and I would hope that discussion of the relative placement of schools isn't such a sacred cow that we need to be careful about looking into it without incurring the wrath of said loungers.


What is your rationale for the weights you assigned different firm sizes there? Just random?


I was wondering the exact same thing.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: addie1412, Bing [Bot], l3g@l33s3, Yahoo [Bot] and 9 guests