Boalt 3L worth returning to school? (Employment Prospects) Forum

[thecynic69]

Though I ultimately think you should stay in school, I feel I should advise against the logic that goes "I have paid x and invested y time. I must stay in school." These are sunk costs and are not important considerations. The question you have to ask yourself is: is it worth 73k (or w/e figure) for a Boalt degree, given a realistic expectation of graduating top 25%/with honors. I think the answer is yes, even if not so much in the short run. My answer shifts to a no if you have other valid options for graduating with a Boalt degree, such as completing your JD as a visiting student (at a cheaper school). Other options include coming back to your legal studies after working your finance job (assuming the legal market recovers within a reasonable time frame). I am not a huge fan of this last option because I think it is unlikely that a person would return to complete their JD, even if it were eventually the smart thing to do (any given yr would seem to be the wrong yr, it'd always be something you'd do next yr), but it is not an altogether bad option. But I digress. The short and simple point: ignore sunk costs.

[shoeshine]

I've been given until Monday by summer employer and new employer to finalize a decision, though fortunately all parties are understanding. I agree that there's a lot of 0L ignorance that a job will be a given or that a big finance firm is going to care if someone has a JD. 65k is just way more money than I can expect to earn as a Boalt grad, so it seems like a no brainer to me. I don't pay 73 grand, and earn more money than I would be able to earn in the legal field. Seems unjustifiable to stay in school.

I think you should drop out. You honestly seem to be the dumbest rising 3L on the planet. If you could do math and look past your immediate employment prospects you would see how you are wasting the 120k you already spent. I am not surprised you struck out at OCI.

[thecynic69]

I've been given until Monday by summer employer and new employer to finalize a decision, though fortunately all parties are understanding. I agree that there's a lot of 0L ignorance that a job will be a given or that a big finance firm is going to care if someone has a JD. 65k is just way more money than I can expect to earn as a Boalt grad, so it seems like a no brainer to me. I don't pay 73 grand, and earn more money than I would be able to earn in the legal field. Seems unjustifiable to stay in school.

I think you should drop out. You honestly seem to be the dumbest rising 3L on the planet. If you could do math and look past your immediate employment prospects you would see how you are wasting the 120k you already spent. I am not surprised you struck out at OCI.

Wow, I point out the sunk cost fallacy, and in the very next post, there it is again. OP is never going to get his 120k back. Only Q is if Boalt is worth 73k etc. I vote yes. Arguments that he has to do the 120k he has already paid justice are just plain awful.

[shoeshine]

Your argument only makes sense if he had paid the "sunk costs" out of pocket. Since he borrowed it in loans he can't just forget those costs. He must to pay them back. It is true that the money he already borrowed he will have to pay back either way but he needs to consider if finishing will put him in a better position to pay those loans back. Thus the debt is relevant.

If he isn't retarded (he sounds like he might be) then the JD should give him greater earning potential over his lifetime.

Had he paid it all in cash, I would agree that "sunk costs" are not relevant.

[thesealocust]

You argument only makes sense if he had paid the "sunk costs" out of pocket. Since he borrowed it in loans he can't just forget those costs. He has to pay them back. It is true that the money he already borrowed he will have to pay back either way but he needs to consider if finishing will put him in a better position to pay those loans back. Thus the debt is relevant.

If he isn't retarded (he sounds like he might be) then the JD should give him greater earning potential over his lifetime.

Had he paid it all in cash I would agree that your sunk cost theory holds more weight.

oh my god. This post is aggressively unintelligent. This is like, what happens when stupid takes steroids and flies into a blind rage, hell bent on destroying rational thought and any opportunity for intellectual advancement it sees. I may actually dumber for having clicked 'view new posts' and read this post.

I think my brain might be bleeding.

Edit: I just reread it. This is actually the stupidest thing I have ever seen somebody attempt to articulate on TLS. This is it. This is the high (low?) watermark. This is as bad as it gets.

[vanwinkle]

The time to drop out was last year. It'd be ludicrous to drop out now that you've invested over 100K in your Boalt degree.

This.

The "sunk costs" argument is bullshit. Two reasons:

1) The cost to you will likely be the same either way. If you've already paid in over $120K, you're going to be relying on IBR to bail your ass out on at least that much. With IBR it doesn't really matter if you owe $120K or $200K, you're making the same payments and (whether you get the JD or not) you'll probably never make enough to even make interest payments on that much debt either way. You'll just be riding out the 25 years until it gets forgiven automagically by the fed, so you may as well actually have the JD at the same cost to you.

2) There is at least a marginal chance that actually finishing law school and getting the JD will lead to better employment opportunities. In this case, given that the cost to you would be the same (see point #1), you may as well just get the degree.

[shoeshine]

oh my god. This post is aggressively unintelligent. This is like, what happens when stupid takes steroids and flies into a blind rage, hell bent on destroying rational thought and any opportunity for intellectual advancement it sees. I may actually dumber for having clicked 'view new posts' and read this post.

I think my brain might be bleeding.

Edit: I just reread it. This is actually the stupidest thing I have ever seen somebody attempt to articulate on TLS. This is it. This is the high (low?) watermark. This is as bad as it gets.

You mad bro?

[boaltrising3l]

The time to drop out was last year. It'd be ludicrous to drop out now that you've invested over 100K in your Boalt degree.

This.

The "sunk costs" argument is bullshit. Two reasons:

1) The cost to you will likely be the same either way. If you've already paid in over $120K, you're going to be relying on IBR to bail your ass out on at least that much. With IBR it doesn't really matter if you owe $120K or $200K, you're making the same payments and (whether you get the JD or not) you'll probably never make enough to even make interest payments on that much debt either way. You'll just be riding out the 25 years until it gets forgiven automagically by the fed, so you may as well actually have the JD at the same cost to you.

2) There is at least a marginal chance that actually finishing law school and getting the JD will lead to better employment opportunities. In this case, given that the cost to you would be the same (see point #1), you may as well just get the degree.

Have to disagree unless I have mistaken Assumptions. There is no guarantee that I will be able to get a similar Finance position next year, can't assume that will be available.

at 100k, the loans are pretty repayable at 65k with opportunity to obviously earn more.

My grades are certainly too low for a fed gov position, top 25% at Boalt just ain't gonna cut it. So realistically my best option is a private firm. I've asked my career office what to expect from non biglaw private firm work. They said typically around 15-20 dollars an hour.

At that rate I'm looking at making in the ballpark of 30-40k a year making it completely unrepayable. At best it seems like I'd be taking a 25k pay cut even if I get a better paying job in law. Don't see how this is justifiable unless somehow I'm able to get Biglaw in the future (and I'm certainly not sure about that).

[Curry]

I find it unbelievably difficult to believe that top 25% at boalt can't get a government gig.

[in my eyes]

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't these NLJ250 #s you guys quote religiously based on heavily skewed self reported data??

I believe OP isn't a flame. At Temple (not Boalt but not Widener) we have several top 5-10% students with LR who couldn't find ANY legal employment. This includes low paying gov jobs and shitlaw.

Many of you 0Ls have no idea just how bad the job market was / still is.

[thesealocust]

I find it unbelievably difficult to believe that top 25% at boalt can't get a government gig.

OP is overstating a little, but not much. Most entry level federal positions will be all but foreclosed to a top 25% at boalt student. The federal government, like many legal employers, picks up a lot of its attorneys as laterals from big firms after a few years. The students it hire straight out are often off of the clerkship track into honors programs, frequently after spending at least part of their 2L summer at the firm.

There are exceptions, but for any given person at top 25% the odds of landing a federal government job are heavily stacked against them. So, believe it.

[bilbobaggins]

I find it unbelievably difficult to believe that top 25% at boalt can't get a government gig.

OP is overstating a little, but not much. Most entry level federal positions will be all but foreclosed to a top 25% at boalt student. The federal government, like many legal employers, picks up a lot of its attorneys as laterals from big firms after a few years. The students it hire straight out are often off of the clerkship track into honors programs, frequently after spending at least part of their 2L summer at the firm.

There are exceptions, but for any given person at top 25% the odds of landing a federal government job are heavily stacked against them. So, believe it.

This isn't true. I know many Boalt grads who have federal govt. jobs and they never worked at firms. However, they did work for the federal govt. during their summers.

[boaltrising3l]

So it appears to me the best option for someone in this position is prob state clerkship or 40k shitlaw. Are there any other options people have heard of for grads of T10 schools?

[lawschoolROCKS22]

Local PD/DA's offices. The hours are typically pretty good, and you won't have clients calling you up to complain about billing them too much. I think that these jobs normally pay in the 40-50K range for entry level positions. Sounds like a pretty good alternative to shitlaw. However, these jobs are getting pretty tough to find right now, and a lot of them are only willing to hire people that are willing to work for free for a year.

[timbs4339]

If your job is in finance, having that JD in the future would open up doors to the CFO route... Obviously nothing to hang your hat on, but I think you're making a monumental mistake buddy... Think about your career trajectory in 20 years? That Boalt JD, very possibly at Cum Laude, will make a huge diff in terms of landing a C-Suite position when your resume is being reviewed by a board of directors...

Just... a terrible mistake, but I understand your situation is tough.

This post doesn't even have a cursory relationship with the truth. Have you even started law school yet?

No but I've been a CPA for the last three years and know how finance functions work... JD's have an advantage in pursuing the CFO route and you don't need a special degree to know that... I've met a couple CFO's with JD's, and my former partner advised getting a JD (before he knew I had any intention of getting one) is one way to get in if I were ever interested in going CFO...

But I dunno. I guess your eyes are closed until the magic moment you arrive at your first class, and then you magically have an opinion that matters.

Clearly, you don't need it for any business job. But it can actually help. Especially when you're already 2/3 done with getting the degree. It's not something that would immediately benefit you though, no. That's true. If you're capable of projecting more than five years into the future though, you could see how it could be an advantage.

Do you know the work background of the executives with JDs? If they started out at law firms and then lateraled over before rising into an executive position (Erin Callan springs to mind) that doesn't really help OP. OP isn't likely to get the kind of work experience (transactional or tax) that would qualify him for an exective position anywhere other than biglaw.

[Anonymous User]

I dont know why so many people criticize OP for being a flame, I think OP's sincere without inquiring whether the 30% number is accurate. It might be a little bit off, but that's not the point here.

Cal legal market is more fucked than some people imagine. People keep talking about S has a rather small class and Boalt is No. 2 in the state, but most likely Boalt kids are competing against HYCCNers for SF/SV SA positions.

To answer OP's question, I guess OP should not drop out. It really depends on whether you want to become a lawyer. Actually to laymen graduating from Boalt means a lot, it is still a rather impressive name outside the legal market. Given OP's confident that s/he could return to previous employers, I assume OP's pre-law background is also solid. With that combined, OP should be able to land some non-law stuffs.

If you want to become a lawyer, then you shouldn’t drop out, but I dont know of your chances graduating with a decent job offer in hand.

Good luck!

[bass08]

The time to drop out was last year. It'd be ludicrous to drop out now that you've invested over 100K in your Boalt degree.

This.

The "sunk costs" argument is bullshit. Two reasons:

1) The cost to you will likely be the same either way. If you've already paid in over $120K, you're going to be relying on IBR to bail your ass out on at least that much. With IBR it doesn't really matter if you owe $120K or $200K, you're making the same payments and (whether you get the JD or not) you'll probably never make enough to even make interest payments on that much debt either way. You'll just be riding out the 25 years until it gets forgiven automagically by the fed, so you may as well actually have the JD at the same cost to you.

2) There is at least a marginal chance that actually finishing law school and getting the JD will lead to better employment opportunities. In this case, given that the cost to you would be the same (see point #1), you may as well just get the degree.

Have to disagree unless I have mistaken Assumptions. There is no guarantee that I will be able to get a similar Finance position next year, can't assume that will be available.

at 100k, the loans are pretty repayable at 65k with opportunity to obviously earn more.

My grades are certainly too low for a fed gov position, top 25% at Boalt just ain't gonna cut it. So realistically my best option is a private firm. I've asked my career office what to expect from non biglaw private firm work. They said typically around 15-20 dollars an hour.

At that rate I'm looking at making in the ballpark of 30-40k a year making it completely unrepayable. At best it seems like I'd be taking a 25k pay cut even if I get a better paying job in law. Don't see how this is justifiable unless somehow I'm able to get Biglaw in the future (and I'm certainly not sure about that).

Lmao. Flame on, brother.

[boaltrising3l]

explain what is flame about this?

[gwuorbust]

Have to disagree unless I have mistaken Assumptions. There is no guarantee that I will be able to get a similar Finance position next year, can't assume that will be available.

at 100k, the loans are pretty repayable at 65k with opportunity to obviously earn more.

My grades are certainly too low for a fed gov position, top 25% at Boalt just ain't gonna cut it. So realistically my best option is a private firm. I've asked my career office what to expect from non biglaw private firm work. They said typically around 15-20 dollars an hour.

At that rate I'm looking at making in the ballpark of 30-40k a year making it completely unrepayable. At best it seems like I'd be taking a 25k pay cut even if I get a better paying job in law. Don't see how this is justifiable unless somehow I'm able to get Biglaw in the future (and I'm certainly not sure about that).

Lmao. Flame on, brother.

notsureifsrs

[Rock-N-Roll]

...since this thread has not yet died...

Something that has been bothering me is the top 25% class rank being mentioned in this thread.

Boalt does not release the rank of their students for the purpose of Big Law, PI, or Gov positions, but only for clerkships.

And as far as guessing class rank goes: With the exception of a student with all HHs or all Ps no one including prospective employers can estimate a Boalt student's rank when considering all possible grade distributions (that is, it's not always the same people getting Hs and HHs in every class).

So OP's belief that he or she is in top 25% at Boalt would have no real practical meaning as far as employment prospects.

[bass08]

explain what is flame about this?

I believe you're a flame simply by the way you've conducted yourself in this thread. I'm not going to spend time explaining it.

However, I can guarantee career services didn't tell you that private firms typically start out at $15-20 an hour. At least not in the Bay Area, and not in the private sector. Non profit attorneys may start out somewhere in the vicinity of $40k annually, but, again, this will depend on the non profit.

[harborleaguemvp]

I am also a rising Boalt 3L and there actually is a rather crude way to approximate class rank. There was a formula posted on some thread a few years ago (HH=5; H=3;P=2 Multiply by Units/Divide by Total Units) something to that effect. >3.0 was top 20% etc. Take it for what its worth.

[Rock-N-Roll]

I am also a rising Boalt 3L and there actually is a rather crude way to approximate class rank. There was a formula posted on some thread a few years ago (HH=5; H=3;P=2 Multiply by Units/Divide by Total Units) something to that effect. >3.0 was top 20% etc. Take it for what its worth.

Thanks for posting. I don't want to get into a debate over whether or not a formula like you posted really works (I don't think it does though). I'm just trying to say that one would expect that using a formula like that would have no practical value in job hunting, because employers don't know and can't properly estimate your rank. I would think that employers just know that HH is better than H which is better than P and having more of the latter is not as good as having more of the former, right?

If not a flame, I believe the OP has painted an inaccurate picture regarding the strength of his or her application by quoting top 25%. Only Boalt knows the actual ranking which can differ wildly from an estimate, and they will only release it for those applying for clerkship.

[boaltrising3l]

Re: career office advice. I remember this conversation vividly after OCI. I asked the career office lady what Boalt grads make in the private sector non-biglaw market. She said 15-20 dollars an hour. Me and many other friends can recall this advice. I also thought this number was absurdly low FWIW.

I am also a rising Boalt 3L and there actually is a rather crude way to approximate class rank. There was a formula posted on some thread a few years ago (HH=5; H=3;P=2 Multiply by Units/Divide by Total Units) something to that effect. >3.0 was top 20% etc. Take it for what its worth.

If that's really true and I dont think you'd make that up it's worth staying and I would be competitive (have a 3.1 so better than top 20%), so thanks for posting that.

Lol at Rock-N-Roll, employers can tell more or less where you fall based on past experience. For instance, at Gibson Dunn anyone with less than 3.0 is dinged and resume trashed. For Kirkland, you need at least 2 HHs and more HHs than Ps or you get trashed. Employers are not dumb, they interview enough Boalt people to know where they stand.

[thecynic69]

Well if what you say is true (I haven't gone through the loan process so I can only assume it is), it isn't the sunk costs argument that suffers, but the general concern about taking on more loans. Your point is just: OP is so far in debt that more debt literally does not matter, given the way you repay loans/fact that loans are forgiven after 25 years.

I maintain the sunk cost analysis is useful. All you are telling me is that cost of attending next year is effectively 0. It is still the case that OP's sunk costs do not matter in the way I suggested: the fact that he has spent 100k for a "good" does not mean he should therefore spend more on that "good". Again, your point actually goes to whether he needs to spend more for that "good". While I agree that OP's sunk costs are the reason why he actually doesn't have to pay anymore for the "good", I stick by my logic that having paid x dollars for something does not mean you ought to pay full price-x for that thing.

But thanks for responding to my post respectfully and all...always glad when mods set a good example.

The time to drop out was last year. It'd be ludicrous to drop out now that you've invested over 100K in your Boalt degree.

This.

The "sunk costs" argument is bullshit. Two reasons:

1) The cost to you will likely be the same either way. If you've already paid in over $120K, you're going to be relying on IBR to bail your ass out on at least that much. With IBR it doesn't really matter if you owe $120K or $200K, you're making the same payments and (whether you get the JD or not) you'll probably never make enough to even make interest payments on that much debt either way. You'll just be riding out the 25 years until it gets forgiven automagically by the fed, so you may as well actually have the JD at the same cost to you.

2) There is at least a marginal chance that actually finishing law school and getting the JD will lead to better employment opportunities. In this case, given that the cost to you would be the same (see point #1), you may as well just get the degree.