UCLA + LR --> Berkeley? Forum

[27AppleTarts]

Completely torn on this. I applied to H & S, but probably don't have the stats to get in (UCLA doesn't rank, but ~3.7, probably top ~10-20%). I made LR at UCLA.

Admitted to Berkeley last week. Berkeley's LR write-on is at the end of July, but no guarantees I'll make it, and I won't find out until after my acceptance is due.

I definitely want to clerk. I'm interested in both BigLaw and DOJ/USAO. I'm interested in tech law, but not completely committed to it. I have a strong preference for practicing in CA but no preference between LA and SF.

Should I do the transfer?

[bankruptedcasino]

Assuming you're paying in-state tuition for UCLA and you're not on any form of scholarship there, I'd transfer.

My logic: Boalt is one of the best. You could stand a decent shot of walking into the DOJ/USAO from there. I'm not sure how UCLA with Law Review compares, but I know that the feds like prestige and it doesn't get more prestigious than Boalt.

Congratulations to you. Many a 1L wish they were in this kind of predicament.

[NoleinNY]

Congratulations to you. Many a 1L wish they were in this kind of predicament.

This.

Also, just curious, would you be giving up scholarship $$$ from UCLA if you transferred?

[MrKappus]

Completely torn on this. I applied to H & S, but probably don't have the stats to get in (UCLA doesn't rank, but ~3.7, probably top ~10-20%). I made LR at UCLA.

Admitted to Berkeley last week. Berkeley's LR write-on is at the end of July, but no guarantees I'll make it, and I won't find out until after my acceptance is due.

I definitely want to clerk. I'm interested in both BigLaw and DOJ/USAO. I'm interested in tech law, but not completely committed to it. I have a strong preference for practicing in CA but no preference between LA and SF.

Should I do the transfer?

If you don't crack the top 10% (preferably top 5%), you don't stand much of a chance at H or S. You should go to Berkeley.

[27AppleTarts]

Thanks, I do realize I'm in a good position, and I know things will work out either way -- I just don't want to go through the logistical hassle of transferring if there isn't a high chance of measurable benefit.

I have a tiny scholarship that won't make a difference in the long run, so it's not really a factor.

Thank you to everyone for your help in making this decision! Berkeley wants to know by July 15, so I don't have much time.

[NoleinNY]

After additional thought, I think transferring to Cal may not be worth it. That LR status is a strong + for clerkships (or so goes TLS conventional wisdom; as an 0L I hesitate to make definitive statements on such matters.) Stanford and Harvard are horses of a different color. For academia, the above still stands.

Of course, if you want better prestige + more BigLaw or Fed options then by all means, ditch your bruins for some golden bears.

[transplantedbuckeye]

Personally, I would probably stay because you are at/near the top of the class and have LR, which I think is definitely going to help you more than the risk of losing it will.

[megaTTTron]

Personally, I would probably stay because you are at/near the top of the class and have LR, which I think is definitely going to help you more than the risk of losing it will.

While this is good advice, I still think you should transfer. I just think the jump is big enough to warrant leaving. Plus, you can still put LR on your resume, and your UCLA grades. But if you want LA, staying is totally reasonable.

Also -- maybe you could leverage a bigger scholly at UCLA?

[2009 Prospective]

Personally, I would probably stay because you are at/near the top of the class and have LR, which I think is definitely going to help you more than the risk of losing it will.

While this is good advice, I still think you should transfer. I just think the jump is big enough to warrant leaving. Plus, you can still put LR on your resume, and your UCLA grades. But if you want LA, staying is totally reasonable.

Also -- maybe you could leverage a bigger scholly at UCLA?

I disagree. If I were OP, I would stay unless I got into Stanford. Either way, OP should definitely talk to the appropriate people though to see if extra scholarship money could be leveraged.

[MrKappus]

Plus, you can still put LR on your resume...

No.

[2009 Prospective]

Plus, you can still put LR on your resume...

No.

+1

Being able to put "invited to LR" at old school won't help at all for obtaining clerkships. I would think top of the class and law review at UCLA could very well put OP in a better position for clerkships than Berkley w/o a journal.

[MrKappus]

Plus, you can still put LR on your resume...

No.

+1

Being able to put "invited to LR" at old school won't help at all for obtaining clerkships. I would think top of the class and law review at UCLA could very well put OP in a better position for clerkships than Berkley w/o a journal.

+1. (Am I +1-ing myself? Oops.) If it's possible to get on Berkeley's LR, then you could be OK. But the value of LR is the research/cite-check skills it gives you. This is a 1L opinion, but I just don't think "invited to LR" will carry the same weight.

[Attucks]

as an 0L I hesitate to make definitive statements on such matters

[Journeybound]

I'm not sure if it matters, but at Berkeley you can join most journals, other than LR, without doing a write-on. I know that some who get into academia only participate on secondary journals. Would it make a huge difference at Berkeley to be on a secondary journal instead of LR for clerkships? Maybe being a staff editor might help?

[megaTTTron]

Plus, you can still put LR on your resume...

No.

+1

Being able to put "invited to LR" at old school won't help at all for obtaining clerkships. I would think top of the class and law review at UCLA could very well put OP in a better position for clerkships than Berkley w/o a journal.

+1. (Am I +1-ing myself? Oops.) If it's possible to get on Berkeley's LR, then you could be OK. But the value of LR is the research/cite-check skills it gives you. This is a 1L opinion, but I just don't think "invited to LR" will carry the same weight.

Okay, I did not realize that OP's objective was to obtain a clerkship -- no doubt "invited to join" will not carry as much weight as actually being on LR. HOWEVER, you are wrong to say it will not carry much weight. TToN experienced this first hand with firms at Chicago's OCI:

If it isn't too late, you really should do the write-on at your original school. Don't underestimate how much the "accepted to blahblahblah law review" line seems to help at OCI. A mistake I learned the hard way. ("You didn't make it on to law review." "Well, I was accepted to transfer bef.." "I see you got on to CJIL. Ok." *ugh*.) Other transfers commented that interviewers seemed to notice that they made LR at the old schools.

See: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&start=50

[dbt]

I would stay put. Berkeley is an excellent school, but I think the gap between UCLA + LR and Berkeley without is insignificant.

[MrKappus]

Okay, I did not realize that OP's objective was to obtain a clerkship -- no doubt "invited to join" will not carry as much weight as actually being on LR. HOWEVER, you are wrong to say it will not carry much weight. TToN experienced this first hand with firms at Chicago's OCI:

This makes no sense. Sorry. If you graded on, then the firms know you did (or could have). If you didn't, then you didn't get any of the actual experience of doing research and checking cites (which is why LR is valued), so you don't get the benefits of doing so. Obvious.

P.S. TToN (whoever that is) and his/her experience during OCI has nothing to do w/ clerkships.

[sbalive]

Agreed with above, definitely stay at UCLA & on LR.

[megaTTTron]

Okay, I did not realize that OP's objective was to obtain a clerkship -- no doubt "invited to join" will not carry as much weight as actually being on LR. HOWEVER, you are wrong to say it will not carry much weight. TToN experienced this first hand with firms at Chicago's OCI:

This makes no sense. Sorry. If you graded on, then the firms know you did (or could have). If you didn't, then you didn't get any of the actual experience of doing research and checking cites (which is why LR is valued), so you don't get the benefits of doing so. Obvious.

P.S. TToN (whoever that is) and his/her experience during OCI has nothing to do w/ clerkships.

not carry much =/= not carry as much

read closely my friend.

Still, I think it's wrong to write off "invited to join" as worthless. First of all, not all LRs are grade-on, many require the write-on even with stellar grades. If UCLA's is purely grade-on then, correct, it will carry even less weight.

As I said, with clerkships, it will not carry as much weight as actual LR experience. But it will carry weight at OCI. That was my point. If OP is SOLELY interested in clerkships, then stay no doubt (I didn't glean that from the OP), but if OP isn't sure, then my advice is still to transfer.

[MrKappus]

not carry much =/= not carry as much

read closely my friend.

Still, I think it's wrong to write off "invited to join" as worthless. First of all, not all LRs are grade-on, many require the write-on even with stellar grades. If UCLA's is purely grade-on then, correct, it will carry even less weight.

As I said, with clerkships, it will not carry as much weight as actual LR experience. But it will carry weight at OCI. That was my point. If OP is SOLELY interested in clerkships, then stay no doubt (I didn't glean that from the OP), but if OP isn't sure, then my advice is still to transfer.

Transferring w/o a journal doesn't leave you in great shape wrt clerkships. "Invited to join" means precisely what most right-thinking ppl think it does. Nothing.

[megaTTTron]

not carry much =/= not carry as much

read closely my friend.

Still, I think it's wrong to write off "invited to join" as worthless. First of all, not all LRs are grade-on, many require the write-on even with stellar grades. If UCLA's is purely grade-on then, correct, it will carry even less weight.

As I said, with clerkships, it will not carry as much weight as actual LR experience. But it will carry weight at OCI. That was my point. If OP is SOLELY interested in clerkships, then stay no doubt (I didn't glean that from the OP), but if OP isn't sure, then my advice is still to transfer.

Transferring w/o a journal doesn't leave you in great shape wrt clerkships. "Invited to join" means precisely what most right-thinking ppl think it does. Nothing.

Of course it doesn't leave you in "great shape" I totally agree, I never said it did.

But man, you're killin' me with the second sentence, lol. Really? Haha. You sound like a whiny 0L.

[MrKappus]

Of course it doesn't leave you in "great shape" I totally agree, I never said it did.

But man, you're killin' me with the second sentence, lol. Really? Haha. You sound like a whiny 0L.

Super. We agree. "Invited to join" wrt to clerkships means nothing.

[megaTTTron]

Of course it doesn't leave you in "great shape" I totally agree, I never said it did.

But man, you're killin' me with the second sentence, lol. Really? Haha. You sound like a whiny 0L.

Super. We agree. "Invited to join" wrt to clerkships means nothing.

Haha, you're like one of those kids who says "I should be a lawyer because I love to argue!" When in reality you just refused to acknowledge any other point of view besides your own, and when you're confronted with a different perspective you get defensive.

Chill out my friend.

[megaTTTron]

Of course it doesn't leave you in "great shape" I totally agree, I never said it did.

But man, you're killin' me with the second sentence, lol. Really? Haha. You sound like a whiny 0L.

Super. We agree. "Invited to join" wrt to clerkships means nothing.

Double post - I'm retarded.

Haha. but actually you keep doing this thing where you jump to absolutes. Maybe sarcasm I'm just not getting lol.

I said it doesn't put you in great shape, which you equated to "worth nothing." Haha.

[MrKappus]

^ Saw your post history. Did better than you, at a better school. Your superiority complex just amuses me.