Top Law Schools

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

I AM SUPERIOR TO YOU!

megaTTTron wrote:

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

I AM SUPERIOR TO YOU!

Lulz.

I'll do you one better:


--ImageRemoved--

megaTTTron wrote:I'll do you one better:


--ImageRemoved--

I concede defeat, actually...that's hilarious.

MrKappus wrote:

megaTTTron wrote:I'll do you one better:


--ImageRemoved--

I concede defeat, actually...that's hilarious.

respect.

Attucks wrote:

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

Despite that being at my expense: lmao

UCLA's LR competition is purely write-on. A few spots are reserved for the top 1-5 or something like that, but I know I'm not one of those.

Honestly, I am leaning toward Berkeley. If it's a wash between UCLA LR and Berkeley No LR, at least I'll have a chance at Berkeley LR, and if I don't make it, I'll do a secondary journal and still have "invited to join UCLA LR" on my resume (Berkeley's CDO materials on transfer resumes indicated that this is acceptable). However, I'm interested in hearing others' opinions, as many people have told me it's better to stay where I am...

.

Right, the "invited" thing would just be for OCI, not clerkships. And since clerking is the primary goal, you're all right, it would have no impact.

I'm going to ask some federal judges their opinions -- UCLA + LR vs. Berkeley + Secondary Journal (probably tech law journal). They do the hiring, after all. I'll let you all know if I get any useful information.

27AppleTarts wrote:UCLA's LR competition is purely write-on. A few spots are reserved for the top 1-5 or something like that, but I know I'm not one of those.

Honestly, I am leaning toward Berkeley. If it's a wash between UCLA LR and Berkeley No LR, at least I'll have a chance at Berkeley LR, and if I don't make it, I'll do a secondary journal and still have "invited to join UCLA LR" on my resume (Berkeley's CDO materials on transfer resumes indicated that this is acceptable). However, I'm interested in hearing others' opinions, as many people have told me it's better to stay where I am...

I don't know whether they enforce this, but when I was visiting UCLA over spring break (I'll be class 2013) and I asked about transferring if I made law review (I know, I know - very pretentious question; whatever), he said that the law review board decided a while ago to forbid those who either transfer out or drop out from mentioning invitation or participation to the UCLA law review. So, I doubt such a decision is enforceable if you slip that info during an interview, but just so you know...

Btw awesome job on your first year!

I abjured from doing the W&L write-on so I wouldn't be faced with this quandary (not that, there, it would have been much of a quandary), but UCLA's quite a bit better than W&L. After all, you could become the editor, whereas how many non-law review people at Berkeley get a good clerkship anyway? I would stick around.

If you already know you want to clerk or think there is a good chance you will want to, transferring to Berkeley is a really terrible idea. Top 10% non law review at UCLA has a good shot at clerking. Top 10% plus law review puts you in contention for Ninth Circuit clerkships if you can get LORs from professors like Varat and Volokh during 2L. Also, you will basically have a good chance at getting a SA offer from ANY firm at UCLA's OCI. The only reason I think would make a transfer to Berkeley worth it is if you either wanted to work in the Bay Area or wanted to work back East or something.