Top Law Schools

Ken,

Very good site, I wish I had found it before applying to law school.

I have a few questions that I hope you can answer. I had mediocre grades as an undergrad, so I am currently at a 2nd tier school (i.e. not ranked in the top 10-15). My goal is to work for a top New York firm so I was wondering if I would be better off transferring to a school where those firms recruit heavily out of (e.g. Duke, Cornell) or would I be better off excelling at my current school? I am inclined to think I would be better of transferring. When applying for on-campus interviews at the beginning of 2L year, how do firms view transfers? Also, what do schools look at when you are trying to transfer? My understanding is that it is largely based on your success at whatever school you are trying to transfer from, but I want to know the accuracy of that. Any insight would be greatly helpful.

Thanks,
David

Hi David,

Indeed you are wise to consider transferring law schools. It is quite common and most top law schools will accept approximately 10-25 transfer students to add to their second year class. Generally, these transfer students were from schools that were 1 or 2 tiers below these top law schools, with the transfer students having excelled (ranked in the top 5% generally) in their first-year classes. Occasionally, you get students who transfer from relatively equal schools (such as from NYU to U.C. Berkeley's Boalt Hall) just because they want a different experience. In that case, the need to be in the top of your class is somewhat minimized.

While your first-year grades will be first and foremost in determining whether your transfer application is accepted, having a good personal statement can also be important. Show them that your marginal undergrad grades are no longer a reflection of your academic potential due to some reason such as time away from school, finding your focus, or not having to work frequently as you did during your undergrad years. Convey that your high-first year grades are reflective of your potential now and what you will achieve in their law school.

Regarding job interviews, transfer students are definitely not looked down upon by law firms. Transfer students are generally very focused and hard working, whereas those first admitted may have aced their LSAT but not have the focus and stamina to succeed in a New York Law Firm. Transfer students generally had more than their fair share of offers after interviews.

When applying to law school I HIGHLY recommend that you apply to many law schools, for you are sometimes amazed that you will be rejected from a lesser ranked school and accepted in to a top law school. I recommend the same when applying to transfer, apply to many law schools to maximize your chances.

All of the above being said, do not kill yourself with stress during your first-year striving to be at the top of your class. If you make it great and either transfer or stay, for with both options you will have many job opportunities. However, life is too short to ignore present happiness while toiling for a future goal (not that you were going to), so enjoy and learn as much as possible during your first-year classes and just confidently believe you will succeed and this will be the likely result.

While the first-year of law school seems inherently stressful, it is also the time when you will learn the most and meet the majority of your friends. At the same time, first-year grades are by far the most important and set the tone for how well you do in your job interviews. Try to both have a great time while being very focused. I need to write a section on how to succeed in your first year at law school, I will see if I can get that posted in the next month or so.

I would greatly appreciate it if you would consider writing a profile of your law school as the year goes on and your sharing your perspective of it for future students (this offer goes out to any law student reading this). I really am glad that this site is informative and hope to make it even more useful as new content is continually added and I am always looking for new writers. Just post your willingness to be an author and I will be thankful and contact you.

Good luck, enjoy your first year and hope to but do not plan on transferring law schools!

The following is a great article on transferring law schools:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 22&t=82937

-Ken

Hi Ken:

Yeah, these posts are indeed really informative and helpful about transferring law schools. There is even more info on transferring law schools in the forum for law students at:
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=3

As far as I understand it, there are plenty of students who transfer to schools which didn't accept them as 1Ls. And schools will from that point on only care about your first year grades and probably not even look at GPA/LSAT anymore when transferring law schools.

When transferring law schools, try to find law schools that accept more transfers than others. For example, Berkeley (where I attended) usually accepts between 20-30 transfer students per year, almost 10% of the entering class. Those I knew who were successful in transferring law schools either were in the top 1% of a school in a different tier (such as in the top 50-100), or in the top 5% if they were in a better tier (top 20-50).

Post on the forum if you have a particular question about transferring law schools.

Wishing everyone the best!

Power bump.

Overall Ken just seems happy that real estate is doing so well in the Valley. Good luck Ken...

(Don't bother with the "I'm different, it's different here" rebuttals)

Regarding job interviews, transfer students are definitely not looked down upon by law firms. Transfer students are generally very focused and hard working, whereas those first admitted may have aced their LSAT but not have the focus and stamina to succeed in a New York law firm. Transfer students generally had more than their fair share of offers after interviews.

For the most part, I think this is true however the new transfer school's OCI policy weights heavily here. I transferred from a T1 40-50 to a T14 law school. At my new school, OCI is blind meaning that you bid on employers who do not have the ability to pre-screen you. As a transfer I think the cycle is a little less predictable because you don't have GPA charts to utilize, etc. Thus, I had firms who thought I was the bees knees and overlooked the transfer and some firms who weren't giving me a real interview. This seemed to correlate directly with firm prestige. From what I've heard, this is the same type of attitude the firms displayed towards those who didn't make the GPA cutoff. All in all, I feel transfers did quite well IN THIS ECONOMY.

So to be more specific, if I don't have the undergrad grades to get into Yale, but I can get into UConn (and finish top 5-10% which I know is not a given), is that a reasonable transfer? Or American to Georgetown? Temple to Penn? George Mason to Virginia?

.

bwv812 wrote:

king3780 wrote:So to be more specific, if I don't have the undergrad grades to get into Yale, but I can get into UConn (and finish top 5-10% which I know is not a given), is that a reasonable transfer? Or American to Georgetown? Temple to Penn? George Mason to Virginia?

If the only thing keeping you out of Yale is your grades, you can get into somewhere in the T14. From the T14, top 5% to Yale is reasonable. But how many school are ranked above UConn? If the top 5% at those schools all try to transfer (and many will), HYS are going to fill up pretty quick. The other transfers you mention are more reasonable, especially GULC and the huge transfer class they admit.

From what I have seen in many years of looking at transfer data, if you finish 1st in your class from a t1 school you have an outstanding chance at Yale, top 5% and you have a great shot at Harvard, top 10% and you are in at Columbia and the rest of the t14, although results will vary from school to school, but you will almost guaranteed get into the t14 and likely the t6.

.

Harvard is in some ways more selective than Yale; they really seem to care about your LSAT and UG GPA more than other schools (who more or less exclusively look at 1L grades), and there are a number of transfer applicants who have made it into Y/S and not H, despite the fact that H takes way more transfers an Y and S combined. For example, I think Yalie10 (top of his class at George Mason) got locked out of H. Columbia and NYU are relatively easy because their transfer classes are very large. Top 5% from T14 might make it to H, but I don't think you can get there as top 5% from any T1.

That seems right. I think the transfer statistics are tighter than people generally predict. Just because one person top 10% at a T1 got into a t14 doesn't mean you are a lock at 10%. Also, people on transferapps who get dinged are less likely to report that school in the database, so the numbers are skewed.

how high would you say i have to rank in my class to be able to transfer from UMiami to UF?

I'd say top 1/3 or so to be in the running and top 20 percent to lock it up. Who knows with the current budget situation though.

I know this is purely anecdotal but 100% true (God, this is starting to sound like a letter to Forum). For the fellow who asked about UConn to Yale or Harvard, a friend of mine studied like a madman and was #1 in his class at the end of his first year at UConn and transferred to Harvard, so it can be done. Not sure about his UG GPA or original LSAT though, just letting you know that it's not exclusive to the top 5% at at T-14. Best of luck!

PKSebben wrote:

Regarding job interviews, transfer students are definitely not looked down upon by law firms. Transfer students are generally very focused and hard working, whereas those first admitted may have aced their LSAT but not have the focus and stamina to succeed in a New York law firm. Transfer students generally had more than their fair share of offers after interviews.

For the most part, I think this is true however the new transfer school's OCI policy weights heavily here. I transferred from a T1 40-50 to a T14 law school. At my new school, OCI is blind meaning that you bid on employers who do not have the ability to pre-screen you. As a transfer I think the cycle is a little less predictable because you don't have GPA charts to utilize, etc. Thus, I had firms who thought I was the bees knees and overlooked the transfer and some firms who weren't giving me a real interview. This seemed to correlate directly with firm prestige. From what I've heard, this is the same type of attitude the firms displayed towards those who didn't make the GPA cutoff. All in all, I feel transfers did quite well IN THIS ECONOMY.

PKSebben, thanks for sharing this tidbit.

I can't believe firms did this for transfers. I kind of understand their attitude toward people with lousy GPAs, but to have that attitude toward transfers makes it seem like you're "guilty" until you prove yourself innocent... except that you've already proven yourself by successfully transferring to a better school.

Are you saying that the more prestigious firms tended to do this? That makes me question the hiring practices of those firms...

Some firms I felt weren't giving me a real interview. I got real interviews / callbacks at really prestigious firms, but some were really cold. It could have been my suit, my stylish haircut, or the fact that I was a transfer. I'm not real sure -- don't get me wrong, I see it their way. OCI is blind at Michigan and if they're looking for top of the class at Michigan (which I wasn't) then I can understand why they felt interviewing a transfer is a waste of time. Blind OCI is the price they pay for interviewing here. However, most didn't seem to care I was a transfer, and some partners on my callbacks said that they had warm feelings towards transfers because they felt they had a chip-on-shoulder work ethic. I had offers at great firms and I'm now at a law firm that I would not have been able to interview with from my previous school.

I recently graduated with a B.S. in finance with a 3.2 GPA. I haven't taken the LSAT yet so its still not clear where I will be a competitive applicant, so I could end up anywhere from cal-western and thomas jefferson to USD and santa clara. Is possible/common to transfer from a cal-western thomas jefferson to a UC davis UC hastings, or even to a UCLA USC? and how? top 1%, 5%, 10%, 20%?? thanks -Joe

I just finished my 1L year at texas wesleyan law. I have a good shot at making law review (3.5 GPA) and I am a brief writer for moot court. I just found out that I got accepted into Seattle Law. I have no idea what I should do. Any transfer students out there with some advice? I LOVE DFW and I also LOVE Seattle. I have always wanted to live and work in Washington but have a Judicial Clerkship in Dallas this summer where I would be networking with DA's and Judges (As of the end of my 1L year I want to prosecute). Whattya think?

txraider182 wrote:I just finished my 1L year at texas wesleyan law. I have a good shot at making law review (3.5 GPA) and I am a brief writer for moot court. I just found out that I got accepted into Seattle Law. I have no idea what I should do. Any transfer students out there with some advice? I LOVE DFW and I also LOVE Seattle. I have always wanted to live and work in Washington but have a Judicial Clerkship in Dallas this summer where I would be networking with DA's and Judges (As of the end of my 1L year I want to prosecute). Whattya think?

Don't know much about DFW job market but Seattle's legal job market is notoriously tight. I have seen posts of top 1/3 UW grads who could not get a biglaw jobs in Seattle, and moved out of state to get a market-paying biglaw job.

If you love Seattle this much you should still do it. But you should be prepared to be satisfied with 50-60k to start at a private firm. I know nothing of Texas Wesleyan but I assume your prospects in Seattle would be slightly higher. And your quality of life would certainly be much higher.

Hello,
I just finished up my 1L year at Southwestern Law School in LA. I CALI-ed three classes, made it onto Law Review (still waiting to hear from moot court), am on Dean's list. I finished the first year with a 3.81 GPA and am in the top 5% of my class. I was also recently admitted to USC Law as a transfer student for the 2L year. Because I have my undergrad degree from USC's Marshall School of Business, I thought this choice would be an easy one...go to SC. However, I have been having great difficulty in making my decision.

I want to go into BigLaw, and I know that SC obviously would provide greater OCI opportunities for BigLaw. However, SC has a blind OCI program. Although SW is not the greatest law school in the LA area, it has a number of connections with BigLaw in LA. I have spoken to a number of students from classes above me who have interviewed and summered with firms such as Gibson Dunn, OMM, Sheppard Mullin, etc. I also just found out that I was chosen to be interviewed by Sheppard Mullin, and McKenna Long from SW's OCI. Also, a student who just finished summering with OMM from SW let me know that my grades/accolades were very similar to his, so I have a pretty good shot at landing an OMM interview.

So, my question is: knowing that I want to work in BigLaw in LA, is it better to transfer to SC and deal with the blind interviews (definitely more interviews, but an uphill battle to land an offer/callback) or stay at SW and deal with the non-blind interviews (less interviews, but the employers have already chosen me based on my qualifications)?

Thanks in advance for everyone's input!

txraider182 wrote:I just finished my 1L year at texas wesleyan law. I have a good shot at making law review (3.5 GPA) and I am a brief writer for moot court. I just found out that I got accepted into Seattle Law. I have no idea what I should do. Any transfer students out there with some advice? I LOVE DFW and I also LOVE Seattle. I have always wanted to live and work in Washington but have a Judicial Clerkship in Dallas this summer where I would be networking with DA's and Judges (As of the end of my 1L year I want to prosecute). Whattya think?

First of all... I live in DFW (for another four days, anyway), and have to ask, what the heck kind of person is capable of loving DFW and Seattle at the same time? Srsly?

But I have done a lot of reading about different job markets and schools and things like that, and I have to say that it looks like the Texas job market is a lot stronger than the Seattle market, for two reasons: 1) In this economy, places like Texas that didn't have a steep rise in the 90s and early 00s are weathering the downturn much better. 2) Even before the current recession, the job market in Seattle was looking pretty saturated, with more lawyers being produced by NW-area schools than new law jobs were being created.

On top of that, you've got your networking going here in the DFW area already. Your judicial clerkship could lead to other connections that could help you. If you move to Seattle you'd be giving that up.

Essentially it's a matter of where do you want to live more, but honestly, as someone who loves Seattle (and almost any city on either coast) more than DFW, I'd have to say that if you like it here, you're better off staying here.

Now, this is just versus Seattle Law. I wouldn't make the same recommendation if we were talking about a T14 or something like that. But for the two schools you listed, both are really only effective in their target markets, so it's just a matter of where you want to live and which job market you want to be playing in when you graduate.

LALawstudent1121 wrote:Hello,
I just finished up my 1L year at Southwestern Law School in LA. I CALI-ed three classes, made it onto Law Review (still waiting to hear from moot court), am on Dean's list. I finished the first year with a 3.81 GPA and am in the top 5% of my class. I was also recently admitted to USC Law as a transfer student for the 2L year. Because I have my undergrad degree from USC's Marshall School of Business, I thought this choice would be an easy one...go to SC. However, I have been having great difficulty in making my decision.

I want to go into BigLaw, and I know that SC obviously would provide greater OCI opportunities for BigLaw. However, SC has a blind OCI program. Although SW is not the greatest law school in the LA area, it has a number of connections with BigLaw in LA. I have spoken to a number of students from classes above me who have interviewed and summered with firms such as Gibson Dunn, OMM, Sheppard Mullin, etc. I also just found out that I was chosen to be interviewed by Sheppard Mullin, and McKenna Long from SW's OCI. Also, a student who just finished summering with OMM from SW let me know that my grades/accolades were very similar to his, so I have a pretty good shot at landing an OMM interview.

So, my question is: knowing that I want to work in BigLaw in LA, is it better to transfer to SC and deal with the blind interviews (definitely more interviews, but an uphill battle to land an offer/callback) or stay at SW and deal with the non-blind interviews (less interviews, but the employers have already chosen me based on my qualifications)?

Thanks in advance for everyone's input!

Transfer.

LALawstudent1121 wrote:Hello,
I just finished up my 1L year at Southwestern Law School in LA. I CALI-ed three classes, made it onto Law Review (still waiting to hear from moot court), am on Dean's list. I finished the first year with a 3.81 GPA and am in the top 5% of my class. I was also recently admitted to USC Law as a transfer student for the 2L year. Because I have my undergrad degree from USC's Marshall School of Business, I thought this choice would be an easy one...go to SC. However, I have been having great difficulty in making my decision.

I want to go into BigLaw, and I know that SC obviously would provide greater OCI opportunities for BigLaw. However, SC has a blind OCI program. Although SW is not the greatest law school in the LA area, it has a number of connections with BigLaw in LA. I have spoken to a number of students from classes above me who have interviewed and summered with firms such as Gibson Dunn, OMM, Sheppard Mullin, etc. I also just found out that I was chosen to be interviewed by Sheppard Mullin, and McKenna Long from SW's OCI. Also, a student who just finished summering with OMM from SW let me know that my grades/accolades were very similar to his, so I have a pretty good shot at landing an OMM interview.

So, my question is: knowing that I want to work in BigLaw in LA, is it better to transfer to SC and deal with the blind interviews (definitely more interviews, but an uphill battle to land an offer/callback) or stay at SW and deal with the non-blind interviews (less interviews, but the employers have already chosen me based on my qualifications)?

Thanks in advance for everyone's input!

I think most people in your position would transfer. However, my understanding is that some people with your credentials stick around because of scholarship money. What has SW offered you to stay?