Top Law Schools

Do you guys think that wanting to become a Biglaw lawyer mostly because of wanting to earn a relatively high income (I consider 160,000 to be high) and have a fancy lifestyle is a bad reason to become a lawyer? (I used to work at retail so yes, again, I consider working at a sky-scrapper in Manhattan and having $50 meals to be fancy living)

If so, why?

What would be a "good" reason to become a Biglaw lawyer? Why do you guys at HLS want to work at Biglaw? (aside from having the need to pay off debt)

roranoa wrote:Do you guys think that wanting to become a Biglaw lawyer mostly because of wanting to earn a relatively high income (I consider 160,000 to be high) and have a fancy lifestyle is a bad reason to become a lawyer? (I used to work at retail so yes, again, I consider working at a sky-scrapper in Manhattan and having $50 meals to be fancy living)

If so, why?

What would be a "good" reason to become a Biglaw lawyer? Why do you guys at HLS want to work at Biglaw? (aside from having the need to pay off debt)

generally, most people advise against a purely financial motive. especially if the motive is a "fancy" lifestyle as opposed to a reasonably certain middle-class career path (the later probably is guaranteed once you start in biglaw). here are some considerations against pure financial motive:

(1) biglaw associates do not live fancy lifestyles. most live in moderately priced apartments while trying to pay down their loans, and most want to eventually leave (or have to leave) and find a cushy but less lucrative job elsewhere. exit option jobs will still pay in the 100k-200k range for the most part, which is surely good compensation, but its not "models and bottles". its more like..suburban house/honda accord/nice tv rather than bentley/manhattan townhouse/yacht.

(2) while legal compensation is good, there are other fields that pay more and have less hours, so why not go for those? (for example hedge funds or banking). of course, those options are not available for anyone so it could be that law is the best you are going to do.

(3) if the end destination for most attorneys is a decent 100k-200k middle class job, there are several alternatives that have less opportunity costs and significantly less risk. accounting, actuarial, engineering, and whatnot. these fields still have entry barriers but its feasible for people to break in and they certainly have less barriers than 3 years of school, tuition, bar exam, 1L stress, OCI.

here are some other potential motivations, roughly in rank order:

(1) enjoy the actual day-to-day work. some people love legal research/writing, coming up with arguments based on cases/facts, or explaining a complex tax issue to a client. its hard to figure this one out before law school but is probably the most "valid" motivation of them all.

(2) enjoy the role/impact/result. perhaps you think it would be exciting to be involved in attacking a company for trademark infringement, or contributing to the latest M&A deal you read about in the Wall St Journal.

(3) service-based industry. service (law/consulting/advisory) vs product (engineer/corporate finance/in-house) careers have a bunch of pros and cons to consider. service jobs typically are more individualized: you stand on your own two feet because clients shop around for certain lawyers. product jobs (eg engineering) are more commoditized and anonymous (no one knows which apple engineer programmed the iphone's messaging software). but service jobs typically require more hours and more commitment: answering emails promptly, looking the part, and so on. then again, service jobs have a small but realistic shot at equity (partnership) which is just not the case for product jobs outside startups.

(4) lock-in. sometimes having less options/choices can be a good thing. i see many "planners" in law school: ie people that have a 5 yr plan or 10 yr plan. law can appeal to this type of person because the next five-seven years of their lives are roughly set in stone and they will land on their feet somewhere decent after that. 3 years of law school, few years at a firm, reasonable exit options that pay well. from the moment you send your acceptance (at least to HYS schools) you are basically all set.

(5) urban lifestyle. most corporate jobs are usually in undesirable locations as the companies are trying to cut costs. most biglaw jobs are in cities. if you really want to live in NY or similar and not be broke, law is a good way to do that.

(6) prestige/high status. law has cachet in our society. i would say its certainly perceived as a step up from most middle class jobs, although perhaps not as high as some others.

englawyer wrote:

roranoa wrote:Do you guys think that wanting to become a Biglaw lawyer mostly because of wanting to earn a relatively high income (I consider 160,000 to be high) and have a fancy lifestyle is a bad reason to become a lawyer? (I used to work at retail so yes, again, I consider working at a sky-scrapper in Manhattan and having $50 meals to be fancy living)

If so, why?

What would be a "good" reason to become a Biglaw lawyer? Why do you guys at HLS want to work at Biglaw? (aside from having the need to pay off debt)

generally, most people advise against a purely financial motive. especially if the motive is a "fancy" lifestyle as opposed to a reasonably certain middle-class career path (the later probably is guaranteed once you start in biglaw). here are some considerations against pure financial motive:

(1) biglaw associates do not live fancy lifestyles. most live in moderately priced apartments while trying to pay down their loans, and most want to eventually leave (or have to leave) and find a cushy but less lucrative job elsewhere. exit option jobs will still pay in the 100k-200k range for the most part, which is surely good compensation, but its not "models and bottles". its more like..suburban house/honda accord/nice tv rather than bentley/manhattan townhouse/yacht.

(2) while legal compensation is good, there are other fields that pay more and have less hours, so why not go for those? (for example hedge funds or banking). of course, those options are not available for anyone so it could be that law is the best you are going to do.

(3) if the end destination for most attorneys is a decent 100k-200k middle class job, there are several alternatives that have less opportunity costs and significantly less risk. accounting, actuarial, engineering, and whatnot. these fields still have entry barriers but its feasible for people to break in and they certainly have less barriers than 3 years of school, tuition, bar exam, 1L stress, OCI.

here are some other potential motivations, roughly in rank order:

(1) enjoy the actual day-to-day work. some people love legal research/writing, coming up with arguments based on cases/facts, or explaining a complex tax issue to a client. its hard to figure this one out before law school but is probably the most "valid" motivation of them all.

(2) enjoy the role/impact/result. perhaps you think it would be exciting to be involved in attacking a company for trademark infringement, or contributing to the latest M&A deal you read about in the Wall St Journal.

(3) service-based industry. service (law/consulting/advisory) vs product (engineer/corporate finance/in-house) careers have a bunch of pros and cons to consider. service jobs typically are more individualized: you stand on your own two feet because clients shop around for certain lawyers. product jobs (eg engineering) are more commoditized and anonymous (no one knows which apple engineer programmed the iphone's messaging software). but service jobs typically require more hours and more commitment: answering emails promptly, looking the part, and so on. then again, service jobs have a small but realistic shot at equity (partnership) which is just not the case for product jobs outside startups.

(4) lock-in. sometimes having less options/choices can be a good thing. i see many "planners" in law school: ie people that have a 5 yr plan or 10 yr plan. law can appeal to this type of person because the next five-seven years of their lives are roughly set in stone and they will land on their feet somewhere decent after that. 3 years of law school, few years at a firm, reasonable exit options that pay well. from the moment you send your acceptance (at least to HYS schools) you are basically all set.

(5) urban lifestyle. most corporate jobs are usually in undesirable locations as the companies are trying to cut costs. most biglaw jobs are in cities. if you really want to live in NY or similar and not be broke, law is a good way to do that.

(6) prestige/high status. law has cachet in our society. i would say its certainly perceived as a step up from most middle class jobs, although perhaps not as high as some others.

You're response is very helpful and awesome. Thank you.

I think my motivation comes mainly from numbers 6, 5, 4 and a little bit of 3.

Some people do tell me that I should look for other jobs that pay as well as law but less hours. The problem is that I don't have the right skill set for any of those jobs. (finance, software engineering and such and such)

Btw, I don't expect my life to be anywhere near living in the upper east side with a Bentley sedan (Although I fantasize sometimes). My definition of "fancy living" is living in an apartment in a big city, car or no car I don't care, enjoying high culture every once in awhile, having nice meals, and so on. Just something a little bit above average would be a dream. (Sometimes I think I should have bigger ambitions but meh.)

I think I'm looking for a relatively stable career given that I don't get lazy with my work (income range: 100k - 200k). Is this a good enough reason to justify oneself stepping into law?

P.S: How is a 100k -200k income range be considered to be middle class?? I don't know maybe that's the way it is in NYC?

roranoa wrote: P.S: How is a 100k -200k income range be considered to be middle class?? I don't know maybe that's the way it is in NYC?

well basically you need to work backwards. you can roughly afford a house that is 3x ur income. good luck finding a house anywhere close to NYC that costs 300k. this is similar for most metropolitan areas.

by middle class i basically mean living in a suburb of a major metro, having a house with a yard, a car, two kids, a dog, etc. to achieve that in today's society you basically need 100k+.

englawyer wrote:

roranoa wrote: P.S: How is a 100k -200k income range be considered to be middle class?? I don't know maybe that's the way it is in NYC?

well basically you need to work backwards. you can roughly afford a house that is 3x ur income. good luck finding a house anywhere close to NYC that costs 300k. this is similar for most metropolitan areas.

by middle class i basically mean living in a suburb of a major metro, having a house with a yard, a car, two kids, a dog, etc. to achieve that in today's society you basically need 100k+.

Unless you're in a two income house hold. I think each parent making 55k would be considered middle class

roranoa wrote:Do you guys think that wanting to become a Biglaw lawyer mostly because of wanting to earn a relatively high income (I consider 160,000 to be high) and have a fancy lifestyle is a bad reason to become a lawyer? (I used to work at retail so yes, again, I consider working at a sky-scrapper in Manhattan and having $50 meals to be fancy living)

If so, why?

What would be a "good" reason to become a Biglaw lawyer? Why do you guys at HLS want to work at Biglaw? (aside from having the need to pay off debt)

Probably the best reason to become a biglaw lawyer, in addition to the training/resume line. You're not doing it for the quality of life, that's for sure.

roranoa wrote:

englawyer wrote:

roranoa wrote:Do you guys think that wanting to become a Biglaw lawyer mostly because of wanting to earn a relatively high income (I consider 160,000 to be high) and have a fancy lifestyle is a bad reason to become a lawyer? (I used to work at retail so yes, again, I consider working at a sky-scrapper in Manhattan and having $50 meals to be fancy living)

If so, why?

What would be a "good" reason to become a Biglaw lawyer? Why do you guys at HLS want to work at Biglaw? (aside from having the need to pay off debt)

generally, most people advise against a purely financial motive. especially if the motive is a "fancy" lifestyle as opposed to a reasonably certain middle-class career path (the later probably is guaranteed once you start in biglaw). here are some considerations against pure financial motive:

(1) biglaw associates do not live fancy lifestyles. most live in moderately priced apartments while trying to pay down their loans, and most want to eventually leave (or have to leave) and find a cushy but less lucrative job elsewhere. exit option jobs will still pay in the 100k-200k range for the most part, which is surely good compensation, but its not "models and bottles". its more like..suburban house/honda accord/nice tv rather than bentley/manhattan townhouse/yacht.

(2) while legal compensation is good, there are other fields that pay more and have less hours, so why not go for those? (for example hedge funds or banking). of course, those options are not available for anyone so it could be that law is the best you are going to do.

(3) if the end destination for most attorneys is a decent 100k-200k middle class job, there are several alternatives that have less opportunity costs and significantly less risk. accounting, actuarial, engineering, and whatnot. these fields still have entry barriers but its feasible for people to break in and they certainly have less barriers than 3 years of school, tuition, bar exam, 1L stress, OCI.

here are some other potential motivations, roughly in rank order:

(1) enjoy the actual day-to-day work. some people love legal research/writing, coming up with arguments based on cases/facts, or explaining a complex tax issue to a client. its hard to figure this one out before law school but is probably the most "valid" motivation of them all.

(2) enjoy the role/impact/result. perhaps you think it would be exciting to be involved in attacking a company for trademark infringement, or contributing to the latest M&A deal you read about in the Wall St Journal.

(3) service-based industry. service (law/consulting/advisory) vs product (engineer/corporate finance/in-house) careers have a bunch of pros and cons to consider. service jobs typically are more individualized: you stand on your own two feet because clients shop around for certain lawyers. product jobs (eg engineering) are more commoditized and anonymous (no one knows which apple engineer programmed the iphone's messaging software). but service jobs typically require more hours and more commitment: answering emails promptly, looking the part, and so on. then again, service jobs have a small but realistic shot at equity (partnership) which is just not the case for product jobs outside startups.

(4) lock-in. sometimes having less options/choices can be a good thing. i see many "planners" in law school: ie people that have a 5 yr plan or 10 yr plan. law can appeal to this type of person because the next five-seven years of their lives are roughly set in stone and they will land on their feet somewhere decent after that. 3 years of law school, few years at a firm, reasonable exit options that pay well. from the moment you send your acceptance (at least to HYS schools) you are basically all set.

(5) urban lifestyle. most corporate jobs are usually in undesirable locations as the companies are trying to cut costs. most biglaw jobs are in cities. if you really want to live in NY or similar and not be broke, law is a good way to do that.

(6) prestige/high status. law has cachet in our society. i would say its certainly perceived as a step up from most middle class jobs, although perhaps not as high as some others.

You're response is very helpful and awesome. Thank you.

I think my motivation comes mainly from numbers 6, 5, 4 and a little bit of 3.

Some people do tell me that I should look for other jobs that pay as well as law but less hours. The problem is that I don't have the right skill set for any of those jobs. (finance, software engineering and such and such)

Btw, I don't expect my life to be anywhere near living in the upper east side with a Bentley sedan (Although I fantasize sometimes). My definition of "fancy living" is living in an apartment in a big city, car or no car I don't care, enjoying high culture every once in awhile, having nice meals, and so on. Just something a little bit above average would be a dream. (Sometimes I think I should have bigger ambitions but meh.)

I think I'm looking for a relatively stable career given that I don't get lazy with my work (income range: 100k - 200k). Is this a good enough reason to justify oneself stepping into law?

P.S: How is a 100k -200k income range be considered to be middle class?? I don't know maybe that's the way it is in NYC?

A job is work. You don't necessarily have to be in biglaw because you "enjoy" the work.

..

ph14 wrote:A job is work. You don't necessarily have to be in biglaw because you "enjoy" the work.

You don't have to enjoy it, but it makes life a lot more tolerable.

Then again, I've never been able to just punch in and out and not care about the substance of what I'm doing.

Seconding "models and bottles"...

englawyer wrote: (4) lock-in. sometimes having less options/choices can be a good thing. i see many "planners" in law school: ie people that have a 5 yr plan or 10 yr plan. law can appeal to this type of person because the next five-seven years of their lives are roughly set in stone and they will land on their feet somewhere decent after that. 3 years of law school, few years at a firm, reasonable exit options that pay well. from the moment you send your acceptance (at least to HYS schools) you are basically all set.

This is nice to hear. Based on EIP this year, would you still say it holds for the vast majority of students?

Lovely Ludwig Van wrote:

englawyer wrote: (4) lock-in. sometimes having less options/choices can be a good thing. i see many "planners" in law school: ie people that have a 5 yr plan or 10 yr plan. law can appeal to this type of person because the next five-seven years of their lives are roughly set in stone and they will land on their feet somewhere decent after that. 3 years of law school, few years at a firm, reasonable exit options that pay well. from the moment you send your acceptance (at least to HYS schools) you are basically all set.

This is nice to hear. Based on EIP this year, would you still say it holds for the vast majority of students?

People do strike out. I don't think it's good to go in the mindset that "the moment you send your acceptance (at least to HYS schools) you are basically all set." The odds are definitely in your favor but the legal hiring market is just not the same as it used to be.

I'm still waiting to hear back, like everyone else applying this cycle, but as an "old" (I'm 34), I'm curious as to how students in their thirties fare at HLS. How many are there, roughly? How do they do academically? Probably most importantly, what do their employment outcomes look like?

I'm definitely very thankful for any input anybody has, so thanks!

elterrible78 wrote:I'm still waiting to hear back, like everyone else applying this cycle, but as an "old" (I'm 34), I'm curious as to how students in their thirties fare at HLS. How many are there, roughly? How do they do academically? Probably most importantly, what do their employment outcomes look like?

I'm definitely very thankful for any input anybody has, so thanks!

Sent you a PM.

elterrible78 wrote:I'm still waiting to hear back, like everyone else applying this cycle, but as an "old" (I'm 34), I'm curious as to how students in their thirties fare at HLS. How many are there, roughly? How do they do academically? Probably most importantly, what do their employment outcomes look like?

I'm definitely very thankful for any input anybody has, so thanks!

There are a few, but definitely a substantial minority. Most people are in their 20s. They do fine...it's not like you turn 34 and are over the hill or something. I think older students though with lots of family commitments may find law school tougher though, depending on their particular situation.

ph14 wrote:

elterrible78 wrote:I'm still waiting to hear back, like everyone else applying this cycle, but as an "old" (I'm 34), I'm curious as to how students in their thirties fare at HLS. How many are there, roughly? How do they do academically? Probably most importantly, what do their employment outcomes look like?

I'm definitely very thankful for any input anybody has, so thanks!

There are a few, but definitely a substantial minority. Most people are in their 20s. They do fine...it's not like you turn 34 and are over the hill or something. I think older students though with lots of family commitments may find law school tougher though, depending on their particular situation.

Thanks very much. I am married, but have no kids, and my wife is a lawyer so I expect she will be pretty understanding if, especially during my first year, I'm stretched pretty thin. What I'm mostly worried about is graduating closer to 40 than 30 and having firms very skeptical of my value. But, as I understand it, most people who get biglaw don't stick around more than a few years anyway. It's kind of silly to even be thinking that far ahead at this point but, you know, it's a pretty big commitment I am going to make, so it's hard to avoid going over the possible outcomes.

Again, thanks.

elterrible78 wrote:

ph14 wrote:

elterrible78 wrote:I'm still waiting to hear back, like everyone else applying this cycle, but as an "old" (I'm 34), I'm curious as to how students in their thirties fare at HLS. How many are there, roughly? How do they do academically? Probably most importantly, what do their employment outcomes look like?

I'm definitely very thankful for any input anybody has, so thanks!

There are a few, but definitely a substantial minority. Most people are in their 20s. They do fine...it's not like you turn 34 and are over the hill or something. I think older students though with lots of family commitments may find law school tougher though, depending on their particular situation.

Thanks very much. I am married, but have no kids, and my wife is a lawyer so I expect she will be pretty understanding if, especially during my first year, I'm stretched pretty thin. What I'm mostly worried about is graduating closer to 40 than 30 and having firms very skeptical of my value. But, as I understand it, most people who get biglaw don't stick around more than a few years anyway. It's kind of silly to even be thinking that far ahead at this point but, you know, it's a pretty big commitment I am going to make, so it's hard to avoid going over the possible outcomes.

Again, thanks.

No problem. Good luck.

elterrible78 wrote:

ph14 wrote:

elterrible78 wrote:I'm still waiting to hear back, like everyone else applying this cycle, but as an "old" (I'm 34), I'm curious as to how students in their thirties fare at HLS. How many are there, roughly? How do they do academically? Probably most importantly, what do their employment outcomes look like?

I'm definitely very thankful for any input anybody has, so thanks!

There are a few, but definitely a substantial minority. Most people are in their 20s. They do fine...it's not like you turn 34 and are over the hill or something. I think older students though with lots of family commitments may find law school tougher though, depending on their particular situation.

Thanks very much. I am married, but have no kids, and my wife is a lawyer so I expect she will be pretty understanding if, especially during my first year, I'm stretched pretty thin. What I'm mostly worried about is graduating closer to 40 than 30 and having firms very skeptical of my value. But, as I understand it, most people who get biglaw don't stick around more than a few years anyway. It's kind of silly to even be thinking that far ahead at this point but, you know, it's a pretty big commitment I am going to make, so it's hard to avoid going over the possible outcomes.

Again, thanks.

You shouldn't have much trouble at all. A lot of people move to law school with significant others. I moved with mine and didn't take law school nearly as seriously as I should have. Still ended up with OK grades and multiple non-NYC offers in difficult markets. Getting to HLS affirms that you are smart. I found that once you are in, the key is going hard for your interests. Join groups you are interested in and be able to articulate that interest and the work that you are doing.

..

acrossthelake wrote:Y'all can speak for yourself.

I'm in this for the models & bottles, hookers & blow.

What??

What did you tell JR when he asked you the "why law school?" question?

What do you say in OCI when they ask you "why law"? (Especially if you're motivation is mainly about money and stability?)

acrossthelake wrote: I personally know 2 people who struck out and they're nice, good people. So, no.

Ouch, sorry to hear that. Not to pry or anything, but what characteristic(s) (if any) would you say those and others who've struck out share?

ph14 wrote: People do strike out. I don't think it's good to go in the mindset that "the moment you send your acceptance (at least to HYS schools) you are basically all set." The odds are definitely in your favor but the legal hiring market is just not the same as it used to be.

Of the people who've struck out, would you say it's more so the inevitable result of a bad legal market and the law of percentages, or bad choices on the part of the individuals (i.e. poor bidding, bad interviewing, LP's, etc.)?

Thanks for your responses.

Lovely Ludwig Van wrote:

acrossthelake wrote: I personally know 2 people who struck out and they're nice, good people. So, no.

Ouch, sorry to hear that. Not to pry or anything, but what characteristic(s) (if any) would you say those and others who've struck out share?

Bad luck.

I hear your first semester is miserable. I also know of more and more people getting no offered. True?

Oh the person that i know that struck out is amazingly social. In fact, he had people come up to him and tell him that he will be successful. Dont get it. #don'tapplytoharvardLaw

mathrev wrote:I hear your first semester is miserable. I also know of more and more people getting no offered. True?

Oh the person that i know that struck out is amazingly social. In fact, he had people come up to him and tell him that he will be successful. Dont get it. #don'tapplytoharvardLaw

This is pretty pathetic trolling.