Top Law Schools

If you know Dallas is where you want to be, and will not want to leave, then yes, SMU is better.

In all seriousness, OP:

If you have ties to TX in general (and Dallas or Houston specifically), and assuming we are talking about BigLaw, I'd say:

YHS > CCNMVPBDN (note: Virgin-ia notably places a lot in TX, CCN don't) > UT > Corneell/George-town > SMU or Houston

kalvano wrote:If you know Dallas is where you want to be, and will not want to leave, then yes, SMU is better.

OP's asking about BigLaw, not life choices.

RVP11 wrote:

kalvano wrote:If you know Dallas is where you want to be, and will not want to leave, then yes, SMU is better.

OP's asking about BigLaw, not life choices.

He specified Dallas or Houston Biglaw.

Dallas is best served by SMU. If he ever wants to transfer out, then UT is probably a better bet. But if he is sure about Dallas, and wants to stay, then SMU is a better choice.

kalvano wrote:

RVP11 wrote:

kalvano wrote:If you know Dallas is where you want to be, and will not want to leave, then yes, SMU is better.

OP's asking about BigLaw, not life choices.

He specified Dallas or Houston Biglaw.

Dallas is best served by SMU. If he ever wants to transfer out, then UT is probably a better bet. But if he is sure about Dallas, and wants to stay, then SMU is a better choice.

So you're saying SMU gives him a better chance of getting Dallas BigLaw than does UT?

And the whole "transfer out" thing is irrelevant.

kalvano wrote:If you know Dallas is where you want to be, and will not want to leave, then yes, SMU is better.

I know nothing about Dallas, I have never even been there, but a friend of mine has lived there all his life and he agrees that SMU is where you want to go for Dallas. Whereas UT grads are spread all over Texas and beyond, most SMU grads stay in or near Dallas giving it a superior alumni base in Dallas. You can't always look just at the rankings. I'm not sure if the same could be said about Houston and UH.

RickyRoe wrote:

kalvano wrote:If you know Dallas is where you want to be, and will not want to leave, then yes, SMU is better.

I know nothing about Dallas, I have never even been there, but a friend of mine has lived there all his life and he agrees that SMU is where you want to go for Dallas. Whereas UT grads are spread all over Texas and beyond, most SMU grads stay in or near Dallas giving it a superior alumni base in Dallas. You can't always look just at the rankings. I'm not sure if the same could be said about Houston and UH.

Alumni base is not what matters here. How deep big Dallas firms are digging into your school is what matters here. Firms in Dallas are undoubtedly taking people from lower in the class at UT than they are at SMU.

RVP11 wrote:So you're saying SMU gives him a better chance of getting Dallas BigLaw than does UT?

Pretty much, yeah. It's in the same city, allowing internships / externships that UT doesn't, plus networking opportunities that aren't available to UT students, etc.

SMU pretty much has a stranglehold on the Dallas market.

RVP11 wrote:Alumni base is not what matters here. How deep big Dallas firms are digging into your school is what matters here. Firms in Dallas are undoubtedly taking people from lower in the class at UT than they are at SMU.

I wouldn't be too sure of that.

kalvano wrote:

RVP11 wrote:So you're saying SMU gives him a better chance of getting Dallas BigLaw than does UT?

Pretty much, yeah. It's in the same city, allowing internships / externships that UT doesn't, plus networking opportunities that aren't available to UT students, etc.

You don't seem to understand how BigLaw hiring is done. It's not done through "internships/externships" and "networking" is hardly relevant. Every major Dallas firm interviews at UT's OCI. You get a BigLaw job by doing a summer associateship, for which the location of your school is irrelevant because it's...during the summer.

RVP11 wrote:You don't seem to understand how BigLaw hiring is done. It's not done through "internships/externships" and "networking" is hardly relevant. Every major Dallas firm interviews at UT's OCI.

OK.

RVP11 wrote: Alumni base is not what matters here. How deep big Dallas firms are digging into your school is what matters here. Firms in Dallas are undoubtedly taking people from lower in the class at UT than they are at SMU.

And your basis for that statement is...?

I'm really interested in seeing a response - because what you just said is not true.

No, it's not true. He's going purely off school rank, which you can't do with a school that is so firmly entrenched in a city like SMU is, with no competition.

My family is quite involved in the legal market in Dallas, and every single person I spoke with clarified if I wanted to stay in Dallas or not, with the advice given that if I did, go to SMU. That's partners in Biglaw firms, judges, private practice attorneys, etc.

HBK wrote:Hey, what about Texas Southern, STCL, Weslayan?

Don't waste your time if you have a boner for BigLaw. Texas Southern throws a few out every now and then because its an HBCU and STCL may hit one because alot of their students are non-traditional and have WE that would give them a slight edge sometimes. And just like everyone else is saying UT beats all in Texas SMU for Dallas and UofH or Texas for Houston (and UofH is going up on Tuition so don't think you can get away with less debt by going to a lower ranked school)

kalvano wrote:

RVP11 wrote:Saying SMU is better than UT in Dallas suggests that you don't

Except for the fact that it is.

I hate to tell you, but Kalvano is correct. SMU does have a stronghold on the city. I wouldn't go as far to say that UT is better than SMU, but it far outperforms it's rankings. However, as I believe kalvano also stated, if your ambition is just to stay in Dallas, SMU cannot be beat. However, to get biglaw you DO need to be top ~10%. SMU has an amazing tie to the Dallas, really. I'm not being an SMU troll or anything, I chose UT over SMU with a large scholarship, for my own personal reasons.

I've lived in Dallas for a very long time, I went to school in Dallas, and I am very well tied to the SMU law community, and this is what I have heard time and time again.

Sangiovese wrote:

RVP11 wrote: Alumni base is not what matters here. How deep big Dallas firms are digging into your school is what matters here. Firms in Dallas are undoubtedly taking people from lower in the class at UT than they are at SMU.

And your basis for that statement is...?

I'm really interested in seeing a response - because what you just said is not true.

Big firms (in Dallas, and anywhere) dig deeper into the class at UT than they do at SMU. What's your basis for it being otherwise? Every BigLaw statistic I've ever seen shows UT with a higher % going into BigLaw. This isn't even a disputed point on T-L-S...except apparently when you get a bunch of zero Ls in the same thread.

Having a strong alumni base definitely helps. But we're comparing UT to SMU - does UT not also have a strong alumni base in Dallas? BigLaw hiring is primarily done through OCI. Every big Dallas firm interviews at and hires from UT. UT is also a significantly better school than SMU. To infer that Dallas firms therefore interview deeper into the class at UT is perfectly natural. And it's correct.

mcflooter06 wrote:However, to get biglaw you DO need to be top ~10%.

So how exactly does this = SMU placing better into Dallas BigLaw than UT?

RVP11 wrote:UT is also a significantly better school than SMU.

LOL.

kalvano wrote:

RVP11 wrote:UT is also a significantly better school than SMU.

your attempt at humor is the most laughable thing about your post; sadly, it is not that laughable.

lawl?

RVP11 wrote:

mcflooter06 wrote:However, to get biglaw you DO need to be top ~10%.

So how exactly does this = SMU placing better into Dallas BigLaw than UT?

As was stated, there are a great deal of firms in Dallas that pay market, but are not considered "BigLaw." Dallas doesn't work like DC or NYC, not in the least bit.

EDIT: There is really no need to get so defensive, we're both just stating what we know. Obviously, I chose UT..

Solerpower wrote:
Cooley College of Law is good, but not quite Texas.

Firms are probably going deeper into U-V-A than into UT, but unless you have prior Texas ties you'd probably be a lot better off going to UT and establishing some.

DoubleChecks wrote:

kalvano wrote:

RVP11 wrote:UT is also a significantly better school than SMU.

your attempt at humor is the most laughable thing about your post; sadly, it is not that laughable.

lawl?

Yeah, that. What an irritating "joke".

mcflooter06 wrote:EDIT: There is really no need to get so defensive, we're both just stating what we know. Obviously, I chose UT..

I don't even like Texas. I can't stand it, actually. But I do know the Dallas legal market pretty well.

mcflooter06 wrote:

RVP11 wrote:

mcflooter06 wrote:However, to get biglaw you DO need to be top ~10%.

So how exactly does this = SMU placing better into Dallas BigLaw than UT?

As was stated, there are a great deal of firms in Dallas that pay market, but are not considered "BigLaw." Dallas doesn't work like DC or NYC, not in the least bit.

So how exactly does this = SMU placing better into Dallas firms that pay $160k than UT?

And there are FAR MORE jobs in Dallas paying $160k at V100/NJ250 firms than there are at non-V100/NLJ250 firms. It's not even close.

RVP11 wrote:

mcflooter06 wrote:

RVP11 wrote:

mcflooter06 wrote:However, to get biglaw you DO need to be top ~10%.

So how exactly does this = SMU placing better into Dallas BigLaw than UT?

As was stated, there are a great deal of firms in Dallas that pay market, but are not considered "BigLaw." Dallas doesn't work like DC or NYC, not in the least bit.

So how exactly does this = SMU placing better into Dallas firms that pay $160k than UT?

And there are FAR MORE jobs in Dallas paying $160k at V100/NJ250 firms than there are at non-V100/NLJ250 firms. It's not even close.

Would you care to tell us how you know so much more about the Dallas legal market (which I have worked within the past two years...) than us?