Is Law School A Losing Game? Forum

[gyndi.mukwano]

Anyone see this article? I'm curious what some of your reactions are/were? Future and current law students! What can we do to make sure we don't end up like some of these people in this article? These are things we should be considering.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/busin ... wanted=all

[Tiago Splitter]

Don't spend 250K on Thomas Jefferson?

[Wade LeBosh]

Future and current law students! What can we do to make sure we don't end up like some of these people in this article?

Retake.

[KevinP]

Don't spend 250K on Thomas Jefferson?

This.

Also, the following probably wasn't a good idea either.

"Instead, Mr. Wallerstein rented a spacious apartment. He also spent a month studying in the South of France and a month in Prague — all on borrowed money. There were cost-of-living loans, and tuition of about $33,000 a year. Later came a $15,000 loan to cover months of studying for the bar."

[PDaddy]

Don't spend 250K on Thomas Jefferson?

Robert Morse is a cop-out! Since when is USNWR beholden to what the ABA does? USNWR can make its own definition for "employed" and run with it. The ABA does not sanction USNWR and the reverse is not true either. If USNWR or the ABA wants a definition for "EMPLOYED", they can start with mine and tweak it to perfection. Just fix it so that employment at Starbucks, etc, doesn't count so that we can see which schools really do work hard for their students and graduates.

An example of an employed person could be the following:

Requirement #1: Full-time Employment and Compensation - unless negotiated by the graduate by way of stipulated contract, and at the graduate's discretion.

1) A graduate who earns at least $25/Hr on a full-time, permanent basis (defined as 40 hrs/week minimum and at least 52 weeks of employment per year for a minimum of two years) at a "law-oriented position", defined as that which requires for its acceptance and performance that a candidate obtains a J.D., LL.B, J.S.D., LL.M, or PH.D degree and/or admission and continued membership to at least one state bar (or "province" if located in Canada), and whose employment normally entitles him/her to systematic performance reviews resulting in raises, and/or whose job offers a comprehensive health benefits package that is covered at 50% or greater by the employer, a paid vacation package of at least two weeks per year, and/or an optional matching stock options, and/or 401K package, and/or a "partner track" progression. "Law-oriented" can be defined as consisting primarily (85%) of duties that have as their central focus the practice of legal skills taught at a law and/or business school, such as the writing, transmission and filing of briefs, the negotiation, making and execution of contracts, and the performaces of duties consistent with being an officer of the courts, such as interviewing witnesses, perfoming depositions, performing oral arguments, performing mediations, conducting legal research, etc., as well as the teaching/training of others in such practices, and doing all in settings that are largely legal in nature, i.e., where the majority of employees and officers perform similar or related duties, or

2) A graduate holding any non-law related profession where the graduate's yearly compensation demonstrably exceeds an average of $70,000 per year regardless of the position (an average of $69,999.99 or less, in a non-law profession, would mean the graduate is "unemployed"), with a minimum of two years in the profession, and either (a) a demonstrable debt to income ratio of 50% or lower, or (b) a generous, consistently subsidized LRAP program by the employer, or

3) A graduate who holds any legal professorship or administrative position at an accredited law school, college or university, paying a minimum of $65,000 per year, offering any or all of the above benefits of the first paragraph, and where the graduate is required to teach the law to others on at least a trice-weekly basis and for at least six months out of a calendar year, required to work at or manage an administrative office or clinic at an accredited law school, college or university, perform research or studies' whose results are intended for publishing, and/or who originates or co-writes legal briefs for submission to courts of law and/or opposing counsels, or who assists and/or oversees law students in such activities, or

4) Any graduate who has successfully campaigned for and obtained a public office (such as City Council or Mayor), regardless of compensation, locality or level.

5) Continued graduate study shall not count as "employment" unless the graduate is pursuing a Ph.D or operates as the primary administrator of a law-related, government or college/university sponsored research project. The graduate's loan payments must be deferred, partially paid/defrayed and/or subsidized by the college/university.

6) A graduate who holds any public interest position and/or position in which participation is on a full-time basis and/or results in the deferral/defrayment of all educational loans by government, or college or university sponsorship or subsidy.

If I can come up with that in a matter of minutes, imagine what the ABA or USNWR could do. My definition is far from perfect, but my point is simple. If USNWR and/or the ABA wanted to conceive and enforce a viable definition for employment, they could easily do it. They do not want to. With the exception of the top-10 schools, the rankings would be shaken up beyond recognition. USNWR would lose all credibility and fold.

[taxguy]

It can be a losing game if you fall into any of these:


* Incurring over 100K of indebtedness to attend a Tier 3-Tier 4 school and even for most T2 schools without a solid job connection. Only exceptions might be if the T2-4 school is the top school in the state that you want to practice in such as University of New Mexico. Even then, I am not sure that this amount of indebtedness is worth it.

* Accepting scholarship offers from much lower ranked schools especially if there are tough requirements to keep the scholarships cough...University of Seattle top 10%...cough.

* Going to a T2-4 law school thinking that you can always transfer to a much higher ranked school.

* Thinking that you will be that special snowflake who will get a job because you will be in the top 5%-10% of your law school class.The odds are guaranteed 9-1 against you.

* Attending almost any lower tiered law school in a state that you have no intention to practice in, absent huge scholarships or guaranteed job connections.

* Unless you have very rich parents, paying sticker for almost any law school outside of the top 15 schools or so unless you are getting in-state tuition.


* After doing the correct research and finding the right school for you, listening to others

* Knowing that unless you attend a top 15 or so school or the top state school in the state and do VERY well, your chances of making over $60,000 per year are slim.

Finally, going to any law school (yes, even a top tier school) without a thorough understanding of what will be required of you as lawyers (excessive time commitments, lots of stress, declining first year salaries etc) since I would bet that most of you will regret your decision about being a lawyer.

[ohmylord]

Man, there is not a single ounce of optimism at TLS at all. yea the real world is tough and cruel, but the amount of pessimism coming from TLS is just appalling sometimes.

[Zazelmaf]

Man, there is not a single ounce of optimism at TLS at all. yea the real world is tough and cruel, but the amount of pessimism coming from TLS is just appalling sometimes.

I agree with you, but I have posted here before, and I don't buy the pessimism. It is really sad to go through law school thinking that you are doomed. Shouldn't one try to at least enjoy this time? I know I am, and I am very hopeful for my future. Some may disagree, but I imagine one will do better if they are not dwelling on their imminent failure all the time.

Also, as far as I learned during my 1L year, most law school students suck at math (yet think they are AMAZING at it), therefore many have no clue what they are talking about when they list percentages and the like.

[bk1]

Man, there is not a single ounce of optimism at TLS at all. yea the real world is tough and cruel, but the amount of pessimism coming from TLS is just appalling sometimes.

TLS is one of the most optimistic places on the internet about law school. Have you been to xoxo or Above the Law or any of the countless scamblogs?

[TTH]

Man, there is not a single ounce of optimism at TLS at all. yea the real world is tough and cruel, but the amount of pessimism coming from TLS is just appalling sometimes.

TLS is one of the most optimistic places on the internet about law school. Have you been to xoxo or Above the Law or any of the countless scamblogs?

This. TLS usually gets slammed for being too pro-law school.

[Bronte]

Man, there is not a single ounce of optimism at TLS at all. yea the real world is tough and cruel, but the amount of pessimism coming from TLS is just appalling sometimes.

I agree with you, but I have posted here before, and I don't buy the pessimism. It is really sad to go through law school thinking that you are doomed. Shouldn't one try to at least enjoy this time? I know I am, and I am very hopeful for my future. Some may disagree, but I imagine one will do better if they are not dwelling on their imminent failure all the time.

Also, as far as I learned during my 1L year, most law school students suck at math (yet think they are AMAZING at it), therefore many have no clue what they are talking about when they list percentages and the like.

You act as if going to a crappy law school is a foregone conclusion, and thus all "pessimism" does is weaken your chances of enjoying your time there. The point of the negativity is not to make everyone sad in law school. It's to raise awareness among those who have not yet made the ill-fated decision to go to a lower ranked school.

And as to your math point: no. The population at large is fully capable of understanding basic percentages.

[vanwinkle]

Really? This got article discussed six months ago when that article was published.