Top Law Schools

I am worried about going out of California for law school because I want to eventually practice in California and I am strapped for cash. Going to a school in California seemed a great option, but with this budget crisis, out of state schools are not looking too bad. So far, I have only applied to all law school in California, but should I expand this list and include Cornell and Texas if I get a 167-169 LSAT? Basically, I am wondering how bad would it be for me to go to UC Davis over Cornell if I wanted to practice patent law? BTW, my GPA is a 3.26 double major biochem and history

If you are concerned about costs and do score in the range you mentioned, I would consider adding the University of Washington to your list unless you are completely opposed to going to law school in the Northwest. UW out of state tuition is considerably cheaper than Davis or Hastings in-state and you can get in-state at UW after your first year. From what I have heard, a UW degree gives you a reasonably good shot at getting back to CA if you are willing to put in the work to network and look for jobs down there while going to school in Seattle. I grew up in the Bay Area and have friends and family there and in Washington and could see myself working either place after school, UW over UC Davis was an easy decision for me last year, and I think I would have made the same decision even if my goal was to eventually work in CA.

Cornell would be better, not sure about Texas, but I don't think a 167-169 will get you either with your GPA.

All that said, focus on the lsat and come back when you have an actual score. Are you taking in December and applying this year?

Save your $ at Texas, they seem to be really GPA focused this year.

Yes, taking the December LSAT for this cycle. I sent in my apps already to UC berk, davis, la, hastings, USD, Santa Clara and California Western. I might wait for LSAT score and if within range apply to a few more schools. USC might make it to the list if I get over 165 and I will think about U washington.

jcl2 wrote:If you are concerned about costs and do score in the range you mentioned, I would consider adding the University of Washington to your list unless you are completely opposed to going to law school in the Northwest. UW out of state tuition is considerably cheaper than Davis or Hastings in-state and you can get in-state at UW after your first year.

Everything I've heard about UW residency requirements has indicated otherwise. IE you can't get residency if you are living there for primarily educational purposes (>6 credits/ year).

leobowski wrote:

jcl2 wrote:If you are concerned about costs and do score in the range you mentioned, I would consider adding the University of Washington to your list unless you are completely opposed to going to law school in the Northwest. UW out of state tuition is considerably cheaper than Davis or Hastings in-state and you can get in-state at UW after your first year.

Everything I've heard about UW residency requirements has indicated otherwise. IE you can't get residency if you are living there for primarily educational purposes (>6 credits/ year).

There is an exemption for graduate/professional students. You can't get residency if you are in UG at a Washington school primarily for educational purposes, but you can if you are a grad/professional student. The reason I know this is that I did a graduate program at a state university in Washington and the department made it very clear that funded students from out of state needed to get their residency for their second year in order to keep their assistantships, and they helped everyone through the process. Just make sure you get a drivers license and permanent address as soon as you get to Washington.

From what I've learned talking to various people, if you're not from T14, UCLA, maybe UT Austin, then you might as well go to a California school like USC/Hastings/Davis/Santa Clara if you're planning to practice there.

For the Bay Area, the regional reputation of Hastings and Santa Clara are surprisingly strong. Most people practicing IP law that I've talked to don't feel that higher ranked schools like BU, GW, WUSTL, Fordham, ND would give you an advantage over Hastings or Santa Clara for IP jobs in the bay area.

Cornell certainly wouldn't be a bad choice against Hastings/Davis.

I would have a hard time committing to a school like Hastings given the recent tuition debacle. What's preventing them from throwing in another 30% tuition hike?

If I plan on practicing in cali, should I stick to a cali law school? Plan on doing IP law. Is there a point to me applying to schools outside cali if I want to practice in Cali.

risktaker wrote:If I plan on practicing in cali, should I stick to a cali law school? Plan on doing IP law. Is there a point to me applying to schools outside cali if I want to practice in Cali.

I've been told to go to "the best school I can get into ITE" by people in the business (meaning patent law). Regional used to be more important than ranking, but I think this idea is fading. This is hearsay.

vl2104 wrote:From what I've learned talking to various people, if you're not from T14, UCLA, maybe UT Austin, then you might as well go to a California school like USC/Hastings/Davis/Santa Clara if you're planning to practice there.

For the Bay Area, the regional reputation of Hastings and Santa Clara are surprisingly strong. Most people practicing IP law that I've talked to don't feel that higher ranked schools like BU, GW, WUSTL, Fordham, ND would give you an advantage over Hastings or Santa Clara for IP jobs in the bay area.

Cornell certainly wouldn't be a bad choice against Hastings/Davis.

This is something I've been wondering as a bioengineering BS looking into IP. I have been accepted into Santa Clara as well as out-of-state schools (Baylor + $, Georgia, Cincinnati so far, waiting on 9 more schools mostly in CA). With a 164 and 3.33, I think I have a chance into Davis and Hastings (maybe UCLA/USC?). If I get into either, I would probably still opt for Santa Clara hopefully with scholarship because my home is in San Jose. I've been there for quite a few events, so maybe I'm just attached. I've been in SoCal for the past 5 years for school and work, and I miss being around familiar people and locales. I would not mind practicing in the suburbs of Mountain View, San Jose, etc.

However, I don't know if this is the best thing to do in terms of job prospects in the Bay Area. People here and offline say Santa Clara has a great local reputation. Would withdrawing from Davis/Hastings/UCLA/Berkeley (lol) be a better move if I'm going to have a easier time being close to home? Potentially I'd be with less competitive students (in terms of LSAT, GPA), so that would raise my chances of being in the top of the class. Another concern is that Silicon Valley is full of high-tech companies, and I don't know if my bioengineering BS will give me any edge such a market, or if it matters if I work in a law firm as opposed to in-house. Any insight would be appreciated.

a male human wrote:

vl2104 wrote:From what I've learned talking to various people, if you're not from T14, UCLA, maybe UT Austin, then you might as well go to a California school like USC/Hastings/Davis/Santa Clara if you're planning to practice there.

For the Bay Area, the regional reputation of Hastings and Santa Clara are surprisingly strong. Most people practicing IP law that I've talked to don't feel that higher ranked schools like BU, GW, WUSTL, Fordham, ND would give you an advantage over Hastings or Santa Clara for IP jobs in the bay area.

Cornell certainly wouldn't be a bad choice against Hastings/Davis.

This is something I've been wondering as a bioengineering BS looking into IP. I have been accepted into Santa Clara as well as out-of-state schools (Baylor + $, Georgia, Cincinnati so far, waiting on 9 more schools mostly in CA). With a 164 and 3.33, I think I have a chance into Davis and Hastings (maybe UCLA/USC?). If I get into either, I would probably still opt for Santa Clara hopefully with scholarship because my home is in San Jose. I've been there for quite a few events, so maybe I'm just attached. I've been in SoCal for the past 5 years for school and work, and I miss being around familiar people and locales. I would not mind practicing in the suburbs of Mountain View, San Jose, etc.

However, I don't know if this is the best thing to do in terms of job prospects in the Bay Area. People here and offline say Santa Clara has a great local reputation. Would withdrawing from Davis/Hastings/UCLA/Berkeley (lol) be a better move if I'm going to have a easier time being close to home? Potentially I'd be with less competitive students (in terms of LSAT, GPA), so that would raise my chances of being in the top of the class. Another concern is that Silicon Valley is full of high-tech companies, and I don't know if my bioengineering BS will give me any edge such a market, or if it matters if I work in a law firm as opposed to in-house. Any insight would be appreciated.

With a 164 you shouldn't have trouble getting into any those schools. Santa Clara is great, it has such a high reputation in Silicon Valley it more than makes up for the 60 or so ranking spots it gives up to UCLA/USC in the bay area. With all the high tech companies around you shouldn't have a problem getting a law firm job with the engineering major, or you could likely just go inhouse out of law school with such great credentials. Also, because your lsat is so much higher than the Santa Clara average, you are poised to place in the top of your class if you work hard--so you could probably break into a prestigious law firm like Cravath that requires high grades. Sounds like you're set! Good luck!

Danneskjöld wrote:

a male human wrote:

vl2104 wrote:From what I've learned talking to various people, if you're not from T14, UCLA, maybe UT Austin, then you might as well go to a California school like USC/Hastings/Davis/Santa Clara if you're planning to practice there.

For the Bay Area, the regional reputation of Hastings and Santa Clara are surprisingly strong. Most people practicing IP law that I've talked to don't feel that higher ranked schools like BU, GW, WUSTL, Fordham, ND would give you an advantage over Hastings or Santa Clara for IP jobs in the bay area.

Cornell certainly wouldn't be a bad choice against Hastings/Davis.

This is something I've been wondering as a bioengineering BS looking into IP. I have been accepted into Santa Clara as well as out-of-state schools (Baylor + $, Georgia, Cincinnati so far, waiting on 9 more schools mostly in CA). With a 164 and 3.33, I think I have a chance into Davis and Hastings (maybe UCLA/USC?). If I get into either, I would probably still opt for Santa Clara hopefully with scholarship because my home is in San Jose. I've been there for quite a few events, so maybe I'm just attached. I've been in SoCal for the past 5 years for school and work, and I miss being around familiar people and locales. I would not mind practicing in the suburbs of Mountain View, San Jose, etc.

However, I don't know if this is the best thing to do in terms of job prospects in the Bay Area. People here and offline say Santa Clara has a great local reputation. Would withdrawing from Davis/Hastings/UCLA/Berkeley (lol) be a better move if I'm going to have a easier time being close to home? Potentially I'd be with less competitive students (in terms of LSAT, GPA), so that would raise my chances of being in the top of the class. Another concern is that Silicon Valley is full of high-tech companies, and I don't know if my bioengineering BS will give me any edge such a market, or if it matters if I work in a law firm as opposed to in-house. Any insight would be appreciated.

With a 164 you shouldn't have trouble getting into any those schools. Santa Clara is great, it has such a high reputation in Silicon Valley it more than makes up for the 60 or so ranking spots it gives up to UCLA/USC in the bay area. With all the high tech companies around you shouldn't have a problem getting a law firm job with the engineering major, or you could likely just go inhouse out of law school with such great credentials. Also, because your lsat is so much higher than the Santa Clara average, you are poised to place in the top of your class if you work hard--so you could probably break into a prestigious law firm like Cravath that requires high grades. Sounds like you're set! Good luck!

Thanks! I'm surprised to see such an optimistic post on TLS.
I'm still not convinced about my bioeng BS, though. Wouldn't high-tech corps and firms favor those with a higher degree such as MS or Ph.D., and those with a background in electrical engineering or computer science? Or does it not matter that much? I didn't know Santa Clara could overshadow the 60-rank difference either. If you know of a source that would further put my concerns to perspective, I'd certainly make use of that.

Danneskjöld wrote:

a male human wrote:

vl2104 wrote:From what I've learned talking to various people, if you're not from T14, UCLA, maybe UT Austin, then you might as well go to a California school like USC/Hastings/Davis/Santa Clara if you're planning to practice there.

For the Bay Area, the regional reputation of Hastings and Santa Clara are surprisingly strong. Most people practicing IP law that I've talked to don't feel that higher ranked schools like BU, GW, WUSTL, Fordham, ND would give you an advantage over Hastings or Santa Clara for IP jobs in the bay area.

Cornell certainly wouldn't be a bad choice against Hastings/Davis.

This is something I've been wondering as a bioengineering BS looking into IP. I have been accepted into Santa Clara as well as out-of-state schools (Baylor + $, Georgia, Cincinnati so far, waiting on 9 more schools mostly in CA). With a 164 and 3.33, I think I have a chance into Davis and Hastings (maybe UCLA/USC?). If I get into either, I would probably still opt for Santa Clara hopefully with scholarship because my home is in San Jose. I've been there for quite a few events, so maybe I'm just attached. I've been in SoCal for the past 5 years for school and work, and I miss being around familiar people and locales. I would not mind practicing in the suburbs of Mountain View, San Jose, etc.

However, I don't know if this is the best thing to do in terms of job prospects in the Bay Area. People here and offline say Santa Clara has a great local reputation. Would withdrawing from Davis/Hastings/UCLA/Berkeley (lol) be a better move if I'm going to have a easier time being close to home? Potentially I'd be with less competitive students (in terms of LSAT, GPA), so that would raise my chances of being in the top of the class. Another concern is that Silicon Valley is full of high-tech companies, and I don't know if my bioengineering BS will give me any edge such a market, or if it matters if I work in a law firm as opposed to in-house. Any insight would be appreciated.

With a 164 you shouldn't have trouble getting into any those schools. Santa Clara is great, it has such a high reputation in Silicon Valley it more than makes up for the 60 or so ranking spots it gives up to UCLA/USC in the bay area. With all the high tech companies around you shouldn't have a problem getting a law firm job with the engineering major, or you could likely just go inhouse out of law school with such great credentials. Also, because your lsat is so much higher than the Santa Clara average, you are poised to place in the top of your class if you work hard--so you could probably break into a prestigious law firm like Cravath that requires high grades. Sounds like you're set! Good luck!

I'm not sure if this is an incredibly lame attempt at humor or if you are just very uninformed. Unfortunately the previous poster has very little chance at USC/UCLA and while Santa Clara may be a good choice for him with a good scholarship if he wants to stay in the south bay, it will not be an easy path to biglaw and certainly not a firm like Cravath, and a 164 is not so far above Santa Clara's average that he will be a lock to finish at the top of the class. If it were me I would would wait to see what the scholarship offer from Santa Clara looks like and consider my career goals before turning down Davis or Hastings.

nealric wrote:I would have a hard time committing to a school like Hastings given the recent tuition debacle. What's preventing them from throwing in another 30% tuition hike?

at these rates, probably the threat of terrorism

jcl2 wrote:

Danneskjöld wrote:
With a 164 you shouldn't have trouble getting into any those schools. Santa Clara is great, it has such a high reputation in Silicon Valley it more than makes up for the 60 or so ranking spots it gives up to UCLA/USC in the bay area. With all the high tech companies around you shouldn't have a problem getting a law firm job with the engineering major, or you could likely just go inhouse out of law school with such great credentials. Also, because your lsat is so much higher than the Santa Clara average, you are poised to place in the top of your class if you work hard--so you could probably break into a prestigious law firm like Cravath that requires high grades. Sounds like you're set! Good luck!

I'm not sure if this is an incredibly lame attempt at humor or if you are just very uninformed. Unfortunately the previous poster has very little chance at USC/UCLA and while Santa Clara may be a good choice for him with a good scholarship if he wants to stay in the south bay, it will not be an easy path to biglaw and certainly not a firm like Cravath, and a 164 is not so far above Santa Clara's average that he will be a lock to finish at the top of the class. If it were me I would would wait to see what the scholarship offer from Santa Clara looks like and consider my career goals before turning down Davis or Hastings.

I think lame and uninformed is a little strong. Optimistic, maybe...
I was pretty surprised myself talking to SCU alumni and other IP attorneys in the Bay Area.
Many feel SCU is equivalent or even better than Hastings/Davis for IP oriented people with science/engineering backgrounds.
It's true that 164/3.33 isn't necessary a lock at Hastings/Davis.
Bioengineering also isn't sought after quite as much as EE. For anything 'Bio' related, a PhD is typically preferred. With good LS grades, many barriers would of course be broken down.
Does Cravath even have an IP department outside of litigation?

vl2104 wrote:

jcl2 wrote:

Danneskjöld wrote:
With a 164 you shouldn't have trouble getting into any those schools. Santa Clara is great, it has such a high reputation in Silicon Valley it more than makes up for the 60 or so ranking spots it gives up to UCLA/USC in the bay area. With all the high tech companies around you shouldn't have a problem getting a law firm job with the engineering major, or you could likely just go inhouse out of law school with such great credentials. Also, because your lsat is so much higher than the Santa Clara average, you are poised to place in the top of your class if you work hard--so you could probably break into a prestigious law firm like Cravath that requires high grades. Sounds like you're set! Good luck!

I'm not sure if this is an incredibly lame attempt at humor or if you are just very uninformed. Unfortunately the previous poster has very little chance at USC/UCLA and while Santa Clara may be a good choice for him with a good scholarship if he wants to stay in the south bay, it will not be an easy path to biglaw and certainly not a firm like Cravath, and a 164 is not so far above Santa Clara's average that he will be a lock to finish at the top of the class. If it were me I would would wait to see what the scholarship offer from Santa Clara looks like and consider my career goals before turning down Davis or Hastings.

I think lame and uninformed is a little strong. Optimistic, maybe...
I was pretty surprised myself talking to SCU alumni and other IP attorneys in the Bay Area.
Many feel SCU is equivalent or even better than Hastings/Davis for IP oriented people with science/engineering backgrounds.
It's true that 164/3.33 isn't necessary a lock at Hastings/Davis.
Bioengineering also isn't sought after quite as much as EE. For anything 'Bio' related, a PhD is typically preferred. With good LS grades, many barriers would of course be broken down.
Does Cravath even have an IP department outside of litigation?

I did a bit of searching around the boards about the MS/PhD issue. Someone has mentioned that the detailed technical knowledge is the responsibility of whoever is filing the patents or expert witnesses, and I just need to be able to follow what they are saying. It's been said pretty often that Santa Clara is best if you want to be in the South Bay doing IP with science background (Go for higher ranked if you want something else. Going to Boalt/Stanford will of course greatly expand your options.). One poster did say the main reason for its reputation in IP is one of the professors who has retired since, which means the school may not have such a strong influence by the time I graduate in 2013. With all these different possible factors, I can't know for sure what my best option is, but I can't shake Santa Clara off my mind as one of my top choices even if I am getting offers elsewhere. At least I can leverage for a bit of scholarship with that Georgia admission. (Plus, I hope to have a more relaxing time at SCU rather than struggle to maintain the median at a tougher school >_>) Thanks for the variety of input so far.

vl2104 wrote:

jcl2 wrote:

Danneskjöld wrote:
With a 164 you shouldn't have trouble getting into any those schools. Santa Clara is great, it has such a high reputation in Silicon Valley it more than makes up for the 60 or so ranking spots it gives up to UCLA/USC in the bay area. With all the high tech companies around you shouldn't have a problem getting a law firm job with the engineering major, or you could likely just go inhouse out of law school with such great credentials. Also, because your lsat is so much higher than the Santa Clara average, you are poised to place in the top of your class if you work hard--so you could probably break into a prestigious law firm like Cravath that requires high grades. Sounds like you're set! Good luck!

I'm not sure if this is an incredibly lame attempt at humor or if you are just very uninformed. Unfortunately the previous poster has very little chance at USC/UCLA and while Santa Clara may be a good choice for him with a good scholarship if he wants to stay in the south bay, it will not be an easy path to biglaw and certainly not a firm like Cravath, and a 164 is not so far above Santa Clara's average that he will be a lock to finish at the top of the class. If it were me I would would wait to see what the scholarship offer from Santa Clara looks like and consider my career goals before turning down Davis or Hastings.

I think lame and uninformed is a little strong. Optimistic, maybe...
I was pretty surprised myself talking to SCU alumni and other IP attorneys in the Bay Area.
Many feel SCU is equivalent or even better than Hastings/Davis for IP oriented people with science/engineering backgrounds.
It's true that 164/3.33 isn't necessary a lock at Hastings/Davis.
Bioengineering also isn't sought after quite as much as EE. For anything 'Bio' related, a PhD is typically preferred. With good LS grades, many barriers would of course be broken down.
Does Cravath even have an IP department outside of litigation?

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound condescending. I actually thought the post might have been a subtle attempt to be facetious and rip on "TTT" schools like SC, which would be way more ridicules than what I think the post actually was -- just overly optimistic. If you have an IP background Santa Clara can be a good place to go, still not sure if it would actually place better than Davis or Hastings, but the door to Biglaw is not really as closed as it would be at many similarly ranked schools, especially for IP. I was just pointing out that that post was way over optimistic and you won't quite be "set" just by going to Santa Clara.

I do have a relative who went to Santa Clara and ended up getting a IP biglaw job by the way.

Hi,

I'm facing a similar decision (Hastings vs Santa Clara; I've been waitlisted at UCLA - ideally I'd be able to go there).

My interests are divided between IP-related law (background in computer engineering) and public interest law.

I currently work in the software industry (QA) and am looking into making a career change into IP / patent law practice and down the line - public interest.

I'd be looking at sticker at Hastings, and some offer of money from santa clara.

Some of my lawyer friends believe it's a horrible time to be entering the legal industry now; others believe that some fields (such as IP) are still relatively stable (of course this one had graduated from Stanford Law so ...).

My biggest concern like many others is finding a job to be able to pay back all that debt. That is complicated by the fact that I have a mortgage to pay as well.

I'd appreciate input into what your thoughts are on

a) Whether to attend (now)

b) Where to attend

c) If I am set on transitioning to the legal field, to go this year, or try again (I got a 168 on my last lsat and feel I can probably eke out a few more points if I had to. My PT average was around 168-169 (I historically have done the worst on logic games, so maybe not?)).


Thanks!

pekkle wrote:Hi,

I'm facing a similar decision (Hastings vs Santa Clara; I've been waitlisted at UCLA - ideally I'd be able to go there).

My interests are divided between IP-related law (background in computer engineering) and public interest law.

I currently work in the software industry (QA) and am looking into making a career change into IP / patent law practice and down the line - public interest.

I'd be looking at sticker at Hastings, and some offer of money from santa clara.

Some of my lawyer friends believe it's a horrible time to be entering the legal industry now; others believe that some fields (such as IP) are still relatively stable (of course this one had graduated from Stanford Law so ...).

My biggest concern like many others is finding a job to be able to pay back all that debt. That is complicated by the fact that I have a mortgage to pay as well.

I'd appreciate input into what your thoughts are on

a) Whether to attend (now)

b) Where to attend

c) If I am set on transitioning to the legal field, to go this year, or try again (I got a 168 on my last lsat and feel I can probably eke out a few more points if I had to. My PT average was around 168-169 (I historically have done the worst on logic games, so maybe not?)).


Thanks!

The mortgage seems like the big sticking point - at sticker at Hastings, you're looking at $200k in debt, in addition to your mortgage.

SCU doesn't seem to give out a lot of money, unfortunately. However, it seems like if you are truly someone who can make it into IP, it's not a bad place to go.

Great Satchmo wrote:

pekkle wrote:Hi,

I'm facing a similar decision (Hastings vs Santa Clara; I've been waitlisted at UCLA - ideally I'd be able to go there).

My interests are divided between IP-related law (background in computer engineering) and public interest law.

I currently work in the software industry (QA) and am looking into making a career change into IP / patent law practice and down the line - public interest.

I'd be looking at sticker at Hastings, and some offer of money from santa clara.

Some of my lawyer friends believe it's a horrible time to be entering the legal industry now; others believe that some fields (such as IP) are still relatively stable (of course this one had graduated from Stanford Law so ...).

My biggest concern like many others is finding a job to be able to pay back all that debt. That is complicated by the fact that I have a mortgage to pay as well.

I'd appreciate input into what your thoughts are on

a) Whether to attend (now)

b) Where to attend

c) If I am set on transitioning to the legal field, to go this year, or try again (I got a 168 on my last lsat and feel I can probably eke out a few more points if I had to. My PT average was around 168-169 (I historically have done the worst on logic games, so maybe not?)).


Thanks!

The mortgage seems like the big sticking point - at sticker at Hastings, you're looking at $200k in debt, in addition to your mortgage.

SCU doesn't seem to give out a lot of money, unfortunately. However, it seems like if you are truly someone who can make it into IP, it's not a bad place to go.

How did you come up with 200k tuition for Hastings? The 2010-2011 estimate is 39k, and it won't rise significantly for the remaining 2 years. I'd say it's closer to 125k at most without scholarships and grants.

a male human wrote:

Great Satchmo wrote:

pekkle wrote:Hi,

I'm facing a similar decision (Hastings vs Santa Clara; I've been waitlisted at UCLA - ideally I'd be able to go there).

My interests are divided between IP-related law (background in computer engineering) and public interest law.

I currently work in the software industry (QA) and am looking into making a career change into IP / patent law practice and down the line - public interest.

I'd be looking at sticker at Hastings, and some offer of money from santa clara.

Some of my lawyer friends believe it's a horrible time to be entering the legal industry now; others believe that some fields (such as IP) are still relatively stable (of course this one had graduated from Stanford Law so ...).

My biggest concern like many others is finding a job to be able to pay back all that debt. That is complicated by the fact that I have a mortgage to pay as well.

I'd appreciate input into what your thoughts are on

a) Whether to attend (now)

b) Where to attend

c) If I am set on transitioning to the legal field, to go this year, or try again (I got a 168 on my last lsat and feel I can probably eke out a few more points if I had to. My PT average was around 168-169 (I historically have done the worst on logic games, so maybe not?)).


Thanks!

The mortgage seems like the big sticking point - at sticker at Hastings, you're looking at $200k in debt, in addition to your mortgage.

SCU doesn't seem to give out a lot of money, unfortunately. However, it seems like if you are truly someone who can make it into IP, it's not a bad place to go.

How did you come up with 200k tuition for Hastings? The 2010-2011 estimate is 39k, and it won't rise significantly for the remaining 2 years. I'd say it's closer to 125k at most without scholarships and grants.

That doesn't include living expenses. When you include those you get 60k for CA residents or 70k per year for non-residents.