Top Law Schools

ATOIsp07 wrote:

Veyron wrote:"5 or 10 years from now, nobody is going to care what you got on the LSAT or where you attended law school."

This is just wrong, TY for playing.

You are so full of yourself. 5 years into your legal career, nobody's going to ask about your LSAT score. Thinking otherwise is almost laughable. I will recant the part about nobody caring where you attend school. But, even then, at that stage of your legal career, it's more for bragging rights and doesn't really make you a better law for attending that particular school.

And, BTW, what they teach you in law school is different from the actual workforce practice.


Quit being an asshat. TY for playing...NOT!

True enough about the LSAT score - wasn't really arguing that. However, I've spoken to biglaw partners and let me tell you, where you go to school will matter until you have built a book of business. Its much easier to get the opp to have done this when you go to a top school.

Unless you're Johnny Cochran or Drew Rosenhaus or anyone else who can make themselves a national name, if you aren't BigLaw in the first couple years after you graduate, it ain't happening. Bottom line is, your school/grades gets you the interview, everything after that is up to you. Key here is: if you don't have the school to get the interview, what's the point of arguing? This comes from my mentors, a Shearman & Sterling hiring partner and a head judge at one of the biggest business law courts in the country. You can move up, but only so far. Don't sell yourself short if you can get into somewhere better. Amortized over the course of a career, the better school will prove so worthwhile if you're concerned about future pay. If you could care less about how much money you make, don't go to law school. Go get a job in Oahu, HI and surf for the rest of your life.

DukeHopeful wrote:Unless you're Johnny Cochran or Drew Rosenhaus or anyone else who can make themselves a national name, if you aren't BigLaw in the first couple years after you graduate, it ain't happening. Bottom line is, your school/grades gets you the interview, everything after that is up to you. Key here is: if you don't have the school to get the interview, what's the point of arguing? This comes from my mentors, a Shearman & Sterling hiring partner and a head judge at one of the biggest business law courts in the country. You can move up, but only so far. Don't sell yourself short if you can get into somewhere better. Amortized over the course of a career, the better school will prove so worthwhile if you're concerned about future pay. If you could care less about how much money you make, don't go to law school. Go get a job in Oahu, HI and surf for the rest of your life.

Well there is a difference between not carrying and not having the pay be a number 1 factor. Regardless..Cooley is Cooley

DukeHopeful wrote:Unless you're Johnny Cochran or Drew Rosenhaus or anyone else who can make themselves a national name, if you aren't BigLaw in the first couple years after you graduate, it ain't happening. Bottom line is, your school/grades gets you the interview, everything after that is up to you. Key here is: if you don't have the school to get the interview, what's the point of arguing? This comes from my mentors, a Shearman & Sterling hiring partner and a head judge at one of the biggest business law courts in the country. You can move up, but only so far. Don't sell yourself short if you can get into somewhere better. Amortized over the course of a career, the better school will prove so worthwhile if you're concerned about future pay. If you could care less about how much money you make, don't go to law school. Go get a job in Oahu, HI and surf for the rest of your life.

So if one doesn't intend on practicing biglaw, that person shouldn't be a lawyer altogether? And get a job surfing? You have a shallow perspective on life and have plenty of growing up to do.

By your logic, then, since a school's name matters so much, nobody outside of HYS should be gunning for biglaw. Students from those schools would certainly have preference for/entitlement to a biglaw job over a dukie!

And, assuming you're admitted into Duke Law, what makes you believe you'll be practicing biglaw when there's a strong chance you won't be in the top half of your class, let alone the top 20%?

ATOIsp07 wrote:

And, assuming you're admitted into Duke Law, what makes you believe you'll be practicing biglaw when there's a strong chance you won't be in the top half of your class, let alone the top 20%?

There is also a 50% chance that he will be in the top half of his class.

psychomohel wrote:

ATOIsp07 wrote:

And, assuming you're admitted into Duke Law, what makes you believe you'll be practicing biglaw when there's a strong chance you won't be in the top half of your class, let alone the top 20%?

There is also a 50% chance that he will be in the top half of his class.

Nope. Class rank is not randomly assigned to students.

The Zeppelin wrote:

psychomohel wrote:

ATOIsp07 wrote:

And, assuming you're admitted into Duke Law, what makes you believe you'll be practicing biglaw when there's a strong chance you won't be in the top half of your class, let alone the top 20%?

There is also a 50% chance that he will be in the top half of his class.

Nope. Class rank is not randomly assigned to students.

Since we don't know who he is in real life and know nothing about the other Duke students, he is basically just a random duke student. So the chance that a random Duke student is in the top 50% of the class is well, 50%.

The Zeppelin wrote:Nope. Class rank is not randomly assigned to students.

No shit, Sherlock. But most people attending a school banking on being in the top 20% of their class will most likely be disappointed. This is just fact. Thanks for playing!

psychomohel wrote:Since we don't know who he is in real life and know nothing about the other Duke students, he is basically just a random duke student. So the chance that a random Duke student is in the top 50% of the class is well, 50%.

bottom 50% of HYS>top 50% of Duke. Correct, right?

Haha, the math is kinda funny. But really, my priorities have changed, and Duke isn't necessarily even my first choice anymore.

For disclosure, I was kinda drunk when I posted the above comment. But basically what I was trying to say is, from the two guys that I've gotten a lot of advice from, that a school's name gets you an interview. Once you have the interview, it's on you. Again, that's their perspective, but they both have significant experience in the field. Perception is reality, and I don't even necessarily agree (maybe I just don't want to) with everything they say. One essentially told me that ITE, if I wasn't going to a T20 school, I should really think about whether I ought to be going at all (this is from a biglaw perspective). This sounds pretty reasonable, and things may even be worse now. My point about surfing was just that if I was going to get a job making $45K a year, I'd skip law school, get a job somewhere nice with easy flexible hours, and do whatever I want whenever I want outside of work. To me, because I really want business law, that's my perspective. Hell, I could bartend summers where I'm from and make $35K in four months.

Basically, I think that it's scary enough thinking about how hard it will be to get the job I want even I am top 1/2 at a T10 school. I wouldn't want to plan around going to a school that gets very little respect from most in the legal community (if someone can prove otherwise, I would stand corrected), doing great a small firm (if the job was even available), and hoping to work my way up to biglaw.

Let's review some quotes:

ATOIsp07 wrote: Quit being an asshat. TY for playing...NOT!

ATOIsp07 wrote: No shit, Sherlock. But most people attending a school banking on being in the top 20% of their class will most likely be disappointed. This is just fact. Thanks for playing!

&

ATOIsp07 wrote:
Law school is temporary. Class is permanent.

Sigh....

...

ATOIsp07 wrote: I understand this is top law school forum but, still, have some consideration and class. Not everyone could attend the best schools. Not everyone had mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes. Not everyone came from a family of doctors and lawyers. Everyone needs to cool off with the snobbery. 5 or 10 years from now, nobody is going to care what you got on the LSAT or where you attended law school. It'll only matter if whether or not you pass the BAR and are a certified lawyer. I highly doubt that 4 years from now, the same people ridiculing OP are going to even remember TLS, let alone trolling on it. Grow up!

Gah this is irritating to me...

Lots of people did not have mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes, came from families without college degrees, and yet still attended great schools (it's called financial aid) and are going to top law schools. For you to look down on those who are going to such schools as all having been products of privilege is just the same as for them to look down on those going to lower-ranked schools as dumb or unfit to practice law.

DukeHopeful wrote:Unless you're Johnny Cochran or Drew Rosenhaus or anyone else who can make themselves a national name, if you aren't BigLaw in the first couple years after you graduate, it ain't happening. Bottom line is, your school/grades gets you the interview, everything after that is up to you. Key here is: if you don't have the school to get the interview, what's the point of arguing? This comes from my mentors, a Shearman & Sterling hiring partner and a head judge at one of the biggest business law courts in the country. You can move up, but only so far. Don't sell yourself short if you can get into somewhere better. Amortized over the course of a career, the better school will prove so worthwhile if you're concerned about future pay. If you could care less about how much money you make, don't go to law school. Go get a job in Oahu, HI and surf for the rest of your life.

this is really true if you want biglaw.

ATOIsp07 wrote:

DukeHopeful wrote:Unless you're Johnny Cochran or Drew Rosenhaus or anyone else who can make themselves a national name, if you aren't BigLaw in the first couple years after you graduate, it ain't happening. Bottom line is, your school/grades gets you the interview, everything after that is up to you. Key here is: if you don't have the school to get the interview, what's the point of arguing? This comes from my mentors, a Shearman & Sterling hiring partner and a head judge at one of the biggest business law courts in the country. You can move up, but only so far. Don't sell yourself short if you can get into somewhere better. Amortized over the course of a career, the better school will prove so worthwhile if you're concerned about future pay. If you could care less about how much money you make, don't go to law school. Go get a job in Oahu, HI and surf for the rest of your life.

So if one doesn't intend on practicing biglaw, that person shouldn't be a lawyer altogether? And get a job surfing? You have a shallow perspective on life and have plenty of growing up to do.

By your logic, then, since a school's name matters so much, nobody outside of HYS should be gunning for biglaw. Students from those schools would certainly have preference for/entitlement to a biglaw job over a dukie!

And, assuming you're admitted into Duke Law, what makes you believe you'll be practicing biglaw when there's a strong chance you won't be in the top half of your class, let alone the top 20%?

That's not what he's saying. People throughout the top-14 have a significantly higher chance at biglaw than those at the 15-200. That's just fact, check the statistics. No going to a top-14 doesn't guarantee anything, but on the flip side not going to a top-14 just about guarantees that you won't be in biglaw. Yes, you can have success without biglaw, but if you want biglaw then you should go top-14.

I will say, though, that you could potentially lateral into biglaw. If you had a law degree, and had a prominent position in the Obama administration right now, I think there are quite a few firms that would be willing to hire you. But this is so unlikely, it's not even really worth considering. And, you're chance of getting that post are improved by....... going to a top school! If even just for the connections you can make.

lawhawk wrote:

ATOIsp07 wrote:

DukeHopeful wrote:Unless you're Johnny Cochran or Drew Rosenhaus or anyone else who can make themselves a national name, if you aren't BigLaw in the first couple years after you graduate, it ain't happening. Bottom line is, your school/grades gets you the interview, everything after that is up to you. Key here is: if you don't have the school to get the interview, what's the point of arguing? This comes from my mentors, a Shearman & Sterling hiring partner and a head judge at one of the biggest business law courts in the country. You can move up, but only so far. Don't sell yourself short if you can get into somewhere better. Amortized over the course of a career, the better school will prove so worthwhile if you're concerned about future pay. If you could care less about how much money you make, don't go to law school. Go get a job in Oahu, HI and surf for the rest of your life.

So if one doesn't intend on practicing biglaw, that person shouldn't be a lawyer altogether? And get a job surfing? You have a shallow perspective on life and have plenty of growing up to do.

By your logic, then, since a school's name matters so much, nobody outside of HYS should be gunning for biglaw. Students from those schools would certainly have preference for/entitlement to a biglaw job over a dukie!

And, assuming you're admitted into Duke Law, what makes you believe you'll be practicing biglaw when there's a strong chance you won't be in the top half of your class, let alone the top 20%?

That's not what he's saying. People throughout the top-14 have a significantly higher chance at biglaw than those at the 15-200. That's just fact, check the statistics. No going to a top-14 doesn't guarantee anything, but on the flip side not going to a top-14 just about guarantees that you won't be in biglaw. Yes, you can have success without biglaw, but if you want biglaw then you should go top-14.

Thanks. If he'd rather prove that he can make biglaw from the outside, then by all means, more power to him. I just don't see why'd you'd want to make it harder on yourself.

There's a significant difference between hating on Cooley because it's a lower ranked school, and hating on Cooley because it's cheapening the national system of law schools, and the lawyer profession in general. This PEP Program, if it is in fact a program to allow people with <143 LSAT scores into law school, only seals this further.

The LSAT may not measure intelligence, but it does measure logical reasoning and reading comprehension fairly well. These two items are possibly *the* most important skills involved with being a lawyer. If you did your best and couldn't score over a 143, I'm sorry, but you just don't have what it takes to be a lawyer. That isn't meant to be stuck up, elitist, or cruel. It's just fact. In some circles, people will tell you to follow your dreams and that you can do whatever you want to. Frankly, that's misguided. Would you support somebody who's terrible at math to become an engineer? No? Then why would you support somebody who's terrible at reading comp/logic to become an attorney?

Doesn't LSAC recommend law schools not to admit students below a 147 or some similar number? <143 is just too low. You shouldn't be able to get into any accredited law school with that until you've improved the skills needed to succeed in the field.

gossipgirl wrote:

ATOIsp07 wrote: I understand this is top law school forum but, still, have some consideration and class. Not everyone could attend the best schools. Not everyone had mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes. Not everyone came from a family of doctors and lawyers. Everyone needs to cool off with the snobbery. 5 or 10 years from now, nobody is going to care what you got on the LSAT or where you attended law school. It'll only matter if whether or not you pass the BAR and are a certified lawyer. I highly doubt that 4 years from now, the same people ridiculing OP are going to even remember TLS, let alone trolling on it. Grow up!

Gah this is irritating to me...

Lots of people did not have mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes, came from families without college degrees, and yet still attended great schools (it's called financial aid) and are going to top law schools. For you to look down on those who are going to such schools as all having been products of privilege is just the same as for them to look down on those going to lower-ranked schools as dumb or unfit to practice law.

Because people who attend the University of Maine, Suffolk University, Thomas Jefferson School of Law or Cooley are a lazy, intellectually-inferior bunch, right?

--ImageRemoved--

ATOIsp07 wrote:

gossipgirl wrote:

ATOIsp07 wrote: I understand this is top law school forum but, still, have some consideration and class. Not everyone could attend the best schools. Not everyone had mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes. Not everyone came from a family of doctors and lawyers. Everyone needs to cool off with the snobbery. 5 or 10 years from now, nobody is going to care what you got on the LSAT or where you attended law school. It'll only matter if whether or not you pass the BAR and are a certified lawyer. I highly doubt that 4 years from now, the same people ridiculing OP are going to even remember TLS, let alone trolling on it. Grow up!

Gah this is irritating to me...

Lots of people did not have mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes, came from families without college degrees, and yet still attended great schools (it's called financial aid) and are going to top law schools. For you to look down on those who are going to such schools as all having been products of privilege is just the same as for them to look down on those going to lower-ranked schools as dumb or unfit to practice law.

Because people who attend the University of Maine, Suffolk University, Thomas Jefferson School of Law or Cooley are a lazy, intellectually-inferior bunch, right?

That went right over your head huh Iota?

DukeHopeful wrote:If he'd rather prove that he can make biglaw from the outside, then by all means, more power to him. I just don't see why'd you'd want to make it harder on yourself.

I'm sure that if OP had his way, he'd be attending HYS, or at least a T14. However, like most applicants, not everyone who wants to do biglaw is able to matriculate into those type of schools for the "preference" by employers that awaits graduates from those schools.

If Cooley is sincerely the best school he can attend, then that's what it is. Although he will also have a mountainous task of making into biglaw, I don't think anybody is in any position to say that he can or cannot make it into biglaw, making a 6-figure salary. Will it be harder for OP to crack biglaw? Definitely. Is he doomed, like so many people on TLS would say/believe? Not necessarily.

ATOIsp07 wrote:

gossipgirl wrote:

ATOIsp07 wrote: I understand this is top law school forum but, still, have some consideration and class. Not everyone could attend the best schools. Not everyone had mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes. Not everyone came from a family of doctors and lawyers. Everyone needs to cool off with the snobbery. 5 or 10 years from now, nobody is going to care what you got on the LSAT or where you attended law school. It'll only matter if whether or not you pass the BAR and are a certified lawyer. I highly doubt that 4 years from now, the same people ridiculing OP are going to even remember TLS, let alone trolling on it. Grow up!

Gah this is irritating to me...

Lots of people did not have mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes, came from families without college degrees, and yet still attended great schools (it's called financial aid) and are going to top law schools. For you to look down on those who are going to such schools as all having been products of privilege is just the same as for them to look down on those going to lower-ranked schools as dumb or unfit to practice law.

Because people who attend the University of Maine, Suffolk University, Thomas Jefferson School of Law or Cooley are a lazy, intellectually-inferior bunch, right?

There are both types of people in all schools ATOI.. you can be a lawyer's son with a father bankrolling you through Suffolk or through Harvard. However there are also hard workers at all levels... all he was trying to say was that not all people going to top schools paid tons of money for top colleges, hired tutors, and took expensive prep courses.

I have gotten decent results, and I think I spent a total of $50 studying for the LSAT as I sat in Borders and read their books while writing down answers in my own notebooks. When applying to schools I got all my information off of TLS, as no one in my family is familiar with law schools.

moonmaster3 wrote:

ATOIsp07 wrote:

gossipgirl wrote:

ATOIsp07 wrote: I understand this is top law school forum but, still, have some consideration and class. Not everyone could attend the best schools. Not everyone had mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes. Not everyone came from a family of doctors and lawyers. Everyone needs to cool off with the snobbery. 5 or 10 years from now, nobody is going to care what you got on the LSAT or where you attended law school. It'll only matter if whether or not you pass the BAR and are a certified lawyer. I highly doubt that 4 years from now, the same people ridiculing OP are going to even remember TLS, let alone trolling on it. Grow up!

Gah this is irritating to me...

Lots of people did not have mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes, came from families without college degrees, and yet still attended great schools (it's called financial aid) and are going to top law schools. For you to look down on those who are going to such schools as all having been products of privilege is just the same as for them to look down on those going to lower-ranked schools as dumb or unfit to practice law.

Because people who attend the University of Maine, Suffolk University, Thomas Jefferson School of Law or Cooley are a lazy, intellectually-inferior bunch, right?

That went right over your head huh Iota?

No I didn't, moon. However, in gossipgirl's response, she is inherently assuming that: A.) Financial Aid is the Holy Grail for those who are not-wealthy/struggling financially B.) Everyone can attend a top school and C.) Those who attend the schools that I mentioned are not fit to practice law.

My response, albeit it was acerbic, was a retort to, what i believe, is, more or less, her actual opinion of those who attend the aforementioned schools.

But I can see how my response was rash.

Between Cooley's cost, its attrition rate, and its bar passage rate, the decision to attend will be a bad one for a very large number of students. Over one third of the 1L class fails out.

SolarWind wrote:

ATOIsp07 wrote:

gossipgirl wrote:

ATOIsp07 wrote: I understand this is top law school forum but, still, have some consideration and class. Not everyone could attend the best schools. Not everyone had mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes. Not everyone came from a family of doctors and lawyers. Everyone needs to cool off with the snobbery. 5 or 10 years from now, nobody is going to care what you got on the LSAT or where you attended law school. It'll only matter if whether or not you pass the BAR and are a certified lawyer. I highly doubt that 4 years from now, the same people ridiculing OP are going to even remember TLS, let alone trolling on it. Grow up!

Gah this is irritating to me...

Lots of people did not have mommy and daddy bankroll them for tutors and LSAT classes, came from families without college degrees, and yet still attended great schools (it's called financial aid) and are going to top law schools. For you to look down on those who are going to such schools as all having been products of privilege is just the same as for them to look down on those going to lower-ranked schools as dumb or unfit to practice law.

Because people who attend the University of Maine, Suffolk University, Thomas Jefferson School of Law or Cooley are a lazy, intellectually-inferior bunch, right?

There are both types of people in all schools ATOI.. you can be a lawyer's son with a father bankrolling you through Suffolk or through Harvard. However there are also hard workers at all levels... all he was trying to say was that not all people going to top schools paid tons of money for top colleges, hired tutors, and took expensive prep courses.

I have gotten decent results, and I think I spent a total of $50 studying for the LSAT as I sat in Borders and read their books while writing down answers in my own notebooks. When applying to schools I got all my information off of TLS, as no one in my family is familiar with law schools.

One example doesn't mean anything, generally speaking. For all I know, you could be an exception or a special case.