Chapman 2013

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
dep15152
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby dep15152 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:09 pm

I suggest those still in review for longer than ten weeks to email Tracy Simmons, she helped me out a ton!

FranchiZe48
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 12:29 am

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby FranchiZe48 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:09 pm

Hey guys,

looking really hard at Chapman. I want to practice in SoCal. Just wanted your guys thoughts about Chapman moving forward and how 1 and 2Ls have faired and their overall experiences there. Thanks!

justright157
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 7:12 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby justright157 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:52 pm

your in at usc, ucla, usd, pepperdine and loyola? why are you considering chapman?

FranchiZe48 wrote:Hey guys,

looking really hard at Chapman. I want to practice in SoCal. Just wanted your guys thoughts about Chapman moving forward and how 1 and 2Ls have faired and their overall experiences there. Thanks!

FranchiZe48
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 12:29 am

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby FranchiZe48 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:58 pm

[quote="justright157"]your in at usc, ucla, usd, pepperdine and loyola? why are you considering chapman?


The prospect of graduating from law school with no debt lol

justright157
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 7:12 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby justright157 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 5:20 pm

i understand what your saying, but if i was accepted to ucla or usc i would be in there no doubt. the amount of money you'll make when you come out can't compare to a loyola or chapman. i'm very interested in chapman myself so im not trying to knock it in anyway, but prospects and reputation you'll get from usc and ucla are in another league

FranchiZe48 wrote:
justright157 wrote:your in at usc, ucla, usd, pepperdine and loyola? why are you considering chapman?


The prospect of graduating from law school with no debt lol

mjs92983
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:23 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby mjs92983 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 6:57 pm

Let's define another league. A top LA job goes for somewhere around 145 to 160k. Match that with about the same amount of debt or more coming straight out of law school. It's a tough choice either way. If you work on the assumption that 145k is the base salary that you'll make your whole life then it's not so bad. But what if you hate doing doc review? What if you decide that you want to put bad guys in jail 2 years into it. Additionally, biglaw jobs aren't guaranteed to USC and UCLA grads. And while a smaller law firm may be impressed that you graduated from usc/ucla, it may not mean that they can pay you accordingly more. There's a lot to consider. I chose Chapman because it gave the the option of picking a lower paying job if i wanted. plus I kind of figured that I'd have to be near the top of my class at USC/UCLA as well as chapman to get a biggishlaw job.

justright157
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 7:12 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby justright157 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:14 pm

i totally get what your saying and debtwise its always nice to go to school for free and not worry about loans even though you might make half than what a ucla jd starting salary is.

when i say another league what i mean is reputation. ucla and usc have a reputation for outstanding lawyers not only in LA but anywhere in this country. i have friends at both ucla and usc and they've stated that even the bottom of the class is able to get internships and jobs that a top person at loyola or santa clara wouldn't be able to get, all because of name recognition. Again im not trying to smack chapman cause i want to go there myself, but chapman's reputation is not in the same league as a usc and ucla.

mjs92983 wrote:Let's define another league. A top LA job goes for somewhere around 145 to 160k. Match that with about the same amount of debt or more coming straight out of law school. It's a tough choice either way. If you work on the assumption that 145k is the base salary that you'll make your whole life then it's not so bad. But what if you hate doing doc review? What if you decide that you want to put bad guys in jail 2 years into it. Additionally, biglaw jobs aren't guaranteed to USC and UCLA grads. And while a smaller law firm may be impressed that you graduated from usc/ucla, it may not mean that they can pay you accordingly more. There's a lot to consider. I chose Chapman because it gave the the option of picking a lower paying job if i wanted. plus I kind of figured that I'd have to be near the top of my class at USC/UCLA as well as chapman to get a biggishlaw job.

Foosters Galore
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:15 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby Foosters Galore » Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:47 pm

justright157 wrote:i totally get what your saying and debtwise its always nice to go to school for free and not worry about loans even though you might make half than what a ucla jd starting salary is.

when i say another league what i mean is reputation. ucla and usc have a reputation for outstanding lawyers not only in LA but anywhere in this country. i have friends at both ucla and usc and they've stated that even the bottom of the class is able to get internships and jobs that a top person at loyola or santa clara wouldn't be able to get, all because of name recognition. Again im not trying to smack chapman cause i want to go there myself, but chapman's reputation is not in the same league as a usc and ucla.

mjs92983 wrote:Let's define another league. A top LA job goes for somewhere around 145 to 160k. Match that with about the same amount of debt or more coming straight out of law school. It's a tough choice either way. If you work on the assumption that 145k is the base salary that you'll make your whole life then it's not so bad. But what if you hate doing doc review? What if you decide that you want to put bad guys in jail 2 years into it. Additionally, biglaw jobs aren't guaranteed to USC and UCLA grads. And while a smaller law firm may be impressed that you graduated from usc/ucla, it may not mean that they can pay you accordingly more. There's a lot to consider. I chose Chapman because it gave the the option of picking a lower paying job if i wanted. plus I kind of figured that I'd have to be near the top of my class at USC/UCLA as well as chapman to get a biggishlaw job.



The part about usc/ucla grads who are at the bottom of their class beating top loyola and the likes grads for jobs is false. Sure it may have happened once or twice, but to imply it occurs with any sort of regularity is flat out incorrect. I know top loyola and pepperdine grads at two of the largest most respected firms in LA. To suggest that usc grads at the bottom of their class would have received these positions is laughable, unless of course they have some serious family connections.

User avatar
Mr. Matlock
Posts: 1360
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 6:36 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby Mr. Matlock » Thu Jun 03, 2010 8:12 pm

mjs92983 wrote:Let's define another league. A top LA job goes for somewhere around 145 to 160k. Match that with about the same amount of debt or more coming straight out of law school. It's a tough choice either way. If you work on the assumption that 145k is the base salary that you'll make your whole life then it's not so bad. But what if you hate doing doc review? What if you decide that you want to put bad guys in jail 2 years into it. Additionally, biglaw jobs aren't guaranteed to USC and UCLA grads. And while a smaller law firm may be impressed that you graduated from usc/ucla, it may not mean that they can pay you accordingly more. There's a lot to consider. I chose Chapman because it gave the the option of picking a lower paying job if i wanted. plus I kind of figured that I'd have to be near the top of my class at USC/UCLA as well as chapman to get a biggishlaw job.

35.9% of UCLA got Biglaw in 2009 and 41.3% from USC! Add to that the prestige of higher clerkships, state/federal government positions, AND your pick of the upper echelon boutique firms from those 2 schools, makes your reasoning puzzling to say the least. In Los Angeles, those 2 schools are worth sticker putting them in a league of their own.

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202443758843&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1

mjs92983
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 6:23 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby mjs92983 » Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:12 pm

Mr. Matlock wrote:
mjs92983 wrote:Let's define another league. A top LA job goes for somewhere around 145 to 160k. Match that with about the same amount of debt or more coming straight out of law school. It's a tough choice either way. If you work on the assumption that 145k is the base salary that you'll make your whole life then it's not so bad. But what if you hate doing doc review? What if you decide that you want to put bad guys in jail 2 years into it. Additionally, biglaw jobs aren't guaranteed to USC and UCLA grads. And while a smaller law firm may be impressed that you graduated from usc/ucla, it may not mean that they can pay you accordingly more. There's a lot to consider. I chose Chapman because it gave the the option of picking a lower paying job if i wanted. plus I kind of figured that I'd have to be near the top of my class at USC/UCLA as well as chapman to get a biggishlaw job.

35.9% of UCLA got Biglaw in 2009 and 41.3% from USC! Add to that the prestige of higher clerkships, state/federal government positions, AND your pick of the upper echelon boutique firms from those 2 schools, makes your reasoning puzzling to say the least. In Los Angeles, those 2 schools are worth sticker putting them in a league of their own.

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202443758843&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1


No one is saying that they aren't better schools. That is clear. What I am saying is that someone considering chapman and other southern CA schools is debt load and the type of life they want to have. If you're positive that you want BigLaw right out of school and stay there the rest of your life then USC/UCLA are the types of schools for you. If you think legal academia is right for you then Chapman isn't the school for you. If you're positive you want to work some place other than Southern CA then Chapmen isn't for you either. By the same token, just because a school is academically better doesn't mean it's the right choice for everyone.

In short, of course USC/UCLA are better schools. but what does it effectively get you? The main promise of payout is for the people that are convinced they want to go to biglaw forever, a lot of people don't. An often underlying defense for going to an academically better school is prestige, which is pretty silly. Prestige is for people with low self esteem, watch some Dr. Phil and get over it. 75% of education is what you put into it anyway.

User avatar
Mr. Matlock
Posts: 1360
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 6:36 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby Mr. Matlock » Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:29 pm

mjs92983 wrote:
No one is saying that they aren't better schools. That is clear. What I am saying is that someone considering chapman and other southern CA schools is debt load and the type of life they want to have. If you're positive that you want BigLaw right out of school and stay there the rest of your life then USC/UCLA are the types of schools for you. If you think legal academia is right for you then Chapman isn't the school for you. If you're positive you want to work some place other than Southern CA then Chapmen isn't for you either. By the same token, just because a school is academically better doesn't mean it's the right choice for everyone.

In short, of course USC/UCLA are better schools. but what does it effectively get you? The main promise of payout is for the people that are convinced they want to go to biglaw forever, a lot of people don't. An often underlying defense for going to an academically better school is prestige, which is pretty silly. Prestige is for people with low self esteem, watch some Dr. Phil and get over it. 75% of education is what you put into it anyway.

I certainly agree with most of what you are saying in the 1st paragraph, but what's in the 2nd doesn't make sense. It has NOTHING to do with prestige and EVERYTHING to do with getting viable employment of any sort. I'm TTT myself, but I'm not foolish enough to think that if I'm not in the top half of my class, at the very least, my opportunities will be next to nothing. To not know that by being at USC/UCLA greatly increases the leeway you have with class placement and the jobs you will be open to, is just choosing to remain ignorant. Prestige be damned. I want a f'ing job when I graduate. (One that's actually in law) I don't want to prove a point to the world by experimenting with other opportunities.

If I am so fortunate to be able to transfer to USC after 1L, no matter how much I love my current school, I'm gone! Same goes for if I'm not in at least the top 30%. If I fail to meet that, I'm gone as well.... to another industry.

User avatar
twert
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby twert » Thu Jun 03, 2010 10:42 pm

Mr. Matlock wrote:
mjs92983 wrote:
No one is saying that they aren't better schools. That is clear. What I am saying is that someone considering chapman and other southern CA schools is debt load and the type of life they want to have. If you're positive that you want BigLaw right out of school and stay there the rest of your life then USC/UCLA are the types of schools for you. If you think legal academia is right for you then Chapman isn't the school for you. If you're positive you want to work some place other than Southern CA then Chapmen isn't for you either. By the same token, just because a school is academically better doesn't mean it's the right choice for everyone.

In short, of course USC/UCLA are better schools. but what does it effectively get you? The main promise of payout is for the people that are convinced they want to go to biglaw forever, a lot of people don't. An often underlying defense for going to an academically better school is prestige, which is pretty silly. Prestige is for people with low self esteem, watch some Dr. Phil and get over it. 75% of education is what you put into it anyway.

I certainly agree with most of what you are saying in the 1st paragraph, but what's in the 2nd doesn't make sense. It has NOTHING to do with prestige and EVERYTHING to do with getting viable employment of any sort. I'm TTT myself, but I'm not foolish enough to think that if I'm not in the top half of my class, at the very least, my opportunities will be next to nothing. To not know that by being at USC/UCLA greatly increases the leeway you have with class placement and the jobs you will be open to, is just choosing to remain ignorant. Prestige be damned. I want a f'ing job when I graduate. (One that's actually in law) I don't want to prove a point to the world by experimenting with other opportunities.

If I am so fortunate to be able to transfer to USC after 1L, no matter how much I love my current school, I'm gone! Same goes for if I'm not in at least the top 30%. If I fail to meet that, I'm gone as well.... to another industry.

i agree with you matlock, but i certainly think mjs makes sense. if you don't want biglaw why pay for a school who's biggest selling point is biglaw? the thing is though that ucla and usc offer so much more certainty and security that you pretty much have to take on the debt.

User avatar
Mr. Matlock
Posts: 1360
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 6:36 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby Mr. Matlock » Thu Jun 03, 2010 11:01 pm

twert wrote:i agree with you matlock, but i certainly think mjs makes sense. if you don't want biglaw why pay for a school who's biggest selling point is biglaw? the thing is though that ucla and usc offer so much more certainty and security that you pretty much have to take on the debt.

I'm not arguing that a full ride guaranteed doesn't makes sense. But regardless, you're stuck in the area you're in and you'd damn well better make sure your at least in the top 1/2 of the class. (Once again, I'm in this situation, but I have a pretty good idea of the lay of the land. 2 years of research hasn't just flown over my head)

The NLJ 250 is just a part of what USC/UCLA gives you. (a BIG part, granted) But it's ALL the other smaller firms, clerkships, top advocate PI and government jobs. Plus they offer extra LRAP options on TOP of IBR for these lower paying PI jobs to help pay off the incredible debt. (God forbid the State of California actually offer anyone a reasonably priced option! :? )

You can't just say the people that go their are only prestige whoring. They have options that many won't get a sniff at beyond just biglaw and academia.

Plus, it was really this quote that stuck out to me. That's why I posted the NLJ250 #'s. 40% getting Big Law in this economy is a HUGE surprise. I doubt top 5% at Chapman even get a summer opportunity.
I chose Chapman because it gave the the option of picking a lower paying job if i wanted. plus I kind of figured that I'd have to be near the top of my class at USC/UCLA as well as chapman to get a biggishlaw job.

Foosters Galore
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:15 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby Foosters Galore » Fri Jun 11, 2010 6:00 pm

Anyone else still under review get an email concerning financial loans? I got pretty excited when I got the email as I assumed they wouldn't send it to someone who hasn't gotten in yet, but my status checker is still at "under review"

User avatar
Mr. Matlock
Posts: 1360
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 6:36 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby Mr. Matlock » Fri Jun 11, 2010 6:43 pm

Foosters Galore wrote:Anyone else still under review get an email concerning financial loans? I got pretty excited when I got the email as I assumed they wouldn't send it to someone who hasn't gotten in yet, but my status checker is still at "under review"

I'm recently waitlisted and got the same email followed by the "clarification". They have nothing else going on until 2nd deposits due on the 15th, so why not fuck with the minds of the weary.

Hell, if I were in their shoes, I'd probably fuck with us too. :|

LawMuns
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby LawMuns » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:32 pm

So, what happens first?

a) Chapman finally reaches a decision on our applications.
b) they finally plug that oil leak in the Gulf.

User avatar
Mr. Matlock
Posts: 1360
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 6:36 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby Mr. Matlock » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:44 pm

LawMuns wrote:So, what happens first?

a) Chapman finally reaches a decision on our applications.
b) they finally plug that oil leak in the Gulf.

It is TRULY sad because I have no idea. Seriously. Great Vegas teaser here.

justright157
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 7:12 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby justright157 » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:15 pm

haha i got that email too...i knew people were going to email back and panic about " does this mean im innnnn!!" ahaha i almost emailed myself.

thanks for fucking with me chapman! ps. i still want in

Mr. Matlock wrote:
Foosters Galore wrote:Anyone else still under review get an email concerning financial loans? I got pretty excited when I got the email as I assumed they wouldn't send it to someone who hasn't gotten in yet, but my status checker is still at "under review"

I'm recently waitlisted and got the same email followed by the "clarification". They have nothing else going on until 2nd deposits due on the 15th, so why not fuck with the minds of the weary.

Hell, if I were in their shoes, I'd probably fuck with us too. :|

dep15152
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby dep15152 » Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:11 pm

justright157 wrote:haha i got that email too...i knew people were going to email back and panic about " does this mean im innnnn!!" ahaha i almost emailed myself.

thanks for fucking with me chapman! ps. i still want in

Mr. Matlock wrote:
Foosters Galore wrote:Anyone else still under review get an email concerning financial loans? I got pretty excited when I got the email as I assumed they wouldn't send it to someone who hasn't gotten in yet, but my status checker is still at "under review"

I'm recently waitlisted and got the same email followed by the "clarification". They have nothing else going on until 2nd deposits due on the 15th, so why not fuck with the minds of the weary.

Hell, if I were in their shoes, I'd probably fuck with us too. :|



Don't worry people who are in got them too. I have a feeling a lot of people will not make that 2nd seat deposit(people with the high LSATS/GPAS that will be attending other places) I think a few people on other boards have yet to accept their offers and the deadline is tomorrow.

Will be rooting for everyone here!

User avatar
SwollenMonkey
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:28 am

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby SwollenMonkey » Mon Jun 14, 2010 6:43 pm

I'm on the wait-list. At least it is now official. Received the confirmation email today and submitted today. Good luck to all striving for Chapman Law!

justright157
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 7:12 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby justright157 » Mon Jun 14, 2010 7:08 pm

good luck bro. at least its not a rejection.

SwollenMonkey wrote:I'm on the wait-list. At least it is now official. Received the confirmation email today and submitted today. Good luck to all striving for Chapman Law!

Foosters Galore
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:15 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby Foosters Galore » Mon Jun 14, 2010 9:04 pm

SwollenMonkey wrote:I'm on the wait-list. At least it is now official. Received the confirmation email today and submitted today. Good luck to all striving for Chapman Law!



Sorry to hear that. When did you go under review? Ive been UR since 4/21 and am expecting news somewhat soon.

User avatar
SwollenMonkey
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:28 am

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby SwollenMonkey » Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:16 pm

Foosters Galore wrote:
SwollenMonkey wrote:I'm on the wait-list. At least it is now official. Received the confirmation email today and submitted today. Good luck to all striving for Chapman Law!



Sorry to hear that. When did you go under review? Ive been UR since 4/21 and am expecting news somewhat soon.



Was in review since 2/11.

Foosters Galore
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:15 pm

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby Foosters Galore » Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:02 am

SwollenMonkey wrote:
Foosters Galore wrote:
SwollenMonkey wrote:I'm on the wait-list. At least it is now official. Received the confirmation email today and submitted today. Good luck to all striving for Chapman Law!



Sorry to hear that. When did you go under review? Ive been UR since 4/21 and am expecting news somewhat soon.



Was in review since 2/11.



Wow. Wtf were they doing?

User avatar
SwollenMonkey
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:28 am

Re: Chapman 2013

Postby SwollenMonkey » Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:56 pm

Foosters Galore wrote:
SwollenMonkey wrote:
Foosters Galore wrote:
SwollenMonkey wrote:I'm on the wait-list. At least it is now official. Received the confirmation email today and submitted today. Good luck to all striving for Chapman Law!



Sorry to hear that. When did you go under review? Ive been UR since 4/21 and am expecting news somewhat soon.



Was in review since 2/11.



Wow. Wtf were they doing?



Hard to say, but I'd like to think they were thinking about my application. =-D




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”