Top Law Schools

Big Dog wrote:

There are lots of non-URM, non-active duty military personnel with profiles like mine but they get dinged for want of the sought-after factor. It's quite unfortunate that adcomms will take the bland 3.8 traditional major and a 170 LSAT than the 3.1 nuclear physics major with PhD and 170 because they want to maintain that USNWR edge. I think the profession loses by having lawyers of cookie-cutter profiles graduating from the T14. I suppose transfer admission is supposed to rectify some of this but many people understandably don't want to put themselves through it so soon + transfer admission can accommodate only so many people.

I understand your angst/frustration, but the logic of your statement is questionable.

t's quite unfortunate that adcomms will take the bland 3.8 traditional major and a 170 LSAT...

Why? (Regardless of USNews. If they want 3.8 non-URMs, and Cal has shown for years that they do, apply somewhere else.)

I think the profession loses...

This is the segment that I don't understand. There are 300+ law schools, all dumping recently-minted JD's into the "profession." Does it mater if the NucEng graduates from a T14, or #20? The "profession" still gains another lawyer. (Whether that is a good thing, or bad thing is a topic for a different thread.)

Look we are obsessing over these great schools because they give us opportunities that a T50-100 just couldn't. Or at least it would be infinitely harder!

}Look we are obsessing over these great schools because of the perceived opportunities they give us opportunities that a T50-100 just couldn't."

There, I fixed it for you.

btw: who said anything about T50? (Now you are making up strawmen in an attempt to make your point.)

There are plenty of schools above ~50 number who would love a splitter with a 170+.

Still UR 1/7 with no movement. Getting painful!

Big Dog wrote:}Look we are obsessing over these great schools because of the perceived opportunities they give us opportunities that a T50-100 just couldn't."

There, I fixed it for you.

btw: who said anything about T50? (Now you are making up strawmen in an attempt to make your point.)

There are plenty of schools above ~50 number who would love a splitter with a 170+.

Oh you are good! I merely submit to you that in these dire economic times even a non-T14 school might be difficult to find a firm job out of. Sadly.

nigerian22 wrote:

Big Dog wrote:}Look we are obsessing over these great schools because of the perceived opportunities they give us opportunities that a T50-100 just couldn't."

There, I fixed it for you.

btw: who said anything about T50? (Now you are making up strawmen in an attempt to make your point.)

There are plenty of schools above ~50 number who would love a splitter with a 170+.

Oh you are good! I merely submit to you that in these dire economic times even a non-T14 school might be difficult to find a firm job out of. Sadly.

I also think that there are plenty of federal judges who hire clerks from their own alma mater or a similarly regarded school. Many federal judges didn't attend stellar law schools. So if you can get such a clerkship (admittedly there aren't so many jobs available) out of a non-stellar law school, you should be golden. Maybe I'm in the minority (no pun intended) but I do think that clerkship is one of those things that transactional lawyers as well as litigators could profit from.

Bright side of things is that although law schools don't tend to love us due our GPA, law FIRMS do. I know a number of PHDs who went to schools I'd never heard of that were heavily recruited by IP departments and made big-law salaries right out of school. The technical edge is in demand. Honestly, I sometimes wonder if T14 is worth it to me or if I should take a free ride somewhere else.

I merely submit to you that in these dire economic times even a non-T14 school might be difficult to find a firm job out of. Sadly

Have you looked at unranked UCI's employment and clerkship numbers?

btw: even more sadly, there are plenty of unemployed/underemployed T14 grads.

nanochick wrote:Bright side of things is that although law schools don't tend to love us due our GPA, law FIRMS do. I know a number of PHDs who went to schools I'd never heard of that were heavily recruited by IP departments and made big-law salaries right out of school. The technical edge is in demand. Honestly, I sometimes wonder if T14 is worth it to me or if I should take a free ride somewhere else.

If you wish to do IP and not much else, I think the prestige of the law school matters considerably less. But if you wish to do the more conventional things, the prestige factor looms large

nigerian22 wrote:

nanochick wrote:Bright side of things is that although law schools don't tend to love us due our GPA, law FIRMS do. I know a number of PHDs who went to schools I'd never heard of that were heavily recruited by IP departments and made big-law salaries right out of school. The technical edge is in demand. Honestly, I sometimes wonder if T14 is worth it to me or if I should take a free ride somewhere else.

If you wish to do IP and not much else, I think the prestige of the law school matters considerably less. But if you wish to do the more conventional things, the prestige factor looms large

Yeah, that's the catch, right? IP would be great, but chief technology officer or VP at a tech firm might be nice eventually. And then the school the starts to matter.

nanochick wrote:

nigerian22 wrote:

nanochick wrote:Bright side of things is that although law schools don't tend to love us due our GPA, law FIRMS do. I know a number of PHDs who went to schools I'd never heard of that were heavily recruited by IP departments and made big-law salaries right out of school. The technical edge is in demand. Honestly, I sometimes wonder if T14 is worth it to me or if I should take a free ride somewhere else.

If you wish to do IP and not much else, I think the prestige of the law school matters considerably less. But if you wish to do the more conventional things, the prestige factor looms large

Yeah, that's the catch, right? IP would be great, but chief technology officer or VP at a tech firm might be nice eventually. And then the school the starts to matter.

Personally I would play it safe and go for both. But that might be just me. I think protecting the prestige factor is the risk-averse woman in me

nigerian22 wrote:

nanochick wrote:

nigerian22 wrote:

nanochick wrote:Bright side of things is that although law schools don't tend to love us due our GPA, law FIRMS do. I know a number of PHDs who went to schools I'd never heard of that were heavily recruited by IP departments and made big-law salaries right out of school. The technical edge is in demand. Honestly, I sometimes wonder if T14 is worth it to me or if I should take a free ride somewhere else.

If you wish to do IP and not much else, I think the prestige of the law school matters considerably less. But if you wish to do the more conventional things, the prestige factor looms large

Yeah, that's the catch, right? IP would be great, but chief technology officer or VP at a tech firm might be nice eventually. And then the school the starts to matter.

Personally I would play it safe and go for both. But that might be just me. I think protecting the prestige factor is the risk-averse woman in me

Understood. And you only go to law school once. That's where I keep falling out, too.

Big Dog wrote:

I merely submit to you that in these dire economic times even a non-T14 school might be difficult to find a firm job out of. Sadly

Have you looked at unranked UCI's employment and clerkship numbers?

btw: even more sadly, there are plenty of unemployed/underemployed T14 grads.

Georgetown takes 650 students and for a bottom of the T14 school it's sometimes tough for their CDO to "absorb" all 650 and find them appropriate & JD-requiring employment

If you wish to do IP and not much else, I think the prestige of the law school matters considerably less. But if you wish to do the more conventional things, the prestige factor looms large [/quote]

Yeah, that's the catch, right? IP would be great, but chief technology officer or VP at a tech firm might be nice eventually. And then the school the starts to matter.[/quote]

Personally I would play it safe and go for both. But that might be just me. I think protecting the prestige factor is the risk-averse woman in me [/quote]

Understood. And you only go to law school once. That's where I keep falling out, too.[/quote]


Right. For me it's more than just risk-aversion for lucrative purposes. I know I will always wonder about the opportunity forgone if I don't take it. So for sanity's sake.

nigerian22 wrote:If you wish to do IP and not much else, I think the prestige of the law school matters considerably less. But if you wish to do the more conventional things, the prestige factor looms large

Yeah, that's the catch, right? IP would be great, but chief technology officer or VP at a tech firm might be nice eventually. And then the school the starts to matter.[/quote]

Personally I would play it safe and go for both. But that might be just me. I think protecting the prestige factor is the risk-averse woman in me [/quote]

Understood. And you only go to law school once. That's where I keep falling out, too.[/quote]


Right. For me it's more than just risk-aversion for lucrative purposes. I know I will always wonder about the opportunity forgone if I don't take it. So for sanity's sake.[/quote]

Makes sense. It's just when I encounter some of the phd's that continued to take in a six figures while going to (free) law school at night and are now making considerably more than that (and aren't partners) I start to think greedy thoughts. But I think you're right.

Sorry, all, I'm done. Didn't mean to hijack Berkeley as the hard science Ph.D thread.

nanochick wrote:Sorry, all, I'm done. Didn't mean to hijack Berkeley as the hard science Ph.D thread.

do you own an iPod nano?

Sorry, all, I'm done. Didn't mean to hijack Berkeley as the hard science Ph.D thread.

Not a problem. It helps fill the time until the results of Friday's reviews are published.

Big Dog wrote:

Sorry, all, I'm done. Didn't mean to hijack Berkeley as the hard science Ph.D thread.

Not a problem. It helps fill the time until the results of Friday's reviews are published.

Indeed... needed this thread to not be super boring

169/3.75 awaiting March 8th decision after passing "initial review" and being told I'm being reviewed by the faculty committee. After reading this forum carefully, I decided not to send a LOCI. I haven't really done anything new, so an "I LOVE YOU BERKELEY!!! PLEASE ACCEPT ME!" e-mail seemed unjustified.

Anyone else having a panic attack? I've gotten into UCLA with $$ but can't tell you how badly I want Berk.

-Moose

Anyone who received the 3/8 email heard a response yet?

moose90 wrote:169/3.75 awaiting March 8th decision after passing "initial review" and being told I'm being reviewed by the faculty committee. After reading this forum carefully, I decided not to send a LOCI.

You were going to send a LOCI... because you went to faculty review? Good god man, put down the keyboard.

TripTrip wrote:

moose90 wrote:169/3.75 awaiting March 8th decision after passing "initial review" and being told I'm being reviewed by the faculty committee. After reading this forum carefully, I decided not to send a LOCI.

You were going to send a LOCI... because you went to faculty review? Good god man, put down the keyboard.

shut up george

ManOfTheMinute wrote:

TripTrip wrote:

moose90 wrote:169/3.75 awaiting March 8th decision after passing "initial review" and being told I'm being reviewed by the faculty committee. After reading this forum carefully, I decided not to send a LOCI.

You were going to send a LOCI... because you went to faculty review? Good god man, put down the keyboard.

shut up george

I bet you'd send a LOCI after you were admitted.

TripTrip wrote:

ManOfTheMinute wrote:

TripTrip wrote:

moose90 wrote:169/3.75 awaiting March 8th decision after passing "initial review" and being told I'm being reviewed by the faculty committee. After reading this forum carefully, I decided not to send a LOCI.

You were going to send a LOCI... because you went to faculty review? Good god man, put down the keyboard.

shut up george

I bet you'd send a LOCI after you were admitted.

I'm not sure Ron would send a Letter of Passing Interest. Unless it involves meat sandwiches.

I'm curious what to make of having gone under review in late November and hearing literally nothing since (i.e., no FR).

It looks like it's probably not a good thing (figuring if I was being strongly considered, I'd either have been admitted in Dean Tom's initial review, or sent to FR), and if that's true, what about an LOCI? I would almost certainly attend if admitted.

Does anyone have any insight?