WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby JCougar » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:31 am

All I can say is that as a splitter with a 168, I only got $10K/year. And I'm competing with the largest national class of law grads ever. You guys and gals are damn lucky.

I hated my pre-law school job so much though that it was almost worth it not to wait. And I might get a job with the Feds pretty soon, so 10 year IBR will make it moot.

All I can say is that the CSO better damn well pay that $350 I asked for to go to this conference this summer. :D

LawSchoolAFROBarbie
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:28 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby LawSchoolAFROBarbie » Tue Jun 18, 2013 6:29 am

JCougar wrote:All I can say is that as a splitter with a 168, I only got $10K/year. And I'm competing with the largest national class of law grads ever. You guys and gals are damn lucky.

I hated my pre-law school job so much though that it was almost worth it not to wait. And I might get a job with the Feds pretty soon, so 10 year IBR will make it moot.

All I can say is that the CSO better damn well pay that $350 I asked for to go to this conference this summer. :D



totally feel you on hating pre-law school job! here is to better days and good luck!

WanderingPondering
Posts: 444
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 10:47 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby WanderingPondering » Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:06 am

You guys are getting full scholarships with 166/3.2??

I had a 166/3.1 and got less than half and withdrew. But would definitely go with a full scholarship.

Should I email them back asking to reconsider or have I lost my chance??

User avatar
sublime
Posts: 15413
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby sublime » Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:09 am

..

User avatar
MarkinKansasCity
Posts: 11019
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:18 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby MarkinKansasCity » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:17 am

jdmonkey wrote:Has anybody bought anything fun or unusual since getting the full ride?

I bought a 21 year old bottle of Glenlivet for $135. I was going to go with Balvenie, but I couldn't stomach the $209 price tag. The Glenlivet is still pretty fucking good though.

User avatar
Xs20
Posts: 821
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:03 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Xs20 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:44 am

MarkinKansasCity wrote:I was going to go with Balvenie, but I couldn't stomach the $209 price tag.

Dm; fr

User avatar
sublime
Posts: 15413
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby sublime » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:47 am

..

User avatar
Xs20
Posts: 821
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:03 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Xs20 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:48 am

.
Last edited by Xs20 on Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sublime
Posts: 15413
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby sublime » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:49 am

..

Dolphine
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 12:38 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Dolphine » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:51 am

I still think wfr is better...but....wfr

User avatar
Xs20
Posts: 821
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:03 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Xs20 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:17 am

.
Last edited by Xs20 on Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MarkinKansasCity
Posts: 11019
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:18 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby MarkinKansasCity » Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:31 am

Xs20 wrote:
Dolphine wrote:I still think wfr is better...but....wfr

This is confusing because it also stands for "Wilderness First Responder" and "With Fried Rice." I like mine better.


I have no idea what that means. (dm; fr) Maybe I'm retarded, but I can't figure it out.

User avatar
DoveBodyWash
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby DoveBodyWash » Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:35 am

MarkinKansasCity wrote:
Xs20 wrote:
Dolphine wrote:I still think wfr is better...but....wfr

This is confusing because it also stands for "Wilderness First Responder" and "With Fried Rice." I like mine better.


I have no idea what that means. (dm; fr) Maybe I'm retarded, but I can't figure it out.

lol PMed

User avatar
MarkinKansasCity
Posts: 11019
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:18 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby MarkinKansasCity » Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:46 am

cusenation wrote:
MarkinKansasCity wrote:
Xs20 wrote:
Dolphine wrote:I still think wfr is better...but....wfr

This is confusing because it also stands for "Wilderness First Responder" and "With Fried Rice." I like mine better.


I have no idea what that means. (dm; fr) Maybe I'm retarded, but I can't figure it out.

lol PMed


That's hilarious. I second the motion to make that a thing. :lol: :lol:

zman
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:31 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby zman » Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:32 am

USC/UCLA/texas/Vandy might do the same thing next year if applications keep falling. But that's the million dollar question, will they keep falling??

User avatar
MarkinKansasCity
Posts: 11019
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:18 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby MarkinKansasCity » Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:36 am

zman wrote:USC/UCLA/texas/Vandy might do the same thing next year if applications keep falling. But that's the million dollar question, will they keep falling??


The supreme irony here is that only the good schools will get fucked financially on this, specifically because they're trying to hold their medians. Do you really think Cooley and Ava Maria give a shit about their medians? Fuck no, and they won't be handing out full rides to hold them.

User avatar
DoveBodyWash
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby DoveBodyWash » Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:39 am

zman wrote:USC/UCLA/texas/Vandy might do the same thing next year if applications keep falling. But that's the million dollar question, will they keep falling??

No way USC/UCLA can afford to do this. Especially UCLA, since the entire UC-system is basically bankrupt. I don't know enough about the financial health of UT and the broader UT-system to speak on them..but I'm not sure that USC, UCLA and UT will ever need to do this. They will always have a healthy pool of qualified candidates just by virtue of being the flagship schools in their respective markets, especially UT. I could see Vanderbilt potentially needing to do-this..but again, i dunno if they could afford it as a smaller university with a smaller endowment.

Applications will either keep falling or "maintain" at these reduced levels...I don't see anyway they increase unless there's a sudden surge in the lower LSAT brackets

zman
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:31 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby zman » Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:48 am

cusenation wrote:
zman wrote:USC/UCLA/texas/Vandy might do the same thing next year if applications keep falling. But that's the million dollar question, will they keep falling??

No way USC/UCLA can afford to do this. Especially UCLA, since the entire UC-system is basically bankrupt. I don't know enough about the financial health of UT and the broader UT-system to speak on them..but I'm not sure that USC, UCLA and UT will ever need to do this. They will always have a healthy pool of qualified candidates just by virtue of being the flagship schools in their market, especially UT. I could see Vanderbilt potentially needing to do-this..but again, i dunno if they could afford it as a smaller university with a smaller endowment.

Applications will either keep falling or "maintain" at these reduced levels...I don't see anyway they increase unless there's a sudden surge in the lower LSAT brackets


yes they can to a certain extent. They have BLOATED bureaucracies. They have a ton of non-tenured profs they can easily fire, administrators they don't need. Don't forget the the LLM programs are growing and they compensate for the lost revenue elsewhere. You underestimate how much waste there is. UC system is not bankrupt. That's a myth, it's just propaganda from corrupt administrators who are not getting the yearly increases they have grown accustomed to. USC's law budget is growing despite the drop in enrollment(220 in 2013, 199 in 2014, 188 in 2015 and probably 170-180 for 2013) Same for Vandy. Texas will always be fine because they have no competition in state.

User avatar
DoveBodyWash
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby DoveBodyWash » Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:57 am

zman wrote:
cusenation wrote:
zman wrote:USC/UCLA/texas/Vandy might do the same thing next year if applications keep falling. But that's the million dollar question, will they keep falling??

No way USC/UCLA can afford to do this. Especially UCLA, since the entire UC-system is basically bankrupt. I don't know enough about the financial health of UT and the broader UT-system to speak on them..but I'm not sure that USC, UCLA and UT will ever need to do this. They will always have a healthy pool of qualified candidates just by virtue of being the flagship schools in their market, especially UT. I could see Vanderbilt potentially needing to do-this..but again, i dunno if they could afford it as a smaller university with a smaller endowment.

Applications will either keep falling or "maintain" at these reduced levels...I don't see anyway they increase unless there's a sudden surge in the lower LSAT brackets


yes they can to a certain extent. They have BLOATED bureaucracies. They have a ton of non-tenured profs they can easily fire, administrators they don't need. Don't forget the the LLM programs are growing and they compensate for the lost revenue elsewhere. You underestimate how much waste there is. UC system is not bankrupt. That's a myth, it's just propaganda from corrupt administrators who are not getting the yearly increases they have grown accustomed to. USC's law budget is growing despite the drop in enrollment(220 in 2013, 199 in 2014, 188 in 2015 and probably 170-180 for 2013) Same for Vandy. Texas will always be fine because they have no competition in state.


I completely agree that there are tons of things that could be cut to make up for lost revenue, I just don't think it's likely that they'll cut those. I'll defer to you abt the UC system since you seem to be more aware of what's going on, but when I see that UCLA and Boalt's RESIDENT tuition is more expensive than our private school tuition at WUSTL (and many other private schools), it makes me wonder. Also when we're talking about what is essentially a tuition bail-out, we're talking about more than just annual budgets of the law school. That's a university-level financial commitment, especially since law schools are traditionally a big source of revenue for their parent institutions.

Vanderbilt, UT, USC, and UCLA all have large endowments. But UCLA and USC both have around 2 billion less than WashU coupled with higher operating costs. The UT-system as a whole has 18 billion to WUSTL's 5 billion, but not sure how much of that pie belongs to UT-Austin specifically. And Vanderbilt probably has similar operating costs to WashU, still has 2 billion less. This isn't to say that they CAN'T do it. It'll just be harder for them.

But I think we agree that UT probably won't ever have to do this

User avatar
MikeSpivey
Posts: 2609
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby MikeSpivey » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:08 pm

MarkinKansasCity wrote:
zman wrote:USC/UCLA/texas/Vandy might do the same thing next year if applications keep falling. But that's the million dollar question, will they keep falling??


The supreme irony here is that only the good schools will get fucked financially on this, specifically because they're trying to hold their medians. Do you really think Cooley and Ava Maria give a shit about their medians? Fuck no, and they won't be handing out full rides to hold them.


No but Cooley and Ava Maria have to worry about enrollment numbers as they are tuition driven law schools --and may be out of business if the drop continues.

User avatar
Presidentjlh
Posts: 868
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:07 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby Presidentjlh » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:42 pm

MarkinKansasCity wrote:When's everyone moving to St. Louis? I'm coming in on July 15th and should be good to get hammered drunk within a few days of then.


Yeah, I'm moving in around then, although I'm headed back to Omaha afterwards to try to make at least another thousand bucks. Offset that debt as much as I can.

Honestly, this full-ride truly turned my up to that point horrible summer in a new direction. Lost my grandmother back in May, a family friend a couple weeks ago...it's been brutal.

Got a cheap apartment right across from the Basilica. Really looking forward to attending Mass there, it looks gorgeous.

jdmonkey
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:13 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby jdmonkey » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:51 pm

Haha I was in court today for work and one of the contract attorneys showed up an hour and a half late for court. He had been assigned 5 clients that he was supposed to represent for arraignments. The judge asked why he was late and why he didn't call the clerk to inform the court. The attorney said "I was watching highlights of the Bruins game because I don't have the NBC Sports package and lost track of time." The judge recommended that he find a friend or an establishment that shows the next game so it doesn't happen again. No formal reprimand, but his clients were certainly not in awe.

User avatar
RetakeFrenzy
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:41 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby RetakeFrenzy » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:55 pm

jdmonkey wrote:Haha I was in court today for work and one of the contract attorneys showed up an hour and a half late for court. He had been assigned 5 clients that he was supposed to represent for arraignments. The judge asked why he was late and why he didn't call the clerk to inform the court. The attorney said "I was watching highlights of the Bruins game because I don't have the NBC Sports package and lost track of time." The judge recommended that he find a friend or an establishment that shows the next game so it doesn't happen again. No formal reprimand, but his clients were certainly not in awe.


nice story! I love the judge's recommendation :)

jdmonkey
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:13 pm

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby jdmonkey » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:21 pm

RetakeFrenzy wrote:
jdmonkey wrote:Haha I was in court today for work and one of the contract attorneys showed up an hour and a half late for court. He had been assigned 5 clients that he was supposed to represent for arraignments. The judge asked why he was late and why he didn't call the clerk to inform the court. The attorney said "I was watching highlights of the Bruins game because I don't have the NBC Sports package and lost track of time." The judge recommended that he find a friend or an establishment that shows the next game so it doesn't happen again. No formal reprimand, but his clients were certainly not in awe.


nice story! I love the judge's recommendation :)


Haha at least he didn't make a misrepresentation to the court. His clients must have thought if that is the best he can do defending himself we are really screwed when he will be defending us.

User avatar
RetakeFrenzy
Posts: 590
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:41 am

Re: WUSTL c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Postby RetakeFrenzy » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:34 pm

jdmonkey wrote:
RetakeFrenzy wrote:
jdmonkey wrote:Haha I was in court today for work and one of the contract attorneys showed up an hour and a half late for court. He had been assigned 5 clients that he was supposed to represent for arraignments. The judge asked why he was late and why he didn't call the clerk to inform the court. The attorney said "I was watching highlights of the Bruins game because I don't have the NBC Sports package and lost track of time." The judge recommended that he find a friend or an establishment that shows the next game so it doesn't happen again. No formal reprimand, but his clients were certainly not in awe.


nice story! I love the judge's recommendation :)


Haha at least he didn't make a misrepresentation to the court. His clients must have thought if that is the best he can do defending himself we are really screwed when he will be defending us.


:lol: :lol: :lol:




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], curry1, DoYouEvenTLS, ellielaw, Long shot hero, Motionsinlemons, Rich Uncle Skeleton, rizzlebizness, TAD, xnsch and 18 guests