UC Hastings c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013)

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
onionskin
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:57 pm

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

Postby onionskin » Wed May 15, 2013 12:42 am

Sweet I got into four of those schools! Must be doing something right.

User avatar
kapital98
Posts: 1188
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:58 pm

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

Postby kapital98 » Wed May 15, 2013 2:05 pm

hiima3L wrote:Congrats to everyone for getting in to one of the top 10 worst law schools in the nation for employment: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0414232451

Think carefully before putting down that deposit.


You're such a cold cynic alumnus.

hiima3L
Posts: 837
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:26 pm

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

Postby hiima3L » Wed May 15, 2013 4:05 pm

kapital98 wrote:
hiima3L wrote:Congrats to everyone for getting in to one of the top 10 worst law schools in the nation for employment: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0414232451

Think carefully before putting down that deposit.


You're such a cold cynic alumnus.


I sure am. It's just unfathomable that with all the information out there countless law schools are still getting hundreds of people willing to pay $150k for abysmal job prospects. I don't know how anyone thinks it's a financially wise decision. Going to anything but the top law schools nowadays without a significant scholarship is financially reckless. I know dozens of people from my class ('12) who are still unemployed, underemployed, or are making peanuts (compared to their debt repayments).

Student loan debt is a national concern and beating around the bush isn't helping anyone. Anyone going to UCH right now and paying anywhere near sticker is making an unbelievably risky decision.

goldengate28
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 11:03 pm

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

Postby goldengate28 » Wed May 15, 2013 9:27 pm

hiima3L wrote:
kapital98 wrote:
hiima3L wrote:Congrats to everyone for getting in to one of the top 10 worst law schools in the nation for employment: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0414232451

Think carefully before putting down that deposit.


You're such a cold cynic alumnus.


I sure am. It's just unfathomable that with all the information out there countless law schools are still getting hundreds of people willing to pay $150k for abysmal job prospects. I don't know how anyone thinks it's a financially wise decision. Going to anything but the top law schools nowadays without a significant scholarship is financially reckless. I know dozens of people from my class ('12) who are still unemployed, underemployed, or are making peanuts (compared to their debt repayments).

Student loan debt is a national concern and beating around the bush isn't helping anyone. Anyone going to UCH right now and paying anywhere near sticker is making an unbelievably risky decision.


I definitely agree - taking on a huge amount of student loan debt is something that should not be taken lightly and not without careful cost/benefit analysis - unless of course you’re one of the lucky ones that don’t have to think about the financial cost of a legal education.

A lot of students go straight from undergrad into law school without really understanding what a legal career entails, so once they graduate there’s a disconnect between the theoretical nature of law learned in the classroom and the real world practice of law - leaving many unequipped to navigate life after law school.

Frankly, I think it’s smart to gain some work experience before deciding to go to law school - whether it’s as legal assistant, paralegal, or whatever - hands on experience is invaluable. Not only are you more informed about what you’re getting into when deciding to go to law school, but you’ll also distinguish yourself after graduation by actually having some REAL work experience to put down on your resume when the time comes, especially considering how tough the legal job market is and will continue to be.

This is not meant to turn anyone off to law school. If you’re 100% sure this is what you want, then by all means go for it! But it should be a well thought out decision - not just something you do to put off having to get a job after undergrad or because you can’t think of what else to do, which is unfortunately the case for many people.

User avatar
DildaMan
Posts: 383
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:03 pm

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

Postby DildaMan » Thu May 16, 2013 1:53 am

hiima3L wrote:
kapital98 wrote:
hiima3L wrote:Congrats to everyone for getting in to one of the top 10 worst law schools in the nation for employment: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0414232451

Think carefully before putting down that deposit.


You're such a cold cynic alumnus.


I sure am. It's just unfathomable that with all the information out there countless law schools are still getting hundreds of people willing to pay $150k for abysmal job prospects. I don't know how anyone thinks it's a financially wise decision. Going to anything but the top law schools nowadays without a significant scholarship is financially reckless. I know dozens of people from my class ('12) who are still unemployed, underemployed, or are making peanuts (compared to their debt repayments).

Student loan debt is a national concern and beating around the bush isn't helping anyone. Anyone going to UCH right now and paying anywhere near sticker is making an unbelievably risky decision.


Whoa, 7/10 of the worst law schools are in California...
Last edited by DildaMan on Thu May 16, 2013 3:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

hiima3L
Posts: 837
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:26 pm

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

Postby hiima3L » Thu May 16, 2013 8:02 am

DildaMan wrote:
hiima3L wrote:
kapital98 wrote:
hiima3L wrote:Congrats to everyone for getting in to one of the top 10 worst law schools in the nation for employment: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0414232451

Think carefully before putting down that deposit.


You're such a cold cynic alumnus.


I sure am. It's just unfathomable that with all the information out there countless law schools are still getting hundreds of people willing to pay $150k for abysmal job prospects. I don't know how anyone thinks it's a financially wise decision. Going to anything but the top law schools nowadays without a significant scholarship is financially reckless. I know dozens of people from my class ('12) who are still unemployed, underemployed, or are making peanuts (compared to their debt repayments).

Student loan debt is a national concern and beating around the bush isn't helping anyone. Anyone going to UCH right now and paying anywhere near sticker is making an unbelievably risky decision.


Whoa, 7/10 of the worse law schools are in California...


I think it really puts into perspective just how f'd the legal market is in CA. 5 or so years ago when I was looking into schools, most of these schools had the same bad statistics (more or less), but UCH had pretty decent job prospects. Now, it's on part with every shitty law school in CA. Even USC and UCLA aren't doing too well. And no one sees improvement on the horizon.

Applicants nowadays are just willfully ignorant or financially reckless/uneducated. I hope they enjoy making $60k-70k, if they can even get a job, and putting half of their income ($1,200-1,500k/mo) toward loans for 10 years.

fab
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 3:30 pm

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

Postby fab » Thu May 16, 2013 3:35 pm

^^

In off WL at 162/3.6. Going to visit next week. I heard it's in a sketchy area but I went to USC so I doubt it could be any sketchier.

Pretty stoked.

Good luck to everyone else on the WL.

PS. They didn't offer me any money at all.

Beemo
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 12:28 pm

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

Postby Beemo » Thu May 16, 2013 4:13 pm

In off WL w/ 13.5K in grants but the COA is still too high so I declined the offer. I like the school but it's just too much debt. Hope the spot/money goes to one of you guys!

User avatar
Mick Haller
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:24 pm

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

Postby Mick Haller » Thu May 16, 2013 5:17 pm

Beemo wrote:In off WL w/ 13.5K in grants but the COA is still too high so I declined the offer. I like the school but it's just too much debt. Hope the spot/money goes to one of you guys!


Good choice

User avatar
1republic
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 10:44 pm

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

Postby 1republic » Fri May 17, 2013 12:43 pm

I also declined. I wonder how big their class will be.

hiima3L
Posts: 837
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:26 pm

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

Postby hiima3L » Fri May 17, 2013 2:26 pm

1republic wrote:I also declined. I wonder how big their class will be.


Approximately 2x too large.

But at least Dean Wu has promised our faculty will continue its engaged scholarship.

User avatar
CO2016YEAH
Posts: 578
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 11:42 am

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

Postby CO2016YEAH » Fri May 17, 2013 8:09 pm

hiima3L wrote:
1republic wrote:I also declined. I wonder how big their class will be.


Approximately 2x too large.

But at least Dean Wu has promised our faculty will continue its engaged scholarship.


Thank God! :D

WhiskeynCoke
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 1:12 am

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

Postby WhiskeynCoke » Sat May 18, 2013 8:19 pm

I think it really puts into perspective just how f'd the legal market is in CA. 5 or so years ago when I was looking into schools, most of these schools had the same bad statistics (more or less), but UCH had pretty decent job prospects. Now, it's on part with every shitty law school in CA. Even USC and UCLA aren't doing too well. And no one sees improvement on the horizon.

Applicants nowadays are just willfully ignorant or financially reckless/uneducated. I hope they enjoy making $60k-70k, if they can even get a job, and putting half of their income ($1,200-1,500k/mo) toward loans for 10 years.


The CA legal market is "fucked" primarily because it is extraordinarily over saturated, thanks to the fact that there are so many god damned law schools in this state. If you aren't going to Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, or USC, you're going to have a damn hard time landing a legal job in CA, unless daddy has one to give you. It's not impossible, just real fuckin rough. Why would an employer hire you when there are so many grads from the 4 previously mentioned schools to choose from, as well as all the other T14 kids trying to get to CA?

Regarding the "no improvement on the horizon" comment... this actually isn't true, at least in the Bay Area. The Bay Area's economy has begun to boom again with the coming of the second tech renaissance. If you live anywhere near SF, you'll notice how much rents have gone up in the past year... Real Estate has been super hot (in SF especially) and I've spoken to quite a few lawyers at the Big Firms in town who are incredibly optimistic about where the Bay Area legal market is headed. The word "Robust" has been thrown around quite a bit.

However, despite these improving prospects, it'll still be some time again, if ever, until firms have to start digging into the classes of the lower ranked CA schools. CA is an awesome state to live in, so people from top schools all over the country are trying land a gig here. Competition is brutal, as evidenced by the 7/10 top underemployment stat.

Moral of the story... It's getting better but it will still suck for most people.

hiima3L
Posts: 837
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:26 pm

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

Postby hiima3L » Sat May 18, 2013 8:38 pm

WhiskeynCoke wrote:
I think it really puts into perspective just how f'd the legal market is in CA. 5 or so years ago when I was looking into schools, most of these schools had the same bad statistics (more or less), but UCH had pretty decent job prospects. Now, it's on part with every shitty law school in CA. Even USC and UCLA aren't doing too well. And no one sees improvement on the horizon.

Applicants nowadays are just willfully ignorant or financially reckless/uneducated. I hope they enjoy making $60k-70k, if they can even get a job, and putting half of their income ($1,200-1,500k/mo) toward loans for 10 years.


Regarding the "no improvement on the horizon" comment... this actually isn't true, at least in the Bay Area. The Bay Area's economy has begun to boom again with the coming of the second tech renaissance. If you live anywhere near SF, you'll notice how much rents have gone up in the past year... Real Estate has been super hot (in SF especially) and I've spoken to quite a few lawyers at the Big Firms in town who are incredibly optimistic about where the Bay Area legal market is headed. The word "Robust" has been thrown around quite a bit.


I question this, but I hope it's true. Rent in SF has been directly linked to the mini second tech boom going on right now. Whether that'll have a spillover effect into the legal market seems unlikely to me. But I have no idea, really. I'm sure attorneys you've spoken to have a much better idea of what's actually going on.

Anecdote: I have friends in a number of the big tech companies and various start-ups, and while they're hiring tons of people, they are not hiring many new legal people. Of the ones they are hiring, it's normally foreign/foreign-language-speaking attorneys. And all the firms just want IP people, spo unless you've got an EECS degree, the legal market's possible improvement seems pretty irrelevant to me.

WhiskeynCoke
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 1:12 am

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

Postby WhiskeynCoke » Sun May 19, 2013 7:40 pm

hiima3L wrote:
WhiskeynCoke wrote:
I think it really puts into perspective just how f'd the legal market is in CA. 5 or so years ago when I was looking into schools, most of these schools had the same bad statistics (more or less), but UCH had pretty decent job prospects. Now, it's on part with every shitty law school in CA. Even USC and UCLA aren't doing too well. And no one sees improvement on the horizon.

Applicants nowadays are just willfully ignorant or financially reckless/uneducated. I hope they enjoy making $60k-70k, if they can even get a job, and putting half of their income ($1,200-1,500k/mo) toward loans for 10 years.


Regarding the "no improvement on the horizon" comment... this actually isn't true, at least in the Bay Area. The Bay Area's economy has begun to boom again with the coming of the second tech renaissance. If you live anywhere near SF, you'll notice how much rents have gone up in the past year... Real Estate has been super hot (in SF especially) and I've spoken to quite a few lawyers at the Big Firms in town who are incredibly optimistic about where the Bay Area legal market is headed. The word "Robust" has been thrown around quite a bit.


I question this, but I hope it's true. Rent in SF has been directly linked to the mini second tech boom going on right now. Whether that'll have a spillover effect into the legal market seems unlikely to me. But I have no idea, really. I'm sure attorneys you've spoken to have a much better idea of what's actually going on.

Anecdote: I have friends in a number of the big tech companies and various start-ups, and while they're hiring tons of people, they are not hiring many new legal people. Of the ones they are hiring, it's normally foreign/foreign-language-speaking attorneys. And all the firms just want IP people, spo unless you've got an EECS degree, the legal market's possible improvement seems pretty irrelevant to me.


Well, lets put it this way. The tech boom in the SF Bay area is pumping in tons of money not only directly to the tech companies, but also to the surrounding area's economy as a whole. Yes, the tech companies and startups are raking it in, but then they (and their employees) go and spend that money in the bay area, where they live. The companies have operating costs and throw (constant) expensive parties for the staff, while the employees buy real-estate (hello robust market), luxuries, go to restaurants, etc.. This has a positive financial impact on everyone else thus generating business.

All of this is good for the legal market because doing business requires navigating the law. Businesses don't hire lawyers because they want to, they hire lawyers because they have to. It seems pretty straightforward to me that as the whole economy picks up, the legal market must also. They don't have to correlate perfectly, but they certainly do in a general sense.

onionskin
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:57 pm

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

Postby onionskin » Sun May 19, 2013 11:25 pm

Has anyone tried negotiating for merit aid with Hastings?

User avatar
kapital98
Posts: 1188
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:58 pm

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

Postby kapital98 » Mon May 20, 2013 6:35 pm

WhiskeynCoke wrote:
Well, lets put it this way. The tech boom in the SF Bay area is pumping in tons of money not only directly to the tech companies, but also to the surrounding area's economy as a whole. Yes, the tech companies and startups are raking it in, but then they (and their employees) go and spend that money in the bay area, where they live. The companies have operating costs and throw (constant) expensive parties for the staff, while the employees buy real-estate (hello robust market), luxuries, go to restaurants, etc.. This has a positive financial impact on everyone else thus generating business.

All of this is good for the legal market because doing business requires navigating the law. Businesses don't hire lawyers because they want to, they hire lawyers because they have to. It seems pretty straightforward to me that as the whole economy picks up, the legal market must also. They don't have to correlate perfectly, but they certainly do in a general sense.


This is a weak empirical argument. You're essentially explaining what's called the "multiplier effect" in macroeconomics. However, just because you have a boom in the general economy does not mean you will have a corresponding increase in the legal sector. Example: The general economy (GDP, Employment) seem to be improving much better than in the legal sector. The legal sector is improving but at a slower rate of change.

User avatar
xiaojimu
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:31 am

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

Postby xiaojimu » Mon May 20, 2013 6:46 pm

onionskin wrote:Has anyone tried negotiating for merit aid with Hastings?


yeah, haven't heard back yet...

AABergq
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:14 pm

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

Postby AABergq » Thu May 23, 2013 9:08 pm

Can't believe I have yet to post- got in last Monday the 13th via phone call, two business days after the email.

Anyone on the facebook page? I don't do facebook anymore, just wondering if I'm missing out at all.

And to those wondering about negotiations- I'm almost positive I read somewhere they do not negotiate unless your other school option are from a short list posted somewhere (they are all Ivy League schools), so I wouldn't bet on that...

hiima3L
Posts: 837
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:26 pm

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

Postby hiima3L » Thu May 23, 2013 11:13 pm

AABergq wrote:Can't believe I have yet to post- got in last Monday the 13th via phone call, two business days after the email.

Anyone on the facebook page? I don't do facebook anymore, just wondering if I'm missing out at all.

And to those wondering about negotiations- I'm almost positive I read somewhere they do not negotiate unless your other school option are from a short list posted somewhere (they are all Ivy League schools), so I wouldn't bet on that...


Don't go.

apollo2015
Posts: 359
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:13 am

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

Postby apollo2015 » Thu May 23, 2013 11:42 pm

AABergq wrote:Can't believe I have yet to post- got in last Monday the 13th via phone call, two business days after the email.

Anyone on the facebook page? I don't do facebook anymore, just wondering if I'm missing out at all.



First off, congratulations!

Secondly, I highly recommend getting a facebook page. While facebook's monopoly power is concerning, law school is highly social in nature, so you would be doing yourself a great disservice by cutting yourself off from one of the main socializing tools. I only know of one person in my section this year who avoided using facebook, and they only successfully managed it by their seemingly being joined at the hip with a couple of prolific facebook users.

jseltzer
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:57 pm

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

Postby jseltzer » Fri May 24, 2013 6:50 pm

just got the email. 14.5k hastings grant. From what i've seen, that sounds about right

onionskin
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:57 pm

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

Postby onionskin » Sat May 25, 2013 10:19 am

I'm hearing nothing about money...

I didn't even get an answer to my query about paying the deposit with an overseas card, even though I eventually got it to work.

onionskin
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:57 pm

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

Postby onionskin » Tue May 28, 2013 10:04 pm

Di I need to apply for financial aid to be considered for/receive merit scholarships?

AABergq
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:14 pm

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

Postby AABergq » Tue May 28, 2013 11:24 pm

I applied for financial aid, with the supplemental application, on time- but still haven't received any news about financial aid (or costs in general aside f/ the standard pamphlet)...those of you in off the waitlist, how long did it take to receive award letters??

And out of curiosity, does anyone know anyone either there or going in that has kids??




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