Top Law Schools

So I have a 2.8 GPA from U of C (assuming the LSAC doesn't think that some of my withdrawals are Fs), and I'm taking the LSAT this June. On practice tests I've been getting somewhere from 2-6 wrong, so I'm probably getting 178-180. I graduated in 2007, have been working since then (analyst at McKinsey for a bit, then teaching SAT test prep and managing a restaurant (long story), and am soon starting a job doing financial modeling).

Sorry for the life story, but here are the schools I'm think of applying to, ranked least to most likely acceptance:

NW (ED)
GULC
GW
BU
BC
Fordham

I'd like to stay in a big city, preferably one that can be managed without a car. At any rate, I'm just starting out on looking at law schools (wanted to be confident I could get a good LSAT first!), so I have no idea if this list is reasonable or laughable. Thoughts?

Edit: I forgot to mention, I'd like to do non-profit/public interest work post-LS. I haven't found much info about strengths of programs in that area, and one guy recommended that I say that I want to do big law because that's what schools look for. True or false?

(Also, my mom's an NYU Law alum so she's been saying I should apply there since the legacy factor makes it more likely. It seems like a waste of the admissions fee to me -- do law schools even care about legacy?)

jpbeatty wrote:So I have a 2.8 GPA from U of C (assuming the LSAC doesn't think that some of my withdrawals are Fs)

Don't they always count withdrawals as F's if on the transcript? You may be out of luck there.

On the other hand, if you pull off that type of LSAT, NW (ED) should be a possibility since you have WE. The I want to do BigLaw thing seems strange, especially if you wanted PI. That guy is wrong.

I've heard of slight bumps for legacy, but that GPA may be a deal breaker for NYU. With that type of LSAT you may be able to get a fee waiver though.

cardnal124 wrote:Don't they always count withdrawals as F's if on the transcript?

That almost gave me a heart attack, because I would be so boned if that were true. I looked it up, and the LSAC says they only count punitive withdrawals as 0's.

If you can get high 170s, then an NYU application is at least worth a shot. The GPA will hurt, but the $70 or whatever it is to apply is certainly worth a potential shot at NYU.

Also, there are a number of posters on this site that have sub-3.0s, work experience, and a 170+ LSAT who got into NW. There are also quite a few on LSN who have done it. NW may be your best bet if you can crack the 170s.

Seriously though, get your LSAT score and then come back TLS with this type of thread. Most people score lower on the LSAT than they practice at. The difference between a 180 and a 170 is not that many questions, and some test-day jitters could significantly affect your score.

Good luck!

jpbeatty wrote:So I have a 2.8 GPA from U of C (assuming the LSAC doesn't think that some of my withdrawals are Fs), and I'm taking the LSAT this June. On practice tests I've been getting somewhere from 2-6 wrong, so I'm probably getting 178-180. I graduated in 2007, have been working since then (analyst at McKinsey for a bit, then teaching SAT test prep and managing a restaurant (long story), and am soon starting a job doing financial modeling).

Sorry for the life story, but here are the schools I'm think of applying to, ranked least to most likely acceptance:

NW (ED)
GULC
GW
BU
BC
Fordham

I'd like to stay in a big city, preferably one that can be managed without a car. At any rate, I'm just starting out on looking at law schools (wanted to be confident I could get a good LSAT first!), so I have no idea if this list is reasonable or laughable. Thoughts?

Edit: I forgot to mention, I'd like to do non-profit/public interest work post-LS. I haven't found much info about strengths of programs in that area, and one guy recommended that I say that I want to do big law because that's what schools look for. True or false?

(Also, my mom's an NYU Law alum so she's been saying I should apply there since the legacy factor makes it more likely. It seems like a waste of the admissions fee to me -- do law schools even care about legacy?)

NU ED is probably the best shot you have at any of those schools. Everyone over 170 got in this year, including me, 2.8/176.

You'll get WL'd at GULC, and have a shot getting off, but they really don't like under 3.0. You'd have a better shot at part time.

GW, Fordham, and BU all possibly but iffy.

BC seems to hate on splitters.

I don't think schools particularly care if you want to do big law.

As to the NYU law thing, I'm not sure. Normally I don't think, they'd take you. I have no clue if legacy + ED would help. I really doubt it.

If you are feeling risky, ED to NYU, knowing you might miss the entire T14 if you aren't successful.

Otherwise I'd ED to NU.

Desert Fox wrote: If you are feeling risky, ED to NYU, knowing you might miss the entire T14 if you aren't successful.

You mean risky because OP wouldn't be able to ED to NU as well? Otherwise, it wouldn't affect anything. Since I'm not all that familiar with the way NU works its admissions, I won't weigh in too much. But if they'd give you a really strong shot without ED, then ED to NYU (only mention this since desert fox said everyone >170 got in this year... which I assume includes those who did not ED).

To the OP, come back when you have your LSAT score. If you really and truly end up with a 180, some schools would take you just so that they could say their total LSAT range is 1XX-180. There are, I want to say, something like 20/year. And at least the majority of those end up in YHSCCN.

You Gotta Have Faith wrote:

Desert Fox wrote: If you are feeling risky, ED to NYU, knowing you might miss the entire T14 if you aren't successful.

You mean risky because OP wouldn't be able to ED to NU as well? Otherwise, it wouldn't affect anything. Since I'm not all that familiar with the way NU works its admissions, I won't weigh in too much. But if they'd give you a really strong shot without ED, then ED to NYU (only mention this since desert fox said everyone >170 got in this year... which I assume includes those who did not ED).

To the OP, come back when you have your LSAT score. If you really and truly end up with a 180, some schools would take you just so that they could say their total LSAT range is 1XX-180. There are, I want to say, something like 20/year. And at least the majority of those end up in YHSCCN.

No I meant that everyone who applied ED with 170 got in. Plenty of people with 170 sitting on hold or waitlist. A lot of those will get in, but a lot won't.

ED plus work experience was almost a sure thing at NU this year. In the future who knows.

OP would have a halfway decent shot at NU with a regular app but a good chance with ED. And I don't think they'll get NYU no matter what.

I strongly believe that without my ED to NU I'd probably be headed to UIUC.

Desert Fox wrote: No I meant that everyone who applied ED with 170 got in. Plenty of people with 170 sitting on hold or waitlist. A lot of those will get in, but a lot won't.

ED plus work experience was almost a sure thing at NU this year. In the future who knows.

OP would have a halfway decent shot at NU with a regular app but a good chance with ED. And I don't think they'll get NYU no matter what.

I strongly believe that without my ED to NU I'd probably be headed to UIUC.

Ah, I see. Well, in that case, EDing to NU may make sense.

But to address OP's legacy concern more thoroughly... this depends. Has your mom either (1) donated a substantial amount to NYU Law at some point in her life, even if was only once, (2) donated a fair amount consistently over the years to NYU Law, (3) is in a unique position, such as at a firm, where she has significant sway in getting jobs/offers/etc. for NYU Law grads, (4) has been heavily involved with NYU Law throughout the years, or (5) is in a unique position of power where NYU Law has a vested interest in having an alumnus there?

If the answer is yes to any of those, then legacy will probably play in at your benefit. But if not, I doubt it. I feel I can speak to this... that's usually what comes into play. Some schools take in the simple "feel good" factors to an extent, but I do not know with NYU.

If she doesn't quite fit the bill on any of those criteria but has a law school buddy or co-worker who does, and of course also attended NYU Law, then you might consider getting that person to write an LOR for you, while mentioning that they know you and that you'd be a marvelous candidate, etc.

Whatever you do, good luck!

I think GULC would take you right away if you applied ED.. assuming you get that 178+ LSAT.
A 174/3.05 and a 176/3.15 got in through Early Decision this year.
However, it probably makes more sense to apply to Northwestern ED because Northwestern opens up your career options a little more unless you're really itching to work in DC. Also you'll avoid the immature and aimless 22 year olds (including me) at Northwestern.

Desert Fox wrote:BC seems to hate on splitters.

At sub-3.0 this is probably correct, but it's possible that they're more open to splitters with legit Boston connections. I got in with a 3.1/175+ split applying from a Boston-area address. Good luck on your LSAT OP.

jpbeatty wrote:On practice tests I've been getting somewhere from 2-6 wrong, so I'm probably getting 178-180.

lostmyname wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:BC seems to hate on splitters.

At sub-3.0 this is probably correct, but it's possible that they're more open to splitters with legit Boston connections. I got in with a 3.1/175+ split applying from a Boston-area address. Good luck on your LSAT OP.

Does BC just dislike low GPA applicants or only those with high LSATs?
I noticed that BC has a 25th percentile GPA of ~3.3 which implies they accept a decent number of sub 3.3 applicants.

Thanks for the advice. Obviously, if I break out in nervous sweats during the LSAT and get a 150... well, probably not going to law school . But I actually tend to do better under pressure -- I took the GRE awhile back, and scored ~50 points higher than I had on any of the practice tests I took. So, hopes are high.

To my knowledge, my mom has not had much if any involvement w/ NYU so it seems like I either shouldn't bother or should just apply non-ED and see if I get lucky.

Finally, not to get ahead of myself, how big a deal is a 178 vs. a 180? The difference is only about 2 questions wrong, but one is high and the other is perfect. Would you guys say that getting a perfect vs. 176+ would significantly change my odds and/or strategy?

jpbeatty wrote: Finally, not to get ahead of myself, how big a deal is a 178 vs. a 180? The difference is only about 2 questions wrong, but one is high and the other is perfect. Would you guys say that getting a perfect vs. 176+ would significantly change my odds and/or strategy?

Virtually no difference with a 178 vs. 180 in your position with the exception of personal bragging rights. A 180 might give you some options that a 176 did not, but frankly, you're going to be comfortably over a school's 75ths at both scores, and you're certainly not going to be affecting medians any differently with those two different scores. Also FYI, I was scoring 179s and 180s before my test, typically do well under pressure, and ended up with a 173 because of some idiotic LR mistakes (-1 on LG+RC combined), which would definitely change things for you. Just don't count on a 178+.