. Forum

[BruceWayne]

Take my advice for what its worth, but if you have the LSAT score to get into UVA, then thats fine, pay sticker. Odds are you'll end up close enough to median to make grades become almost irrelevant to you getting a job. But you better be prepared to hustle your ass off, interview like a champ, do all the little things necessary, otherwise you'll be screwed.

If I were you OP, I would work, live, travel, teach in foreign countries, enjoy life for as long as possible before you come to law school. I am in my mid 20's, I feel like i'm 16 still, and im stressed like im 40. I'm lucky to have made things happen for myself (still not going to be as well paid as biglaw), but schools don't give a shit about you, you are just another tuition check, even at UVa. I'm not a riskaverse person, and I have confidence that I will totally fine in life, im sure you are too. But before you take the gamble, why not live it up while you still can?

Because the OP is from the South, the calculus is different for him.

Really depends on where you decide to practice in the south.

In a fairly large market like Atlanta, I believe it would definitely be worth it. Top law firms there take great honor in recruiting new attorneys from a school such as UVA.

However, if you decide to move to a smaller market like Birmingham, Columbia, any of the FL cities besides maybe Miami, or Nashville, it may be more of a stretch.

Once thing to consider is that in general the cost of living is much less in the south, hence lower salaries relative to other parts of the country. Definitely will take more than 3-4 years.

...then if you get married/have children soon after.. decades...

In response to the bolded. Not really. Atlanta is a market that focuses much more heavily on grades than school name. All things equal they prefer UVA grads, but they're going to pick top 10 percent UGA, Emory, and sometimes even Ga State over below median UVA any day. Further, it will be easier for the OP to get a job in almost every other market on your list than Atlanta. Atlanta is one of the most competitive legal markets in the country. Probably right up there with DC and Austin TX.

[flem]

In response to the bolded. Not really. Atlanta is a market that focuses much more heavily on grades than school name. All things equal they prefer UVA grads, but they're going to pick top 10 percent UGA, Emory, and sometimes even Ga State over below median UVA any day. Further, it will be easier for the OP to get a job in almost every other market on your list than Atlanta. Atlanta is one of the most competitive legal markets in the country. Probably right up there with DC and Austin TX.

Half true. ATL is super grade-whorey, but they're plenty prestige whore-y as well. A kid who is top third at Vandy is going to own someone who's top 10% at GA State any day, all things being equal.

[BruceWayne]

Half true. ATL is super grade-whorey, but they're plenty prestige whore-y as well. A kid who is top third at Vandy is going to own someone who's top 10% at GA State any day, all things being equal.

I mean you're talking about someone who beat 70 percent of his/her classmates. That's very grade whorey. What I'm saying is that many firms, unlike firms in other major markets, will absolutely not sniff a below median or even median top 14 student, but will gladly take a top 10 percent Mercer or Ga State grad. They don't go deep at all into top 14 schools in Atlanta not named Yale, Harvard, or Stanford.

[flem]

I mean you're talking about someone who beat 70 percent of his/her classmates. That's very grade whorey. What I'm saying is that many firms, unlike firms in other major markets, will absolutely not sniff a below median or even median top 14 student, but will gladly take a top 10 percent Mercer or Ga State grad. They don't go deep at all into top 14 schools in Atlanta not named Yale, Harvard, or Stanford.

I think we're basically on the same page. You just have a larger cushion if you're at a T14 + ties, where if you end up below top 15% at UGA or somewhere you won't get a second look.

[jrstephens1991]

Take my advice for what its worth, but if you have the LSAT score to get into UVA, then thats fine, pay sticker. Odds are you'll end up close enough to median to make grades become almost irrelevant to you getting a job. But you better be prepared to hustle your ass off, interview like a champ, do all the little things necessary, otherwise you'll be screwed.

If I were you OP, I would work, live, travel, teach in foreign countries, enjoy life for as long as possible before you come to law school. I am in my mid 20's, I feel like i'm 16 still, and im stressed like im 40. I'm lucky to have made things happen for myself (still not going to be as well paid as biglaw), but schools don't give a shit about you, you are just another tuition check, even at UVa. I'm not a riskaverse person, and I have confidence that I will totally fine in life, im sure you are too. But before you take the gamble, why not live it up while you still can?

Because the OP is from the South, the calculus is different for him.

Really depends on where you decide to practice in the south.

In a fairly large market like Atlanta, I believe it would definitely be worth it. Top law firms there take great honor in recruiting new attorneys from a school such as UVA.

However, if you decide to move to a smaller market like Birmingham, Columbia, any of the FL cities besides maybe Miami, or Nashville, it may be more of a stretch.

Once thing to consider is that in general the cost of living is much less in the south, hence lower salaries relative to other parts of the country. Definitely will take more than 3-4 years.

...then if you get married/have children soon after.. decades...

In response to the bolded. Not really. Atlanta is a market that focuses much more heavily on grades than school name. All things equal they prefer UVA grads, but they're going to pick top 10 percent UGA, Emory, and sometimes even Ga State over below median UVA any day. Further, it will be easier for the OP to get a job in almost every other market on your list than Atlanta. Atlanta is one of the most competitive legal markets in the country. Probably right up there with DC and Austin TX.

True. But I think Atlanta firms also know a great non-regional institution when they see one. Sure an Emory grad in the Top 10% would have a better chance, but I would say that grads from GSU or even UGA would pale in comparison to a UVA grad who graduated near the same ranking. True, most large firms in ATL have strong alumni holds strung from the Good Ole' Country boys of Athens, but this is clearly changing. With the awful economy, and oversaturated market, firms even in the south are being alot more selective in their employment offers. They want to recruit from an institution where they are getting the best of the best, and not many can argue with the clout of UVA.

Of course, all of this is assuming the OP will be graduating in the top half of his class if he attends UVA.

[FlightoftheEarls]

Based on Rayiner's UN-employment chart that measure unemployment and underemployment - UVA grads have about a 35% chance of not getting a job; Michigan grads have about a 28% chance of not getting a job. Would you take a scholarship you had a 30% chance of losing? Probably you would, but so would everyone else. Some of you are going to be losers, that is just a fact. Why is everyone so confident it won't be them? It has to be someone.

chart
thread

I agree with the vast majority of what you're saying, but keep in mind that these figures represent c/o 2011. The economy is hardly peachy, and it's certainly not 2006 all over again. That said, Cravath is taking a few more than 22 summers this year, and it's a little disingenuous to pretend that prospective students' outcomes are exactly the same as they were for c/o 2011.

you're joking right? You are going to base the odds of getting a biglaw job from Cravath taking a few more summers?

Yeah bro, my entire argument was based on Cravath single-handedly taking 22 summers for c/o 2011 and 82 for c/o 2013, rather than the enormous reductions in hiring across the board that hit c/o 2011 significantly worse than any other class in history.

I'm hardly a legal-market cheerleader, but using the c/o 2011 numbers to suggest that c/o 2015 is facing the same hiring odds is simply false.

[BruceWayne]

True. But I think Atlanta firms also know a great non-regional institution when they see one. Sure an Emory grad in the Top 10% would have a better chance, but I would say that grads from GSU or even UGA would pale in comparison to a UVA grad who graduated near the same ranking. True, most large firms in ATL have strong alumni holds strung from the Good Ole' Country boys of Athens, but this is clearly changing. With the awful economy, and oversaturated market, firms even in the south are being alot more selective in their employment offers. They want to recruit from an institution where they are getting the best of the best, and not many can argue with the clout of UVA.

Of course, all of this is assuming the OP will be graduating in the top half of his class if he attends UVA.

It's not that they don't recognize a great non-regional institution. It's just that they care more about grades. I've seen the GPA info of people who get Atlanta from UVA, I've applied to the market and interviewed, and I know others who have as well. Atlanta firms just prefer high GPA people from regional schools to median or below GPA's from top schools that aren't HYS. You aren't getting Alston or King and Spalding Atlanta for example from UVA with a 3.3. They generally stay in the 3.6 range. In other words, top 10 percent of the class. Ironically your comment about the economy causing Southern firms to be more selective is true. Just not in the way that you think. Before the crash they were hiring median and below UVA in droves. Now they've shifted their hiring to consist mainly of high GPA regionals. They will obviously hire from UVA, but now they won't do so without top 1/3 grades. No more dipping to median and below. I've heard of some exceptions, but those are few and far between.

[sunynp]

If you want more recent hiring numbers this graphic might be helpful. It shows the size of summer associate classes this summer and the number of first years starting this year. The only real useful part seems to be the comparison of the size of SA classes for 2012 to 2011, Instead of putting in the numbers though they just put a percentage. Most firms do show an increase.

They show Cravath with 87 SAs and 44 first years starting. Cravath's SA class is up 64% from last summer.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/07/02/law ... teractive/
from this article:
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/07/02/law ... whos-down/

I posted it before here, but it wasn't that interesting.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=188447

[AllDangle]

.

[timbs4339]

True. But I think Atlanta firms also know a great non-regional institution when they see one. Sure an Emory grad in the Top 10% would have a better chance, but I would say that grads from GSU or even UGA would pale in comparison to a UVA grad who graduated near the same ranking. True, most large firms in ATL have strong alumni holds strung from the Good Ole' Country boys of Athens, but this is clearly changing. With the awful economy, and oversaturated market, firms even in the south are being alot more selective in their employment offers. They want to recruit from an institution where they are getting the best of the best, and not many can argue with the clout of UVA.

Of course, all of this is assuming the OP will be graduating in the top half of his class if he attends UVA.

It's not that they don't recognize a great non-regional institution. It's just that they care more about grades. I've seen the GPA info of people who get Atlanta from UVA, I've applied to the market and interviewed, and I know others who have as well. Atlanta firms just prefer high GPA people from regional schools to median or below GPA's from top schools that aren't HYS. You aren't getting Alston or King and Spalding Atlanta for example from UVA with a 3.3. They generally stay in the 3.6 range. In other words, top 10 percent of the class. Ironically your comment about the economy causing Southern firms to be more selective is true. Just not in the way that you think. Before the crash they were hiring median and below UVA in droves. Now they've shifted their hiring to consist mainly of high GPA regionals. They will obviously hire from UVA, but now they won't do so without top 1/3 grades. No more dipping to median and below. I've heard of some exceptions, but those are few and far between.

This was my experience in another secondary market. They have to maintain relationships with local/regional schools so it's very important to them that they fill quotas from those schools first. If there are less spots to go around, there are going to be less spots for people from OOS. There's no great productivity bump from hiring a UVA below-median student over some top 20% students at Emory, Vandy, GA, GA state.

[justonemoregame]

Does anyone know what percentage UVA's tuition usually increases from year to year?

I think it went up about 4% (2K) this last round

[sunynp]

One more attempt at the job prospects out of UVA I've been going on about as being not worth sticker. I asked Rayiner about his graph and current hiring. His point was 1. Government and PI hiring haven't picked up at all ( I think it might be worse just because spots are filled and the line of grads in front of you is getting pretty long) so there are plenty of people getting nothing, 2. Biglaw may have picked up last year but we don't know what this year will bring.

I am still voting a solid no for UVa not being worth sticker. I know others disagree. Maybe if you are from the south it helps, I'm not from the south and I can't speak to that.

Here is the thread where UVa and Michigan are compared:
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=189060

[Nickg415]

Key Facts:
17% of graduates were employed in school-funded jobs. 17% were in full-time, long-term school-funded jobs (i.e. the job was for at least 35 hours per week, and had a fixed duration of at least one year or the job had no definite duration).
94.7% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs. This figure includes an unknown number school-funded jobs.
97.3% graduates were employed in long-term jobs.
97.1% graduates were employed in full-time jobs.

[rickgrimes69]

Key Facts:
17% of graduates were employed in school-funded jobs. 17% were in full-time, long-term school-funded jobs (i.e. the job was for at least 35 hours per week, and had a fixed duration of at least one year or the job had no definite duration).
94.7% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs. This figure includes an unknown number school-funded jobs.
97.3% graduates were employed in long-term jobs.
97.1% graduates were employed in full-time jobs.

Thanks for bumping a thread to quote LST