New York Law School Forum

[Coveted]

About 10 yrs ago R-N had a much, much better reputation than SH, and was actually much harder to get into. Nowdays I think they're about equal in terms of both being essentially toilets with placement that borders on downright abysmal for 95% of the class.

I will say that among older NJ lawyers, R-N still is viewed as head and shoulders above Seton Hall. SH has always been known for lax admissions standards and mediocrity. SH is a "country club" type private school for the offspring of wealthy white people. It's known for an "Alex P. Keaton" type of annoying yuppie, like this idiot alum who landed in Federal prison recently:

http://www.northjersey.com/news/crime_c ... rison.html

He's a perfect example of the sort of "short bus" types that end up at SH. Mostly spoiled, snotty white boys who try and convince themselves that SH is a "real" law school (which of course it isn't and never will be). Also whatever small Biglaw placement SH has likely comes from nepotism - again, a lot of VERY rich kids go here, and even with their seriously limited skills/intelligence, a family member may have the juice to get them something decent.

So tell us how you really feel.

[oaken]

touche. i guess i just didn't want to face the idea of taking a year off before law school.

Why not?

[somewhatwayward]

i know every single person in the world says "i'll be top 1/3 or top 10%" and I understand that my chances of landing a decent job are small but i do have a few contacts and I know no matter what i say i can't convince anyone on here of my work ethic, test taking abilities or intelligence. All i know is that when I put my mind to something I achieve it and I know i can do this in law school. but, this being said i do understand a harsh reality awaits me if i fall short of this goal.

Then why don't you put your mind to getting a LSAT score in the 99th percentile?

+1. Here's the thing: this is a classic example of confirmation bias. You believe you can make top 10% at RU-N and you point toward the confirming evidence, your work ethic and your intelligence. What you aren't taking into consideration, though, is the disconfirming evidence, which may be your own personal traits but is more likely the fact that all the other people at RU-N also have good worth ethic and believe in their intelligence, etc. You can't all be at the top. What really makes you certain you can beat out a big chunk of the class when they all believe the same thing? Sure, a small portion of the class will be lazy and those people can be beat, but what about the other 90%?

February LSAT is not necessarily too late for this cycle. A 168 would give you a good shot at Cornell, a 169 might give you a shot at GT or Mich, and a 170 might give you a chance at Penn, Duke, or NW (and increase your M chances), depending on how desperately schools need 170s this cycle. If V would let you apply ED in March, that would also be an option with a 170 although paying sticker there would not be such a great plan. You would also get more scholarship money from your current schools and have a chance at money at T1 schools with 5+ more points.

Think about those possibilities for a second. How excited would you be to be going to Penn or Mich (or having more $ elsewhere)? A higher score in March could be too late, but in that case, waiting a year and reapplying would be TCR.

[sadsituationJD]

You believe you can make top 10% at RU-N and you point toward the confirming evidence, your work ethic and your intelligence. What you aren't taking into consideration, though, is the disconfirming evidence, which may be your own personal traits but is more likely the fact that all the other people at RU-N also have good worth ethic and believe in their intelligence, etc. You can't all be at the top. What really makes you certain you can beat out a big chunk of the class when they all believe the same thing? Sure, a small portion of the class will be lazy and those people can be beat, but what about the other 90%?

I believe R-N also gives either extra points (or extra time on exams, or both) if you are a URM. So if not a URM you're already behind the 8-ball at that school. Also URM get a special, early OCI at R-N, so they have first crack at jobs too.

I don't think SH even really has an OCI- they just pressure everyone to take those traffic court "clerkships." There was a funny story going around a few years ago that one of the big Newark firms, probably McCarter, wasn't not only doing OCI at SH but had even stopped accepting resumes from there lol. Again, the downturn has made NJ's version of "biglaw" capable of getting Top 14'ers who strike out at real NY Biglaw, so they have no reason to do any OCI nowadays at TTT dumps like R-N and SH. You figure those firms would rather stack their ranks/website with Ivy types even if lower in the class rather than "superstars" from TTT's like SH/RN. Those top school may lead to contacts and/or business, plus extra prestige.

Even the crummy NJ "traffic court" clerkships are getting Ivy grads applying:

http://www.northjersey.com/news/1127653 ... _road.html

User has been warned for this post.

[Coveted]

You believe you can make top 10% at RU-N and you point toward the confirming evidence, your work ethic and your intelligence. What you aren't taking into consideration, though, is the disconfirming evidence, which may be your own personal traits but is more likely the fact that all the other people at RU-N also have good worth ethic and believe in their intelligence, etc. You can't all be at the top. What really makes you certain you can beat out a big chunk of the class when they all believe the same thing? Sure, a small portion of the class will be lazy and those people can be beat, but what about the other 90%?

I believe R-N also gives either extra points (or extra time on exams, or both) if you are a URM. So if not a URM you're already behind the 8-ball at that school. Also URM get a special, early OCI at R-N, so they have first crack at jobs too.

I don't think SH even really has an OCI- they just pressure everyone to take those traffic court "clerkships." There was a funny story going around a few years ago that one of the big Newark firms, probably McCarter, wasn't not only doing OCI at SH but had even stopped accepting resumes from there lol. Again, the downturn has made NJ's version of "biglaw" capable of getting Top 14'ers who strike out at real NY Biglaw, so they have no reason to do any OCI nowadays at TTT dumps like R-N and SH. You figure those firms would rather stack their ranks/website with Ivy types even if lower in the class rather than "superstars" from TTT's like SH/RN. Those top school may lead to contacts and/or business, plus extra prestige.

Even the crummy NJ "traffic court" clerkships are getting Ivy grads applying:

http://www.northjersey.com/news/1127653 ... _road.html

So with a mid 160's LSAT and a strong GPA are there any regional schools you would apply too?

I know the typical answer is going to be retake until high 160's or a 170.

[dingbat]

So with a mid 160's LSAT and a strong GPA are there any regional schools you would apply too?

I know the typical answer is going to be retake until high 160's or a 170.

He wouldn't attend anything short of a T14 with scholarship.

Personally, I'd say with a strong GPA and a mid 160s LSAT, the best schools to aim for are Berkeley and Cornell, followed by USC, UCLA, UT and Vandy. If you're interested in the region, Minnesota, WUSTL and Washington are perfectly fine, as is Alabama and BYU. GW/BC/BU/Fordham/Emory/ND are a bit riskier, but have a better chance of getting biglaw. I'm sure there are a few more, like Iowa, Ohio or maybe Arizona, but I know nothing about those schools or regions

[piccolittle]

i guess i just didn't want to face the idea of taking a year off before law school.

Taking a year off would be beneficial for other reasons than a higher LSAT score. Work experience is crucial at OCI. I see you have law firm work experience - was it full time? Was it paid? These things matter when trying to sell yourself as a candidate for a high-paying, professional job.

Being afraid of waiting one year is a silly reason in the face of a lifetime of unemployment or at least risking a huge income disparity if you find legal employment at all from one of those schools. Imagine yourself 10 years down the road - will you regret your impatience?

[zoomzoom88]

i had a paid internship for 2 summers and a winter and have another this winter and summer. All well paying and well regarding law firms in my local area.

[somewhatwayward]

So with a mid 160's LSAT and a strong GPA are there any regional schools you would apply too?

I know the typical answer is going to be retake until high 160's or a 170.

He wouldn't attend anything short of a T14 with scholarship.

Personally, I'd say with a strong GPA and a mid 160s LSAT, the best schools to aim for are Berkeley and Cornell, followed by USC, UCLA, UT and Vandy. If you're interested in the region, Minnesota, WUSTL and Washington are perfectly fine, as is Alabama and BYU. GW/BC/BU/Fordham/Emory/ND are a bit riskier, but have a better chance of getting biglaw. I'm sure there are a few more, like Iowa, Ohio or maybe Arizona, but I know nothing about those schools or regions

Naww, sadsituationJD (AKA AYI) wouldn't attend any school, not even YLS with a reverse quarter million dollar scholarship (they pay you to attend). The reason is that any possible post-law school career is some type of cut-and-paste boilerplate paper-pushing whether it is ID or BIG PAPERPUSHING.

On a serious point, I would hesitate to attend USC/UCLA/UT/Vandy without money, let alone Minn, WUSTL, UWash, Alabama, BYU, GW, BU, BC, Emory, Fordham or ND. They are all good schools that might be viable at sticker in a good economy but not right now.