Top Law Schools

Just to remind us that it is not H>>>>>>>>>>>everything else. Another reason to take the $$$ at Columbia or choose to attend Stanford over Harvard, if you are lucky enough to have those kinds of choices. There are apparently enough of them that they have their own article in the Harvard Law Record.

--LinkRemoved--

Despite what ATL thinks of this, I thank the writer for at least being up front. On this board people tend to think that everyone from Harvard gets something good, unless they are defective in some way. I have a source that has told me that this is not the case, but now you all do, too.

The Brainalist wrote:Just to remind us that it is not H>>>>>>>>>>>everything else. Another reason to take the $$$ at Columbia or choose to attend Stanford over Harvard, if you are lucky enough to have those kinds of choices. There are apparently enough of them that they have their own article in the Harvard Law Record.

--LinkRemoved--

Despite what ATL thinks of this, I thank the writer for at least being up front. On this board people tend to think that everyone from Harvard gets something good, unless they are defective in some way. I have a source that has told me that this is not the case, but now you all do, too.

Interesting article. Just wondering why you say its another reason to choose Stanford over Harvard?

I still think that you have to be defective to end up unemployed out of HLS. And by defective I include unwilling to work outside of NYC, unwilling to look for jobs outside of OCI, and unwilling to work for $145k instead of $160k.

Renzo wrote:I still think that you have to be defective to end up unemployed out of HLS. And by defective I include unwilling to work outside of NYC, unwilling to look for jobs outside of OCI, and unwilling to work for $145k instead of $160k.

Really? But what do you do if you get no-offered? How can you get another Biglaw job (using Biglaw since that's what the author clearly desires)?

adameus wrote:

Interesting article. Just wondering why you say its another reason to choose Stanford over Harvard?

No particular reason. I don't have any such information regarding Stanford. Absent these tidbits, people on this site are tempted to say that people at H are guaranteed a great job, and choose it over another school based on misinformation. With this kind of information, I presume turning down Stanford or a school like columbia with scholarship would be a closer call.

Renzo, I do think you have a point, but it is probably less clear than you think. My understanding is that these are no-offered 3Ls, and 3L OCI is supposed to be non-existent.

Also, people aren't wrong for focusing on 160k jobs in new york. They would probably prefer some job to no job, but the mistake is probably more about the opportunity cost of spending time only on big NY jobs while deadlines for back-up plans lapse.

lawschoollll wrote:

Renzo wrote:I still think that you have to be defective to end up unemployed out of HLS. And by defective I include unwilling to work outside of NYC, unwilling to look for jobs outside of OCI, and unwilling to work for $145k instead of $160k.

Really? But what do you do if you get no-offered? How can you get another Biglaw job (using Biglaw since that's what the author clearly desires)?

The same way all the other 6,000ish laid-off associates and no-offered graduates are going to get jobs. Networking, mass mailing, setting their collective sights lower, and figuring out what caused them to be no-offered despite the HLS pedigree in cases where it's applicable.

adameus wrote:

The Brainalist wrote:Just to remind us that it is not H>>>>>>>>>>>everything else. Another reason to take the $$$ at Columbia or choose to attend Stanford over Harvard, if you are lucky enough to have those kinds of choices. There are apparently enough of them that they have their own article in the Harvard Law Record.

--LinkRemoved--

Despite what ATL thinks of this, I thank the writer for at least being up front. On this board people tend to think that everyone from Harvard gets something good, unless they are defective in some way. I have a source that has told me that this is not the case, but now you all do, too.

Interesting article. Just wondering why you say its another reason to choose Stanford over Harvard?

LOL, my first thought. So, OP, why Stanford again?

Renzo wrote: The same way all the other 6,000ish laid-off associates and no-offered graduates are going to get jobs. Networking, mass mailing, setting their collective sights lower, and figuring out what caused them to be no-offered despite the HLS pedigree in cases where it's applicable.

This is true, but it may be difficult to do networking to a secondary market from Boston, while making sure you are getting all the requirements for graduating done, and getting ready for the bar. In a way, if you were trying to network your way into some secondary market like Atlanta, students at emory would have the networking advantage over you. They can do local functions, volunteering, face-to-face stuff, while the boston kids can do little more than send out mass emails. Also, it isn't like some little atlanta specialty practice is going to be sending an job announcements to harvard. It would send it to Emory, and they'll have first crack at it.

LOL, my first thought. So, OP, why Stanford again?

Why not? I am just thinking of cross-admit schools.

The Brainalist wrote:

LOL, my first thought. So, OP, why Stanford again?

Why not? I am just thinking of cross-admit schools.

I cannot think of someone who would actually claim: go to Harvard over Stanford $$ because it's so much cooler. [Well, I do think so, though, this is waaayy too subjective to ever impel someone to make this choice.] Hence, your H vs S comparison is ummm.... really interesting. Though, I do agree that H vs C$$ could be a reasonable debate for one.

TheLuckyOne wrote:LOL, my first thought. So, OP, why Stanford again?

Before I begin, you all know I am biased toward Stanford.

That said, California firms haven't been hit nearly as hard as NYC firms and Stanford grads have an easier time getting a job in california than Harvard grads (all things being equal). Numerous attorneys I've spoken to who work in Bay Area firms say that they prefer SLS grads to HLS grads because they are more sure the SLS grad actually wants California than the HLS grad. They also say that Stanford=Yale for California firms.

TheLuckyOne wrote:go to Harvard over Stanford $$ because it's so much cooler.

Neither H nor S gives merit aid, so this is never going to be a choice, unless H gives no need aid and S does.

crackberry wrote:

TheLuckyOne wrote:LOL, my first thought. So, OP, why Stanford again?

Before I begin, you all know I am biased toward Stanford.

That said, California firms haven't been hit nearly as hard as NYC firms and Stanford grads have an easier time getting a job in California than Harvard grads (all things being equal). Numerous attorneys I've spoken to who work in Bay Area firms say that they prefer SLS grads to HLS grads because they are more sure the SLS grad actually wants California than the HLS grad. They also say that Stanford=Yale for California firms.

Is that really true? Several TLS posts have rumored that Boalt's OCI has dropped off a cliff ITE compared to MVP, due to the collapsing CA economy. Also, UCLA is supposedly placing about 10-15% of their class this year.

im_blue wrote:

crackberry wrote:

TheLuckyOne wrote:LOL, my first thought. So, OP, why Stanford again?

Before I begin, you all know I am biased toward Stanford.

That said, California firms haven't been hit nearly as hard as NYC firms and Stanford grads have an easier time getting a job in California than Harvard grads (all things being equal). Numerous attorneys I've spoken to who work in Bay Area firms say that they prefer SLS grads to HLS grads because they are more sure the SLS grad actually wants California than the HLS grad. They also say that Stanford=Yale for California firms.

Is that really true? Several TLS posts have rumored that Boalt's OCI has dropped off a cliff compared to MVP, due to the collapsing CA economy.

There were definitely fewer no-offers (by percentage) at California firms than NYC firms. NYC's economy tanked harder than CA when Wall St. bit the dust, and many NYC firms were so heavily focused on Wall St. that they had to be severely crippled.

crackberry wrote:

TheLuckyOne wrote:go to Harvard over Stanford $$ because it's so much cooler.

Neither H nor S gives merit aid, so this is never going to be a choice, unless H gives no need aid and S does.

Well, yeah, my point was that no one really impels one to go to Harvard over Stanford or vice versa unless there is some compelling reason. When choosing between HYS, I guess, personal biases come into play more than anything else.

TheLuckyOne wrote:

crackberry wrote:

TheLuckyOne wrote:go to Harvard over Stanford $$ because it's so much cooler.

Neither H nor S gives merit aid, so this is never going to be a choice, unless H gives no need aid and S does.

Well, yeah, my point was that no one really endorses one to go to Harvard over Stanford or vice versa unless there is some compelling reason. When choosing between HYS, I guess, personal biases come into play more than anything else.

Yes, that is definitely true. BigLaw prospects are roughly equivalent coming out of all three and as a result geographic considerations and specific areas of interest are more important. When it comes to clerkships/academia/PI/gov't, it's sort of a different story.

TheLuckyOne wrote:

The Brainalist wrote:

LOL, my first thought. So, OP, why Stanford again?

Why not? I am just thinking of cross-admit schools.

I cannot think of someone who would actually claim: go to Harvard over Stanford $$ because it's so much cooler. [Well, I do think so, though, this is waaayy too subjective to ever impel someone to make this choice.] Hence, your H vs S comparison is ummm.... really interesting. Though, I do agree that H vs C$$ could be a reasonable debate for one.

I meant stanford regardless of aid, columbia with aid.

The Brainalist wrote:

TheLuckyOne wrote:

The Brainalist wrote:

LOL, my first thought. So, OP, why Stanford again?

Why not? I am just thinking of cross-admit schools.

I cannot think of someone who would actually claim: go to Harvard over Stanford $$ because it's so much cooler. [Well, I do think so, though, this is waaayy too subjective to ever impel someone to make this choice.] Hence, your H vs S comparison is ummm.... really interesting. Though, I do agree that H vs C$$ could be a reasonable debate for one.

I meant stanford regardless of aid, columbia with aid.

Read above...

im_blue wrote:Is that really true? Several TLS posts have rumored that Boalt's OCI has dropped off a cliff ITE compared to MVP, due to the collapsing CA economy. Also, UCLA is supposedly placing about 10-15% of their class this year.

Yeah, as snobbish as this may sound, I'm really only comparing HYSColumbia here. Stanford grads still own California, regardless of the state's problems. With all the firms in the state, SLS grads still don't have problems finding jobs (yes, I understand the absurdity of me, a 0L, saying this to you, a 1L at SLS, but whatever).

crackberry wrote: (yes, I understand the absurdity of me, a 0L, saying this to you, a 1L at SLS, but whatever).

crackberry wrote:

im_blue wrote:Is that really true? Several TLS posts have rumored that Boalt's OCI has dropped off a cliff ITE compared to MVP, due to the collapsing CA economy. Also, UCLA is supposedly placing about 10-15% of their class this year.

Yeah, as snobbish as this may sound, I'm really only comparing HYSColumbia here. Stanford grads still own California, regardless of the state's problems. With all the firms in the state, SLS grads still don't have problems finding jobs (yes, I understand the absurdity of me, a 0L, saying this to you, a 1L at SLS, but whatever).

LOL actually I'm a Stanford -1L, not 1L. I decided to take a year off due to personal issues, but I might hit you up for advice in the future.

im_blue wrote:

crackberry wrote:

im_blue wrote:Is that really true? Several TLS posts have rumored that Boalt's OCI has dropped off a cliff ITE compared to MVP, due to the collapsing CA economy. Also, UCLA is supposedly placing about 10-15% of their class this year.

Yeah, as snobbish as this may sound, I'm really only comparing HYSColumbia here. Stanford grads still own California, regardless of the state's problems. With all the firms in the state, SLS grads still don't have problems finding jobs (yes, I understand the absurdity of me, a 0L, saying this to you, a 1L at SLS, but whatever).

LOL actually I'm a Stanford -1L, not 1L. I decided to take a year off due to personal issues, but I might hit you up for advice in the future.

Wait so you're gonna be Stanford c/o 2014?

crackberry wrote: Yes, that is definitely true. BigLaw prospects are roughly equivalent coming out of all three and as a result geographic considerations and specific areas of interest are more important. When it comes to clerkships/academia/PI/gov't, it's sort of a different story.

This is the thing I'm getting from the article to be honest, and to a certain extent it may be due to a total lack of information on Stanford and Yale but....

Harvard= some chance of no job at all, much less NLJ250, a clerkship, or top PI/govt
Yale= guaranteed a job, probably NLJ250 (if desired) or a gov't job, if you don't land a clerkship first
Stanford= probably guaranteed a job, probably NLJ250 (given the latest statistics, where it didn't go down at all) or a gov't job, if you don't land a clerkship.

Without information that there is even one 3L without a job from stanford, I have seen quite a few examples of that from Harvard. Granted, harvard is almost 3 times the size, but that is something to consider.

ETA: I'm Blue, do you have any insight on the 3L unemployment, if it exists at Stanford?

Nobody is guaranteed a job regardless of where they go to school.

not at harvard, not at yale, not at stanford.

/thread

The Brainalist wrote: Harvard= some chance of no job at all, much less NLJ250, a clerkship, or top PI/govt
Yale= guaranteed a job, probably NLJ250 (if desired) or a gov't job, if you don't land a clerkship first
Stanford= probably guaranteed a job, probably NLJ250 (given the latest statistics, where it didn't go down at all) or a gov't job, if you don't land a clerkship.

Blatant anti-Harvard trolling!

Because of the way percentages work, I understand there are holes in this argument, but I'd argue that Stanford and Yale are better off that Harvard in this economy. S and Y have class sizes < 200. HLS has a class size of ~550.