Top Law Schools

So I've sent in all my deposits to Pace, got the single room I requested, and then I get a call from SJU Law today saying I got into their PT program and can transfer to Full Time in a year. What Would a TLSer do?

Retake. Two sheep in a NYC market slaughterhouse.

Columbia Law wrote:Retake. Two sheep in a NYC market slaughterhouse.

TCR.

But of the two, I would pick St. John's. It is very far from a sure thing (or even a good bet), but it's older and has a bigger alumni network. Many firms in New York have a partner that went to SJU. I know lawyers who went there and are doing well.

Would I be able to transfer out of SJU as a part-time student into a full time program? How does that work?

Look into this more - there is a world of difference between these schools. For NYC placement & prestige, there is practically no difference between SJ, Brooklyn, and Cardozo. Granted, in this economy, landing a six figure salary will be very tough coming out of SJ, but you already knew that.

And yes, you can transfer from SJ PT to a FT program.

I would be very very cautious of both given the state of the economy. However, st johns may have better (barely) placement in New York City.

I would base my decision on two things: cost and quality of life.

St. Johns is in the city. AKA much more awesome than Westchester.
Cost: Obviously living in Westchester will be cheaper + you have a scholly.
I would however say that if you want a job in the city, St. John's is that little bit better. Pick your priorities I guess.

Do NOT go to either. Retake and reapply.

rad law wrote:Do NOT go to either. Retake and reapply.

I love how everyone says retake as if when you do you'll wind up getting a 170+, get into Harvard and be set for life. It's like people never stop to think that maybe the OP did the best they could and can't do any better (or does not feel that taking a year off to study is the best use of their time), would still like to go to law school, knowing that the economy isn't the best, perhaps does not want to work in big law, and will instead just pick between the two aforementioned schools. I think everyone can assume that your post is a given in any "where should I go that isn't HYS" thread, and need not be posted. Instead, just answer the question.

snowpeach06 wrote:

rad law wrote:Do NOT go to either. Retake and reapply.

I love how everyone says retake as if when you do you'll wind up getting a 170+, get into Harvard and be set for life. It's like people never stop to think that maybe the OP did the best they could and can't do any better (or does not feel that taking a year off to study is the best use of their time), would still like to go to law school, knowing that the economy isn't the best, perhaps does not want to work in big law, and will instead just pick between the two aforementioned schools. I think everyone can assume that your post is a given in any "where should I go that isn't HYS" thread, and need not be posted. Instead, just answer the question.

well noone should go to sju at sticker. and the scholly at pace law probably has stipulations for renewal. this alone would reason enough for me to not to go to either. i don't know about retaking,but maybe casting a wider net or being more flexible with location preference would be appropriate.

snowpeach06 wrote:

rad law wrote:Do NOT go to either. Retake and reapply.

I love how everyone says retake as if when you do you'll wind up getting a 170+, get into Harvard and be set for life. It's like people never stop to think that maybe the OP did the best they could and can't do any better (or does not feel that taking a year off to study is the best use of their time), would still like to go to law school, knowing that the economy isn't the best, perhaps does not want to work in big law, and will instead just pick between the two aforementioned schools. I think everyone can assume that your post is a given in any "where should I go that isn't HYS" thread, and need not be posted. Instead, just answer the question.

The best OP could do doesn't get OP into any school worth the money in this economy. It's not the question of biglaw or not, it's the question of crushing debt vs. job prospects, ANY job prospects, not just biglaw.

The conventional TLS wisdom, "go to a truly national school or go to the best school in the region you want to practice (with $$)" still applies.

rad law wrote:

snowpeach06 wrote:

rad law wrote:Do NOT go to either. Retake and reapply.

I love how everyone says retake as if when you do you'll wind up getting a 170+, get into Harvard and be set for life. It's like people never stop to think that maybe the OP did the best they could and can't do any better (or does not feel that taking a year off to study is the best use of their time), would still like to go to law school, knowing that the economy isn't the best, perhaps does not want to work in big law, and will instead just pick between the two aforementioned schools. I think everyone can assume that your post is a given in any "where should I go that isn't HYS" thread, and need not be posted. Instead, just answer the question.

The best OP could do doesn't get OP into any school worth the money in this economy. It's not the question of biglaw or not, it's the question of crushing debt vs. job prospects, ANY job prospects, not just biglaw.

The conventional TLS wisdom, "go to a truly national school or go to the best school in the region you want to practice (with $$)" still applies.

The fact of the matter is that not everyone can get into a truly national school or the best school in their region. If they still want to go to law school, as long as they are aware of the realities, then that is their prerogative.

snowpeach06 wrote: The fact of the matter is that not everyone can get into a truly national school or the best school in their region. If they still want to go to law school, as long as they are aware of the realities, then that is their prerogative.

This is a terrible way to think about it, considering that even finding a legal job is not a sure bet from these schools. I'm not entirely convinced OP is aware of the realities of his/her likely impending indentured servitude.

rad law wrote:

snowpeach06 wrote: The fact of the matter is that not everyone can get into a truly national school or the best school in their region. If they still want to go to law school, as long as they are aware of the realities, then that is their prerogative.

This is a terrible way to think about it, considering that even finding a legal job is not a sure bet from these schools. I'm not entirely convinced OP is aware of the realities of his/her likely impending indentured servitude.

Trust me, one trip to this website is all it takes to be aware of the realities. The economy won't be bad for the rest of our lives. And even if you do think it will be, in the end, it isn't up to you what someone else does with their lives.

snowpeach06 wrote:

rad law wrote:

snowpeach06 wrote: The fact of the matter is that not everyone can get into a truly national school or the best school in their region. If they still want to go to law school, as long as they are aware of the realities, then that is their prerogative.

This is a terrible way to think about it, considering that even finding a legal job is not a sure bet from these schools. I'm not entirely convinced OP is aware of the realities of his/her likely impending indentured servitude.

Trust me, one trip to this website is all it takes to be aware of the realities. The economy won't be bad for the rest of our lives. And even if you do think it will be, in the end, it isn't up to you what someone else does with their lives.

You're right. It's not. You have the right to make as many terrible financial decisions as you want.

rad law=the worst

musshockey15 wrote:rad law=the worst

Glad you've been enjoying my body of work.

snowpeach06 wrote:

rad law wrote:

snowpeach06 wrote:

rad law wrote:Do NOT go to either. Retake and reapply.

I love how everyone says retake as if when you do you'll wind up getting a 170+, get into Harvard and be set for life. It's like people never stop to think that maybe the OP did the best they could and can't do any better (or does not feel that taking a year off to study is the best use of their time), would still like to go to law school, knowing that the economy isn't the best, perhaps does not want to work in big law, and will instead just pick between the two aforementioned schools. I think everyone can assume that your post is a given in any "where should I go that isn't HYS" thread, and need not be posted. Instead, just answer the question.

The best OP could do doesn't get OP into any school worth the money in this economy. It's not the question of biglaw or not, it's the question of crushing debt vs. job prospects, ANY job prospects, not just biglaw.

The conventional TLS wisdom, "go to a truly national school or go to the best school in the region you want to practice (with $$)" still applies.

The fact of the matter is that not everyone can get into a truly national school or the best school in their region. If they still want to go to law school, as long as they are aware of the realities, then that is their prerogative.

OP asked for advice, and rad law is giving it. ultimately he is not stopping anyone from going to law school. it is just a piece of info that the OP can use while making his decision.

ETA: these economic realities are not something to be taken lightly. i am going to a very good school, and i am worried about job prospects. a lot of people aren't really "aware of the realities". either they haven't done the research to know how tough it is or they have been misled by stats manipulated by the schools or they have put major blinders on to the truth and insist on going through with it anyway. thus, the risks of these schools needs to be emphasized.....but in the end each person will make his/her own choice...

snowpeach06 wrote:I love how everyone says retake as if when you do you'll wind up getting a 170+, get into Harvard and be set for life. It's like people never stop to think that maybe the OP did the best they could and can't do any better (or does not feel that taking a year off to study is the best use of their time), would still like to go to law school, knowing that the economy isn't the best, perhaps does not want to work in big law, and will instead just pick between the two aforementioned schools. I think everyone can assume that your post is a given in any "where should I go that isn't HYS" thread, and need not be posted. Instead, just answer the question.

I think that the vast majority of people can do better on the LSAT, often well enough to get into significantly better schools. The difference even a point or two makes is ridiculous (look at LSN). The fact is that most people do not consider retake/reapply as an option and I think that there is nothing wrong with telling pretty much everyone who gets into a subpar school that they should retake/reapply.

If you truly want to be a lawyer and the best possible school you can get into is Cooley at sticker, then I personally think you should go as long as you understand the realities of your situation. But for most people, they can get into better schools or at least the same schools with money. These people are often unwilling to consider waiting another year and TLS should tell them to retake/reapply because we do not know the OP's situation and must operate as if they are the average person (who can do better on the LSAT even if they do not think so).

But heck, if the someone responds saying they studied for hours upon hours with every study plan imaginable and got 3 scores in the sub-150 range, yet still wants to be a lawyer above all else, then I would wish them best of luck wherever they got in as long as they are aware of what going to that school means.

rad law wrote:crushing debt

This term is relative