Top Law Schools

.

.

I don't think going to Boalt is going to strengthen your ties to SoCal anymore than they already are. Would LA firms dig deeper into UChi's class than Boalt's? My gut says they are at worst equal, if not a slight advantage for Chi. This is basically all speculation though.

But, I'd pick UChi to maximize chances at biglaw overall as I don't feel like either is going to give you that much of a leg up in LA.

As a 0L just speculating from what I've heard around here I'd say:

If you are set on LA biglaw between these two you should go wherever you will do better, be happier and have less debt - Chicago does have a slight national prestige advantage and firms may be willing to go deeper into the class but more LA firms may visit Boalt and there may be more Boalt alumni in LA...if its just about getting biglaw anywhere then Chi definitely

jtemp320 wrote:As a 0L just speculating from what I've heard around here I'd say:

If you are set on LA biglaw between these two you should go wherever you will do better, be happier and have less debt - Chicago does have a slight national prestige advantage and firms may be willing to go deeper into the class but more LA firms may visit Boalt and there may be more Boalt alumni in LA...if its just about getting biglaw anywhere then Chi definitely

Agreed.

Frankly, after YHSC I don't think that ANY of these schools has a powerful national draw. I've lived in both San Francisco and Los Angeles, so I can state without qualification that both NYU and UChicago hold less "prestige" than Berkeley here in California; I'm also fairly certain that a revealed preferences of cross-admits would indicate this to be the case as well. (Again, I tend to think that the most prestige accrues to the top 4 schools, and that the rest is just about a school's placement into the right jobs.) Moreover, I'm equally sure from having spent enough time working in Manhattan that the inverse is true in the Northeast: NYU would be the easy choice. Based on what the previous poster is saying, UChicago might place better into New York firms, but I am not certain of that since a large majority people at Berkeley (and Stanford for that matter) aren't interested in leaving California. The Boalt students I've met who have bid for New York firms didn't seem to do any worse than those who bid for San Francisco ones; it's there in both cities if you're at that level.

So given that you know you want to work in LA, I would definitely take Berkeley over those two. I tend to think that a significant number of students at Boalt doesn't even want BigLaw and that it's there for you if you are in the upper 1/3 of students (exceptions both ways of course); moreover, liking Los Angeles is actually fairly uncommon amongst people in the San Francisco Bay Area, and comparatively few from Berkeley especially will indicate LA as their #1 choice.

akikaze wrote:

jtemp320 wrote:As a 0L just speculating from what I've heard around here I'd say:

If you are set on LA biglaw between these two you should go wherever you will do better, be happier and have less debt - Chicago does have a slight national prestige advantage and firms may be willing to go deeper into the class but more LA firms may visit Boalt and there may be more Boalt alumni in LA...if its just about getting biglaw anywhere then Chi definitely

Agreed.

Frankly, after YHSC I don't think that ANY of these schools has a powerful national draw. I've lived in both San Francisco and Los Angeles, so I can state without qualification that both NYU and UChicago hold less "prestige" than Berkeley here in California; I'm also fairly certain that a revealed preferences of cross-admits would indicate this to be the case as well. (Again, I tend to think that the most prestige accrues to the top 4 schools, and that the rest is just about a school's placement into the right jobs.) Moreover, I'm equally sure from having spent enough time working in Manhattan that the inverse is true in the Northeast: NYU would be the easy choice. Based on what the previous poster is saying, UChicago might place better into New York firms, but I am not certain of that since a large majority people at Berkeley (and Stanford for that matter) aren't interested in leaving California.

So given that you know you want to work in LA, I would definitely take Berkeley over those two. I tend to think that a significant number of students at Boalt doesn't even want BigLaw and that it's there for you if you want it and are in the upper 1/3 of students (exceptions both ways of course); moreover, liking Los Angeles is actually fairly uncommon amongst people in the San Francisco Bay Area, and comparatively few from Berkeley especially will indicate LA as their #1 choice.

No.

OP: go to Chicago if the cost difference isn't great.

Visit both and pick the one that feels better. The marginal difference (if one even exists) for LA biglaw will be greatly overshadowed by ability to show ties, why you want to be there, and your grades.

bk187 wrote: But, I'd pick UChi to maximize chances at biglaw overall as I don't feel like either is going to give you that much of a leg up in LA.

This is credited, particularly since there are very few jobs in LA.

If you would be down to work in either SF, LA or SD if push came to shove, I'd go to Berkeley. In fact, either way I'd probably go to Berkeley.

SBL wrote:If you would be down to work in either SF, LA or SD if push came to shove, I'd go to Berkeley. In fact, either way I'd probably go to Berkeley.

Ditto