UC Davis, Hastings, Irvine or Emory? Forum

[20160810]

No to emory, you don't want to live in Georgia when California is the alternative.

Biglaw prospects are probably the same out of UCH, UCD (Top 10%-15% is generous based on 2010 OCI). I think your prospects may be similar out of UCI. Yes, they push a hard non-profit message and focus efforts there, but most law schools claim to be "non-profit" lawyer factories even as they charge exorbitant tuition that prevents many from going into the non-profit field. I think UCI is positioned to be a T30-T50 so I don't think your Biglaw odds will be that different, although location will be hugely different. UCI if you want SoCal, either UCH or UCD for Norcal. You'll have degree mobility in CA with UCH or UCD but it will be harder to get socal.

It is not difficult to work in SoCal from Davis at all. Tons of LA/OC firms do OCI, and about half of our graduates end up there. I suspect the same is true of Hastings.

UCI is just too much of an unknown to pick over D or H absent a full ride IMO.

[yo!]

Not naive. The rankings jump/fall re: Davis, Hastings, Emory reflect changing post-grad prospects out of these schools. Everybody knows how bad Emory is doing.

I have no idea how this argument relates to shifts in rankings

=====


UCH/UCD job prospects are pretty much identical and have been for many years. Choose based location and $$. Everything else will probably mislead you.
Go to Emory if you'd rather work in GA than CA. If you rather work in CA, then rule out Emory.... also probably best to rule out UCI. 1/3 scholarship not enough to warrant risk.

This

[Metaread]

Thanks for the input everyone! Keep it coming! The choice is still really tough. Tbh I'm not sure if I'd want NorCal or SoCal just yet. I haven't stayed in Cali long so I haven't had the chance to compare cities in CA for their living, culture, etc. If someone would make recommendations/offer thoughts I'd be grateful for that.

Your chances at getting BigLaw from any of these schools is not great (I'd guess somewhere between 10-20%). SF is a particularly competitive market and ATL has been decimated. I don't know about UCI in the LA/OCI area; it's kind of a risk (although at least they will be accredited this summer - I think), but it's your only SoCal option if you want SoCal.

If I were you, I'd visit the three CA schools or even just UCD/UCH if you are from the Bay area and don't want SoCal and then decide from there. Just know your chances at a BigFirm job are low unless you get top grades. You have to go to a school where you would be comfortable graduating with median grades rather than thinking of which one would place best if you are at the top.

Concerning location: As I mentioned in my parent post, the idea of being stuck in GA/the South is scary to me. But on the off chance I place in the top third or fourth of the class I think I'd have a decent chance at getting into a NYC BigLaw firm, which would be ideal. Cali is probably safer but will be just as unfamiliar for me, since I've not been to GA or CA much. It's true I should just think of a school where I'd be comfortable with a median...so that would defo favor Cali.

Also, it seems employment wise for big firms Davis is worse off than Emory (not just in the reputation ranking, but Big Law %-wise placement too). But it all depends on the scholarship I suppose. Emory seems a *safer* bet now after having some conversations with people who have mixed feelings towards Emory's career service. Basically, yes, there are problems with them, but it's no problem at all if you market yourself and be proactive rather than expecting a job (and this is the same for most schools apparently)....

Additionally, please ignore the votes for UC Irvine. Sure it projects to be a strong school. If you go there you will be on your own for job hunting. I don't see any argument for Irvine unless COA is FREE. And for you it isn't.

But aren't we all on our own for job hunting below T-14? OCI sucks this year almost universally it seems, even for Yale and Harvard it was worse than last year apparently...Irvine is definitely a risk, but if it's one with a decent payout...it could either end in great happiness or great regret, I suppose.

Personally, I believe Irvine blows the other two out of the water, since quality of professors is the biggest factor in my decision. Add the 1/3 scholarship, gorgeous weather, a student body that seems overwhelmingly passionate, a more cooperative atmosphere, and the fact that Irvine could eventually be a T-20 institution down the road, and it becomes the clear winner in my mind.

Since UCI won't be ranked for a while and the professors seem awesome it's also a tempting choice (I think employers will be attracted to it while it has small classes and great profs). I think being part of "making" something (orgs, etc) will have greater import there than at the other law schools, since if I was going to Davis or Emory (for example) then I would just apply to law journals and other orgs that were formed ages ago. BUT I would hesitate to be so sure that Irvine will place in the top 20. For one thing, it lacks the grand facilities and alumni bases of current 20s-ranked schools, and though that could change over the years, it won't be that much better in 2 years, or 3.

But it's still so tempting to go! The facilities they do have are great, and I hear several reputable law firms visited Irvine to pick up grads as future partners. Sheppard (sp?) was among them. Still, the idea of graduating into BigLaw is a huge uncertainty, and it looks like no one from UC Irvine law can really....say anything more about that. As people said, still too uncertain, which makes my choice still a tough one.

It's reasonable to assume Davis is "on the rise" given the changes in rankings. 1-2 years of USNews are hardly the end-all, be-all, but if you're choosing between D and H and don't have a strong reason to want to be in SF, why wouldn't you go with the higher ranked option? Hastings is a fine school, but it's not the one I'd pick right now.

That said, I think the "Hastings is a sinking ship" stuff is a little silly and mainly stems from the fact that UCH was a top-20 school in the 80s. It's ALWAYS been regarded as a solid T1 school and will continue to be.

Davis is still the same school as it was 3 years ago when it was ranked in the 30s, though, no? What has changed other than the building of the new King Hall and the school's apparent newfound experience with "gaming" the employment stats? Just playing devil's advocate here.

I will also say I'm convinced Hastings is the worst option now though, even if all the stuff about a sinking ship is false.

----------------------------

The choice between Davis, Emory and UCI is still difficult! Would like others to weigh in if possible?

Let's debate the merits of CA/GA legal job markets? Or would that just go nowhere? I'm also wondering about Davis' career services, and how they compare to Emory's abysmal counterpart (again: take it with a grain of salt, as you're meant to go looking for jobs rather than expect them, according to common knowledge).

[FireNextTime]

Hastings tuition is through the roof

UC Davis, estimated in-state tuition, 2011-12:
$45,441.50. Source here.

UC Hastings, approved in-state tuition, 2011-12:
$40,653. Source: E-mail from Administration today. Yes, it is an increase. No, it is not more than UC Davis.

Further, OOS tuition peaked for this academic year at Hastings. It is actually decreasing next year.

And before anyone tries it: living in San Francisco is not $5,000 more expensive than living in Davis or Sacramento. If you think it is, then you're doing it wrong.

In sum: There are many legit reasons to attend Davis over Hastings (and vice-versa). Cost is not one of them, absent relative scholarship offers.

[yo!]

Davis is still the same school as it was 3 years ago when it was ranked in the 30s, though, no? What has changed other than the building of the new King Hall and the school's apparent newfound experience with "gaming" the employment stats? Just playing devil's advocate here.

I will also say I'm convinced Hastings is the worst option now though, even if all the stuff about a sinking ship is false.

Yes, mostly. The school just made some pretty decent hires though, so it seems that they are serious about improving our reputation. Aside from a few people making fools of themselves at law prom, I'd say that things are looking pretty good (as far as ranking maintenance goes). The new chief justice of the CA Supreme Court is a King Hall alum, and the 9th circuit just held oral arguments in our new building. Nothing's changed that's going to propel us into the t14 anytime soon (or ever), but I think things are moving in a positive direction.

http://www.law.ucdavis.edu/news/news.aspx?id=3158

[ipod]

Why not just visit the schools and talk to the students? For Irvine, I recommend speaking with the 1Ls. They're more in line with your year's prospects, since they're not all golden T14/full-ride caliber (as I'm sure the biglaw firms are aware of). No burn intended. Anyway, speaking with them will give you a good idea about the support network Irvine provides. For Davis and Hastings, I recommend speaking with the 2Ls and also their career services to see what steps they're making towards increasing their biglaw placement.

While you're at it, you can also check out other cool things like classes, professors, deans, premises, town, feel, etc.

[Metaread]

I would love to visit the schools, ipod, and it would definitely give me a better idea of the respective law schools' cultures/atmospheres etc but I can't, as I'm living in a foreign country and I have employment here. I am talking to a current Irvine student, though. No offense taken at the T-14. I would be that caliber had I known several things about the law schools' attitude to GPAs (namely, that taking an easy major doesn't hurt. I did a challenging double major thinking it would show intellectual rigor. Apparently it didn't quite achieve that? Or it did at the expense of the GPA, which is 2 steps backward anyway).

Anyone on this website who attends Davis or Hastings and want to talk about it? So far I've had difficulty finding people.

Yes, mostly. The school just made some pretty decent hires though, so it seems that they are serious about improving our reputation. Aside from a few people making fools of themselves at law prom, I'd say that things are looking pretty good (as far as ranking maintenance goes). The new chief justice of the CA Supreme Court is a King Hall alum, and the 9th circuit just held oral arguments in our new building. Nothing's changed that's going to propel us into the t14 anytime soon (or ever), but I think things are moving in a positive direction.

That's interesting. But Irvine stole Ivy League profs, it's quite hard to beat that. Agreed on the positive direction though. Now, if only that admitted student packet would just arrive. =|

Also, question: how does Irvine's being based in a public school (UC Irvine) affect it as a law school? Or does it not matter beyond housing and the campus surrounds? Would it affect the vibe/reputation/employment prospects, you think? So far I've heard feedback from one person who said, "It's a University of California branch, that means they have good support" and also another person who said, "It's an LS formed around a public school, which means its reputation and quality are low. Don't choose Irvine." What do you all think?

[thegreatk]

Also, question: how does Irvine's being based in a public school (UC Irvine) affect it as a law school? Or does it not matter beyond housing and the campus surrounds? Would it affect the vibe/reputation/employment prospects, you think? So far I've heard feedback from one person who said, "It's a University of California branch, that means they have good support" and also another person who said, "It's an LS formed around a public school, which means its reputation and quality are low. Don't choose Irvine." What do you all think?

So....Boalt, Michigan, UVA, UCLA, UT have low reputations with low quality? I've never heard that, and logically it seems like BS.

And I understand your point about Irvine lacking an alumni base....I have to admit, I have a law job lined up already and connections in the legal field, so those risks are largely mitigated for me. I'll let you know if I still feel as jazzed about attending after ASD on March 31.

[Cade McNown]

UC Hastings, approved in-state tuition, 2011-12:
$40,653. Source: E-mail from Administration today. Yes, it is an increase. No, it is not more than UC Davis.

Hastings COA: IS - 59K, OOS - 70K --LinkRemoved--
Davis COA: IS - 58K, OOS - 67K http://www.law.ucdavis.edu/current/fina ... dance.html

So Hasintings is higher, but you're right that they're essentially identical. This is astounding to me b/c last cycle I remember estimated COA was about 10K less at Davis.

[Cade McNown]

But aren't we all on our own for job hunting below T-14? OCI sucks this year almost universally it seems, even for Yale and Harvard it was worse than last year apparently...Irvine is definitely a risk, but if it's one with a decent payout...it could either end in great happiness or great regret, I suppose.

It isn't all OCI. In periods when OCI is down, students rely on a strong alumni base for connections and job opportunities. So no, most students are not completely on their own. I know Irvine is attractive given its strong faculty and congenial atmosphere, but it's more risk than I would take on.

[Borhas]

Also, question: how does Irvine's being based in a public school (UC Irvine) affect it as a law school? Or does it not matter beyond housing and the campus surrounds? Would it affect the vibe/reputation/employment prospects, you think? So far I've heard feedback from one person who said, "It's a University of California branch, that means they have good support" and also another person who said, "It's an LS formed around a public school, which means its reputation and quality are low. Don't choose Irvine." What do you all think?

Frankly, that's by far the worst criteria to even consider.

From what I've gathered by living in CA for a few months is that the UC's have a pretty good rep out here.

[Metaread]

It isn't all OCI. In periods when OCI is down, students rely on a strong alumni base for connections and job opportunities. So no, most students are not completely on their own. I know Irvine is attractive given its strong faculty and congenial atmosphere, but it's more risk than I would take on.

How do people get jobs through alumni though? Do they just hear of opportunities/get opportunities through them? I'm wondering if Emory or UC Davis' alumni base would be helpful, if not UCI wouldn't be as much of a risk in that regard per se (partly because its newness carries the aura of mystery around it that might attract some employers, I'm assuming).

Also, question: how does Irvine's being based in a public school (UC Irvine) affect it as a law school? Or does it not matter beyond housing and the campus surrounds? Would it affect the vibe/reputation/employment prospects, you think? So far I've heard feedback from one person who said, "It's a University of California branch, that means they have good support" and also another person who said, "It's an LS formed around a public school, which means its reputation and quality are low. Don't choose Irvine." What do you all think?

Frankly, that's by far the worst criteria to even consider.

From what I've gathered by living in CA for a few months is that the UC's have a pretty good rep out here.

Point taken on the public school thing, I was asking how Irvine being a public school affects its law school to the person who said it. No reply so far. I think he simply thought the reputation would take a hit? That seems silly though. Law schools aren't as connected to the undergrad/medical/business/other parts of a university as he seems to think (if he thought that). =|

And I understand your point about Irvine lacking an alumni base....I have to admit, I have a law job lined up already and connections in the legal field, so those risks are largely mitigated for me. I'll let you know if I still feel as jazzed about attending after ASD on March 31.

You have a legal job already? Then...if I may ask, why are you planning on attending law school? It's great to hear you'll be having less risk when attending UCI, but I don't have similar legal connections, as you guessed.

[ipod]

Some places in norcal haven't heard of UCI law. Bingham, for one lol.

Anyway, my bet's still on Irvine for the LA/OC market. Chem's reputation depends on the first three classes being largely employed. So if you don't get biglaw, at least you'll have that safety net of public interest and boutique firms.

[Aberzombie1892]

OP - choosing between this schools will require a balancing test.

On one end, Emory will offer the highest chances of high paid employment. One the other end, I think you want to be in CA. Think carefully and decide what is more important to you. If you have ties to CA, Emory can get you back (however, I am not sure how Emory is perceived out there).

UCD/UCH are very similar schools. I believe that the class of 2009 fared better at Hastings than Davis. There is actually a thread on this board that goes up to the T80 + 4th tier. Do not, and i repeat, do not pick Davis solely because it is ranked higher. As you may well be aware of, tls.com generally follows the US News rankings when giving advice and that is not always the best way to give advice (especially when trying to decide between pier schools). For example, SMU offers the highest chances of high paid employment outside of BU/BC/Emory/Notre Dame/WashU/Fordham but a lot of people don't even consider the school because it is borderline T2.

UCI is a new school. It is unclear of how job prospects will look after graduation from there. The only possible way to look at is to look at how other new schools fared when they began (which wasn't well). Also, the poor legal job market will likely hurt UCI as well. If you were interested in not quite hyper competitive PI in CA, I would suggest considering UCI. However, because you want private practice, I'm not certain of UCI's job outlook. This is especially true if you do not get a job through OCI. Most smaller firms will undoubtedly be skeptical of overlooking tried and true graduates from established schools for graduates from a new school. It's something to think about.

[Metaread]

OP - choosing between this schools will require a balancing test.

On one end, Emory will offer the highest chances of high paid employment. One the other end, I think you want to be in CA. Think carefully and decide what is more important to you. If you have ties to CA, Emory can get you back (however, I am not sure how Emory is perceived out there).

Does Emory really offer a higher chance of high paid employment than the other schools? Could you let me know what stats/graphs support this idea?

UCI is a new school. It is unclear of how job prospects will look after graduation from there. The only possible way to look at is to look at how other new schools fared when they began (which wasn't well). Also, the poor legal job market will likely hurt UCI as well. If you were interested in not quite hyper competitive PI in CA, I would suggest considering UCI. However, because you want private practice, I'm not certain of UCI's job outlook. This is especially true if you do not get a job through OCI. Most smaller firms will undoubtedly be skeptical of overlooking tried and true graduates from established schools for graduates from a new school. It's something to think about.

Concerning new schools, what new schools did badly when they began? I'm hoping law firms will be less skeptical given UCI's faculty but perhaps that's hoping for too much.

Anyway, my bet's still on Irvine for the LA/OC market. Chem's reputation depends on the first three classes being largely employed. So if you don't get biglaw, at least you'll have that safety net of public interest and boutique firms.

Public interest....no thanks, at least, not for the first few years. I may end up having no choice if I go there though, right? This decision is still painful. If I heard back from USC or some others it'd be easier.

[Metaread]

Shameless bump. More light has been shed on factors in this decision, but the decision remains rather difficult. I will prolly not pick Hastings though. With a couple more votes, my fate will be decided! (unless UC Davis offers a generous scholarship which might shift things, or schools that waitlisted me take me off).

[minky]

Shameless bump. More light has been shed on factors in this decision, but the decision remains rather difficult. I will prolly not pick Hastings though. With a couple more votes, my fate will be decided! (unless UC Davis offers a generous scholarship which might shift things, or schools that waitlisted me take me off).

Did you go to Hastings ASD yesterday?

[drdolittle]

With a couple more votes, my fate will be decided!

[IzziesGal]

I'm voting for Hastings (although another poster was right - only Irvine truly has good weather. San Francisco weather is not good, really, We get an Indian summer and it's hot from like August to November, but summer time is chilly. My hubby and I spent July 4th on the piers in SF in complete fog - could barely see the fireworks - and it was so cold we were bundled up in hats, mittens, and scarves. It's funny to see all the tourists come to SF from other parts of the country thinking it's like LA and wearing shorts - truth is, at a moment's notice, the weather can get cold fast.)

I'm going with Hastings because Hastings kids have a reputation in the Bay Area for being really good practicing attorneys. I've worked with a lot of them during my two internships, and they are on top of their game. My current federal internship is pretty much dominated by Hastings students - their law school is only like 2 or 3 blocks away from the federal building with district courts, 9th Circuit courthouse, SF City Hall, etc. So it's super convenient for them to get internships during the school year. I would check some firm websites in SF and SV (Silicon Valley) to see how Hastings is represented there. Hastings also hosts PIPS day, I believe, which is a big career fair for public interest and public service.

Davis - I'd say no personally just because it's so far out near Sacramento (1.5 hr drive to San Francisco, two hours+ by train). It's pretty much in the middle of nowhere (farmland). Sacramento is the closest city, and while it's beautiful, it's not a capital as you would imagine it (I worked there previously). There's isn't much to do, the city is pretty dead, and the last bus out to Davis left at 5pm weekdays (my friend always got stuck). I know a few Davis kids and they are struggling for jobs - even gov't ones. I know a Davis 2L who had a good transcript and prior big law paralegal experience and still got shut out. We had over 150 something employers come to OCIP at my school, and I remember this person complaining that they had something like 40 firms and that was it. (Before everyone slaughters me, I am going off of what I was told - I haven't done any research - Davis kids should speak out about this if they know for sure). I'd talk to the Davis career people and get a list of who came to their OCIP last year and the year before. In fact, I would do that for every school you are considering.

[Metaread]

No, I didn't go to Hastings ASD. I really wish I could have, but for various reasons I couldn't go out to California to visit the schools in this poll. I am overseas though, if that helps understand why.

'm voting for Hastings (although another poster was right - only Irvine truly has good weather. San Francisco weather is not good, really, We get an Indian summer and it's hot from like August to November, but summer time is chilly. My hubby and I spent July 4th on the piers in SF in complete fog - could barely see the fireworks - and it was so cold we were bundled up in hats, mittens, and scarves. It's funny to see all the tourists come to SF from other parts of the country thinking it's like LA and wearing shorts - truth is, at a moment's notice, the weather can get cold fast.)

I'm going with Hastings because Hastings kids have a reputation in the Bay Area for being really good practicing attorneys. I've worked with a lot of them during my two internships, and they are on top of their game. My current federal internship is pretty much dominated by Hastings students - their law school is only like 2 or 3 blocks away from the federal building with district courts, 9th Circuit courthouse, SF City Hall, etc. So it's super convenient for them to get internships during the school year. I would check some firm websites in SF and SV (Silicon Valley) to see how Hastings is represented there. Hastings also hosts PIPS day, I believe, which is a big career fair for public interest and public service.

Davis - I'd say no personally just because it's so far out near Sacramento (1.5 hr drive to San Francisco, two hours+ by train). It's pretty much in the middle of nowhere (farmland). Sacramento is the closest city, and while it's beautiful, it's not a capital as you would imagine it (I worked there previously). There's isn't much to do, the city is pretty dead, and the last bus out to Davis left at 5pm weekdays (my friend always got stuck). I know a few Davis kids and they are struggling for jobs - even gov't ones. I know a Davis 2L who had a good transcript and prior big law paralegal experience and still got shut out. We had over 150 something employers come to OCIP at my school, and I remember this person complaining that they had something like 40 firms and that was it. (Before everyone slaughters me, I am going off of what I was told - I haven't done any research - Davis kids should speak out about this if they know for sure). I'd talk to the Davis career people and get a list of who came to their OCIP last year and the year before. In fact, I would do that for every school you are considering.

But no scholarship with Hastings is a killer, no? I've heard that Hastings does have a very good rep among older lawyers particularly, but its current (and rather stable) position in the 40s in the rankings is also something of a concern. Point taken about Hastings' presence in California, though. And Davis, which for all its proponents is still a bit suspicious--particularly in regards to state reputation.

[LettuceBeefRealTea]

haters gonna hate, but i think irvine has momentum. there is a risk that it could flop, but i highly doubt it will.
that quality of teachers in such small classes sounds awesome. there is also a lot of literature saying that the school is getting a lot of support from socal firms.

[alexonfyre]

UCI will be a powerhouse one day, and it will be a completely unique resume item in the next 5 years to say "FOUNDED UC-Irvine law review" (or similar) once the school is large enough to distribute it nationally.

[Metaread]

UCI does look awesome, but the paranoid part of me has concerns. I'm concerned Irvine doesn't have an alumni base to draw on...though I'm debating what the benefits of having an alumni base really are at the moment. If it doesn't really lead to jobs, I wouldn't see how it would hamper going to Irvine any. I'm also a bit concerned that it'll take quite a while for Irvine to be ranked and known more nationally, though they do seem to have nice support in the OC for sure. Also unsure about how Irvine would do for my BigLaw goals. It seems some people got internships with firms at UCI, but whether those translate into jobs is an open question at the moment. I'm not sure if I can get any of these questions fully answered though, it's all related to the nebulous future, risk-taking and speculations.

[alexonfyre]

UCI does look awesome, but the paranoid part of me has concerns. I'm concerned Irvine doesn't have an alumni base to draw on...though I'm debating what the benefits of having an alumni base really are at the moment. If it doesn't really lead to jobs, I wouldn't see how it would hamper going to Irvine any. I'm also a bit concerned that it'll take quite a while for Irvine to be ranked and known more nationally, though they do seem to have nice support in the OC for sure. Also unsure about how Irvine would do for my BigLaw goals. It seems some people got internships with firms at UCI, but whether those translate into jobs is an open question at the moment. I'm not sure if I can get any of these questions fully answered though, it's all related to the nebulous future, risk-taking and speculations.

I feel like with Hastings or Davis you know what you are getting, with UCI you could get hosed, but if you don't, then the upside is much higher than any of the schools mentioned, and for cheaper.
My reasoning for wanting to go there is that it is absolutely in the school's best interest to leverage every advantage they have to placing you in the best jobs they can find in the coming years. Not just the Class of '13, but each and every student individually; they know that these students are taking a huge risk to go there, and if they don't come through for them, then high quality applicants will be deterred in the future. I think they are doing that well, seeing as the number of OCIs has exceeded the number of students in each class every year so far.

EDIT: inb4 LSAT Prep crowd shows up with evidence that "would most weaken the conclusion" that I have made.

[jfliegel]

I'm choosing between UC Davis at sticker or Northeastern with $60k and living at home. Torn between practicing in Boston or California. Can anyone help? It seems that no one seems to think UC Davis really deserves to be the #23 ranked LS.. also seems strange that people would go to Hastings (#42) over #23 when they are in the same legal market. What are the prospects for BigLaw out of UC Davis? Any advice would be great..