Top Law Schools

I previously had to make (what I thought would be) a pretty final decision, Willamette with slightly more money versus Oregon with slightly less. A convincing argument was made to go to the University of Oregon based on employability. I had written off L&C and Utah, as I figured I would languish and then perish on their waitlists. (http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=185347)

So Lewis & Clark called today and said, "Hey, modus pwnens, we totally have a spot for you. You want it?"

*headdesk*

Requisite information:

I intend on practicing in the PNW, so portability isn't as huge an issue. Specifically, I would prefer to practice in Portland. L&C is in Portland, of course, Oregon is in Eugene, although I suspect most of the UofO students want to practice in Portland, anyway. L&C has the advantage in networking... but in a practical sense, just how big is that advantage? I don't know.

What to make of difference in rankings? Oregon is in the 80s; L&C the 50s. One argument has been made to me that while it's roughly the same tier, it's at two opposite ends, and instead of thinking in large tiers it's better to think in terms of bands around either ranking, as 58 vs 82 is a big jump. Another argument made has been "dude, they're both tier 2, go back in time and fix your GPA and reapply, haha."

Received opinion (from here, at least): L&C places more people in better jobs in Oregon than any other school. If you want to practice in Portland and you don't come from YHS, L&C is the best way to do it. (This is what I have received, at least.)

The real issue: money. If L&C had called today with money, they'd have my decision already. Tuition at UofO is ~$35k, and I have a $10k scholarship with a "good academic standing" stip. Tuition at Lewis & Clark is $38k. When I spoke with the Assistant Dean of Admissions at L&C this morning, she told me flat-out that there was no scholarship money available for me, and I already tried (unsuccessfully) to negotiate up at UofO.

Unless I'm overlooking something, the issue comes down to: are the employment prospects, location in--rather than 100+ miles from--my primary market, and academic reputation of Lewis & Clark worth paying an additional $13k a year?

Secondary issue: my kids live in Portland. I would like to be near to them, naturally, but I've been in San Diego the last few years, so I'm used to not seeing them as much as I would like. That said, living in the same city would be heaven; Eugene, however, isn't that far away as I wouldn't be seeing them every night anyway.

Tertiary issue: how cute are the L&C girls versus the UofO girls? ;)

modus pwnens wrote:One argument has been made to me that while it's roughly the same tier, it's at two opposite ends, and instead of thinking in large tiers it's better to think in terms of bands around either ranking, as 58 vs 82 is a big jump.

Nope

Go to the cheaper one. They're peers brah

And if your total debt will be greater than 80Kish from the cheaper one, retake the LSAT or don't go to law school.

Good luck

Have you tried negotiating with UofO using your L&C acceptance? Get them to give you more money.

In before Rinkrat

I live and work in Portland (in a law office). L&C and Oregon are peers for all but about 25 jobs per year in the top firms. And for those jobs, half are L&C folks, and the rest are T14 students (with a couple Oregon and Willamette grads each year).

However, this is not enough to justify a huge amount of debt for a slim chance at the big firms. If you're going to kick ass at Oregon, you'll kick ass at LC, and have pretty much the same shot at getting a big lol gig here in town. Most of the lawyers at my firm are from Oregon, with one from LC and one from Willamette.

My decision pretty much came down to these schools. I was offered $10 K from LC and $10 K from Oregon originally. Received a fellowship offer from Oregon and an extra $5 K from LC by negotiating with larger scholarships. Ultimately chose LC because living in Portland is preferable for me, the cost is so similar, and I am interested in water law and tribal law. Both schools have strong legal writing programs. I visited both campuses. UO has very nice, new facilities that I felt comfortable in. LC's buildings are a little older, but its location in a state forest is ideal. I especially liked the library that has large windows looking out on acres of trees.

In your situation, I would probably would have chosen UO because of the cost. They are both strong schools in the Pacific Northwest. $13 K per year is a substantial savings. Then again, if you're really set on Portland... you may earn much of that back by working in your 2L and 3L years, as accommodated by LC. Flexibility is another reason I went with LC. I wish you luck as you make your decision!

Also consider cost of living, which is generally higher in Portland than Eugene. Generally, I'd advise UO because the cost difference is enough to outweigh any advantage L&C has quality-wise. But with your kids in Portland, that would probably tip me the other way.

You don't seem to be considering cost of living. Eugene is considerably cheaper than Portland.

I wouldn't pay sticker at L&C, regardless of the edge it has over UO in Portland (the size of the edge is debatable, but it is at least non-zero).

Be realistic about your likely results: only the very top few students at each school get the biglaw jobs. Midlaw or government are more likely (assuming you're not in the unlucky . Biglaw "market" salary in Portland is $100k-115k, and midlaw would obviously be less. Calculate your monthly loan payment and think about paying it on a five-figure salary. Would you be okay at $90k? $70k? $60k?

Fewer L&C c/o 2010 grads ended up unemployed than UO grads (14.5% vs. 22.5%), but neither is particularly great in that area. Minimizing debt is important when there's a non-negligible chance that you'll end up without a job.