Top Law Schools

I know TLS tends to be more pessimistic/realistic than the average shitboomer w/r/t the legal economy, but with all the doom and gloom, I have to ask: who SHOULD be going to law school? Is there anyone that should ITE? Is the economy turning around so we'll be okay? Is the legal economy changed forever (sounds like yes)? Should just HYS admitted students go? T14 admitted kids with major schollies? T20 kids with major schollies? Honestly, I'm stumped. I'm really, really torn on whether or not I should be going to law school this fall, and while I'm not looking to make this a discussion solely about me, I am interested to hear actual non-sarcastic advice/data about who should be going to law school.


(background about me: redacted to retain some semblance of anonymity....hah. Suffice it to say after being scheduled 64 hours and a 6th day of work next week I'm pretty excited for law school.)


Again, not necessarily looking for info specific to me, but I just wonder with the inflating tuition rates and stagnant biglaw salaries, who should be going to law school, if anyone. What are decent ways to search for non-law jobs just to look around and see? For those of us who are entry-level, what are good job search engines, or are we totally fucked? I've looked on a few sites but nothing seems interesting to me. Should I defer a year (again...3 years between UG and LS) and try and work another job somewhere? I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.

ETA I don't really think taking another year off is a good idea for me, however I will be trying to shadow some in-town lawyers in various sectors after I move home before law school to at least get a better idea of the daily grind and whether to focus on PI/corporate (again, not trying to play the pity card, but my daily grind is pretty.fucking.miserable and the thought of pushing paper at a desk sounds fantastic- not on my feet, not outside in the rain/wind/cold, not getting physically/verbally assaulted, etc.).

You should get an entry level job in a firm and decide if you like it before you head off to law school. More grad school isn't a way to deal with an uncertain future, especially if you are undecided on it.

Me, I think that almost no one should be going. I don't see why people don't wait a year or two and see what the shakeout will be at virtually all law schools. There is nothing to lose. Admissions are going to keep dropping as the employment lies promulgated by the schools are replaced by truth.

I am also not sure what is happening with biglaw, the stock market is up, will that gear up biglaw again? Most people don't think so because of the long term changes happening in the biglaw structure. Most firms aren't planning to increase entry level hiring over the next few years. Will an M&A boom change that? Not a single person knows for sure.

I am also debt averse. I have many reasons for that but one is seeing people get fired and not being able to find other jobs. For biglaw people who have tacked their entire self esteem on their career, it is a tough blow and people struggle. Stuff like that scares me when 0Ls are talking about taking on so much debt. But obviously even in the darkest days not everyone gets fired. So, there's that. Now firms need mid-levels because they fired almost everyone who would be in that spot now. Will they learn? My guess is no.

Luckily for you, Prof. Campos isn't as negative. Read his book called Dont go to law school unless. He explains the unless part of who should go. You may already know a lot of his points but it doesn't hurt to review. I think it costs $5 on kindle reader.

Barely anyone should go to law school and if the stats we have today were available when I decided to go to law school in 2010, I probably would not have gone.

Imagine making a decision about where to go to law school based on NLJ250 from 2009 plus AIII clerk numbers from 2006. That was literally the best info available.

Now we have LST to show how much of a crappy decision law school is generally

You should go if you get into YLS.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:You should go if you get into YLS.

or a ruby

If your COA is around 200k and the value added to your salary is roughly 11k a year on average for 40 years, you should go, financially.

Personally, if your working a minimum wageish job, it is my personal opinion to take T14 minus gtown at sticker and UT/Vandy/usc/UCLA/GTOWN at under 160k coa.


These are bets I would take but there are no guarantees and the stakes are high with law school so if you are debt averse, you may see things very differently.

sinfiery wrote:If your COA is around 200k and the value added to your salary is roughly 11k a year on average for 40 years, you should go, financially.

Personally, if your working a minimum wageish job, it is my personal opinion to take T14 minus gtown at sticker and UT/Vandy/usc/UCLA/GTOWN at under 160k coa.


These are bets I would take but there are no guarantees and the stakes are high with law school so if you are debt averse, you may see things very differently.

That is such a dumb way to think about it ITE, 200k at 8% interest, NBD.

Look, someone whose debt adversity makes them overlook an already conservative statistical analysis.


If your working minimum wage and will be for the forseeable future, you take the options she has.

sinfiery wrote:Look, someone whose debt adversity makes them overlook an already conservative statistical analysis.


If your working minimum wage and will be for the forseeable future, you take the options she has.

Totally agree. Its about alternatives as well guys. If you're thinking about going to law school to leave your amazing finance job, that's one thing. OP is working minimum wage, and now has a 2 year gap on their resume. The alternatives don't seem to be there. But on that note, what do you see your alternatives as OP?

In regards to your questions about job searches. Indeed is probably the best one I've come across. You've really dug yourself a hole by working minimum wage after graduation though, resume gaps are a serious problem.

With a low debt load. Even Yale doesn't save you from getting lathamed / hating big law / fucking your bosses wife.

Being a sallie mae slave isn't a good outcome.

Desert Fox wrote:With a low debt load. Even Yale doesn't save you from getting lathamed / hating big law / fucking your bosses wife.

Being a sallie mae slave isn't a good outcome.

is she hot?

Here is the people who should go to law school ITE IMO:

People who actually want to be an attorney and who do not have better job prospects (i.e. Engineers, people who can get into medical school, accountants, police officers, etc. should not apply) who also have one of the following situations available to them:

1. HYS
2. T4-13 with a half tuition scholly with no or negligible stips.
3. Strong Regional with half (if in-state) to full tuition scholly with no or negligible stips.


I was starting to realize how bad it was, but last year LST made it wildly clear to me when they came out with the reworked 2011 numbers. I probably shouldn't have gone, even though I really want to be an attorney and it appears I'm likely to get a job post graduation. I took a 1/3 scholly at a strong regional with crappy stips and I left a good, well paying job. If I knew now what I knew then let me just say that while it looks like I won't regret it... so many of my class will.

The narrative has shifted somewhat. ITE originally meant "don't go because you won't get biglaw like you used to." Now that things have settled down, it's clear that a handful of schools still give you a good shot at biglaw, but the conventional wisdom is now that it's not worth it even if you get biglaw because of debt. That is true, for many people, but they are two separate problems.

Law is not a great profession for anyone to be entering at the moment. But OP if you can go to Berkeley with a significant scholarship (as you imply) I think you would not be making a bad decision.

..

spleenworship wrote:Here is the people who should go to law school ITE IMO:

People who actually want to be an attorney and who do not have better job prospects (i.e. Engineers, people who can get into medical school, accountants, police officers, etc. should not apply) who also have one of the following situations available to them:

1. HYS
2. T4-13 with a half tuition scholly with no or negligible stips.
3. Strong Regional with half (if in-state) to full tuition scholly with no or negligible stips.


I was starting to realize how bad it was, but last year LST made it wildly clear to me when they came out with the reworked 2011 numbers. I probably shouldn't have gone, even though I really want to be an attorney and it appears I'm likely to get a job post graduation. I took a 1/3 scholly at a strong regional with crappy stips and I left a good, well paying job. If I knew now what I knew then let me just say that while it looks like I won't regret it... so many of my class will.

This seems about right.

TBH I'm a little jealous of the applicants for 2013. Class sizes have really decreased and scholly money is easier to get. If you meet the conditions I suggested, now is a better time than when I applied.

..

sublime12089 wrote:

spleenworship wrote:TBH I'm a little jealous of the applicants for 2013. Class sizes have really decreased and scholly money is easier to get. If you meet the conditions I suggested, now is a better time than when I applied.

Yea, not to rub it in but I applied late with a 166/~3.7 and while it isn't T14, schools that I may not have been admitted to two years ago are offering significant money. Has really surprised me.

Same. I have significantly outperformed my expectations.

Plus, with the schools I have visited thus far, they seem to have stepped up their effort in networking and guiding the students to jobs.

I think everyone besides HYS knows that simple OCI won't cut it. (A statement to the quality of HYS' OCIs rather than the jab at their career offices.)

sublime12089 wrote:

spleenworship wrote:TBH I'm a little jealous of the applicants for 2013. Class sizes have really decreased and scholly money is easier to get. If you meet the conditions I suggested, now is a better time than when I applied.

Yea, not to rub it in but I applied late with a 166/~3.7 and while it isn't T14, schools that I may not have been admitted to two years ago are offering significant money. Has really surprised me.

Just to add to this: a few former AdComms I've spoken to have explicitly said that people assessing their chances for next cycle should only look at LSN profiles from this cycle and nothing before that. There isn't too much historical precedent for how admissions will go from here on out. But it's all for the betterment of the profession IMO.

..

sublime12089 wrote:I agree. It definitely is. It's insane though. I probably should have applied to more t14/top 20 schools, as the two I have gotten into have given money, even though I am below both of their medians. Initially, i was like, WTF. Completely shocked.

If you are sure you want to go to law school, and get a 165 or better on the LSAT, I would say this cycle or next cycle would be when to do it. Eventually it will probably normalize somewhere in between where it is now, and what it was 3 years ago, imo.

More like get a 170+ on the LSAT. The 165+ advice is much moreso applicable to URMs.

..

sublime12089 wrote:

John_rizzy_rawls wrote:

sublime12089 wrote:I agree. It definitely is. It's insane though. I probably should have applied to more t14/top 20 schools, as the two I have gotten into have given money, even though I am below both of their medians. Initially, i was like, WTF. Completely shocked.

If you are sure you want to go to law school, and get a 165 or better on the LSAT, I would say this cycle or next cycle would be when to do it. Eventually it will probably normalize somewhere in between where it is now, and what it was 3 years ago, imo.

More like get a 170+ on the LSAT. The 165+ advice is much moreso applicable to URMs.

Of course, get the highest score that you can, but my interpretation of everything is that the T14 is still going to snatch up all the 170 pluses anyway, you may be able to go a little higher and get more money, but there are more schools who need the mid to high 160s to keep their medians up, schools are having to outbid each other to pay for them.

It is possible that I am misunderstanding that, but I believe I got it from a post from Spivey, I will see if I can find it.

In that context, I see what you're saying.

John_rizzy_rawls wrote:

sublime12089 wrote:I agree. It definitely is. It's insane though. I probably should have applied to more t14/top 20 schools, as the two I have gotten into have given money, even though I am below both of their medians. Initially, i was like, WTF. Completely shocked.

If you are sure you want to go to law school, and get a 165 or better on the LSAT, I would say this cycle or next cycle would be when to do it. Eventually it will probably normalize somewhere in between where it is now, and what it was 3 years ago, imo.

More like get a 170+ on the LSAT. The 165+ advice is much moreso applicable to URMs.

I don't think so at all. I actually feel that the 164-168 range has had the most movement. 170s with average grades have always gotten money somewhere. But now lower LSAT scores are not only getting into T14, but they're doing it with at least some $.