Top Law Schools

Flip-flopping between two schools for a while and could use some other perspectives on the topic to help with the decision. Narrowed my choices down to Boston College(22K/year scholarship) and University of Texas- Austin(out of state sticker for the first year and in-state for the second and third year). My plan is to get into big/medium law and can't decide if the marginal advantage UT has is worth the extra ~20K/year(taking into account COL differences). Ideally would love to work in Chicago, but working in big/medium law is more important to me than the location. That being said, I would prefer living the Northeast a lot more than Texas.

I know TLS is overloaded with the don't pay sticker outside of HYS and always retake mentality, but I'm looking more for insight between the two and how large/small the perceived difference between them would be in terms of my goals rather then just the standard re-take post. Also recent downward trend for BC likely to continue?

Thanks in advance for any help and feel free to PM me if you have an opinion you don't want to post publicly!

BC LST: http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school=bc
UT LST: http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school=texas

Total COA for each?

Neither of these schools gives you a meaningful shot at cracking the Chicago market. Retake the LSAT.

What makes you think you'll get in-state for 2L and 3L at UT? It's not automatic, and unless you have a Texan spouse or buy property, it doesn't usually happen AFAIK.

Do you have TX ties?

COA UT: Year 1: $70,318, Year 2/3: $51,864
COA BC: $40,871/year (after taking into account the scholarship)

I have family who is looking to buy an investment property in the area, which I would maintain and live in and be able to claim residency. (disclaimer: I am not rich, the property just happens to be a very fortunate coincidence). Also I have no ties in TX or MA.

That BC CoA must be per year, so you're looking at ~120k, right? If the CoA are similar, go to the school in the area you'd like to practice or retake. Neither school really gives you a good chance for biglaw.

Seems to me that you could go either way.
(1) Scholly means a cheaper education at BC, by about $50k, which gives you solid employment options in the east coast for the type of work that you want to do. Thus, BC is a winner regarding the financial aspect.
(2) However, you also mentioned that you would ideally want to work in Chicago. For that, you want UT Austin because of its national mobility. However, the mobility will cost you an extra ~$50k.

It's up to you. It's a tradeoff between saving $50k and improving your national mobility.
If I were you, I would choose UT because it provides you with more opportunities in the long run. I am sure that you will make some changes in your career as you go along in your life. UT will open more doors in general than a BC degree. For example, say that at the age of 45, you want to pursue becoming a federal judge. There are a heck more federal judges from UT than from BC.
My vote went for UT.

[quote="chraruce"]Seems to me that you could go either way.
(1) Scholly means a cheaper education at BC, by about $50k, which gives you solid employment options in the east coast for the type of work that you want to do. Thus, BC is a winner regarding the financial aspect.
(2) However, you also mentioned that you would ideally want to work in Chicago. For that, you want UT Austin because of its national mobility. However, the mobility will cost you an extra ~$50k.

UT doesn't really have national mobility.. LST doesn't show any UT grads in Chicago.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school= ... b=location

Honestly OP, if you want Chicago retake.

Winston1984 wrote:

chraruce wrote:Seems to me that you could go either way.
(1) Scholly means a cheaper education at BC, by about $50k, which gives you solid employment options in the east coast for the type of work that you want to do. Thus, BC is a winner regarding the financial aspect.
(2) However, you also mentioned that you would ideally want to work in Chicago. For that, you want UT Austin because of its national mobility. However, the mobility will cost you an extra ~$50k.

UT doesn't really have national mobility.. LST doesn't show any UT grads in Chicago.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school= ... b=location

Honestly OP, if you want Chicago retake.

That was one of the concerns I had with UT, that after paying more money I still don't get the national mobility and their big law numbers aren't significantly different. Also while I would love to work in Chicago, I am okay working in the northeast as well. I have already taken some time off after undergrad and just want to get started with law school and a real career.

ls23 wrote:

Winston1984 wrote:

chraruce wrote:Seems to me that you could go either way.
(1) Scholly means a cheaper education at BC, by about $50k, which gives you solid employment options in the east coast for the type of work that you want to do. Thus, BC is a winner regarding the financial aspect.
(2) However, you also mentioned that you would ideally want to work in Chicago. For that, you want UT Austin because of its national mobility. However, the mobility will cost you an extra ~$50k.

UT doesn't really have national mobility.. LST doesn't show any UT grads in Chicago.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school= ... b=location

Honestly OP, if you want Chicago retake.

That was one of the concerns I had with UT, that after paying more money I still don't get the national mobility and their big law numbers aren't significantly different. Also while I would love to work in Chicago, I am okay working in the northeast as well. I have already taken some time off after undergrad and just want to get started with law school and a real career.

I have two friends from UT law. One ended up in Cali and the other one in NYC. Not sure what type of law the Cali guy is doing, but the NYC one is a Manhattan DA. In the eyes of TLS, this is probably viewed as a shitty outcome, because it isn't Big Law. The Manhattan DA office is no joke though. That will open a lot of doors for my friend. They got these jobs in 2010ish. I know these are just two examples, but it is something. UT probably doesn't have enough portability to justify the amount of money you are about to pay.

ls23 wrote:

Winston1984 wrote:

chraruce wrote:Seems to me that you could go either way.
(1) Scholly means a cheaper education at BC, by about $50k, which gives you solid employment options in the east coast for the type of work that you want to do. Thus, BC is a winner regarding the financial aspect.
(2) However, you also mentioned that you would ideally want to work in Chicago. For that, you want UT Austin because of its national mobility. However, the mobility will cost you an extra ~$50k.

UT doesn't really have national mobility.. LST doesn't show any UT grads in Chicago.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school= ... b=location

Honestly OP, if you want Chicago retake.

That was one of the concerns I had with UT, that after paying more money I still don't get the national mobility and their big law numbers aren't significantly different. Also while I would love to work in Chicago, I am okay working in the northeast as well. I have already taken some time off after undergrad and just want to get started with law school and a real career.

northeast then BC is a no-brainer pick

That being said, I would prefer living the Northeast a lot more than Texas.

Not sure who voted for Austin, but this ain't even close, particularly since instate residency is not assured.

I have been leaning towards BC, but what I have been going back on forth on is the recent downward trend they are having. Not just looking at USNWR rankings and their steady decline for a while in those (although that is def. concerning), but also looking at recent employment data compared to BU and other schools they consider peers. UT's consistency is what is making this decision harder. And while I would prefer the Northeast to Texas, having a firm job is more important to me than where I initially live. Just want to make sure I don't pass up on that opp. by picking the wrong school because of money.

Thanks for all the responses so far, being able to talk it out and get other perspectives on it has been very helpful!

ls23 wrote:I have been leaning towards BC, but what I have been going back on forth on is the recent downward trend they are having. Not just looking at USNWR rankings and their steady decline for a while in those (although that is def. concerning), but also looking at recent employment data compared to BU and other schools they consider peers. UT's consistency is what is making this decision harder. And while I would prefer the Northeast to Texas, having a firm job is more important to me than where I initially live. Just want to make sure I don't pass up on that opp. by picking the wrong school because of money.

Thanks for all the responses so far, being able to talk it out and get other perspectives on it has been very helpful!

if firm job is more important and you don't mind working in TX , then UT is the way to go.

maxmartin wrote:

ls23 wrote:

Winston1984 wrote:

chraruce wrote:Seems to me that you could go either way.
(1) Scholly means a cheaper education at BC, by about $50k, which gives you solid employment options in the east coast for the type of work that you want to do. Thus, BC is a winner regarding the financial aspect.
(2) However, you also mentioned that you would ideally want to work in Chicago. For that, you want UT Austin because of its national mobility. However, the mobility will cost you an extra ~$50k.

UT doesn't really have national mobility.. LST doesn't show any UT grads in Chicago.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school= ... b=location

Honestly OP, if you want Chicago retake.

That was one of the concerns I had with UT, that after paying more money I still don't get the national mobility and their big law numbers aren't significantly different. Also while I would love to work in Chicago, I am okay working in the northeast as well. I have already taken some time off after undergrad and just want to get started with law school and a real career.

northeast then BC is a no-brainer pick

+1, I'd only plan on UT being great for TX and not much more.

maxmartin wrote:

ls23 wrote:I have been leaning towards BC, but what I have been going back on forth on is the recent downward trend they are having. Not just looking at USNWR rankings and their steady decline for a while in those (although that is def. concerning), but also looking at recent employment data compared to BU and other schools they consider peers. UT's consistency is what is making this decision harder. And while I would prefer the Northeast to Texas, having a firm job is more important to me than where I initially live. Just want to make sure I don't pass up on that opp. by picking the wrong school because of money.

Thanks for all the responses so far, being able to talk it out and get other perspectives on it has been very helpful!

if firm job is more important and you don't mind working in TX , then UT is the way to go.

Is the 60-70K difference by the time i pay it off, worth the 5% increase in big law numbers that UT has? BC has 21% and UT has 26%.

if you want to work in the northeast, go to BC at that price. if you want to work elsewhere, retake.

66k scholly for BC is not enough.... UT ain't worth it unless you are from there.

Classic retake and reapply situation.

Go forth and prosper...

ls23 wrote:

maxmartin wrote:

ls23 wrote:I have been leaning towards BC, but what I have been going back on forth on is the recent downward trend they are having. Not just looking at USNWR rankings and their steady decline for a while in those (although that is def. concerning), but also looking at recent employment data compared to BU and other schools they consider peers. UT's consistency is what is making this decision harder. And while I would prefer the Northeast to Texas, having a firm job is more important to me than where I initially live. Just want to make sure I don't pass up on that opp. by picking the wrong school because of money.

Thanks for all the responses so far, being able to talk it out and get other perspectives on it has been very helpful!

if firm job is more important and you don't mind working in TX , then UT is the way to go.

Is the 60-70K difference by the time i pay it off, worth the 5% increase in big law numbers that UT has? BC has 21% and UT has 26%.

I think its a few more percentage points. Quite a few of the top 10 lit boutiques are in TX. Robin Gibbs likes to say Texans are more entrepreneurial so there are more high caliber boutiques in TX than in other states. No clue what actually drives it. Point is, I'd say another 10-20 people go to market paying boutiques like McKool, Susman, Yetter, Gibbs, etc. Since those firms are smaller than 100 people, they won't show up in the data that's used as a proxy for big law. I doubt BC has equal top 10 lit boutique placement. That probably makes the big law differential closer to 9-10%.

If you wanted to work in Chicago, why didn't you apply to WUSTL/ND? If they took you in and offered you money, it'd be worth it.

Neither. Retake!

This thread started promising, but then the bad advice avalanche started. Both schools are too expensive and a bad fit for your career goals. You need to pick a school that places well in the region where you have ties to and it has to come at a reasonable cost. That does not apply to these two options.

Sitting it out and retaking doesn't sound super great but you have at least two people ITT who did it and say its the smartest possible thing they could have done for themselves. Both these people got into great schools that they wanted to go to at reasonable prices. Sometimes being a grown up is about making tough decisions are delaying gratification. And really, it's not even a tough decision, it should be pretty obvious when looking at the debt levels and probable outcomes from these schools.

dissonance1848 wrote:66k scholly for BC is not enough.... UT ain't worth it unless you are from there.

Classic retake and reapply situation.

Go forth and prosper...

Classic didn't read the OP situation.

Go away.

BeenDidThat wrote:

dissonance1848 wrote:66k scholly for BC is not enough.... UT ain't worth it unless you are from there.

Classic retake and reapply situation.

Go forth and prosper...

Classic didn't read the OP situation.

Go away.

The OP asked this question on toplawschools.com. And that is good advice. If they wanted bad advice then they should have gone and asked their uncle or brother-in-law.

I'd bet buttons to dollars you're not getting In-State. It's a lot harder than you'd think. Plus with your attitude about not wanting to work in Texas, people are going to be wondering what you're doing there. Go to BC.