Top Law Schools

xxx

Before anyone jumps to say "retake", I'll say congrats on your scholarships, and go to UCLA.

If you want CA biglaw over NY biglaw, you have ties, and your CoL could be lower, and your parents may help, UCLA is the clear winner to me. Although, as some will surely post, it is in no way a guarantee of biglaw, and still a sizeable risk for that much debt. You will have to be content with staying in california, and prepared for the possibility of working in a midsize SoCal firm.

Not only is Cornell extremely expensive, but it won't do as well in los angeles, you will be taking yourself away from home, your friends, family, ect. for 3 years and probably longer, and I'm sure you'd have a lot less fun doing it. If you change your mind in the coming days and decide you want NYC biglaw, then cornell becomes your only option.

.

xxx

comeonletsgo wrote:Thanks guys. I should say that I took the LSAT twice and scored a 168 both times, although I was PTing around 172-175. I'm worried about retaking again, doing about the same, and having to explain why I withdrew my applications previously.

Have you thought about retaking in June? If you score where you were PTing, you could reapply. If you don't, you can go through with one of these options.

Your current options: as someone else said, I would take UCLA but only with the knowledge that if you strike out of biglaw, you can be content working in LA at a smaller firm. Cornell is too expensive especially if you want LA biglaw.

Rev. Cherrycoke wrote:

comeonletsgo wrote:Thanks guys. I should say that I took the LSAT twice and scored a 168 both times, although I was PTing around 172-175. I'm worried about retaking again, doing about the same, and having to explain why I withdrew my applications previously.

Have you thought about retaking in June? If you score where you were PTing, you could reapply. If you don't, you can go through with one of these options.

Your current options: as someone else said, I would take UCLA but only with the knowledge that if you strike out of biglaw, you can be content working in LA at a smaller firm. Cornell is too expensive especially if you want LA biglaw.

Oof. I wish I had thought of this sooner. I don't think I'd be able to swing it. I'd be okay working at a smaller firm, but I think I would do NYC big law before that. I probably should have noted that when making this post.

comeonletsgo wrote:Thanks guys. I should say that I took the LSAT twice and scored a 168 both times, although I was PTing around 172-175. I'm worried about retaking again, doing about the same, and having to explain why I withdrew my applications previously.

I would really consider taking the June LSAT and then either attempt to negotiate with UCLA or sit out a cycle and reapply. Schools are certainly not going to hold a grudge against you for withdrawing your applications, and I'm very confident that you would have similar options next cycle even if you somehow scored WORSE on the LSAT. Whereas just 1-2 points more would be HUGE for scholarship money and could save you tens of thousands of dollars. If you were PTing that high it would be a very poor decision not to give the LSAT one last try.

WokeUpInACar wrote:Schools are certainly not going to hold a grudge against you for withdrawing your applications, and I'm very confident that you would have similar options next cycle even if you somehow scored WORSE on the LSAT. Whereas just 1-2 points more would be HUGE for scholarship money and could save you tens of thousands of dollars. If you were PTing that high it would be a very poor decision not to give the LSAT one last try.

+1. You'll be surprised at how many more options you have if you can crack the 170s (depending on your GPA).

If you're absolutely bent on not retaking, I'd pick UCLA.

PRgradBYU wrote:

WokeUpInACar wrote:Schools are certainly not going to hold a grudge against you for withdrawing your applications, and I'm very confident that you would have similar options next cycle even if you somehow scored WORSE on the LSAT. Whereas just 1-2 points more would be HUGE for scholarship money and could save you tens of thousands of dollars. If you were PTing that high it would be a very poor decision not to give the LSAT one last try.

+1. You'll be surprised at how many more options you have if you can crack the 170s (depending on your GPA).

If you're absolutely bent on not retaking, I'd pick UCLA.

+2 on the retake June advice

I can't in good conscience say take either because both are way too expensive. Gun to your head? I say Cornell. Both options neccesitate big law and Cornell would give you a significantly better chance at LA big law and big law in general. If you can knock 40-50K off that price at UCLA either by negotiating or living at home I would probably say UCLA is the better choice.

comeonletsgo wrote:Thanks guys. I should say that I took the LSAT twice and scored a 168 both times, although I was PTing around 172-175. I'm worried about retaking again, doing about the same, and having to explain why I withdrew my applications previously.

Did you get a 168 or 169? Your LSN says 169. If you do have a 169, Cornell should have given you more money. I have almost an identical GPA and 169 last year and got 60k. If you havent already, call them and tell them about your UCLA offer.

I know this sucks OP, but I have to jump on the "retake" bandwagon with everyone else.
The debt for these two schools is too high.

comeonletsgo wrote:

Rev. Cherrycoke wrote:

comeonletsgo wrote:Thanks guys. I should say that I took the LSAT twice and scored a 168 both times, although I was PTing around 172-175. I'm worried about retaking again, doing about the same, and having to explain why I withdrew my applications previously.

Have you thought about retaking in June? If you score where you were PTing, you could reapply. If you don't, you can go through with one of these options.

Your current options: as someone else said, I would take UCLA but only with the knowledge that if you strike out of biglaw, you can be content working in LA at a smaller firm. Cornell is too expensive especially if you want LA biglaw.

Oof. I wish I had thought of this sooner. I don't think I'd be able to swing it. I'd be okay working at a smaller firm, but I think I would do NYC big law before that. I probably should have noted that when making this post.

Wanting NYC biglaw after LA biglaw is what makes it tough. It's easier to get LA biglaw from UCLA but much harder to get NYC biglaw. Conversely, it's easier to get NYC biglaw from Cornell but much harder to get LA biglaw (although your connections would help). Maybe you can find someone to talk to who went from Cornell to California. Given your goals, however, I don't think Cornell is worth almost 100k more than UCLA.

And being from LA, I think you have to take into account what living in Ithaca would be like. I'm from CA and Cornell is an option that I have but one that I dread simply because I have never been in an cold weather environment like that.

All this being said, I believe you should strongly consider sitting for the June LSAT.

I'm almost certain that LA big law would be easier from Cornell in general. Lower grade cut offs and less competition.

BigZuck wrote:I'm almost certain that LA big law would be easier from Cornell in general. Lower grade cut offs and less competition.

This could be true. However, I'm simply looking at the numbers which is why I mentioned the OP's connections.

xxx

BigZuck wrote:I'm almost certain that LA big law would be easier from Cornell in general. Lower grade cut offs and less competition.

Yeah, I'm afraid that everyone at UCLA will be going for the same jobs, whereas a Cornell degree may help me stand out a bit more. From the Cornell ASD I attended, there were a number of California natives on the student panel and they said that even though Cornell recently got rid of its California recruiting event, everyone that wanted California got it. I don't know how true that is since it was ASD, but that did alleviate my fears somewhat. Not sure if that is worth the higher debt, however.

Yeah OP, you need to retake. Cracking 170 could get you some more money, or even into Berkeley (don't know your GPA).

That's not a good enough price for UCLA. You should retake. If you won't retake, go to Cornell, but try to negotiate first.

i would take ucla due to your preference of LA biglaw (i had the same preference and made a similar decision), though this is very close.

did usc not offer more money? would have been an easy choice if they offered something like $90k.

BigZuck wrote:I'm almost certain that LA big law would be easier from Cornell in general. Lower grade cut offs and less competition.

not sure if this is true. in LA, there isn't really a tangible or significant prestige gap between ucla/usc and the lower t14.

also, the notion of less competition is pretty absurd. you will still be competing against the same people for the same jobs, regardless of school. i know a few biglaw firms that arguably prefer local hiring from the top LA schools (ucla/usc); in these instances cornell would not provide an advantage.

OP needs to weigh, however, what is more important: the preference for LA biglaw, or just biglaw in general. if the latter, cornell is a better choice.

xxx

comeonletsgo wrote:

ImNoScar wrote:That's not a good enough price for UCLA. You should retake. If you won't retake, go to Cornell, but try to negotiate first.

So that is what Cornell offered after I showed them my USC scholarship ($75k) and UCLA scholarship. Do you recommend that I go back and say that I need more to be swayed?

you should go back to usc as well and ask for a bit more. hell, the 15k at usc is already a better option than ucla, though you may have good reason for thinking otherwise.

Lasers wrote:

comeonletsgo wrote:

ImNoScar wrote:That's not a good enough price for UCLA. You should retake. If you won't retake, go to Cornell, but try to negotiate first.

So that is what Cornell offered after I showed them my USC scholarship ($75k) and UCLA scholarship. Do you recommend that I go back and say that I need more to be swayed?

you should go back to usc as well and ask for a bit more. hell, the 15k at usc is already a better option than ucla, though you may have good reason for thinking otherwise.

I'll try this. Thanks so much for your help!

Lasers wrote:

comeonletsgo wrote:

ImNoScar wrote:That's not a good enough price for UCLA. You should retake. If you won't retake, go to Cornell, but try to negotiate first.

So that is what Cornell offered after I showed them my USC scholarship ($75k) and UCLA scholarship. Do you recommend that I go back and say that I need more to be swayed?

you should go back to usc as well and ask for a bit more. hell, the 15k at usc is already a better option than ucla, though you may have good reason for thinking otherwise.

Pretty sure UCLA is marginally cheaper for the OP even though USC offered 15K more. Could be wrong though.

The whole "some local firms prefer kids from the local school over T14" thing sounds like an elaborate flame concocted by kids who choose strong regionals over T14 schools. I'm sure it's true in some cases and it varies from firm to firm but I have heard of plenty of median and below kids at T14s who get big law in their home markets when that is not possible at the strong regional in that market. But maybe LA is different than other markets. And of course I am a 0L so I probably don't know what I'm talking about.

jbagelboy wrote:Before anyone jumps to say "retake", I'll say congrats on your scholarships, and go to UCLA.

If you want CA biglaw over NY biglaw, you have ties, and your CoL could be lower, and your parents may help, UCLA is the clear winner to me. Although, as some will surely post, it is in no way a guarantee of biglaw, and still a sizeable risk for that much debt. You will have to be content with staying in california, and prepared for the possibility of working in a midsize SoCal firm.

Not only is Cornell extremely expensive, but it won't do as well in los angeles, you will be taking yourself away from home, your friends, family, ect. for 3 years and probably longer, and I'm sure you'd have a lot less fun doing it. If you change your mind in the coming days and decide you want NYC biglaw, then cornell becomes your only option.

You need to stop giving such authoritative-sounding advice (emphasis on "sounding") as a 0L. At least preface these posts with, "As a 0L, I really have no idea whatsoever, but here are my thoughts..."

OP, do not go to UCLA at that cost. If you insist on going to either of these schools at these costs, which I can't endorse, go to Cornell. At least you'll have a much better shot of paying your debt off, regardless of where you end up practicing.