@ all
Thank you for the (quick) replies. All feedback is appreciated.
If anyone saying NU has more portability out of state/to CA could provide some backing that would be really appreciated. I've been hearing UT has solid rep from local lawyers (SF) and that really the main edge NU has is that more CA firms show up to their OCI but if one is persistent the "prestige" edge is smaller.
Also re: UT is regional consider that most NU alums stay in the midwest so I'm not sure their alumni network in CA is that much better than UT's
DId you not apply to Georgetown, GW, USC, UCLA? The two schools you have here seem pretty bad for your goals.
Haha yea I've been thinking about that as well. But honestly my main goal is interesting job that involves keeping at least part of my soul. I am not enamoured with any specific PI cause over the others and in the private sector could easily see myself being persuaded that X specialized form of litigation is a better opportunity than appellate.
Anyways:
Gtown-waitlist ergo no $- seems inferior to both options
GW- withdraw because cost was slightly more than Texas and job prospects were a lot worse. Way I figure it I have to crush 1L to get a good job from GW (gov/public interest litigation), but if I can do that I can probably get the job from UT or NU at least as easily. But GW's backup options are much much worse than other options.
USC/UCLA- Didn't apply because I wanted to try living outside of CA. Maybe that was a bad decision networking wise but given cost of living and saturated legal market it didn't seem like a good idea to permanently tie myself to CA without a basis for comparison. Plus I'm from the bay so access to socal but no real edge up here isn't a huge plus for me. My COA would also be much higher than Texas because of the out of state tuition waiver program and COL difference.
P.S. you look familiar have I seen you on a UT thread?
Dude, the answer is so easily UT its not even funny. NU is not repeat not worth $180K more than UT.
I'm also a CA person, went to UVA and now am SAing in SF.
Sweet deal I'm in SF as well. Do you know any UT people and/or have a sense of what it's rep is like out here? I've got anecdotes but could always use more. UT alums tendency to self-select Texas kind of distorts their statistics.
the two schools you have as options are really not ideal for wanting to get back to California.
Job satisfaction > location for me. Especially with big law hours and limited options available to most students. My gut says Chicago would be a much better place to live than Dallas or Houston which is realistically where most of the Texas jobs are but I'm not sure how heavily to weigh that.
But nah, you have to take Northwestern or not attend here. You can't take a regional for six figures when you don't want to work in the region. The difference in debt isn't significant here. It's a big number, but you need big law either way.
I kind of like this perspective/rationalization. But I'm not sure it's true. Here's a take home comparison (after taxes) for both debt amounts at various salaries under various payment plans:
NU- 25 year 10 year UT Income 25 years 10 years 5 years- high interest estimate, 50% of what calculator says for 10 years.
80000 2172.333 882.3333 80000 3222.333 2541.333 1474.367
90000 2714 1424 90000 3764 3083 2016.033
100000 3255.667 1965.667 100000 4305.667 3624.667 2557.7
110000 3797.333 2507.333 110000 4847.333 4166.333 3099.367
120000 4339 3049 120000 5389 4708 3641.033
130000 4880.667 3590.667 130000 5930.667 5249.667 4182.7
140000 5422.333 4132.333 140000 6472.333 5791.333 4724.367
150000 5964 4674 150000 7014 6333 5266.033
160000 6505.667 5215.667 160000 7555.667 6874.667 5807.7
170000 7047.333 5757.333 170000 8097.333 7416.333 6349.367
(apologies for format)
Seems like mid size firms are a lot more doable from UT.