Top Law Schools

I realize that these type of postings are not popular and I also realize that I will get flamed for saying I don't want big law. With that said, I need advice on what I should do given the fact(s) that (i) I don't aspire to work big law right out of the gate; Maybe one day but it's not a goal of mine. (ii) I would be fine with making 60-75k as I have been poor my entire life and 60k would be a fortune to me and I also value time with my family so I dont want to work 90+ hrs a week. I obviously will want to make upper 6figs eventually but I won't be hurt if I don't make 140k out of the gate (I live in Tx.. Low COL here).

Problem is, all of the advice I have received basically come from people who tell me T14 or bust. I get it, but my goal is to leave law school without paying a dime in tuition. Besides, I only have a 2.83 ugpa and have yet to take the LSAT (but I have been making 169-173 or my practice tests in a LSAT testing environment) so I highly doubt I make the T14.

My second problem is the fact that I live in Texas. My wife is a school teacher here so it will be hard to leave the state but I feel that I need to. First reason is the fact that the absolute best school here is UTexas. 2nd place is SMU and 3rd place is UH. With my numbers, I can probably swing UH but will pay sticker; I refuse to pay sticker. So I want to leave the state and set up somewhere where with a school that has VERY strong regional ties.


My Predicted stats for the next cycle:

Ugpa 2.83

Lsat: We'll call it 165 to be safe.

SOFTS: URM (Black male), worked throughout college, started college at 16 (Associates degree at 17), Upward grade trend (about 3.4 over last 60 i think.. maybe a tad bit higher), first generation college student, excellent LOR, Leadership roles in college (Started and served as president of a student org.. VP for another).. But nothing much outside of this. Majored in Public Administration if my major matters at all.

I know I technically didn't ask a question but my hope if to get advice on what I should do in terms of going t14 or free at a lower tier/regionally strong school, Scholly chances at schools you guys think I should apply for, Leaving a state in which I have never been away from, and if I am crazy for not shooting for big-law.

Thanks in advance.. First post here so Im not familiar with the unwritten rules here just yet. If I must be flamed for saying something dumb.. flame away so I know the score around here.

There's a lot more to be answered here by people who have actually been to law school, but as a first thought to one of your primary questions:
If you want to work in a non-biglaw firm and are okay with that kind of money, minimizing debt is your top priority.

yossarian71 wrote:There's a lot more to be answered here by people who have actually been to law school, but as a first thought to one of your primary questions:
If you want to work in a non-biglaw firm and are okay with that kind of money, minimizing debt is your top priority.

DO you think I could do that with a school in the top 100 or maybe top 50?

cwill011 wrote:

yossarian71 wrote:There's a lot more to be answered here by people who have actually been to law school, but as a first thought to one of your primary questions:
If you want to work in a non-biglaw firm and are okay with that kind of money, minimizing debt is your top priority.

DO you think I could do that with a school in the top 100 or maybe top 50?

desert fox?

No one will flame you for not wanting biglaw. The regular posters on here who actually work in biglaw talk all the time about how terrible it is.

I don't really understand what it is you want. You said you want to find a school with strong regional ties. Ties to Texas? Or to the region it's located in? If you just want to know what the strong regionals are, go here and sort by employment score: http://www.lstscorereports.com/national

Your goals seem incongruent. You want middle class pay, low hours for family reasons, but expect to one day make well into the six figs? Rarely does this happen. For that kind of pay, you'll need BIGLAW from the start or be willing to kill yourself in hours in smaller law to have a shot at making the six fig level.

Legal salaries are notoriously bimodal, meaning you'll either make 160k or 40k with little in between.

As for your options, with a 165+, 2.8, and urm you're looking at a very unpredictable cycle. No one here will be able to predict where you might get money. But, if you're not going t14, stick to places in Texas and hope they throw you money.

matthewsean85 wrote:Your goals seem incongruent. You want middle class pay, low hours for family reasons, but expect to one day make well into the six figs? Rarely does this happen. For that kind of pay, you'll need BIGLAW from the start or be willing to kill yourself in hours in smaller law to have a shot at making the six fig level.

Legal salaries are notoriously bimodal, meaning you'll either make 160k or 40k with little in between.

As for your options, with a 165+, 2.8, and urm you're looking at a very unpredictable cycle. No one here will be able to predict where you might get money. But, if you're not going t14, stick to places in Texas and hope they throw you money.

Idk how true this is. I agree with you that starting salaries are bimordal. However, if you talk to older attorney's who started out as a PD or DA or maybe at a small firm and went solo over time they made more money than when they started. Its not like you just stay at your starting salary forerver as with any career. So I can't necessarily agree with your statement. I'm sure even PD lifers make high 5 figures eventually. Solos with a huge book of business are probably making well into six figures. Its just not going to happen overnight or probably within ten years of graduating if OP doesn't do biglaw, but it can and probably will happen if OP gets a legal job and starts building a career.

Lacepiece23 wrote:

matthewsean85 wrote:Your goals seem incongruent. You want middle class pay, low hours for family reasons, but expect to one day make well into the six figs? Rarely does this happen. For that kind of pay, you'll need BIGLAW from the start or be willing to kill yourself in hours in smaller law to have a shot at making the six fig level.

Legal salaries are notoriously bimodal, meaning you'll either make 160k or 40k with little in between.

As for your options, with a 165+, 2.8, and urm you're looking at a very unpredictable cycle. No one here will be able to predict where you might get money. But, if you're not going t14, stick to places in Texas and hope they throw you money.

Idk how true this is. I agree with you that starting salaries are bimordal. However, if you talk to older attorney's who started out as a PD or DA or maybe at a small firm and went solo over time they made more money than when they started. Its not like you just stay at your starting salary forerver as with any career. So I can't necessarily agree with your statement. I'm sure even PD lifers make high 5 figures eventually. Solos with a huge book of business are probably making well into six figures. Its just not going to happen overnight or probably within ten years of graduating if OP doesn't do biglaw, but it can and probably will happen if OP gets a legal job and starts building a career.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

You're crazy if you think OP will "probably" be making six figures by grinding at a small firm or opening up a solo shop. Possibly? Sure. Probably? No way to tell. It's a helluva lot more likely if you start with six figures and lateral out after a few years.

ITT, snowflake hunting unicorns who longs for prestigious regional while pissing on UT. GLHF.

Post removed.

Idk how true this is. I agree with you that starting salaries are bimordal. However, if you talk to older attorney's who started out as a PD or DA or maybe at a small firm and went solo over time they made more money than when they started. Its not like you just stay at your starting salary forerver as with any career. So I can't necessarily agree with your statement. I'm sure even PD lifers make high 5 figures eventually. Solos with a huge book of business are probably making well into six figures. Its just not going to happen overnight or probably within ten years of graduating if OP doesn't do biglaw, but it can and probably will happen if OP gets a legal job and starts building a career.

I think there are a lot of "ifs" involved here but is the basic premise that after working several years you will make more money than when you started really that controversial for people who start in these kind of jobs? It just seems like if you start out making 40k you will probably make more than that at some point in the future. If thats not the case though I'd like to hear it, this is something that comes up a lot here.

http://www.ogc.state.pa.us/portal/serve ... t_ogc/3260

Check this link out. This is the salary range for attorneys in PA who work for state agencies. These jobs are not easy to get (as are any) but it is not impossible to get and a reasonably easy itnernship to land while in law school and then make connections through. It is likely that a career attorney in a similar state gove job will make close to six figs during career.

rickgrimes69 wrote:

Lacepiece23 wrote:

matthewsean85 wrote:Your goals seem incongruent. You want middle class pay, low hours for family reasons, but expect to one day make well into the six figs? Rarely does this happen. For that kind of pay, you'll need BIGLAW from the start or be willing to kill yourself in hours in smaller law to have a shot at making the six fig level.

Legal salaries are notoriously bimodal, meaning you'll either make 160k or 40k with little in between.

As for your options, with a 165+, 2.8, and urm you're looking at a very unpredictable cycle. No one here will be able to predict where you might get money. But, if you're not going t14, stick to places in Texas and hope they throw you money.

Idk how true this is. I agree with you that starting salaries are bimordal. However, if you talk to older attorney's who started out as a PD or DA or maybe at a small firm and went solo over time they made more money than when they started. Its not like you just stay at your starting salary forerver as with any career. So I can't necessarily agree with your statement. I'm sure even PD lifers make high 5 figures eventually. Solos with a huge book of business are probably making well into six figures. Its just not going to happen overnight or probably within ten years of graduating if OP doesn't do biglaw, but it can and probably will happen if OP gets a legal job and starts building a career.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

You're crazy if you think OP will "probably" be making six figures by grinding at a small firm or opening up a solo shop. Possibly? Sure. Probably? No way to tell. It's a helluva lot more likely if you start with six figures and lateral out after a few years.

I think low six figures - maybe around 200 - is very reachable for someone that goes to a midlevel firm and makes partner. And I don't doubt that they'd be able to get into six figures before partnership. But high six figures is very unlikely, unless you hit the plaintiff contingency fee lottery.

But, making partner at a small firm isn't any easier than a big firm. So that's not something to bank on either.

And solo shops are completely hit or miss, just like any start-up. Lots of risk here related to the "high six figure" salary later in life. Like one poster said, your goals are a bit divergent from a probability standpoint.

Did you already graduate from college?

Lacepiece23 wrote:

matthewsean85 wrote:Your goals seem incongruent. You want middle class pay, low hours for family reasons, but expect to one day make well into the six figs? Rarely does this happen. For that kind of pay, you'll need BIGLAW from the start or be willing to kill yourself in hours in smaller law to have a shot at making the six fig level.

Legal salaries are notoriously bimodal, meaning you'll either make 160k or 40k with little in between.

As for your options, with a 165+, 2.8, and urm you're looking at a very unpredictable cycle. No one here will be able to predict where you might get money. But, if you're not going t14, stick to places in Texas and hope they throw you money.

Idk how true this is. I agree with you that starting salaries are bimordal. However, if you talk to older attorney's who started out as a PD or DA or maybe at a small firm and went solo over time they made more money than when they started. Its not like you just stay at your starting salary forerver as with any career. So I can't necessarily agree with your statement. I'm sure even PD lifers make high 5 figures eventually. Solos with a huge book of business are probably making well into six figures. Its just not going to happen overnight or probably within ten years of graduating if OP doesn't do biglaw, but it can and probably will happen if OP gets a legal job and starts building a career.

Just to make clear, I wasn't stating that it's impossible to make that money from small law, etc. My point was that the only way to make that money is to absolutely kill yourself hustling for business. Even then it's a risk, but it's possible.

Getting high pay combined with reasonable hours down the line is really only a somewhat safe venture when you go the BIGLAW route.

Apply broadly and see where you get money. I think your career goals are pretty compatible with Texas. No need to leave unless your family wants to. The hardest part will be getting your first job and you should be prepared to make 40-50k if necessary. Within 5-10 years though it is a pretty safe assumption you will earn between 100-200k a year whether by going solo or partner at local firm. Some of the above posts are way overestimating the difficulty of going solo. Most solos have great work life balance and make solid money. The end game is easy though. The concern is the first few steps.

Where do you want to live and work? Texas? If so, then going to a school away from Texas would be a mistake. If you can swing a good LSAT (170+), SMU favors the LSAT and being URM, you'd like get a fairly substantial offer from them (although not full tuition). That would give you the best shot at mid-level firms in Dallas. The same is true for UofH and Houston market, although I think UofH is a bit stingier (though much cheaper than SMU).

Going to a place like Penn State or similar for free with the intention of coming back to work in Texas would be a mistake. Going to a strong regional with the intention of staying in that region would be a much better bet (especially if you're going for free or close to it).

JohannDeMann wrote:Apply broadly and see where you get money. I think your career goals are pretty compatible with Texas. No need to leave unless your family wants to. The hardest part will be getting your first job and you should be prepared to make 40-50k if necessary. Within 5-10 years though it is a pretty safe assumption you will earn between 100-200k a year whether by going solo or partner at local firm. Some of the above posts are way overestimating the difficulty of going solo. Most solos have great work life balance and make solid money. The end game is easy though. The concern is the first few steps.

Going solo is easy? Tell that to the countless failed solos that shutter every year. Any start up business takes a ton of work, long hours and grueling networking unless you already have strong connections to the legal community, like you get having worked in a firm and generated business contacts for the last ten years.

Solo isn't impossible, it's just damn hard.

Honestly the only advice we can really give you is to do the best you can on your LSAT, apply broadly, and see what happens. I don't think your goal of starting out at a smaller or mid-sized firm and eventually making six figures is unreasonable, especially in texas, where there are more smaller firms doing business/corporate work. And remember, state government can get you into the six figures over time as well.

A score of 169+ combined with URM status would give you a great chance at a T14, although your cycle would be totally unpredictable. Unfortunately UT tends to prefer GPA's over LSAT, but with the decline in applications, who knows? High-LSAT, low-GPA URM splitters are almost impossible to predict, and the uncertainty is even higher now that applications are down.

Yes, your GPA is low (raise it more if you haven't graduated yet). But you have the benefit of URM boost, which is even stronger for AA males because your group is even less represented in law schools.

Study hard for the LSAT. The LSAT is very learnable with time and effort. DO NOT cheap out on resources. Buy the Manhattan LSAT bundle, or the LSAT trainer series, or the Powerscore Bibles. All of those are better than Kaplan brand anything. In your case it might even be best to get a tutor because you have so much $$$ to gain with each LSAT point. Just don't half ass the process is what I'm trying to say.

Apply to those three TX schools and other TX schools and see what happens. Leaving the state is a bad idea in many ways, and it seems you prefer not to regardless. One of those for free is possible with a high LSAT. Negotiate scholarships! Don't sign on the dotted line until you've asked each school you're accepted to for more at least once (preferably keep going - politely - until they say no). Doing well on the LSAT isnt easy, but if you do, I think you're underestimating what will come from it. If you can clear 165, good things will happen. If you can clear 168, GREAT things will happen from these schools.

Go for it and good luck!

Fiero85 wrote:Yes, your GPA is low (raise it more if you haven't graduated yet). But you have the benefit of URM boost, which is even stronger for AA males because your group is even less represented in law schools.

Study hard for the LSAT. The LSAT is very learnable with time and effort. DO NOT cheap out on resources. Buy the Manhattan LSAT bundle, or the LSAT trainer series, or the Powerscore Bibles. All of those are better than Kaplan brand anything. In your case it might even be best to get a tutor because you have so much $$$ to gain with each LSAT point. Just don't half ass the process is what I'm trying to say.

Apply to those three TX schools and other TX schools and see what happens. Leaving the state is a bad idea in many ways, and it seems you prefer not to regardless. One of those for free is possible with a high LSAT. Negotiate scholarships! Don't sign on the dotted line until you've asked each school you're accepted to for more at least once (preferably keep going - politely - until they say no). Doing well on the LSAT isnt easy, but if you do, I think you're underestimating what will come from it. If you can clear 165, good things will happen. If you can clear 168, GREAT things will happen from these schools.

Go for it and good luck!

This, negotiation is key. Expect your offers to not be final, and expect lowball offers. I had UH and Baylor both give me less money than Washington & Lee and other peerish schools (although not in the same market whatsoever) and got Baylor to up to a full ride with an almost identical GPA to yours and a 168 (but not URM).

Study hard, and if you can't move then get a full ride to UH/SMU or pay some for UT.

Just to be clear, if you want to work in Texas, you should only go to UT / UofH / SMU, if you're choosing among Texas schools.

** Edited for clarity.

cwill011 wrote:

yossarian71 wrote:There's a lot more to be answered here by people who have actually been to law school, but as a first thought to one of your primary questions:
If you want to work in a non-biglaw firm and are okay with that kind of money, minimizing debt is your top priority.

DO you think I could do that with a school in the top 100 or maybe top 50?

This question is unanswerable without an LSAT score. Even w/ a score, it's been mentioned that you are an incredibly hard combination to predict admission chance. Do I think you could get a full ride in the top 50 with a 169+, probably. But, while debt is your biggest concern, regional ties aren't far behind. You're not going to go to Colorado on a full-ride and easily transition back into TX. Some might pull it off, but the risks aren't advisable.

Even if you get a full-ride at a strong regional, and your wife is willing to move, you don't have established ties. How important this is varies from market to market and firm to firm. You do have ties in TX. If it's your top choice geographically, and you are sure you want to do law, you gotta gun for TX. People have covered that here. Others w/ southern experience may be able to point to strong southern regionals that could play okay in TX. Maybe Alabama? Kalv, way smarter, more experienced than me, just said only those 3 TX schools for TX.

But the point is LSAT first. Then think about debt/region. Then apply everywhere. Then negotiate. Then choose the place w/ the best debt to region ratio. Ideally, you're not paying much, and you aren't straying far from your region. Also, somewhere in there, make sure law is what you really want and giving up three years of what you're doing now is worth it.

ymmv wrote:ITT, snowflake hunting unicorns who longs for prestigious regional while pissing on UT. GLHF.

What does all this mean? Who pissed on UT? I said I have no chance of getting in UT. Im from Texas, that would obviously be my first choice.

alphasteve wrote:

rickgrimes69 wrote:

Lacepiece23 wrote:

matthewsean85 wrote:Your goals seem incongruent. You want middle class pay, low hours for family reasons, but expect to one day make well into the six figs? Rarely does this happen. For that kind of pay, you'll need BIGLAW from the start or be willing to kill yourself in hours in smaller law to have a shot at making the six fig level.

Legal salaries are notoriously bimodal, meaning you'll either make 160k or 40k with little in between.

As for your options, with a 165+, 2.8, and urm you're looking at a very unpredictable cycle. No one here will be able to predict where you might get money. But, if you're not going t14, stick to places in Texas and hope they throw you money.

Idk how true this is. I agree with you that starting salaries are bimordal. However, if you talk to older attorney's who started out as a PD or DA or maybe at a small firm and went solo over time they made more money than when they started. Its not like you just stay at your starting salary forerver as with any career. So I can't necessarily agree with your statement. I'm sure even PD lifers make high 5 figures eventually. Solos with a huge book of business are probably making well into six figures. Its just not going to happen overnight or probably within ten years of graduating if OP doesn't do biglaw, but it can and probably will happen if OP gets a legal job and starts building a career.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

You're crazy if you think OP will "probably" be making six figures by grinding at a small firm or opening up a solo shop. Possibly? Sure. Probably? No way to tell. It's a helluva lot more likely if you start with six figures and lateral out after a few years.

I think low six figures - maybe around 200 - is very reachable for someone that goes to a midlevel firm and makes partner. And I don't doubt that they'd be able to get into six figures before partnership. But high six figures is very unlikely, unless you hit the plaintiff contingency fee lottery.

But, making partner at a small firm isn't any easier than a big firm. So that's not something to bank on either.

And solo shops are completely hit or miss, just like any start-up. Lots of risk here related to the "high six figure" salary later in life. Like one poster said, your goals are a bit divergent from a probability standpoint.

Alright, high six figures to me would be 100-200k. Again, I live in texas.. that is a ton of money. I don't see how I would continue to make my starting salary 15 years into my career... I would see 100k at some point I would think (hope). If I can last 15 years I can probably swing 100k+ at some point right?