Top Law Schools

Hey guys,

sorry to bring this back up again but just got admitted to UC Davis. Waiting on their financial aid information. What do you guys think? Which school should I go with? I have 20k at UC Hastings renewable with no stip. Not sure what I will get at Davis yet. I get a week and a half to decide.

Thanks in advance guys!

Neither, retake

Davis might be ok on a full ride and with modest career goals

Hastings is a TTT in decline. I don't think I would even pay COL there

Since you've said "3.7" and I believe "big law" before, retake is the only sensible choice if you want to go to law school

CA legal market is rough man, there's only like 4 schools in the state worth attending for the most part

BigZuck wrote:Neither, retake

Davis might be ok on a full ride and with modest career goals

Hastings is a TTT in decline. I don't think I would even pay COL there

Since you've said "3.7" and I believe "big law" before, retake is the only sensible choice if you want to go to law school

CA legal market is rough man, there's only like 4 schools in the state worth attending for the most part

Retake aside, between the two, would you take Hastings or Davis? MY concern was always that Davis is in Sacramento area so feel like networking would be biased towards that area as opposed to SF? The funny thing is I only applied to Davis based on a fee waiver they gave me.

.

Moonlight wrote:

BigZuck wrote:Neither, retake

Davis might be ok on a full ride and with modest career goals

Hastings is a TTT in decline. I don't think I would even pay COL there

Since you've said "3.7" and I believe "big law" before, retake is the only sensible choice if you want to go to law school

CA legal market is rough man, there's only like 4 schools in the state worth attending for the most part

Retake aside, between the two, would you take Hastings or Davis? MY concern was always that Davis is in Sacramento area so feel like networking would be biased towards that area as opposed to SF? The funny thing is I only applied to Davis based on a fee waiver they gave me.

At your current/projected cost of attendance? I honestly just wouldn't go to law school.

I was right there two cycles ago man. Pretty much the exact same LSAT/GPA as you, almost went to Hastings. It's just not worth it.

BigZuck wrote:Neither, retake

Davis might be ok on a full ride and with modest career goals

Hastings is a TTT in decline. I don't think I would even pay COL there

This. So much this. As a fellow Californian, if you want to practice in CA, Davis/UCI full ride is the lowest I would go ITE.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/davis/2013/
http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/irvine/2013/
http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/hastings/2013/

Hastings has a 41.1% full time lawyer job rate. Match that up with it's staggering 47.2% underemployment rate, I would not go there on a full ride due to the insane COL and poor job prospects. Just think of it this way. It's 41.1% vs 47.2%. You're more likely to be underemployed/unemployed than to have a full time job as an attorney.

Davis/UCI at full ride are defensible. Roughly 65% full time lawyer job rate (not talking about big law rate, just talking about ANY full time lawyer job).

Moonlight wrote:

BigZuck wrote:Neither, retake

Davis might be ok on a full ride and with modest career goals

Hastings is a TTT in decline. I don't think I would even pay COL there

Since you've said "3.7" and I believe "big law" before, retake is the only sensible choice if you want to go to law school

CA legal market is rough man, there's only like 4 schools in the state worth attending for the most part

Retake aside, between the two, would you take Hastings or Davis? MY concern was always that Davis is in Sacramento area so feel like networking would be biased towards that area as opposed to SF? The funny thing is I only applied to Davis based on a fee waiver they gave me.

I agree with BigZuck--the correct answer is neither. But as for your follow-up question, your geographic concerns are not completely unfounded, particularly if your focus is PI or small/mid law. Overall, though, I would say that a UCD grad has about the same (small) chance at SF Big Law as a Hastings grad. You've got a legit shot if you're top 10% - 15%. I wouldn't risk sticker (or anything close to it) on that bet, though.

rpupkin wrote:

Moonlight wrote:

BigZuck wrote:Neither, retake

Davis might be ok on a full ride and with modest career goals

Hastings is a TTT in decline. I don't think I would even pay COL there

Since you've said "3.7" and I believe "big law" before, retake is the only sensible choice if you want to go to law school

CA legal market is rough man, there's only like 4 schools in the state worth attending for the most part

Retake aside, between the two, would you take Hastings or Davis? MY concern was always that Davis is in Sacramento area so feel like networking would be biased towards that area as opposed to SF? The funny thing is I only applied to Davis based on a fee waiver they gave me.

I agree with BigZuck--the correct answer is neither. But as for your follow-up question, your geographic concerns are not completely unfounded, particularly if your focus is PI or small/mid law. Overall, though, I would say that a UCD grad has about the same (small) chance at SF Big Law as a Hastings grad. You've got a legit shot if you're top 10% - 15%. I wouldn't risk sticker (or anything close to it) on that bet, though.

What would you say are the chances of medium law between UCD and UCH then? And thanks for entertaining my other question.

Moonlight wrote: What would you say are the chances of medium law between UCD and UCH then? And thanks for entertaining my other question.

Probably the same, which is to say chances at medium law at both suck. Law salaries are bimodal.

http://www.nalp.org/salarydistrib

The median expectation coming out of Davis should be small law firm or perhaps PD/DA PI stuff.

The median expectation coming out of Hastings should be doc review/unemployed.

Neither are worth what you're about to pay. With your GPA, just a few more points on the LSAT and you could be deciding between UCLA/USC with $$$ or a lower T-14.

Moonlight wrote:
What would you say are the chances of medium law between UCD and UCH then? And thanks for entertaining my other question.

I have no personal knowledge about how medium and small law firms view graduates of those schools. But the numbers on LSN LST suggest that UCD fares better at placing students into those types of jobs. I imagine that most of those jobs are in Sacramento and the Central Valley, but I'm not sure.

I'm new here but Big Zuck seems to know what he's talking about.

What do you mean by medium law? Can you give me some specific examples of these types of firms? Also, I take it that they hire freshly minted grads?

BigZuck wrote:What do you mean by medium law? Can you give me some specific examples of these types of firms? Also, I take it that they hire freshly minted grads?

Is this question directed at me? If so, I can't help you--I don't know much about small and mid-sized firms in Sacramento. I know of a couple that hire "freshly minted grads," but I only know of those firms because I have a couple of friends I went to undergrad with know got hired at those firms right out of law school.

I was just basing my comment on the ABA/LSN data, which shows that about 30% of UCD grads are at firms with 250 attorneys or fewer (and most of those firms are at the small end of the range).

rpupkin wrote:

BigZuck wrote:What do you mean by medium law? Can you give me some specific examples of these types of firms? Also, I take it that they hire freshly minted grads?

Is this question directed at me? If so, I can't help you--I don't know much about small and mid-sized firms in Sacramento. I know of a couple that hire "freshly minted grads," but I only know of those firms because I have a couple of friends I went to undergrad with know got hired at those firms right out of law school.

I was just basing my comment on the ABA/LSN data, which shows that about 30% of UCD grads are at firms with 250 attorneys or fewer (and most of those firms are at the small end of the range).

Naw pup, I was asking Moony

He was asking about medium law and I was trying to figure out what he meant

Medium law is just my way of saying one of those firms that isn't Big Law but then isn't so small that its a 3 person law firm.

Moonlight wrote:Medium law is just my way of saying one of those firms that isn't Big Law but then isn't so small that its a 3 person law firm.

5.6% of hastings grads got those jobs 21/373
9.7% at uc davis 19/196

You have a 3.8 and you're going to toss it on Hastings @ 20k or Davis for less than a full ride?

Gotta retake, man. A low 170s will probably net you serious money in the lower T14 or a full ride to your flagship regional. It's not worth throwing your life away because you absolutely must go to law school this year.

1. Retake
2. UCLA/USC

OP is going to go to Hastings. This is like his 5th thread on this subject.

No one is going to tell you it's a good idea. Unless you get a full ride out of Davis, retake is the only reasonable answer. Even if you get a full ride out of Davis, retake is still the better answer.

Best of luck.

.

Why do people post these threads? (Not a rhetorical question). It's like someone walking into an AA meeting and asking whether he should drink a fifth of vodka or gin.

Don't tell me to stay sober because I've already decided to get wasted tonight. Also I'll be driving.

Paul Campos wrote:Why do people post these threads? (Not a rhetorical question). It's like someone walking into an AA meeting and asking whether he should drink a fifth of vodka or gin.

Don't tell me to stay sober because I've already decided to get wasted tonight. Also I'll be driving.

I've made up my mind. I'm not going to not drink. That is not an option. I just want to know which one is better.

Paul Campos wrote:Why do people post these threads? (Not a rhetorical question). It's like someone walking into an AA meeting and asking whether he should drink a fifth of vodka or gin.

It's more like telling people you're going to get blackout drunk, and you want to know whether it's better to wake up--with a wicked hangover--in the Tenderloin or in a cow field in Davis. I think there's some value in knowing the answer to this question. (For the record, I'd rather wake up with a hangover in the cow field.)

OP you have a 3.8...thats pretty good, wish I had that gpa. Just even three or four more points would definitely get you in to usc, and a good chance at UCLA according to LSN. I just found it funny cuz it seemed like u were bashing davis on the davis thread haha, but congrats.

In terms of hastings v davis you seemed to have your own reasons for choosing hastings over davis. If you receive no money or less than 10k per year from Davis I'd say go Hastings. It seems as though you'd prefer to live in the city from previous posts. If getting equal money then go Davis for the obvious reason of employment scores. Good luck.

Paul Campos wrote:Why do people post these threads? (Not a rhetorical question). It's like someone walking into an AA meeting and asking whether he should drink a fifth of vodka or gin.

Don't tell me to stay sober because I've already decided to get wasted tonight. Also I'll be driving.

This needs to be posted in any nonsense thread