Top Law Schools

I'm still waiting on several schools so I'm not in the decision phase yet but I'd like to get some opinions.

I live in LA so ideally I'd like to practice there although I'm not completely opposed to moving.
If I stay in LA for school, I'd most likely be living at home.
I'd like to get into BigLaw but I'm not biglaw or bust. I know a school like Southwestern is a terrible idea for biglaw unless I'm in the top 5-10% then maybe I have a decent shot.
For a lot of people the goal is to get a well paying job to pay off the debt and getting a job like that is difficult for most law grads and even more so for grads of TT/TTT schools. But if you're going to have little to no debt, doesn't it make easier to take that risk?

I'm not planning on going to SW although the scholly is tempting. But I've noticed some people say you shouldn't go to schools like that even if it's free and I was just wondering, why?

http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/ ... tern/2013/

That is why not...no amount of free education can make up for having extremely limited job prospects upon graduation.

Edit: What options are you waiting to hear from?

Because the odds of getting ANY kind of legal job out of a dumpster fire like Southwestern are pretty miserable.
http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/ ... /ABA/2013/

"JD advantage" jobs aren't necessarily bad, but often aren't a great outcome.
Jobs at "2-10 attorney" firms are often groups of desperate students banding up to try their luck at forming firms. (These usually fail.)
"Business & Industry" jobs could be anything, from in-house counsel to slinging coffee at Starbucks (guess which is more likely out of Southwestern).
Even "Government" jobs aren't necessarily attorney jobs.

Count up the numbers of people with decent employment outcomes.

Even if you hardly spend any money, if you come out of it without a legal job (which is much more likely than not, as the others above have pointed out) that's still three years of your life you've pretty much pissed away.

Probably won't be worth anything other than not working for 3 years and a dice roll. But there's no downside to it.

JohannDeMann wrote:Probably won't be worth anything other than not working for 3 years and a dice roll. But there's no downside to it.

Three years of opportunity cost and COL is a downside I'd say lol

most people would view three years of vacation instead of work a plus and also COL is a constant. you always have to feed yourself and house yourself.

Exactly, they would be better off spending three years of their life vacationing than in a TTTT law school.

Attending a school like Southwestern signals serious deficits. Perhaps most notably, it significantly lowers the chance that a knowledgeable employer will respect your ability to make reasonable, well-informed decisions. For that reason, it is a negative item on your resume, and will make you less employable. Spending three years making yourself less employable is usually a bad decision. It might sometimes be worth it because there are other considerations in play (eg caring for a sick relative). But making the decision to spend three years becoming less employable in order to improve your career is not a good choice.

If you choose to listen to what people say you risk being part of the norm. I would challenge you to think for yourself and take informed risks. People often speak about the probability of being employed because of the need for a high income in order to pay the huge debt they have acquired. However, if you don't accumulate considerable debt you have the liberty to explore your passion whatever it may be. Will you allow the Law School NAME/BRAND you attend to define your level of competence as an attorney or will you take the matter in to your own hands and let your work ethic, tenacity and passion demonstrate your competence? Weather you attend Southwestern, UC Irvine, Stanford or any law school, you have to learn to be a leader. Most of the law schools are good schools, including Southwestern. Whatever you end up doing, do it because it is your decision and not based on what others think.

LawDreamer15 wrote:If you choose to listen to what people say you risk being part of the norm. I would challenge you to think for yourself and take informed risks. People often speak about the probability of being employed because of the need for a high income in order to pay the huge debt they have acquired. However, if you don't accumulate considerable debt you have the liberty to explore your passion whatever it may be. Will you allow the Law School NAME/BRAND you attend to define your level of competence as an attorney or will you take the matter in to your own hands and let your work ethic, tenacity and passion demonstrate your competence? Weather you attend Southwestern, UC Irvine, Stanford or any law school, you have to learn to be a leader. Most of the law schools are good schools, including Southwestern. Whatever you end up doing, do it because it is your decision and not based on what others think.

If you want to make a good decision and not ruin your life or chances at being a successful attorney, you should listen to what people in this thread say. The name/brand of the school you attend will have a huge impact on how you start your career and will continue to affect you for the rest of your career. You have no idea how well you will do in law school and you will probably have to do very well to get a ANY legal job out of Southwestern.

This is your decision to make, but make an objectively awful one makes you an idiot, regardless of what we think.

There are a couple typos in the title of the thread: colon instead of comma, and period instead of question mark.

LawDreamer 15 is a bit too mature for this forum, in my opinion. No debt is good.

LawDreamer15 wrote:If you choose to listen to what people say you risk being part of the norm. I would challenge you to think for yourself and take informed risks. People often speak about the probability of being employed because of the need for a high income in order to pay the huge debt they have acquired. However, if you don't accumulate considerable debt you have the liberty to explore your passion whatever it may be. Will you allow the Law School NAME/BRAND you attend to define your level of competence as an attorney or will you take the matter in to your own hands and let your work ethic, tenacity and passion demonstrate your competence? Weather you attend Southwestern, UC Irvine, Stanford or any law school, you have to learn to be a leader. Most of the law schools are good schools, including Southwestern. Whatever you end up doing, do it because it is your decision and not based on what others think.

hahahahahaha i don't know where to begin ("...you risk being part of the norm", "weather you attend...", "you have to learn to be a leader"), so let me just say:

southwestern @full tuition + a generous stipend still probably wouldn't be worth it. this is because you still have to live/exist for three years and end up with a degree that no one will even recognize, let alone respect.

fyi:

"No one will even recognize, let alone respect." Sound very strong. I think you can't speak for every law firm and every lawyer.

LawDreamer15 wrote:"No one will even recognize, let alone respect." Sound very strong. I think you can't speak for every law firm and every lawyer.

Yeah but he speaks for a majority of them and there's no point in limiting employment prospects severely before even starting law school.

What do you mean no one will respect? The stats are right there and show 60% or whatever I can't see on my phone respect it. Tls really is dumb as fuck sometimes. What are your alternatives op? Why go into law?

Edit - this is to say tls advice that schools like this for free aren't worth it is way overblown. It's a risky school but you've limited the risk to 0. Being a lawyer still sucks though so you should go do something else with your life.