Top Law Schools

Alright so I'm down to these two schools

In order to receive the best feedback in this forum, please provide as much of the following information in your original post as possible:

-The schools you are considering: Vanderbilt Law and Emory Law
-The total Cost of Attendance (COA) of each. COA = cost of tuition + fees + books + cost of living (COL) + accumulated interest - scholarships. Here is a helpful calculator.: Debt at Repayment: 130,000 at Vandy, 65,000 at Emory
-How you will be financing your COA, i.e. loans, family, or savings: Loans,help from Family,scholarships
-Where you are from and where you want to work, and other places where you have significant ties (if any): I'm from Georgia, lived here for more than a decade, I have some ties to Miami as well.
-Your general career goals: Working at a medium sized to large law firm anywhere( of course I'll gun for the South hard)
-Your LSAT/GPA numbers: 3.4, 167
-How many times you have taken the LSAT: Twice(out performed my practice test scores the second time)

These aren't the best options but this is what I'm looking at

If I were in your shoes, I'd go to Vanderbilt. I personally think 65k is worth the better employment prospects. Also, if you want Atlanta biglaw, Vanderbilt is probably much better than Emory. In general, I think a Vanderbilt JD can take you much further throughout the South than an Emory JD.

Yeezus wrote:If I were in your shoes, I'd go to Vanderbilt. I personally think 65k is worth the better employment prospects. Also, if you want Atlanta biglaw, Vanderbilt is probably much better than Emory. In general, I think a Vanderbilt JD can take you much further throughout the South than an Emory JD.

Vanderbilt has much better BL + FC placement, but if I'd be really surprised if they had that much of an advantage at placing in Atlanta BL over a school that's in Atlanta. Emory places over half of their employed grads in Georgia. I can't find any data on how many grads Vandy places in Georgia.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/compare/ ... anderbilt/

stasg wrote:

Yeezus wrote:If I were in your shoes, I'd go to Vanderbilt. I personally think 65k is worth the better employment prospects. Also, if you want Atlanta biglaw, Vanderbilt is probably much better than Emory. In general, I think a Vanderbilt JD can take you much further throughout the South than an Emory JD.

Vanderbilt has much better BL + FC placement, but if I'd be really surprised if they had that much of an advantage at placing in Atlanta BL over a school that's in Atlanta. Emory places over half of their employed grads in Georgia. I can't find any data on how many grads Vandy places in Georgia.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/compare/ ... anderbilt/

I think you're overestimating Emory's placement power. I live in Georgia myself. From all the people I've talked to, the consensus seems to be UVA and Duke > Vanderbilt > Emory for Atlanta biglaw. Emory is pretty overrated if you ask me. An argument can even be made that if you're from Georgia and don't want to work anywhere else, UGA might even be a better option than Emory.

Vanderbilt isn't worth that kind of cash. And Emory gives you far less than a coin flip of a chance at your goals.

If you have a 167 on your LSAT you're a smart enough person. Find something else to do with your life. Law school is way too expensive. These are bad choices, and there is a very good chance you are going to regret this.

Nomo wrote:Vanderbilt isn't worth that kind of cash. And Emory gives you far less than a coin flip of a chance at your goals.

If you have a 167 on your LSAT you're a smart enough person. Find something else to do with your life. Law school is way too expensive. These are bad choices, and there is a very good chance you are going to regret this.

You'd think so but you can't do much with a political science degree from a state school

adil91 wrote:

Nomo wrote:Vanderbilt isn't worth that kind of cash. And Emory gives you far less than a coin flip of a chance at your goals.

If you have a 167 on your LSAT you're a smart enough person. Find something else to do with your life. Law school is way too expensive. These are bad choices, and there is a very good chance you are going to regret this.

You'd think so but you can't do much with a political science degree from a state school

Not sure that doubling down with an Emory JD is really a good move either though. Decently high probability you spend 60K and are in worse shape than you are now.

That's more than I would be willing to spend for Vandy.

I guess Emory is defensible at that price but it's really not a very good option for big law. That's what the T14 is for, I wouldn't go there without an openness (ideally a desire) for more modest career outcomes.

adil91 wrote:

Nomo wrote:Vanderbilt isn't worth that kind of cash. And Emory gives you far less than a coin flip of a chance at your goals.

If you have a 167 on your LSAT you're a smart enough person. Find something else to do with your life. Law school is way too expensive. These are bad choices, and there is a very good chance you are going to regret this.

You'd think so but you can't do much with a political science degree from a state school

It seemed like that to me around 2008. But seven years later I'm amazed at how many of my friends with degrees in english, political science, music, philosophy, etc. from a no-name state school have found their way into stable middle class with some room for advancement in big companies or in the government bureaucracy.

Nomo wrote:

adil91 wrote:

Nomo wrote:Vanderbilt isn't worth that kind of cash. And Emory gives you far less than a coin flip of a chance at your goals.

If you have a 167 on your LSAT you're a smart enough person. Find something else to do with your life. Law school is way too expensive. These are bad choices, and there is a very good chance you are going to regret this.

You'd think so but you can't do much with a political science degree from a state school

It seemed like that to me around 2008. But seven years later I'm amazed at how many of my friends with degrees in english, political science, music, philosophy, etc. from a no-name state school have found their way into stable middle class with some room for advancement in big companies or in the government bureaucracy.

Yeah, people act like if you don't major in accounting/engineering/nursing you'll never get a job. The majority of jobs in the middle class economy basically require a liberal arts degree.

If I find a way to lower my debt at repayment at Vandy to around 110,000 would it make more sense for me to attend ?

adil91 wrote:If I find a way to lower my debt at repayment at Vandy to around 110,000 would it make more sense for me to attend ?

110k in debt from Vandy is defensible. As long as you're not dead set on Biglaw (which it looks like you aren't), I think it's a fine option, especially if you want to stay in the South.

Yeezus wrote:

adil91 wrote:If I find a way to lower my debt at repayment at Vandy to around 110,000 would it make more sense for me to attend ?

110k in debt from Vandy is defensible. As long as you're not dead set on Biglaw (which it looks like you aren't), I think it's a fine option, especially if you want to stay in the South.

The OP's only stated career goals are big law and "mid law" which is either an unmountable unicorn or something that is just as hard to get as big law.

OP- where is the extra 20K coming from? Out of your pocket?
I don't think I would do Vandy for 110K but lots of people probably would I guess.

Vandy is not worth over 100k imo

BigZuck wrote:

Yeezus wrote:

adil91 wrote:If I find a way to lower my debt at repayment at Vandy to around 110,000 would it make more sense for me to attend ?

110k in debt from Vandy is defensible. As long as you're not dead set on Biglaw (which it looks like you aren't), I think it's a fine option, especially if you want to stay in the South.

The OP's only stated career goals are big law and "mid law" which is either an unmountable unicorn or something that is just as hard to get as big law.

OP- where is the extra 20K coming from? Out of your pocket?
I don't think I would do Vandy for 110K but lots of people probably would I guess.

It would be more like 15k(which would be about 20 when 3 years of interest accumulates) and it would be from my parents

BigZuck wrote: The OP's only stated career goals are big law and "mid law" which is either an unmountable unicorn or something that is just as hard to get as big law.

if it is just as hard to get as biglaw, shouldn't we start including firms with 50+ or even 26+ in calculating the 'BL+FC desireable outcome category' and adjust our rankings accordinlgy.

Under this new system, Vandy jumps to 50+ % desireable outcome status.

starry eyed wrote:

BigZuck wrote: The OP's only stated career goals are big law and "mid law" which is either an unmountable unicorn or something that is just as hard to get as big law.

if it is just as hard to get as biglaw, shouldn't we start including firms with 50+ or even 26+ in calculating the 'BL+FC desireable outcome category' and adjust our rankings accordinlgy.

Under this new system, Vandy jumps to 50+ % desireable outcome status.

Naw

Desireable 25+ person firms aren't neccessarily the same thing as all 25+ person firms. Desireable 25+ person firms aren't neccessarily the same thing as attainable (for a freshly minted grad) 25+ person firms either.

Some good firms are being ignored by not considering 25+ person firms in the calculus for sure. I'm ok with that.

BigZuck wrote:

starry eyed wrote:

BigZuck wrote: The OP's only stated career goals are big law and "mid law" which is either an unmountable unicorn or something that is just as hard to get as big law.

if it is just as hard to get as biglaw, shouldn't we start including firms with 50+ or even 26+ in calculating the 'BL+FC desireable outcome category' and adjust our rankings accordinlgy.

Under this new system, Vandy jumps to 50+ % desireable outcome status.

Naw

Desireable 25+ person firms aren't neccessarily the same thing as all 25+ person firms. Desireable 25+ person firms aren't neccessarily the same thing as attainable (for a freshly minted grad) 25+ person firms either.

Some good firms are being ignored by not considering 25+ person firms in the calculus for sure. I'm ok with that.

Maybe the higher up you go in the rankings, the higher the percentage that those 25+ firms are desireable.

If Cornell puts 20 people into 26-100 man firms, could we label their outcomes as 'above modest' or no?

starry eyed wrote:Maybe the higher up you go in the rankings, the higher the percentage that those 25+ firms are desireable.

If Cornell puts 20 people into 26-100 man firms, could we label their outcomes as 'above modest' or no?

Some of them probably are, but I don't know how you could begin to judge exactly what portion of those are going to boutique paying NYC market and who in there is at a personal injury firm in Buffalo.

usn26 wrote:

starry eyed wrote:Maybe the higher up you go in the rankings, the higher the percentage that those 25+ firms are desireable.

If Cornell puts 20 people into 26-100 man firms, could we label their outcomes as 'above modest' or no?

Some of them probably are, but I don't know how you could begin to judge exactly what portion of those are going to boutique paying NYC market and who in there is at a personal injury firm in Buffalo.

yet another fallacy of relying heavily on numbers

the subjective factors:

the higher up you go in the rankings, the higher the percentage of students there gunning and getting preftigious PI gigs, so we have to fudge their numbers a little to reflect that.

Now we have to deal with the 'midlaw' situation and the percent of students who actually 'wanted' said midlaw has to be higher the further you go up in the rankings, so we can fudge those #'s too... SMH

the thing is when we fudge the numbers, a lot of time it turns out what would most likely lead to a bad outcome (less than 50% in desirable jobs biglaw/FC), ends up amounting to more optimistic results. (due to self selection and the above factors)

starry eyed wrote:

usn26 wrote:

starry eyed wrote:Maybe the higher up you go in the rankings, the higher the percentage that those 25+ firms are desireable.

If Cornell puts 20 people into 26-100 man firms, could we label their outcomes as 'above modest' or no?

Some of them probably are, but I don't know how you could begin to judge exactly what portion of those are going to boutique paying NYC market and who in there is at a personal injury firm in Buffalo.

yet another fallacy of relying heavily on numbers

the subjective factors:

the higher up you go in the rankings, the higher the percentage of students there gunning and getting preftigious PI gigs, so we have to fudge their numbers a little to reflect that. (this results in a belo

Now we have to deal with the 'midlaw' situation and the percent of students who actually 'wanted' said midlaw has to be hirer the further you go up in the rankings, so we can fudge those #'s too... SMH

the thing is when we fudge the numbers, a lot of time it turns out what would most likely lead to a bad outcome (less than 50% in desirable jobs biglaw/FC), ends up amounting to more optimistic results. due to self selection and the above factors

What's your point? Not being snarky, I've just lost track of the argument you're making here. You're... opposed to using BL+FC as a metric?

usn26 wrote:

starry eyed wrote:

usn26 wrote:

starry eyed wrote:Maybe the higher up you go in the rankings, the higher the percentage that those 25+ firms are desireable.

If Cornell puts 20 people into 26-100 man firms, could we label their outcomes as 'above modest' or no?

Some of them probably are, but I don't know how you could begin to judge exactly what portion of those are going to boutique paying NYC market and who in there is at a personal injury firm in Buffalo.

yet another fallacy of relying heavily on numbers

the subjective factors:

the higher up you go in the rankings, the higher the percentage of students there gunning and getting preftigious PI gigs, so we have to fudge their numbers a little to reflect that. (this results in a belo

Now we have to deal with the 'midlaw' situation and the percent of students who actually 'wanted' said midlaw has to be hirer the further you go up in the rankings, so we can fudge those #'s too... SMH

the thing is when we fudge the numbers, a lot of time it turns out what would most likely lead to a bad outcome (less than 50% in desirable jobs biglaw/FC), ends up amounting to more optimistic results. due to self selection and the above factors

What's your point? Not being snarky, I've just lost track of the argument you're making here.

nothing. just hoping 0L's read.

more of a PSA

You guys could look at the salary data that shows how much people make in different firm sizes from each school. Shouldn't change your opinions too much but if you really want to break it down it's there.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/ ... more/2012/

I just had a discussion with my dad. He thinks Emory is the right call here. He basically said he'd pay for the entire cost of Emory if I went there. I spoke to an attorney who is a partner of a small law firm, and I honestly liked the type of work he was doing. I just don't want to work in shitlaw but I wouldn't mind working for a small firm that does criminal defense or business law. Is Emory a no-brainer now or what?

If you want to work for Emory university seems like a good call

Mack.Hambleton wrote:If you want to work for Emory university seems like a good call

?