Top Law Schools

.

Its at least $30k more valuable

But both are too expensive

.

Well, I think Michigan is clear between these two. Unless the market for UCLA candidates has improved significantly over the past three years.

Michigan!

yea but answer the questions in the sticky anyways
if they didn't help us give you the best advice they wouldn't be there

.

how do you expect us to answer any of this

you didn't say whether you'd take out loans or how much you had saved (or any other means of financing law school)
so we have no idea how risky this is financially or if you've correctly calculated coa
and you didn't post numbers so we can't tell you if you're getting a good deal or if/how much leverage you have for negotiation

everything anyone posts will be guesswork because you can't follow directions

.

Any "longtime reader" would know neither of these options are defensible in most situations. If you have a special circumstance (family money, GI Bill, guaranteed job offer, etc.), let us know, otherwise, I think you know neither of these choices are good. If forced to choose, Michigan, but it's risky. Certainly you have lower COA options--WUSTL, Emory, USC?

ETA: You got 20k from Mich with a 163? I don't care if you have to sit out an entire 12 months for it, you need to retake or not go at all. I know it seems like a lot now, but a few points higher and you're looking at savings of tens of thousands of dollars.

.

Michigan is worth more, but I would definitely not pay >100k for their shaky biglaw placement

163/3.8 gets $60k at Mich? Nice work, looks like you over performed your numbers a good bit. Michigan is the better option, but I wouldn't take out that much to go to Michigan.

op also underestimated debt by 20 or 30k