St. Johns ($) vs Brooklyn ($$) vs Waitlists Forum

[Rigo]

Right. Good points. I do want to be a lawyer and no, the answer of "retake an get above a 165" is not realistic for me. I understand that I am looking at some tier 1 - mostly all tier 2s. They mainly have similar outcomes. Quite frankly, St. Johns and Brooklyn seem to have the best BigLaw and small firm placement out of all tier 2's and some tier 1's. Thanks for looking out and not providing a condescending answer though.

Then just understand your chances of getting biglaw from either are 0. So get biglaw out of your mind if you go to either.

Eh this is a bit much. OP should def have more realistic fall backs but it ~could~ happen. 15-20% of each class gets bigLaw which is pretty decent for schools in that tier.

The main problem is these stips, OP.
And honestly the rankings are pretty worthless at that level. Next year brooklyn could easily be on top. There is so much fluctuation. Rutgers jumped 30 places this year. Should someone choose Rutgers because of that? Hell no. They could drop 40 next year.

Get rid of those stips though. They SCREAM section stacking.

I am dubious of the 20% biglaw claim by Brooklyn. They can say someone is employed by biglaw but don't breakdown how many in what position. They have absolutely no salary info either.

I mean, the ABA publishes the raw employment data.
http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org

[Npret]

Not dead set meaning being ok with working in small firm/public sector. Ultimate goals meaning it would be the most preferential.

Ok, so you aren't looking at/ expecting a specific salary?

The reason it matters is that these schools are so expensive and it is difficult to tell where their grads find jobs.

[UVA2B]

Right. Good points. I do want to be a lawyer and no, the answer of "retake an get above a 165" is not realistic for me. I understand that I am looking at some tier 1 - mostly all tier 2s. They mainly have similar outcomes. Quite frankly, St. Johns and Brooklyn seem to have the best BigLaw and small firm placement out of all tier 2's and some tier 1's. Thanks for looking out and not providing a condescending answer though.

Then just understand your chances of getting biglaw from either are 0. So get biglaw out of your mind if you go to either.

Eh this is a bit much. OP should def have more realistic fall backs but it ~could~ happen. 15-20% of each class gets bigLaw which is pretty decent for schools in that tier.

The main problem is these stips, OP.
And honestly the rankings are pretty worthless at that level. Next year brooklyn could easily be on top. There is so much fluctuation. Rutgers jumped 30 places this year. Should someone choose Rutgers because of that? Hell no. They could drop 40 next year.

Get rid of those stips though. They SCREAM section stacking.

I am dubious of the 20% biglaw claim by Brooklyn. They can say someone is employed by biglaw but don't breakdown how many in what position. They have absolutely no salary info either.

It's certainly possible given the disclosures that they have some contract and staff attorneys working at big firms. I'd even venture that there is likely one or two of those. But given the general lack of transparency in their disclosures, it's probably just prudent to give the number an asterisk and move on. I don't think a discussion of whether or not the number is dubious materially changes the decision being made.

[Rigo]

73 out of 336 grads were either A3 clerks or in firms with 100+ attorneys. That's 21.7% of grads in the Beooklyn's c/o 2015.

41 out of 248 for St. John's for 16.5%

[Npret]

Right. Good points. I do want to be a lawyer and no, the answer of "retake an get above a 165" is not realistic for me. I understand that I am looking at some tier 1 - mostly all tier 2s. They mainly have similar outcomes. Quite frankly, St. Johns and Brooklyn seem to have the best BigLaw and small firm placement out of all tier 2's and some tier 1's. Thanks for looking out and not providing a condescending answer though.

Then just understand your chances of getting biglaw from either are 0. So get biglaw out of your mind if you go to either.

Eh this is a bit much. OP should def have more realistic fall backs but it ~could~ happen. 15-20% of each class gets bigLaw which is pretty decent for schools in that tier.

The main problem is these stips, OP.
And honestly the rankings are pretty worthless at that level. Next year brooklyn could easily be on top. There is so much fluctuation. Rutgers jumped 30 places this year. Should someone choose Rutgers because of that? Hell no. They could drop 40 next year.

Get rid of those stips though. They SCREAM section stacking.

I am dubious of the 20% biglaw claim by Brooklyn. They can say someone is employed by biglaw but don't breakdown how many in what position. They have absolutely no salary info either.

I mean, the ABA publishes the raw employment data.
http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org

I was looking at LST for Brooklyn and it says "unknown" for job type and just gives a total.
https://www.lstreports.com/schools/brooklyn/jobs/

Also salary data was not reported.
https://www.lstreports.com/schools/brooklyn/sals/

[UVA2B]

73 out of 336 grads were either A3 clerks or in firms with 100+ attorneys. That's 21.7% of grads in the Beooklyn's c/o 2015.

41 out of 248 for St. John's for 16.5%

As previously mentioned, some could be contract or staff attorneys that make significantly less, and nothing about the data spells that out. You could definitely include an asterisk on the number if you're skeptical, but that doesn't change anything about the overall analysis.

[Rigo]

73 out of 336 grads were either A3 clerks or in firms with 100+ attorneys. That's 21.7% of grads in the Beooklyn's c/o 2015.
41 out of 248 for St. John's for 16.5%

As previously mentioned, some could be contract or staff attorneys that make significantly less, and nothing about the data spells that out. You could definitely include an asterisk on the number if you're skeptical, but that doesn't change anything about the overall analysis.

To be clear, I'm not saying these schools are good.

Just don't want TLS to go overboard on yelling that the sky is falling.

[UVA2B]

73 out of 336 grads were either A3 clerks or in firms with 100+ attorneys. That's 21.7% of grads in the Beooklyn's c/o 2015.
41 out of 248 for St. John's for 16.5%

As previously mentioned, some could be contract or staff attorneys that make significantly less, and nothing about the data spells that out. You could definitely include an asterisk on the number if you're skeptical, but that doesn't change anything about the overall analysis.

To be clear, I'm not saying these schools are good.

Just don't want TLS to go overboard on yelling that the sky is falling.

Obviously, I was more trying to supplement what this innocuous quibble was over, not to contradict what you're saying.

[Keekee1231]

.

[Npret]

Right. Good points. I do want to be a lawyer and no, the answer of "retake an get above a 165" is not realistic for me. I understand that I am looking at some tier 1 - mostly all tier 2s. They mainly have similar outcomes. Quite frankly, St. Johns and Brooklyn seem to have the best BigLaw and small firm placement out of all tier 2's and some tier 1's. Thanks for looking out and not providing a condescending answer though.

Then just understand your chances of getting biglaw from either are 0. So get biglaw out of your mind if you go to either.

Eh this is a bit much. OP should def have more realistic fall backs but it ~could~ happen. 15-20% of each class gets bigLaw which is pretty decent for schools in that tier.

The main problem is these stips, OP.
And honestly the rankings are pretty worthless at that level. Next year brooklyn could easily be on top. There is so much fluctuation. Rutgers jumped 30 places this year. Should someone choose Rutgers because of that? Hell no. They could drop 40 next year.

Get rid of those stips though. They SCREAM section stacking.

I am dubious of the 20% biglaw claim by Brooklyn. They can say someone is employed by biglaw but don't breakdown how many in what position. They have absolutely no salary info either.

It's certainly possible given the disclosures that they have some contract and staff attorneys working at big firms. I'd even venture that there is likely one or two of those. But given the general lack of transparency in their disclosures, it's probably just prudent to give the number an asterisk and move on. I don't think a discussion of whether or not the number is dubious materially changes the decision being made.

You could be a paralegal,secretary or work in the mailroom and still be counted as employed by biglaw.
(And, yes, schools have done this in the past.)

I thought OP wanted biglaw or clerking but now I understand that isn't the case.

[UVA2B]

Right. Good points. I do want to be a lawyer and no, the answer of "retake an get above a 165" is not realistic for me. I understand that I am looking at some tier 1 - mostly all tier 2s. They mainly have similar outcomes. Quite frankly, St. Johns and Brooklyn seem to have the best BigLaw and small firm placement out of all tier 2's and some tier 1's. Thanks for looking out and not providing a condescending answer though.

Then just understand your chances of getting biglaw from either are 0. So get biglaw out of your mind if you go to either.

Eh this is a bit much. OP should def have more realistic fall backs but it ~could~ happen. 15-20% of each class gets bigLaw which is pretty decent for schools in that tier.

The main problem is these stips, OP.
And honestly the rankings are pretty worthless at that level. Next year brooklyn could easily be on top. There is so much fluctuation. Rutgers jumped 30 places this year. Should someone choose Rutgers because of that? Hell no. They could drop 40 next year.

Get rid of those stips though. They SCREAM section stacking.

I am dubious of the 20% biglaw claim by Brooklyn. They can say someone is employed by biglaw but don't breakdown how many in what position. They have absolutely no salary info either.

It's certainly possible given the disclosures that they have some contract and staff attorneys working at big firms. I'd even venture that there is likely one or two of those. But given the general lack of transparency in their disclosures, it's probably just prudent to give the number an asterisk and move on. I don't think a discussion of whether or not the number is dubious materially changes the decision being made.

You could be a paralegal,secretary or work in the mailroom and still be counted as employed by biglaw.
I thought OP wanted biglaw or clerking but now I understand that isn't the case.

Ehh, according to their ABA disclosure they have ~70 graduates in long-term, bar-passage required positions in firms of 101+, which would exclude paralegals and secretaries and mailroom workers.

[Rigo]

You could be a paralegal,secretary or work in the mailroom and still be counted as employed by biglaw.
(And, yes, schools have done this in the past.)

I don't think these would he counted as full time long term jobs requiring a JD.
e: scooped

[Rigo]

So what is your actual debt at each going to be including living expenses for 3 years?

Bump for new page.

[Npret]

Right. Good points. I do want to be a lawyer and no, the answer of "retake an get above a 165" is not realistic for me. I understand that I am looking at some tier 1 - mostly all tier 2s. They mainly have similar outcomes. Quite frankly, St. Johns and Brooklyn seem to have the best BigLaw and small firm placement out of all tier 2's and some tier 1's. Thanks for looking out and not providing a condescending answer though.

Then just understand your chances of getting biglaw from either are 0. So get biglaw out of your mind if you go to either.

Eh this is a bit much. OP should def have more realistic fall backs but it ~could~ happen. 15-20% of each class gets bigLaw which is pretty decent for schools in that tier.

The main problem is these stips, OP.
And honestly the rankings are pretty worthless at that level. Next year brooklyn could easily be on top. There is so much fluctuation. Rutgers jumped 30 places this year. Should someone choose Rutgers because of that? Hell no. They could drop 40 next year.

Get rid of those stips though. They SCREAM section stacking.

I am dubious of the 20% biglaw claim by Brooklyn. They can say someone is employed by biglaw but don't breakdown how many in what position. They have absolutely no salary info either.

It's certainly possible given the disclosures that they have some contract and staff attorneys working at big firms. I'd even venture that there is likely one or two of those. But given the general lack of transparency in their disclosures, it's probably just prudent to give the number an asterisk and move on. I don't think a discussion of whether or not the number is dubious materially changes the decision being made.

You could be a paralegal,secretary or work in the mailroom and still be counted as employed by biglaw.
I thought OP wanted biglaw or clerking but now I understand that isn't the case.

Ehh, according to their ABA disclosure they have ~70 graduates in long-term, bar-passage required positions in firms of 101+, which would exclude paralegals and secretaries and mailroom workers.

I'm curious why LST has it as unknown then?

[Rigo]

I'm curious why LST has it as unknown then?

Tbf, LST also has unknown listed for Yale and Harvard so it's either that LST isn't updated to provide all data or that the lack of transparency is unfortunately the norm.

[UVA2B]

I'm curious why LST has it as unknown then?

Tbf, LST also has unknown listed for Yale and Harvard so it's either that LST isn't updated to provide all data or that the lack of transparency is unfortunately the norm.

Yeah, ABA only lists a single person in a firm of unknown size at BLS.

[Keekee1231]

So basically the answer is go to Brooklyn over St. John's but beware of stipulations (even though 80% seems very reasonable). What if I threw Rutgers Newark in the mix with an in state tuition? Still Brooklyn?

[UVA2B]

So basically the answer is go to Brooklyn over St. John's but beware of stipulations (even though 80% seems very reasonable). What if I threw Rutgers Newark in the mix with an in state tuition? Still Brooklyn?

Maybe you're not completely understanding what we're saying to you about regional schools. If you want to practice in NY, cheaper of St. Johns and Brooklyn are your best options absent stipulations. If you want to practice in NJ, Rutgers makes more sense than the other two. They should not be considered in overlap.

[Rigo]

So basically the answer is go to Brooklyn over St. John's but beware of stipulations (even though 80% seems very reasonable). What if I threw Rutgers in the mix with an in state tuition? Still Brooklyn?

80% sounds reasonable until you're thrown in a section with everyone else who got scholarships (i.e. everyone is smarter insomuch as LSAT/GPA correlate to law school ability) and 20% are fucked and the competition causes you to get poorer grades than you would have in an evenly-balanced section.

And no do not throw Rutgers into the mix unless you want NJ law.

Please answer your debt question.

[Keekee1231]

I did answer debt question. I would equally consider NJ and NY.

[Npret]

I'm curious why LST has it as unknown then?

Tbf, LST also has unknown listed for Yale and Harvard so it's either that LST isn't updated to provide all data or that the lack of transparency is unfortunately the norm.

I found another page with the ABA disclosures on it which breaks down the numbers. But that just says the number employed at the firm- not if bar passage is required.

https://www.lstreports.com/schools/brooklyn/ABA/

OP: sorry if this detailed your thread.

[Rigo]

I did answer debt question. I would equally consider NJ and NY.

I don't see it. You mean a post that you edited out with a period? Uhhh okay...

[UVA2B]

So basically the answer is go to Brooklyn over St. John's but beware of stipulations (even though 80% seems very reasonable). What if I threw Rutgers in the mix with an in state tuition? Still Brooklyn?

80% sounds reasonable until you're thrown in a section with everyone else who got scholarships (i.e. everyone is smarter insomuch as LSAT/GPA correlate to law school ability) and 20% are fucked and the competition causes you to get poorer grades than you would have in an evenly-balanced section.

And no do not throw Rutgers into the mix unless you want NJ law.

Please answer your debt question.

Just looked up BLS 509, 1/6 of most recent disclosure lost their conditional scholarship. I retract BLS at 80% being the marginally better offer. They're both terrible.

[Keekee1231]

.

[Rigo]

So basically the answer is go to Brooklyn over St. John's but beware of stipulations (even though 80% seems very reasonable). What if I threw Rutgers in the mix with an in state tuition? Still Brooklyn?

80% sounds reasonable until you're thrown in a section with everyone else who got scholarships (i.e. everyone is smarter insomuch as LSAT/GPA correlate to law school ability) and 20% are fucked and the competition causes you to get poorer grades than you would have in an evenly-balanced section.

And no do not throw Rutgers into the mix unless you want NJ law.

Please answer your debt question.

Just looked up BLS 509, 1/6 of most recent disclosure lost their conditional scholarship. I retract BLS at 80% being the marginally better offer. They're both terrible.

Fuck. Yeah that's 100% section stacking.
OP you gotta avoid these schools. Damn. What tricky shits.