Top Law Schools

.

I can't imagine any situation where UW for $50k and a guaranteed 1L SA job isn't better than Michigan for Seattle Biglaw. Maybe Michigan for $75k COA? That guaranteed 1L SA tips the scales because you could be walking into OCI with an offer in hand (I'm assuming the 1L SA is at a big firm that could/will offer you a chance to return if they like you), which is huge.

I sincerely doubt Michigan will offer you any type of tuition discount off the WL that will make it remotely as valuable as your current offer given your goals.

I feel like I'd need to know more about how the guaranteed 1L SA thing works, and if they usually extend 2l SA offers to recipients (regardless of grades).

I'm pretty hesitant to recommend UW to someone who's number one priority seems to be landing an Article III clerkship (although how 0Ls know they want this I'll never understand) and biglaw of some kind.

If OP said his priorities were Seattle Biglaw > Seattle small firm > working somewhere else, then I'd be all for UW, but I'm pretty skeptical here.

existentialcrisis wrote:I feel like I'd need to know more about how the guaranteed 1L SA thing works, and if they usually extend 2l SA offers to recipients (regardless of grades).

I'm pretty hesitant to recommend UW to someone who's number one priority seems to be landing an Article III clerkship (although how 0Ls know they want this I'll never understand) and biglaw of some kind.

If OP said his priorities were Seattle Biglaw > Seattle small firm > working somewhere else, then I'd be all for UW, but I'm pretty skeptical here.

Agree with all of this. I still would stick with UW over UM at sticker (which is the likely case if OP gets off WL), but need a little more info and background

trebekismyhero wrote:

existentialcrisis wrote:I feel like I'd need to know more about how the guaranteed 1L SA thing works, and if they usually extend 2l SA offers to recipients (regardless of grades).

I'm pretty hesitant to recommend UW to someone who's number one priority seems to be landing an Article III clerkship (although how 0Ls know they want this I'll never understand) and biglaw of some kind.

If OP said his priorities were Seattle Biglaw > Seattle small firm > working somewhere else, then I'd be all for UW, but I'm pretty skeptical here.

Agree with all of this. I still would stick with UW over UM at sticker (which is the likely case if OP gets off WL), but need a little more info and background

Yea, I want to clarify that I absolutely don't think OP should go to UM at sticker. But if those are OPs goals then going to law school this year is probably not a good idea.

.

rozes wrote:

existentialcrisis wrote:

trebekismyhero wrote:

existentialcrisis wrote:I feel like I'd need to know more about how the guaranteed 1L SA thing works, and if they usually extend 2l SA offers to recipients (regardless of grades).

I'm pretty hesitant to recommend UW to someone who's number one priority seems to be landing an Article III clerkship (although how 0Ls know they want this I'll never understand) and biglaw of some kind.

If OP said his priorities were Seattle Biglaw > Seattle small firm > working somewhere else, then I'd be all for UW, but I'm pretty skeptical here.

Agree with all of this. I still would stick with UW over UM at sticker (which is the likely case if OP gets off WL), but need a little more info and background

Yea, I want to clarify that I absolutely don't think OP should go to sticker. But if those are OPs goals then going to law school this year is probably not a good idea.

Interesting — didn't expect this pushback on UW at 50k COA, tbh (though I guess it's more in the context of FC goals than cost). Goals are FC/BL simply because while I think know what I would like to do (environmental/energy law), I would still like to go to a school that doesn't preclude a prestigious job and high salary in case that becomes important over the course of law school. I would be fine with Seattle small firm if it did come to that — staying close to family and friends is important. The opportunity for something on the 9th circ, though, is a nice thought.

Having spoken to former fellows, 1L SA doesn't guarantee a 2L SA, but lowers the academic bar for OCI — contingent on adequate performance. (e.g., if grades cut was 3.4, a fellow with a 3.2 might still get an interview.)

This will probably all be moot — highly doubt I would get off of UM's WL with significant $$$. Just prepping my mindset if it did come to that, as I do like Michigan.

Much appreciated to all of you for your comments!

This paints a bit less rosy picture of the fellowship than I imagined/hoped. I still think UW is the right choice here, but you should probably just dispel of 9th Circuit dreams until they become a possibility once you're in law school and miraculously end up top of your class.

Agreed with all of the above that it would be ludicrous to go to UM at sticker or close to it. No access to some ill-defined prestige is worth that. Save your money, enjoy staying in your target market, and work your butt off so you do more than get interviews for firms during OCI. Interviews are great, but offers are what you should really be concerned about, which will require top notch grades at UW. But even if you end up at a smaller firm following graduation, not drowning in debt will #feelsgoodman.

UVA2B wrote:

rozes wrote:

existentialcrisis wrote:

trebekismyhero wrote:

existentialcrisis wrote:I feel like I'd need to know more about how the guaranteed 1L SA thing works, and if they usually extend 2l SA offers to recipients (regardless of grades).

I'm pretty hesitant to recommend UW to someone who's number one priority seems to be landing an Article III clerkship (although how 0Ls know they want this I'll never understand) and biglaw of some kind.

If OP said his priorities were Seattle Biglaw > Seattle small firm > working somewhere else, then I'd be all for UW, but I'm pretty skeptical here.

Agree with all of this. I still would stick with UW over UM at sticker (which is the likely case if OP gets off WL), but need a little more info and background

Yea, I want to clarify that I absolutely don't think OP should go to sticker. But if those are OPs goals then going to law school this year is probably not a good idea.

Interesting — didn't expect this pushback on UW at 50k COA, tbh (though I guess it's more in the context of FC goals than cost). Goals are FC/BL simply because while I think know what I would like to do (environmental/energy law), I would still like to go to a school that doesn't preclude a prestigious job and high salary in case that becomes important over the course of law school. I would be fine with Seattle small firm if it did come to that — staying close to family and friends is important. The opportunity for something on the 9th circ, though, is a nice thought.

Having spoken to former fellows, 1L SA doesn't guarantee a 2L SA, but lowers the academic bar for OCI — contingent on adequate performance. (e.g., if grades cut was 3.4, a fellow with a 3.2 might still get an interview.)

This will probably all be moot — highly doubt I would get off of UM's WL with significant $$$. Just prepping my mindset if it did come to that, as I do like Michigan.

Much appreciated to all of you for your comments!

This paints a bit less rosy picture of the fellowship than I imagined/hoped. I still think UW is the right choice here, but you should probably just dispel of 9th Circuit dreams until they become a possibility once you're in law school and miraculously end up top of your class.

Agreed with all of the above that it would be ludicrous to go to UM at sticker or close to it. No access to some ill-defined prestige is worth that. Save your money, enjoy staying in your target market, and work your butt off so you do more than get interviews for firms during OCI. Interviews are great, but offers are what you should really be concerned about, which will require top notch grades at UW. But even if you end up at a smaller firm following graduation, not drowning in debt will #feelsgoodman.

Makes sense. My bad for not better specifying — I was sorta under the impression that all 1L SAs operated like this (no guaranteed 2L SA), but some quick due diligence seems to indicate otherwise. Also was a little lax by saying the previous fellows only received interviews — they all received offers as well. But that doesn't make what you're saying here to be any less true.

I think UW is the clear option here unless Dean Z gives me a near full-ride. So crossing my fingers for that!

rozes wrote:

existentialcrisis wrote:

trebekismyhero wrote:

existentialcrisis wrote:I feel like I'd need to know more about how the guaranteed 1L SA thing works, and if they usually extend 2l SA offers to recipients (regardless of grades).

I'm pretty hesitant to recommend UW to someone who's number one priority seems to be landing an Article III clerkship (although how 0Ls know they want this I'll never understand) and biglaw of some kind.

If OP said his priorities were Seattle Biglaw > Seattle small firm > working somewhere else, then I'd be all for UW, but I'm pretty skeptical here.

Agree with all of this. I still would stick with UW over UM at sticker (which is the likely case if OP gets off WL), but need a little more info and background

Yea, I want to clarify that I absolutely don't think OP should go to sticker. But if those are OPs goals then going to law school this year is probably not a good idea.

Interesting — didn't expect this pushback on UW at 50k COA, tbh (though I guess it's more in the context of FC goals than cost). Goals are FC/BL simply because while I think know what I would like to do (environmental/energy law), I would still like to go to a school that doesn't preclude a prestigious job and high salary in case that becomes important over the course of law school. I would be fine with Seattle small firm if it did come to that — staying close to family and friends is important. The opportunity for something on the 9th circ, though, is a nice thought.

Having spoken to former fellows, 1L SA doesn't guarantee a 2L SA, but lowers the academic bar for OCI — contingent on adequate performance. (e.g., if grades cut was 3.4, a fellow with a 3.2 might still get an interview.)

This will probably all be moot — highly doubt I would get off of UM's WL with significant $$$. Just prepping my mindset if it did come to that, as I do like Michigan.

Much appreciated to all of you for your comments!

My pushback was almost entirely due to your stated goal of biglaw, which UW gives you a very poor chance at. If your number one priority is to stay in Washington (and you'd be open to biglaw if your grades allow for it), then I think UW with a full ride is an excellent option. If your number one priority is to start at big firm (and you'd simply prefer that the firm be in Seattle), then UW isn't a good choice at any cost, and you should retake for $$ in the T14.

I am highly skeptical that a median student would be offered a chance to return to the 1L firm.

existentialcrisis wrote:I am highly skeptical that a median student would be offered a chance to return to the 1L firm.

I'm sure this is mostly firm-dependent, as some explicitly do not offer 1Ls an opportunity to return without going through interviews and reconsideration based on 1L grades, etc. But many firms that do 1L SA programs leave returning as a possibility, and I would imagine how well you do during that SA and how well you work with the attorneys at that firm could be enough to overcome median grades that might not otherwise be good enough. Given the particular circumstances here, it definitely sounds like the firm is reserving the right to reject you if your grades aren't good enough, but if the firm does offer 1Ls a chance to return at a 3.2 vice 3.4 (which is likely just napkin math of how selective that firm is combined with the quoted fellow's estimation of how much leeway is given to fellows), it's probably because they made a good impression on the hiring committee at that firm during the summer and got an offer to return because of their summer work.

1L grades play a huge part at OCI and during 2L hiring for sure, but when we're talking about chances at a law firm where you've actually already worked with the firm and the attorneys responsible for putting together the 2L SA class, seeing a familiar name/face could make for a much easier decision because they already know you and presumably like you and the work you did. They will probably look at your 3.2 and it'll make it tougher to offer you a position, but if you did good work for the firm already and were a pleasant person to work with, I'd have to imagine the thought process behind the hiring decision changes not insignificantly.

UVA2B wrote:

existentialcrisis wrote:I am highly skeptical that a median student would be offered a chance to return to the 1L firm.

I'm sure this is mostly firm-dependent, as some explicitly do not offer 1Ls an opportunity to return without going through interviews and reconsideration based on 1L grades, etc. But many firms that do 1L SA programs leave returning as a possibility, and I would imagine how well you do during that SA and how well you work with the attorneys at that firm could be enough to overcome median grades that might not otherwise be good enough. Given the particular circumstances here, it definitely sounds like the firm is reserving the right to reject you if your grades aren't good enough, but if the firm does offer 1Ls a chance to return at a 3.2 vice 3.4 (which is likely just napkin math of how selective that firm is combined with the quoted fellow's estimation of how much leeway is given to fellows), it's probably because they made a good impression on the hiring committee at that firm during the summer and got an offer to return because of their summer work.

1L grades play a huge part at OCI and during 2L hiring for sure, but when we're talking about chances at a law firm where you've actually already worked with the firm and the attorneys responsible for putting together the 2L SA class, seeing a familiar name/face could make for a much easier decision because they already know you and presumably like you and the work you did. They will probably look at your 3.2 and it'll make it tougher to offer you a position, but if you did good work for the firm already and were a pleasant person to work with, I'd have to imagine the thought process behind the hiring decision changes not insignificantly.

The other thing to note is that the explicit goal of the Gregoire Fellowship is to improve diversity in law, especially BL. The firms that participate in this fellowship with guaranteed 1L SA tend to be highly selective--they're the powerhouses of the NW--but they also seem to be genuinely committed to the goals of the program. I don't have any information on actual outcomes, but the fellowship isn't given out for strict academics, and firms know this when they participate.

UVA2B wrote:

existentialcrisis wrote:I am highly skeptical that a median student would be offered a chance to return to the 1L firm.

I'm sure this is mostly firm-dependent, as some explicitly do not offer 1Ls an opportunity to return without going through interviews and reconsideration based on 1L grades, etc. But many firms that do 1L SA programs leave returning as a possibility, and I would imagine how well you do during that SA and how well you work with the attorneys at that firm could be enough to overcome median grades that might not otherwise be good enough. Given the particular circumstances here, it definitely sounds like the firm is reserving the right to reject you if your grades aren't good enough, but if the firm does offer 1Ls a chance to return at a 3.2 vice 3.4 (which is likely just napkin math of how selective that firm is combined with the quoted fellow's estimation of how much leeway is given to fellows), it's probably because they made a good impression on the hiring committee at that firm during the summer and got an offer to return because of their summer work.

1L grades play a huge part at OCI and during 2L hiring for sure, but when we're talking about chances at a law firm where you've actually already worked with the firm and the attorneys responsible for putting together the 2L SA class, seeing a familiar name/face could make for a much easier decision because they already know you and presumably like you and the work you did. They will probably look at your 3.2 and it'll make it tougher to offer you a position, but if you did good work for the firm already and were a pleasant person to work with, I'd have to imagine the thought process behind the hiring decision changes not insignificantly.

Yea I mean I get how 1L SAs work, and I'm sure this helps the fellows' odds of landing a job with the firm a good amount. The question (assuming OP's goals are what I think they are) is whether attending UW with this fellowship offers GOOD odds of landing a big firm gig?

UW 2017 grad here. Gregoire Fellowship started during the 2014-2015 cycle when I was already a 1L. The fellows have far better odds at biglaw than most of their classmates, even if they are outside the top 20% of their class. This is what I've gathered from speaking to the first batch of fellows and a couple of the current 1L batch. That summer SA gig really does help, even if you don't end up at the same firm. The people who were at Perkins 1L returned for Perkins 2L, and I know one of them has fairly similar grades to mine (lower end of the top third of the class, journal but not law review).

Seattle is also a very exclusive market. They have turned their nose up at people from top 10 schools before absent other extra factors (ties, being top of your class, prior relevant work experience if you're a lateral, etc.). Michigan actually might close more doors than it opens if Seattle is the end-game, especially for right after graduation or a clerkship.

Two of my classmates graduating with me have district court and ninth circuit clerkships lined up. Two others off the top of my head have district court clerkships lined up. Several others have state supreme court clerkships, and some of the current state supreme court clerks I know there from UW have recently moved over to federal district court and the ninth circuit.

In terms of Seattle biglaw, UW with Gregoire is a much better choice than Michigan absent a huge scholarship boost and some other extra factor that you bring to the table.

For federal clerkships, I defer on the criteria aspect to the other more experienced voices in this thread, but as for UW students landing them, they can do it, they usually just need to be very highly ranked, based on my observations of my classmates. Also, a lot of the judges in the district court in Seattle (W.D. Wash.) tend to want people with a year or more of experience under their belt, and will just drop announcements on OSCAR 6 months in advance of the expected start-date, so that can be hard to anticipate. (It's driving me crazy since I'm working on applying for clerkships myself.) This and the folks mentioned above going to state supreme court first can make the numbers look lower. I don't think UW is some secret hot-shot clerkship placement machine, but we're a little bit better than what the ABA report might show, especially for people coming to clerkships 1+ years after graduation.

I get the draw to prestige at Michigan and I would be similarly tempted, but you've landed yourself a pretty sweet situation that puts you ahead of a ton of students, including many at schools like Michigan, and you'll be leaps and bounds ahead of most of your UW classmates. And I can tell you as a recently graduated 3L that looking at my debt load right now is even more unpleasant than I anticipated it would be when I entered law school.

Take the money and guaranteed job, dude. Take it!

2016 UW grad and I practice in Seattle. If you want Seattle biglaw, I would take UW at even money with Michigan.

The big incentive for people to go to T-13 over UW when Seattle is desired is the ability to place in non-PNW market BIglaw, primarily NY. This has value if you are taking on 200k debt in case you can't land a spot in Seattle BL. But for 50k COA? I would take 50k UW over most T-13, including Michigan, at even money.

What you have is a great opportunity and I think you'd do yourself a huge disservice if you chose Michigan thinking it's going to give you a leg up here.

Sidenote: While typically only 20% of UW grads get biglaw, midlaw is real in Seattle. My research and anecdotal experiences indicate that UW grads are very competitive for these positions. The firm I currently work at starts associates at 70K.

19% of UW co'16 grads made biglaw or fed clerk. There isn't some giant stash of people who don't have either at graduation and somehow get it later. Just clarifying that for 0Ls. I'm sure it happens at the same rate as any other school.

With that said, if someone prefers Seattle small law to NYC biglaw, then this fellowship sounds like a no-brainer over the lower T14. But it sounds like OP is biglaw or bust, in which case it's important to remember that lateraling is a thing for PNW natives, so the fallback option of NYC biglaw holds immense value for you.

I would pay about $125k for the lower T14. Just my personal threshold. If you're biglaw or bust, take a lower T14 package if it doesn't encumber you more than that. If you can't get a T14 deal like that, then a dirt cheap top regional plus 1L SA is an excellent opportunity.

Thanks all — these insights were all tremendously helpful!