Best Law School for Texas? Forum

[mcflooter06]

Really, I'm in NO way advocating UT over SMU, but its a choice that shouldn't be ignored. I think it is really up to the person. I chose UT for its more national placement, because I want a clerkship after law school, and it carries a bigger name across the entire STATE, not just Dallas. Though, I honestly want nothing more than to work in Dallas.

[RVP11]

Care to mention a single way in which I'm wrong and then back it up?

I'm relaying what is pretty established knowledge.

You don't need special knowledge of the inner workings of the Dallas legal market to know that UT gives you a better shot than SMU at Dallas BigLaw or that nearly every market paying job in Dallas is at a V100 or NLJ250 firm.

[RVP11]

Really, I'm in NO way advocating UT over SMU, but its a choice that shouldn't be ignored. I think it is really up to the person. I chose UT for its more national placement, because I want a clerkship after lawl skool, and it carries a bigger name across the entire STATE, not just Dallas. Though, I honestly want nothing more than to work in Dallas.

You made the right choice. Even for Dallas.

[kalvano]

Really, I'm in NO way advocating UT over SMU, but its a choice that shouldn't be ignored. I think it is really up to the person. I chose UT for its more national placement, because I want a clerkship after lawl skool, and it carries a bigger name across the entire STATE, not just Dallas. Though, I honestly want nothing more than to work in Dallas.

This.

But if you never want to leave Dallas, then SMU is a better choice.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

If you know Dallas is where you want to be, and will not want to leave, then yes, SMU is better.

Every single lawyer I have talked to in Dallas about law school disagrees with this assessment.

[kalvano]

I'm relaying what is pretty established knowledge.

Apparently not, since people familiar with Dallas and the legal market in Dallas disagree with you.

Are you from here? Any ties? Worked here?

Dallas is a unique legal market.

[Sangiovese]

Alumni base is not what matters here. How deep big Dallas firms are digging into your school is what matters here. Firms in Dallas are undoubtedly taking people from lower in the class at UT than they are at SMU.

And your basis for that statement is...?

I'm really interested in seeing a response - because what you just said is not true.

Big firms (in Dallas, and anywhere) dig deeper into the class at UT than they do at SMU. What's your basis for it being otherwise? Every BigLaw statistic I've ever seen shows UT with a higher % going into BigLaw. This isn't even a disputed point on T-L-S...except apparently when you get a bunch of zero Ls in the same thread.

Having a strong alumni base definitely helps. But we're comparing UT to SMU - does UT not also have a strong alumni base in Dallas? BigLaw hiring is primarily done through OCI. Every big Dallas firm interviews at and hires from UT. UT is also a significantly better school than SMU. To infer that Dallas firms therefore interview deeper into the class at UT is perfectly natural. And it's correct.

OK... since you refuse to back your position with anything other than "because I said so" I'll go ahead and toss out some numbers from offices in Dallas. Thanks to Aberzombie1892 who compiled these and posted them in a different thread.

For example let's look at the firm Jones Day:
There are 38 SMU grads that work for Jones Day in Dallas
There are 39 UT grads that work for Jones Day in Dallas

Another example, Baker Botts:
31 SMU in Dallas
32 UT in Dallas

Another example, Haynes and Boone:
38 SMU in Dallas
14 UT in Dallas

Another example, Thompson & Knight:
14 SMU in Dallas
51 UT in Dallas

Another example, Sidley Austin:
7 SMU in Dallas
6 UT in Dallas


Aside from Thompson & Knight (favors UT) and Haynes and Boone (favors SMU) it looks like pretty equal representation between SMU and UT in the big firms in Dallas. So what exactly leads you to say that the firms "dig deeper" into the UT class than SMU?

Generic stats saying that more of the UT class get biglaw don't mean squat when the discussion is focused on one city. And in this one city, SMU places dead even with UT.

It is debatable which school is the better choice if you want to work in Dallas... but to come in and spout off nonsense about placement opportunities in the city with zero data to back it up is pretty... well... crappy

[RVP11]

As has been stated in this thread earlier, UT grads have options in multiple cities. SMU places primarily into Dallas. Showing raw numbers from Dallas firms does nothing but tend to prove MY point. That UT places throughout Texas and even outside Texas yet still manages to get those numbers into Dallas firms just goes to show that Dallas firms are digging deeper into UT classes.

Notice I never once said that UT places MORE people into Dallas BigLaw or into Dallas generally. I honestly don't know that. What I do know is that it has better placement power, meaning you can be lower in the class and get the same interviews.

[mcflooter06]

Well, hey, lets agree to disagree. I don't really feel like in getting an internet cupcake fight. But really, Dallas functions much differently, and it is very difficult for people who are not at least familiar with Texas to understand how it works. We take care of our own, simple as that.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Alumni base is not what matters here. How deep big Dallas firms are digging into your school is what matters here. Firms in Dallas are undoubtedly taking people from lower in the class at UT than they are at SMU.

And your basis for that statement is...?

I'm really interested in seeing a response - because what you just said is not true.

Big firms (in Dallas, and anywhere) dig deeper into the class at UT than they do at SMU. What's your basis for it being otherwise? Every BigLaw statistic I've ever seen shows UT with a higher % going into BigLaw. This isn't even a disputed point on T-L-S...except apparently when you get a bunch of zero Ls in the same thread.

Having a strong alumni base definitely helps. But we're comparing UT to SMU - does UT not also have a strong alumni base in Dallas? BigLaw hiring is primarily done through OCI. Every big Dallas firm interviews at and hires from UT. UT is also a significantly better school than SMU. To infer that Dallas firms therefore interview deeper into the class at UT is perfectly natural. And it's correct.

OK... since you refuse to back your position with anything other than "because I said so" I'll go ahead and toss out some numbers from offices in Dallas. Thanks to Aberzombie1892 who compiled these and posted them in a different thread.

For example let's look at the firm Jones Day:
There are 38 SMU grads that work for Jones Day in Dallas
There are 39 UT grads that work for Jones Day in Dallas

Another example, Baker Botts:
31 SMU in Dallas
32 UT in Dallas

Another example, Haynes and Boone:
38 SMU in Dallas
14 UT in Dallas

Another example, Thompson & Knight:
14 SMU in Dallas
51 UT in Dallas

Another example, Sidley Austin:
7 SMU in Dallas
6 UT in Dallas


Aside from Thompson & Knight (favors UT) and Haynes and Boone (favors SMU) it looks like pretty equal representation between SMU and UT in the big firms in Dallas. So what exactly leads you to say that the firms "dig deeper" into the UT class than SMU?

Generic stats saying that more of the UT class get biglaw don't mean squat when the discussion is focused on one city. And in this one city, SMU places dead even with UT.

It is debatable which school is the better choice if you want to work in Dallas... but to come in and spout off nonsense about placement opportunities in the city with zero data to back it up is pretty... well... crappy

SMU does great in Dallas no doubt, but SMU students are much more likely to stay in or around Dallas. UT students spread across the state (and country). Without talking to someone on a Dallas biglaw hiring committee (or someone from either CSO) to know what your placement needs to be to be competitive at these firms, the numbers alone don't tell us near the whole story.

I have sincere doubts that median at SMU vs median at UT is equivalent in competitiveness for Dallas biglaw.

[mcflooter06]

As has been stated in this thread earlier, UT grads have options in multiple cities. SMU places primarily into Dallas. Showing raw numbers from Dallas firms does nothing but tend to prove MY point. That UT places throughout Texas and even outside Texas yet still manages to get those numbers into Dallas firms just goes to show that Dallas firms are digging deeper into UT classes.

Notice I never once said that UT places MORE people into Dallas BigLaw or into Dallas generally. I honestly don't know that. What I do know is that it has better placement power, meaning you can be lower in the class and get the same interviews.

Now that sounds very plausible. Glad we could find some common ground

They seem to place the same AMOUNT of people in BigLaw, but lower people in the class at UT will have the opportunity to get biglaw, but the top kids at UT tend to go elsewhere.

[kalvano]

I don't see why you would stay in Texas if you are in the top portion of the UT class.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

I don't see why you would stay in Texas if you are in the top portion of the UT class.

Because people love living in Texas?

[RVP11]

I don't see why you would stay in Texas if you are in the top portion of the UT class.

I visited UT before I chose to attend my T10. This was prior to the economy really tanking.

It was generally accepted by students at UT that Dallas and Houston were almost like the "fallback" markets for people at UT. If you were only median, you had to go to Dallas or Houston. If you had stellar grades, you could crack NYC/DC/California or Austin.

Again, this tends to show that UT has better placement power than SMU.

[RickyRoe]

If you want to go into Big Law, go to UT. If you want to go into Big Law in Dallas in particular, go to SMU.

Top 10% at UT vs. Top 10% at SMU; maybe a firm takes the UT grad maybe not, it could go either way. However, if you are looking at law schools which school do you think is going to give you a better chance of making it to the top 10%. Like you said, UT is a much higher ranked school and thus it would be more difficult to make top 10% there than at SMU.

To sum up my point, if two equally ranked candidates applied for the same Dallas Big Law job they would have have an equal chance of getting the job, but a 0L has a much better chance of finishing at the top of his class at SMU than UT so SMU has the advantage in my opinion.

[RVP11]

If you want to go into Big Law, go to UT. If you want to go into Big Law in Dallas in particular, go to SMU.

Top 10% at UT vs. Top 10% at SMU; maybe a firm takes the UT grad maybe not, it could go either way. However, if you are looking at law schools which school do you think is going to give you a better chance of making it to the top 10%. Like you said, UT is a much higher ranked school and thus it would be more difficult to make top 10% there than at SMU.

To sum up my point, if two equally ranked candidates applied for the same Dallas Big Law job they would have have an equal chance of getting the job, but a noel has a much better chance of finishing at the top of his class at SMU than UT so SMU has the advantage in my opinion.

This is not good reasoning. Don't assume anything about the relative ease of getting any given class rank at a school.

And if you compared top 25% at SMU to top 25% at UT, it wouldn't be so flattering for SMU.

[Sangiovese]

As has been stated in this thread earlier, UT grads have options in multiple cities. SMU places primarily into Dallas. Showing raw numbers from Dallas firms does nothing but tend to prove MY point. That UT places throughout Texas and even outside Texas yet still manages to get those numbers into Dallas firms just goes to show that Dallas firms are digging deeper into UT classes.

And NOBODY in this thread has ever said anything different about UT giving more options outside of Dallas.

As for being able to place equivalent numbers in Dallas while also placing in other cities.... don't forget that UT's class size is double SMUs.

The NLJ250 report shows UT placing 8-9% more of its class in biglaw. Nobody is doubting that.

But if you think that UT having a 9% placement advantage nationally translates to a big advantage in SMUs home city then you are really out to lunch.

But I expect you'll ignore this and continue to fall back on "everyone knows" rather than showing anything to support your argument. Hope you don't plan on litigation as a career path.

And for what it's worth, here's a link to a pretty picture that shows how the various Texas law firms place. Hope it helps those who are looking for real information rather than just an opportunity to spout their opinion.

http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/regional_TX.pdf

[Bustang]

Alumni base is not what matters here. How deep big Dallas firms are digging into your school is what matters here. Firms in Dallas are undoubtedly taking people from lower in the class at UT than they are at SMU.

And your basis for that statement is...?

I'm really interested in seeing a response - because what you just said is not true.

Big firms (in Dallas, and anywhere) dig deeper into the class at UT than they do at SMU. What's your basis for it being otherwise? Every BigLaw statistic I've ever seen shows UT with a higher % going into BigLaw. This isn't even a disputed point on T-L-S...except apparently when you get a bunch of zero Ls in the same thread.

Having a strong alumni base definitely helps. But we're comparing UT to SMU - does UT not also have a strong alumni base in Dallas? BigLaw hiring is primarily done through OCI. Every big Dallas firm interviews at and hires from UT. UT is also a significantly better school than SMU. To infer that Dallas firms therefore interview deeper into the class at UT is perfectly natural. And it's correct.

OK... since you refuse to back your position with anything other than "because I said so" I'll go ahead and toss out some numbers from offices in Dallas. Thanks to Aberzombie1892 who compiled these and posted them in a different thread.

For example let's look at the firm Jones Day:
There are 38 SMU grads that work for Jones Day in Dallas
There are 39 UT grads that work for Jones Day in Dallas

Another example, Baker Botts:
31 SMU in Dallas
32 UT in Dallas

Another example, Haynes and Boone:
38 SMU in Dallas
14 UT in Dallas

Another example, Thompson & Knight:
14 SMU in Dallas
51 UT in Dallas

Another example, Sidley Austin:
7 SMU in Dallas
6 UT in Dallas


Aside from Thompson & Knight (favors UT) and Haynes and Boone (favors SMU) it looks like pretty equal representation between SMU and UT in the big firms in Dallas. So what exactly leads you to say that the firms "dig deeper" into the UT class than SMU?

Generic stats saying that more of the UT class get biglaw don't mean squat when the discussion is focused on one city. And in this one city, SMU places dead even with UT.

It is debatable which school is the better choice if you want to work in Dallas... but to come in and spout off nonsense about placement opportunities in the city with zero data to back it up is pretty... well... crappy

Im curious what the #'s are like in Houston (comparing UT grads with U of H grads). I'm willing to wager $1 that they're similar.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

If you want to go into Big Law, go to UT. If you want to go into Big Law in Dallas in particular, go to SMU.

Top 10% at UT vs. Top 10% at SMU; maybe a firm takes the UT grad maybe not, it could go either way. However, if you are looking at law schools which school do you think is going to give you a better chance of making it to the top 10%. Like you said, UT is a much higher ranked school and thus it would be more difficult to make top 10% there than at SMU.

To sum up my point, if two equally ranked candidates applied for the same Dallas Big Law job they would have have an equal chance of getting the job, but a noel has a much better chance of finishing at the top of his class at SMU than UT so SMU has the advantage in my opinion.

Trying to predict grades based on school rank FTL.

And top 10% from SMU or UT are both in good shape for biglaw in Dallas. What is more helpful to know is how top 30% compare, how do median compare? etc.

[Sangiovese]

I have sincere doubts that median at SMU vs median at UT is equivalent in competitiveness for Dallas biglaw.

I doubt that median at either school has much of an opportunity at big law, in Dallas or anywhere else.

[kalvano]

I don't see why you would stay in Texas if you are in the top portion of the UT class.

Because people love living in Texas?

Which again validates another of my theories on people.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

I don't see why you would stay in Texas if you are in the top portion of the UT class.

Because people love living in Texas?

Which again validates another of my theories on people.

That people want to stay in places where they love to live?

[RVP11]

And for what it's worth, here's a link to a pretty picture that shows how the various Texas law firms place. Hope it helps those who are looking for real information rather than just an opportunity to spout their opinion.

http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/regional_TX.pdf

You might be misreading that graph in a fundamental way.

It's not ranking the schools based on placement in that specific region.

It's taking national placement rankings and then grouping schools by region. Get it?

[kalvano]

I don't see why you would stay in Texas if you are in the top portion of the UT class.

Because people love living in Texas?

Which again validates another of my theories on people.

That people want to stay in places where they love to live?

Not quite so flattering.

[RVP11]

I have sincere doubts that median at SMU vs median at UT is equivalent in competitiveness for Dallas biglaw.

I doubt that median at either school has much of an opportunity at big law, in Dallas or anywhere else.

Probably true ITE.

Top 25% is probably good place for comparison. Around there I'd say UT is going to beat SMU in terms of getting you into screening interviews with Dallas firms.