Top Law Schools

"I am due to graduate from my undergrad degree from a state university at age 19 (BS) (I currently stand with a 3.86 GPA and a 163 LSAT), and that is obviously not the average age for 1Ls. "

I am concerned about whether my age disparity will be a hinderance to law school admission or to my success as a law student. If so, would it be ideal to continue with a masters or work until I have gained more experience in my undergraduate field (business)?

It won't matter for admissions, at all.

Law school isn't very fun when you can't drink legally. You would have basically no social life at most schools. Take a couple of years to get some work experience. I really don't know how well a 20 year old would do at OCI.

Also, retake.

Work experience would only help you; plus you should probably retake the LSAT if you want to attend a law school that's actually worth attending.

Also, if you graduated college at age 19 I'd guess you haven't had much time to actually enjoy life. Go do that while you still can.

fmcasas wrote:"I am due to graduate from my undergrad degree from a state university at age 19 (BS) (I currently stand with a 3.86 GPA and a 163 LSAT), and that is obviously not the average age for 1Ls. "

I am concerned about whether my age disparity will be a hinderance to law school admission or to my success as a law student. If so, would it be ideal to continue with a masters or work until I have gained more experience in my undergraduate field (business)?

As far as chances go, I wouldn't worry. Law school is a numbers game; if you have the numbers, you'll be okay. Your numbers are not terrible, so you will most likely get into a decent law school with a decent scholarship. I have similar numbers and I did okay. You probably should retake though, especially if this was your first time taking the test with that 163. A GPA like yours plus a few extra points on that LSAT can be the difference between scraping your way into WUSTL like I did, and getting a full ride.

I think right now you are a fine candidate for law school, especially if you retake. The issue here is not can you go, but should you go. You probably just don't have the experience necessary to say whether or not the three year commitment is worth it. If I were you, I would volunteer at your local prosecutor or public defender's office, and see how you like it. If you love it, then go for it next year! If you don't, then I'll accept thanks in any combination of six packs of beer and money for saving you from 3 years of a wasteful commitment.

As far as your age hindering you as a law student, I think that age for something like law school is definitely a factor. But not as much of a factor as, say, study habits or intelligence. And age only matters as far as maturity goes. It's definitely common for someone who is 19 to lack the maturity that something like law school would require, but I've met 19 year olds that are more mature than 30 year olds. So if you happen to be a very mature 19 year old, it shouldn't hurt you very much. Unfortunately, only you can know this; I cant.

The short version - While going to law school now or soon would probably not be the worst thing in the world, I would advise you to wait and spend time retaking the LSAT and getting relevant work experience in the meantime.

I just turned 21. I slightly under performed my numbers. I've seen people on LSN who were young who had the same problem. OCI will also be harder. The only reason I'm going to LS this year is because I have full time managerial work experience, which I hope will cancel out my age a bit.

I'd recommend sitting out 2 years. You'll still be young but have 2 years of WE.

I can't give any advice as far as age for admissions goes but I would definitely recommend not going straight to law school. Get some work experience. And most importantly spend several months studying and taking practice LSATs. Retake the LSATs just to see if you can increase your score. Reevaluate where you're at after the work experience and retake. Like someone said (in a way), not being able to drink in law school will be the annoying as hell.

Sit out. Retake. Get some WE. You have plenty of time to go to law school.

163 is going to hurt your admissions chances regardless of your age. Shoot for 5+ points improvement.

jkhalfa wrote:Work experience would only help you; plus you should probably retake the LSAT if you want to attend a law school that's actually worth attending.

Also, if you graduated college at age 19 I'd guess you haven't had much time to actually enjoy life. Go do that while you still can.

for the love of gawd to all these things

minnbills wrote:It won't matter for admissions, at all.

And where did you come to this brilliant, conclusive decision?

A 19-year-old will face a major disadvantage with many adcomms. It's common sense, which you probably lack

SFrost wrote:

minnbills wrote:It won't matter for admissions, at all.

And where did you come to this brilliant, conclusive decision?

A 19-year-old will face a major disadvantage with many adcomms. It's common sense, which you probably lack

I'd imagine it'd matter slightly, but less than a single point on the lsat or .1 for GPA. Obviously it matters different amounts to different schools.

That being said, dude... attitude. Don't be such an ass.

Retake retake retake. Don't apply until you make it into the 170s. You've got even less of a reason to not retake than people who at least feel like they're getting old and want to get to law school. Don't waste your GPA.

Why would you even want to go at 19?

Retake. Most adcomms outside of HYS and Boalt won't care, but employers will.

It won't matter for getting in to law school, but honestly it would be stupid to go so young. You will do better in law school, and be better equipped to actually be a lawyer, after a few years.

take time off

retake

Join the military and get the GI Bill

You'll be 23 when you finish. You could easily save 45k cash and have about 120k in GI Bill money. That's including housing stipend of about 60k and tuition money at 60k.

You will have served your country and will have learned lessons you can't learn elsewhere.

If I were you this is what I would do. 30 years from now you'll look back and wish you had done something like this.

and not for the money... just for the basic notion of having served your country

Edited: Going to PM this to you because I think the person I referenced is a TLS-er and I don't want him to read this. Ha.

I'm 20 and I'll be 23 when I graduate from Law School, so I'm on a very similar boat. I'm working on my network over the summer, and I've spoken to a couple of people in the business about my age. The general feel I get is that my age will matter a bit at first, but it won't cause me much trouble long term if I don't do anything stupid.

I think the biggest issue with getting a JD earlier than normal is that you might be missing out on a lot if you go to Law School before you turn 21. I come from a different country with a different Culture, so I burned through my "wild phase" earlier than most born Americans.

SFrost wrote:

minnbills wrote:It won't matter for admissions, at all.

And where did you come to this brilliant, conclusive decision?

A 19-year-old will face a major disadvantage with many adcomms. It's common sense, which you probably lack

Congrats! You are one of the very few people who have noticed the "applicants by age" button on LSN! These idiots try to preach LSAT/GPA, LSAT/GPA, ad naseum. I'm glad that you (and I, I might add) have noticed that the strongest correlation is age.

scoobers wrote:http://lawschoolnumbers.com/proud2b19

I wonder to what extent the amount of AP credits hurt them at HYS (with the semi-holistic review that they do). Certainly somewhere like Yale, where profs review the application, having almost half your college credits be AP credits isn't going to look very impressive. Obviously there's a correlation with age, in that that candidate finished college so young because they had so many AP credits, but I don't know if it's age they object to rather than the academic path. If that makes any sense.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

scoobers wrote:http://lawschoolnumbers.com/proud2b19

I wonder to what extent the amount of AP credits hurt them at HYS (with the semi-holistic review that they do). Certainly somewhere like Yale, where profs review the application, having almost half your college credits be AP credits isn't going to look very impressive. Obviously there's a correlation with age, in that that candidate finished college so young because they had so many AP credits, but I don't know if it's age they object to rather than the academic path. If that makes any sense.

I think she probably trumpeted her age a bit, as if she should get into HYS just because she finished college at 19 ("Will be attending top 25 LS this fall at age 19."). I can see that making a pretty entitled/shitty PS/250.

Having that many credits AP probably means her GPA isn't that valid. It would be like if you transferred and your original GPA didn't matter anymore. It's not that hard to get good grades in your degree classes, which was probably most of what she took.

Yeah, I think profs look askance at someone getting a college degree for which only half the credits actually came from college courses. But I also agree that making your PS/application shtick about "I'm going to law school at 19!" isn't really going to help you.