Top Law Schools

Haven't seen too much on the subject. I know that law school adcoms don't care about where you went as long as your GPA is desirable. And I also see alot of folks here agree that it if it doesn't matter then it really is negligible at OCI. However, I just discovered I can search for current associates in my market area at all the big firms and see where they went and what they did in UG and Law school.

After doing about two hours of stalking I found one single associate at Jones Day who attended my UG... all the other 125+ at Baker Botts, Akin Gump, Haynes Boone et. al. were from the big states schools/ private uni's.

If I want to even keep the possibility of biglaw on the table should I transfer to a school that has more alums at the firms or is it more likely that it is a matter of self-selection? I could imagine that people from my mediocre college also happen to, normally, do mediocre at law school and simply don't try to get into biglaw. But I'm afraid that adds fuel to the "prestige" fire and would work against me.

Liberal Theory wrote:Haven't seen too much on the subject. I know that law school adcoms don't care about where you went as long as your GPA is desirable. And I also see alot of folks here agree that it if it doesn't matter then it really is negligible at OCI. However, I just discovered I can search for current associates in my market area at all the big firms and see where they went and what they did in UG and Law school.

After doing about two hours of stalking I found one single associate at Jones Day who attended my UG... all the other 125+ at Baker Botts, Akin Gump, Haynes Boone et. al. were from the big states schools/ private uni's.

If I want to even keep the possibility of biglaw on the table should I transfer to a school that has more alums at the firms or is it more likely that it is a matter of self-selection? I could imagine that people from my mediocre college also happen to, normally, do mediocre at law school and simply don't try to get into biglaw. But I'm afraid that adds fuel to the "prestige" fire and would work against me.

I wouldn't worry about this at all. If you're happy at your school then stay there.

I would wager that it's a matter of few people from less reputable schools getting good grades and good test scores and going to top schools because of those 2 factors

I went to a shitty undergrad and it wasn't really an issue. Of course, going to hyp or other highly represented schools is nice, it certainly isn't worth transferring over for that specific reason.

Liberal Theory wrote:Haven't seen too much on the subject. I know that law school adcoms don't care about where you went as long as your GPA is desirable. And I also see alot of folks here agree that it if it doesn't matter then it really is negligible at OCI. However, I just discovered I can search for current associates in my market area at all the big firms and see where they went and what they did in UG and Law school.

After doing about two hours of stalking I found one single associate at Jones Day who attended my UG... all the other 125+ at Baker Botts, Akin Gump, Haynes Boone et. al. were from the big states schools/ private uni's.

If I want to even keep the possibility of biglaw on the table should I transfer to a school that has more alums at the firms or is it more likely that it is a matter of self-selection? I could imagine that people from my mediocre college also happen to, normally, do mediocre at law school and simply don't try to get into biglaw. But I'm afraid that adds fuel to the "prestige" fire and would work against me.

If you're this set on prestige chasing now, I think you will be a fine fit in biglaw.
Please tell us why you want biglaw and what you know about it other than the paycheck.

Liberal Theory wrote:Haven't seen too much on the subject. I know that law school adcoms don't care about where you went as long as your GPA is desirable. And I also see alot of folks here agree that it if it doesn't matter then it really is negligible at OCI. However, I just discovered I can search for current associates in my market area at all the big firms and see where they went and what they did in UG and Law school.

After doing about two hours of stalking I found one single associate at Jones Day who attended my UG... all the other 125+ at Baker Botts, Akin Gump, Haynes Boone et. al. were from the big states schools/ private uni's.

If I want to even keep the possibility of biglaw on the table should I transfer to a school that has more alums at the firms or is it more likely that it is a matter of self-selection? I could imagine that people from my mediocre college also happen to, normally, do mediocre at law school and simply don't try to get into biglaw. But I'm afraid that adds fuel to the "prestige" fire and would work against me.

Don't transfer. Put your energy elsewhere.

Npret wrote:

Liberal Theory wrote:Haven't seen too much on the subject. I know that law school adcoms don't care about where you went as long as your GPA is desirable. And I also see alot of folks here agree that it if it doesn't matter then it really is negligible at OCI. However, I just discovered I can search for current associates in my market area at all the big firms and see where they went and what they did in UG and Law school.

After doing about two hours of stalking I found one single associate at Jones Day who attended my UG... all the other 125+ at Baker Botts, Akin Gump, Haynes Boone et. al. were from the big states schools/ private uni's.

If I want to even keep the possibility of biglaw on the table should I transfer to a school that has more alums at the firms or is it more likely that it is a matter of self-selection? I could imagine that people from my mediocre college also happen to, normally, do mediocre at law school and simply don't try to get into biglaw. But I'm afraid that adds fuel to the "prestige" fire and would work against me.

If you're this set on prestige chasing now, I think you will be a fine fit in biglaw.
Please tell us why you want biglaw and what you know about it other than the paycheck.

I simply want to keep it as an option. I have read enough about the 70+ hour workweeks and toxic associate-partner dynamics alot of firms have. If I ever get the opportunity to clerk or do something else that would elevate my future opportunities (BigFed/ Judge/ etc) I would take it over biglaw. However, I am open to biglaw because by the time I would be graduating LS my fiancée would be in residency (she will be graduating from med school same time I will be done with LS) so she would be working similar hours. So if we are both going to be in considerable debt and hardly home- might as well go biglaw and quit it when we're ready to settle down together and she doesn't have to work as much. Also I am a prestige whore, I guess. And potentially facing 6 figures in debt is something that necessitates biglaw. I'd rather be an biglaw slave for two years than relying on PSLF in this administration.

Thanks for asking.

Also, does anyone have any insight on why most of the biglaw associates have degrees in finance/ business/ engineering? Could it be disadvantageous to have a liberal arts degree for that position?

Liberal Theory wrote:
Also, does anyone have any insight on why most of the biglaw associates have degrees in finance/ business/ engineering? Could it be disadvantageous to have a liberal arts degree for that position?

1) Can you provide a source on "most of the biglaw associates" having degrees in "finance/business/engineering," because I don't think that statement is even true. Perhaps on the transactional end I could see finance/business being more popular, but that makes sense. If you studied finance/business in UG, you're probably interested in those fields and will want to do corporate work. I can't imagine the statistics showing that litigators were predominately finance/business/engineering majors in college. If you're seeing some sort of trend, it's 95% going to be based of self-selection and not an actual preference on the employer's end (excluding maybe tax preferring accountants to cut down on flight risks and patent requiring STEM).

2) It is not disadvantageous to have a liberal arts degree. If you were a history major and went to medical school, no hospital would choose to not employ you because you were a history major in undergrad. They care about how well you did in medical school and your residency. In the same vein, firms care about where you went to law school, your GPA, 1L summer employment (?), and journal. They don't care if you majored in underwater basket weaving (very prestigious) or nuclear physics (clearly near the bottom of the prestige rankings).

The bottom line is that if you are happy at your UG, not accumulating too much debt, and are getting good grades, then you're as well off as someone who is at Harvard doing the same things. The LS admissions game is 95% LSAT + GPA. You're not going to get into better law schools by transferring. It's a silly and uninformed notion.

RedPurpleBlue wrote:

Liberal Theory wrote:
Also, does anyone have any insight on why most of the biglaw associates have degrees in finance/ business/ engineering? Could it be disadvantageous to have a liberal arts degree for that position?

1) Can you provide a source on "most of the biglaw associates" having degrees in "finance/business/engineering," because I don't think that statement is even true. Perhaps on the transactional end I could see finance/business being more popular, but that makes sense. If you studied finance/business in UG, you're probably interested in those fields and will want to do corporate work. I can't imagine the statistics showing that litigators were predominately finance/business/engineering majors in college. If you're seeing some sort of trend, it's 95% going to be based of self-selection and not an actual preference on the employer's end (excluding maybe tax preferring accountants to cut down on flight risks and patent requiring STEM).

2) It is not disadvantageous to have a liberal arts degree. If you were a history major and went to medical school, no hospital would choose to not employ you because you were a history major in undergrad. They care about how well you did in medical school and your residency. In the same vein, firms care about where you went to law school, your GPA, 1L summer employment (?), and journal. They don't care if you majored in underwater basket weaving (very prestigious) or nuclear physics (clearly near the bottom of the prestige rankings).

The bottom line is that if you are happy at your UG, not accumulating too much debt, and are getting good grades, then you're as well off as someone who is at Harvard doing the same things. The LS admissions game is 95% LSAT + GPA. You're not going to get into better law schools by transferring. It's a silly and uninformed notion.

On the contrary I have noticed many top criminal defense attorneys have finance degrees. I won't name them all but
I have come across many like Johnny Cochran for example. The senator in my state, too. I guess it is all circumstantial.

Liberal Theory wrote:Haven't seen too much on the subject. I know that law school adcoms don't care about where you went as long as your GPA is desirable. And I also see alot of folks here agree that it if it doesn't matter then it really is negligible at OCI. However, I just discovered I can search for current associates in my market area at all the big firms and see where they went and what they did in UG and Law school.

After doing about two hours of stalking I found one single associate at Jones Day who attended my UG... all the other 125+ at Baker Botts, Akin Gump, Haynes Boone et. al. were from the big states schools/ private uni's.

If I want to even keep the possibility of biglaw on the table should I transfer to a school that has more alums at the firms or is it more likely that it is a matter of self-selection? I could imagine that people from my mediocre college also happen to, normally, do mediocre at law school and simply don't try to get into biglaw. But I'm afraid that adds fuel to the "prestige" fire and would work against me.

IMO, the main reason you are seeing this pattern in attorneys and to understand why you have to do some research on how BigLaw came to be. I'm talking the actual meaning of how the term white shoe law firm came to be. (WASP &elite). It has become more diverse due to the time we live in as far as race & religion goes. The fact remains that BigLaw has deep elite roots & and its not going to change.

On the other hand you can go to any UG and if you get a 4.0/180 you'll get into the elite law schools. If you succeed there you'll be in the same boat as many others. However you will still not be on the yacht if you get my drift.

future liT1g4tor wrote:

Liberal Theory wrote:Haven't seen too much on the subject. I know that law school adcoms don't care about where you went as long as your GPA is desirable. And I also see alot of folks here agree that it if it doesn't matter then it really is negligible at OCI. However, I just discovered I can search for current associates in my market area at all the big firms and see where they went and what they did in UG and Law school.

After doing about two hours of stalking I found one single associate at Jones Day who attended my UG... all the other 125+ at Baker Botts, Akin Gump, Haynes Boone et. al. were from the big states schools/ private uni's.

If I want to even keep the possibility of biglaw on the table should I transfer to a school that has more alums at the firms or is it more likely that it is a matter of self-selection? I could imagine that people from my mediocre college also happen to, normally, do mediocre at law school and simply don't try to get into biglaw. But I'm afraid that adds fuel to the "prestige" fire and would work against me.

IMO, the main reason you are seeing this pattern in attorneys and to understand why you have to do some research on how BigLaw came to be. I'm talking the actual meaning of how the term white shoe law firm came to be. (WASP &elite). It has become more diverse due to the time we live in as far as race & religion goes. The fact remains that BigLaw has deep elite roots & and its not going to change.

On the other hand you can go to any UG and if you get a 4.0/180 you'll get into the elite law schools. If you succeed there you'll be in the same boat as many others. However you will still not be on the yacht if you get my drift.

You're fun