Top Law Schools

rad law wrote:No one can answer without cost of attendance, career goals, and where you want to work.

deadhipsters wrote:

rad law wrote:No one can answer without cost of attendance, career goals, and where you want to work.

Even without knowing it's safe bet to say Rutger's. American is really expensive and in a tough market. And I seem to remember them being stingy with money. At least Rutgers-Camden would give you access to Philly, NJ, and even an outside shot at DC.

gsat wrote:Not getting aid from either, which I've come to terms with. PI emphasis. What concerns me is the versatility of degrees across the nation. To offer a further explanation, I am an east coaster that has just spent the last 8 years in California. I’ve noticed that they both have a small percentage of graduates that end up on the Pacific Coast, which is understandable considering the scarcity of internships. I am willing, however, to put forth the effort in finding my own California based internships. Please keep in mind that I am a first generation anything and that all of this is new territory for me.

Thanks for the help

gsat wrote:I would like to further add that I am also considering transferring. I would really like to begin my JD degree this year, as I have been out of school for a few years now.

vanwinkle wrote: The near-universal response you will get is that you should never attend a school specifically intending to transfer. There are two reasons for this.

The first is that 95% of transfer admissions is your 1L grades, and you can't predict in advance how well you're going to do your 1L year. If you intend to transfer up a tier, you're going to need to do very well your first year, probably top 10% or better. The problem is, everyone is going to be trying to be in the top 10% of their class their first year, and if 100% of the class is trying to be in the top 10%, 90% will be disappointed. And since there's no way to know where you'll do until you actually finish 1L year, you have no way of knowing as a 0L whether you'll be in the top 10% or the disappointed 90% until you actually are.

The second is that transferring schools means you leave behind professors that you built up a reputation with and are starting over. This is why even lateral transfers, which are a lot more possible, are typically regarded as dumb. You're leaving behind all the good things you built up at your first year of school and not gaining any new employment opportunities because you're not transferring upward at all. If you plan on attending school X for a year and then transfer to similarly-ranked school Y, you should've just attended school Y in the first place.

The typical answer you're going to get, if you can't get into school Y, is to take a year, fix whatever is causing you to not get into school Y (retake the LSAT, get more WE, etc.), and reapply. That is, honestly, both easier and better for you than transferring. Transferring is a bitch, do not count on it.

rad law wrote:

gsat wrote:I would like to further add that I am also considering transferring. I would really like to begin my JD degree this year, as I have been out of school for a few years now.

Consider this

vanwinkle wrote: The near-universal response you will get is that you should never attend a school specifically intending to transfer. There are two reasons for this.

The first is that 95% of transfer admissions is your 1L grades, and you can't predict in advance how well you're going to do your 1L year. If you intend to transfer up a tier, you're going to need to do very well your first year, probably top 10% or better. The problem is, everyone is going to be trying to be in the top 10% of their class their first year, and if 100% of the class is trying to be in the top 10%, 90% will be disappointed. And since there's no way to know where you'll do until you actually finish 1L year, you have no way of knowing as a 0L whether you'll be in the top 10% or the disappointed 90% until you actually are.

The second is that transferring schools means you leave behind professors that you built up a reputation with and are starting over. This is why even lateral transfers, which are a lot more possible, are typically regarded as dumb. You're leaving behind all the good things you built up at your first year of school and not gaining any new employment opportunities because you're not transferring upward at all. If you plan on attending school X for a year and then transfer to similarly-ranked school Y, you should've just attended school Y in the first place.

The typical answer you're going to get, if you can't get into school Y, is to take a year, fix whatever is causing you to not get into school Y (retake the LSAT, get more WE, etc.), and reapply. That is, honestly, both easier and better for you than transferring. Transferring is a bitch, do not count on it.

joncrooshal wrote:Well, you cannot go far in Jersey without finding a lawyer from Rutgers. They permeate the state top to bottom. If you want to work in Jersey, there aren't many better options for you. The alumni base is pretty huge. But if you don't want to work in Jersey (or the surrounding areas), than it would be kind of dumb to go to school there.

flexityflex86 wrote:

joncrooshal wrote:Well, you cannot go far in Jersey without finding a lawyer from Rutgers. They permeate the state top to bottom. If you want to work in Jersey, there aren't many better options for you. The alumni base is pretty huge. But if you don't want to work in Jersey (or the surrounding areas), than it would be kind of dumb to go to school there.

Wouldn't a top 14 outdo Rutgers if they wanted

flexityflex86 wrote:

joncrooshal wrote:Well, you cannot go far in Jersey without finding a lawyer from Rutgers. They permeate the state top to bottom. If you want to work in Jersey, there aren't many better options for you. The alumni base is pretty huge. But if you don't want to work in Jersey (or the surrounding areas), than it would be kind of dumb to go to school there.

Wouldn't a top 14 outdo Rutgers if they wanted

kaiser wrote:Look at every large firm in NJ. They are PACKED with Rutgers and Seton Hall grads. I went to school (T25) out of state (am an NJ native) and was getting beat out by Rutgers 1L's left and right for summer positions. Rutgers = loyalty to NJ, which is taken very seriously since many NJ employers are wary of those who apply simply because they couldn't get a job in NY. They treat their own very well. And Rutgers runs through NJ's blood. So if you want to get a job in Jersey, you can get very far with a Rutgers degree. Anywhere else though and then the degree becomes of much less use.

gsat wrote:So what I'm gathering is that if I really want to study in New Jersey, then attend Rutgers. Or, attend American whole heartedly, or, wait a year and reapply to all of my top schools?

gsat wrote:wait a year and reapply to all of my top schools?

flexityflex86 wrote:Hard to believe Rutgers is such a powerhouse. You guys are talking about it like it's better than BU/BC job wise.

flexityflex86 wrote:Hard to believe Rutgers is such a powerhouse. You guys are talking about it like it's better than BU/BC job wise.

joncrooshal wrote:Rutgers is a powerhouse in New Jersey. End of story.