Top Law Schools

Socked away my 171 before I graduated and was sent to work (ie, prison). 3.7 is on the lower end. (Non-URM). Finishing up my second year at a well-known investment bank as an analyst.

I know my WE will get me BigLaw interviews, but it's not clear to me if it's going to help me for admissions. (Considering the hours and the type of work I did in M&A, I think it's the best possible WE anyone could get out of undergrad short of active-duty military service, but hey, Yale seems to think making cupcakes for two years is WE, so I clearly don't know fucking anything.)

Chance me for T14? I'd love to go to Berkeley (irony...), and am an alum/Cali resident, if that helps.

Side note: 100ish hours a week (an average week, for me) is 9am-2am M-F, and then splitting 9-5pm Sat/Sun. From what I can tell, BigLaw is 65-75. That's awesome. So that's why I'm making the switch. Y'all are way too down on your profession

Posting in a legendary thread.

i don't see why cal wouldn't let you back in...

i don't see why cal wouldn't let you back in...

So being an alumnus will help me in admissions?

You might look into exit options in finance first. If you think you have the ability to work in trading you should probably try that. Preferably on the floor of one of the exchanges in Chicago or NYC. Some of those guys work 35-40 hours a week and make about 500k a year. You have 0 job security in most cases and have to legitimately have talent though... Also, you'd start out as a trader assistant making like 40K, but if you were good you'd get to that 500k mark in a couple years (and if you weren't good, you'd be fired).

If all else fails, Penn JD/MBA.

Biglaw is actually fewer hours...

You'll get T14. Someone with slightly lower numbers got Northwestern's ED full scholarship, and with your work experience, I'd think you'd pick it up, too.

Betharl wrote:You might look into exit options in finance first. If you think you have the ability to work in trading you should probably try that. Preferably on the floor of one of the exchanges in Chicago or NYC. Some of those guys work 35-40 hours a week and make about 500k a year. You have 0 job security in most cases and have to legitimately have talent though... Also, you'd start out as a trader assistant making like 40K, but if you were good you'd get to that 500k mark in a couple years (and if you weren't good, you'd be fired).

If all else fails, Penn JD/MBA.

Appreciate the advice. Typical exit opps for my position are in private equity (think Bain Capital), but I have little-no interest in investing myself.

Trading is out of my area of expertise. Nobody in my group would, honestly, be able to tell you anything about markets. We deal with large companies, not individual stocks. Additionally, the job function is moving more and more towards quantitative/high-frequency trading where computer programming and high-level mathematics are valuable. I'm a business major. The "fat guys yelling across the floor" mystique is just that, myth. Today's traders are nerds from MIT.

As for JD MBA, think that's a little out of my league, although I'd love to go. Essentially all Wharton MBA finance admits would have done 4 years in banking/PE, rather than two. Would I be a good candidate for just the JD though?

OP - I have a similar background, although you have a better LSAT than I did when I applied. Not sure how much schools care about work experience (my guess is it is a small factor) but you have a solid GPA/LSAT combo and should be able to get in somewhere legit. I do know, however, that firms LOVE the M&A analyst background. This was a huge selling point in interviews, and the experience translates very very well into biglaw work. Your point about hours is right on as well - the biglaw week will seem like a joke to you and the pay isn't much less (at the outset at least). Let me know if you have any questions about the move into law.

weaselology wrote:OP - I have a similar background, although you have a better LSAT than I did when I applied. Not sure how much schools care about work experience (my guess is it is a small factor) but you have a solid GPA/LSAT combo and should be able to get in somewhere legit. I do know, however, that firms LOVE the M&A analyst background. This was a huge selling point in interviews, and the experience translates very very well into biglaw work. Your point about hours is right on as well - the biglaw week will seem like a joke to you and the pay isn't much less (at the outset at least). Let me know if you have any questions about the move into law.

Awesome, thanks man, glad to hear it. What do you actually DO as a BigLaw associate (in securities/transaction-type work)? Is it interesting/enjoyable/analytical? Or am I essentially taking a pay/hours cut to do due diligence type stuff.

OP.... stick with banking. People go to law school because they can't get normal jobs, or their jobs are really awful, or they get pushed out of finance/consulting/other competitive stuff.

dissonance1848 wrote:OP.... stick with banking. People go to law school because they can't get normal jobs, or their jobs are really awful, or they get pushed out of finance/consulting/other competitive stuff.

Nobody in banking "sticks with banking." Only 1 in 5/6 analysts is promoted; the rest either leave voluntarily or are laid off. I have no interest in staying. That's for masochists. Law school is my "exit opportunity," in bankerspeak.

dissonance1848 wrote:OP.... stick with banking. People go to law school because they can't get normal jobs, or their jobs are really awful, or they get pushed out of finance/consulting/other competitive stuff.

A ton of people in my class at NU did banking, consulting, etc. I left a good engineering job. Lawyers are unbelievably "grass is greener" sort of people.

When I did my Georgetown interview, the guy I interviewed with (partner at a mid-size Atlanta firm), asked me: "why the hell do you want to go to law school, you're a rocket scientist?" I couldn't seem to convey to him that engineering is for suckers who want to work big law hours for a fraction of the money with zero chance at equity. People bitch about the 5% chance of making partner at S&C, but when you go work for Lockheed, etc, you have exactly a 0% chance of getting real equity.

Google or Facebook is the WLRK of engineering, getting a job there is nearly impossible, and if you're a top performer there you might make about as much as a senior associate at any lock-step NYC V100. At a law firm you're working hard to make the partners rich, but you still get paid ~20-25% of the money you bring into the firm. At an engineering company you get paid a fraction of what you bring in. You might be brilliant and invent something that makes millions for your company, and your reward is a $10k or so bonus for the resulting patent.

Lawyers, at least from the T14, have it fucking great compared to nearly any other profession.

Dude you worked in M&A and are leaving for law? Smart money is on private equity bro, way more earnings potential and you don't have to pay for 3 yrs of school, i'd say to stick with that but if you don't your stats are great and t-14 should be in the cards.

triplectz wrote:

weaselology wrote:OP - I have a similar background, although you have a better LSAT than I did when I applied. Not sure how much schools care about work experience (my guess is it is a small factor) but you have a solid GPA/LSAT combo and should be able to get in somewhere legit. I do know, however, that firms LOVE the M&A analyst background. This was a huge selling point in interviews, and the experience translates very very well into biglaw work. Your point about hours is right on as well - the biglaw week will seem like a joke to you and the pay isn't much less (at the outset at least). Let me know if you have any questions about the move into law.

Awesome, thanks man, glad to hear it. What do you actually DO as a BigLaw associate (in securities/transaction-type work)? Is it interesting/enjoyable/analytical? Or am I essentially taking a pay/hours cut to do due diligence type stuff.

You're going to spend a good portion of your time doing due diligence/trivial tasks your first couple years. As you move up, you start to actually take the lead on transactions and do some creative structuring, deal with unique strategic issues for a transaction and kind of run the entire process (i.e. herd the bankers, management, accountants, and others). I know senior bankers like to believe they are the masters of the universe, but that's really not true in most transactions; it is the senior lawyers that management at firms entrusts with major transactional decisions.

So basically, to summarize, work is generally tedious and not very glamorous the first few years, but then you start to take on more strategic, planning and structuring work, as well as take on a leadership role in the transaction as you get more senior. The work, on the whole, is probably more intellectually stimulating for senior lawyers than it would be for senior bankers.

BigBucks wrote:Dude you worked in M&A and are leaving for law? Smart money is on private equity bro, way more earnings potential and you don't have to pay for 3 yrs of school, i'd say to stick with that but if you don't your stats are great and t-14 should be in the cards.

Private equity /= the smart money. You continue working heinous, life-ruining hours and the pay is not always amazing (despite popular misconceptions). There is a VERY large difference between working 60-70 hours a week consistently vs. working 100-110 hours a week consistently. The stress level is much higher as well. Good private equity positions that pay serious $$$ are rare and unbelievably competitive, so it is highly unlikely you will land at a place like KKR, Carlyle etc. Plus, the personalities are, on the whole, obnoxious. Biglaw is actually a much better route to aim for.

1. I know full well PE is highly competitive, but this dude worked in the most desirable group in investment banking, if he really wanted to he could get a PE job (depending on which bank he was in M&A for, a really good PE job).
2. There are other ways to work 60-80 hr weeks with great pay. After serving 2 years as an analyst, there are many doors open for him. Equity Research, F500 corporate development/strategy, Consulting. (none of these require 3 years of grueling academia)
3. 90-110 hr weeks are not common in PE like they are in banking, also, 1 promotion or so and you will be working the same BigLaw hours earning 2x as much dough.
4. How is the smart money not on PE when this entire board acknowledges the legal environment is in shambles? I am not saying finance is much better, just that law is also not great at the moment, therefore his decision should not be made based on Law being in a better state than finance.


p.s. with all that said they are both good decisions and if he really wants to practice law instead of work in finance then he should go for it.

My question then is the following; What professions have it better than biglaw?

BigBucks wrote:1. I know full well PE is highly competitive, but this dude worked in the most desirable group in investment banking, if he really wanted to he could get a PE job (depending on which bank he was in M&A for, a really good PE job).
2. There are other ways to work 60-80 hr weeks with great pay. After serving 2 years as an analyst, there are many doors open for him. Equity Research, F500 corporate development/strategy, Consulting. (none of these require 3 years of grueling academia)
3. 90-110 hr weeks are not common in PE like they are in banking, also, 1 promotion or so and you will be working the same BigLaw hours earning 2x as much dough.
4. How is the smart money not on PE when this entire board acknowledges the legal environment is in shambles? I am not saying finance is much better, just that law is also not great at the moment, therefore his decision should not be made based on Law being in a better state than finance.


p.s. with all that said they are both good decisions and if he really wants to practice law instead of work in finance then he should go for it.

M&A is also one of the largest groups in investment banking, and there are a ton of M&A analysts who've put in their 2-year stint that are now looking for those oh-so-rare PE positions.

If he wants to do F500 or consulting, at some point he'll probably have to get his MBA to keep moving up. An b-school is way more fun than law school (NU JD's go to Malawi over spring break to study their legal system; NU MBA's go to the French Riviera) but it's still time and money.

The finance sector is even worse off than the legal field. Law firms are stealthing a few people here and there--top banks are laying off dozens and hundreds. Imagine what would happen if WLRK announced it was laying off a dozen associates--that's what the banking sector is like right now.

I do agree he should decide whether he would rather do law or finance. I can't imagine a lot of people who like one type of work enjoying the other.

dissonance1848 wrote:My question then is the following; What professions have it better than biglaw?

It depends on what you want. Job security? Doctors, dentists, tenured professors. Top-end earning potential? Traders. Interesting work? Engineers.

dissonance1848 wrote:My question then is the following; What professions have it better than biglaw?

I'd say professors at large universities.

triplectz wrote:

i don't see why cal wouldn't let you back in...

So being an alumnus will help me in admissions?

with your stats, it should. i know alumni that have gotten in despite having lower both than yours (not by much though) but no work experience. write a good essay and you should be fine