Top Law Schools

Edit: Thanks!

Rainy wrote:3.75 GPA (Top 10 UG), 175 LSAT. Weak softs. I'm not sure how much it helps me, if at all, but I have three family members (brother, sister, mother), who currently attend/attended Stanford undergraduate.

I'd be a lot more confident if I had a 10th of a percentage higher in my GPA and I'm certainly not holding my breath knowing how much Stanford values GPA. I suppose my biggest question is to what extent having family attend the university helps my prospects.

Thanks in advance.

P.S.I haven't submitted my application so I'm a little worried applying on the late side will hurt me.

I doubt your family will count for much. Assuming this is accurate, your chances are very low.

Apply and find out brother. My understanding is legacy does not do much to boost your chance of acceptance. And I would stray away from citing your family going there as a main reason why you want to attend. However, it may be smart to work in how you have come to love the school through your experiences visiting and listening to your family.

As far as chance go... seems like you are definitely in their range, but lack of real world experience may hurt you. Good luck, worst case scenario -- Boalt isn't so bad is it?

DrStudMuffin wrote:

Rainy wrote:3.75 GPA (Top 10 UG), 175 LSAT. Weak softs. I'm not sure how much it helps me, if at all, but I have three family members (brother, sister, mother), who currently attend/attended Stanford undergraduate.

I'd be a lot more confident if I had a 10th of a percentage higher in my GPA and I'm certainly not holding my breath knowing how much Stanford values GPA. I suppose my biggest question is to what extent having family attend the university helps my prospects.

Thanks in advance.

P.S.I haven't submitted my application so I'm a little worried applying on the late side will hurt me.

I doubt your family will count for much. Assuming this is accurate, your chances are very low.

What are you spewing? T10 UG counts for something.The dude has a decent chance at Stanford (and Harvard).

ZVBXRPL wrote:

DrStudMuffin wrote:

Rainy wrote:3.75 GPA (Top 10 UG), 175 LSAT. Weak softs. I'm not sure how much it helps me, if at all, but I have three family members (brother, sister, mother), who currently attend/attended Stanford undergraduate.

I'd be a lot more confident if I had a 10th of a percentage higher in my GPA and I'm certainly not holding my breath knowing how much Stanford values GPA. I suppose my biggest question is to what extent having family attend the university helps my prospects.

Thanks in advance.

P.S.I haven't submitted my application so I'm a little worried applying on the late side will hurt me.

I doubt your family will count for much. Assuming this is accurate, your chances are very low.

What are you spewing? T10 UG counts for something.The dude has a decent chance at Stanford (and Harvard).

Sure thing bro.


Note I said nothing about Harvard.

UnderrateOverachieve wrote:
ood luck, worst case scenario -- Boalt isn't so bad is it?

No, I'd be thrilled to go Boalt. Although my understanding is that I have a very strong shot at getting into Columbia. Just was interested in seeing if Stanford was a possibility. Thank you all for your responses thus far.

Rainy wrote:

UnderrateOverachieve wrote:
ood luck, worst case scenario -- Boalt isn't so bad is it?

No, I'd be thrilled to go Boalt. Although my understanding is that I have a very strong shot at getting into Columbia. Just was interested in seeing if Stanford was a possibility. Thank you all for your responses thus far.

You've got very strong odds everywhere outside of HYS, and still a solid shot at H. I was answering only in regard to S.

DrStudMuffin wrote:

ZVBXRPL wrote:

DrStudMuffin wrote:

Rainy wrote:3.75 GPA (Top 10 UG), 175 LSAT. Weak softs. I'm not sure how much it helps me, if at all, but I have three family members (brother, sister, mother), who currently attend/attended Stanford undergraduate.

I'd be a lot more confident if I had a 10th of a percentage higher in my GPA and I'm certainly not holding my breath knowing how much Stanford values GPA. I suppose my biggest question is to what extent having family attend the university helps my prospects.

Thanks in advance.

P.S.I haven't submitted my application so I'm a little worried applying on the late side will hurt me.

I doubt your family will count for much. Assuming this is accurate, your chances are very low.

What are you spewing? T10 UG counts for something.The dude has a decent chance at Stanford (and Harvard).

Sure thing bro.


Note I said nothing about Harvard.

So they have a better shot at Harvard than Penn? That just doesn't seem right.

Again, OP has a decent chance because he went to a top UG. Most of the rejects you cited probably did not.
Verdict: at least a WL (25-35% Admit).
Source: http://mylsn.info/cyyikm

ZVBXRPL wrote:Again, OP has a decent chance because he went to a top UG. Most of the rejects you cited probably did not.
Verdict: at least a WL (25-35% Admit).
Source: http://mylsn.info/cyyikm

First, you are most certainly pulling that out of your ass.

Second, of the two applicants with those numbers who were accepted, one was a HYP grad and the other had the equivalent of a Fulbright/another advanced degree.

Third, OP admitted to having weak softs.

Thus, as I said, assuming that the family connection doesn't amount to much, I still think OP's chances are very low. Maybe I would revise this to just low (or a middling chance at a waitlist), but I feel pretty good at very low. Either way OP will have great options, I just don't think those options will include Stanford.*

*Disclaimer: I am a somewhat similarly situated Stanford hopeful, but I've convinced myself that it very likely won't happen.

unc0mm0n1 wrote:
So they have a better shot at Harvard than Penn? That just doesn't seem right.

YP.

Thanks for pointing out that the two admits had weaker LSAT numbers (174/73). Bottom line: OP has more than a small chance. I'd say a WL is quite likely.

ZVBXRPL wrote:Thanks for pointing out that the two admits had weaker LSAT numbers (174/73). Bottom line: OP has more than a small chance. I'd say a WL is quite likely.

And thank you for reinforcing my point that it's about softs within this GPA/LSAT range. Ultimately that's what it will come down to (sounds weird saying that, but for S and Y I think it's actually legit), and OP has stated that they lack anything notable in this regard.

And to your point about UG being worth something: going to a top 10 school is only going to break ties in OP's favor if he/she has softs that are on par with other applicants.

The Dr is right wrt everything stated here. Chances at Stanford are slim to none for any 3.7x or below with weak softs. Most people at Stanford, Columbia, Harvard law ect. went to good schools for UG (although TLS just loves to deny this its true), and thus simply attending one doesnt in itself provide any boost. The added soft factors implicit in the structural advantages of an elite undergrad? Well, OP just denied he had strong softs so thats not really a consideration.

So maybe OP will get WL'd at stanford, so what? I was WL'd at stanford but Im not going to tell someone with my numbers that they have a strong chance.

In at Columbia (possibly with Butler), 50/50 at H if you're a good interviewer.. Boalt actually isnt a sure bet, but everything else should be with "Why x" essays to dispel YP.

Stanford will be tough with a 3.75. That's likely at or under their 25th%, and unless you have superior softs/URM, HYS are unlikely to take anyone in the bottom quartile, even with a 175. You have an excellent shot at Columbia though, probably with good money as well.

ZVBXRPL wrote:Bottom line: OP has more than a small chance.

Nope.

.

unc0mm0n1 wrote: So they have a better shot at Harvard than Penn? That just doesn't seem right.

Penn waitlists applicants above their range to help with yield.

As one blog put it, that's like sending a letter to Scarlett Johansson telling her you won't be taking her to the Prom.

TigerDude wrote:

unc0mm0n1 wrote: So they have a better shot at Harvard than Penn? That just doesn't seem right.

Penn waitlists applicants above their range to help with yield.

As one blog put it, that's like sending a letter to Scarlett Johansson telling her you won't be taking her to the Prom.

I understand YP but Penn is the school that does it? I thought all schools did YP. Why is Penn the only school (besides YS) with a lower acceptance rate than Harvard.

unc0mm0n1 wrote:

TigerDude wrote:

unc0mm0n1 wrote: So they have a better shot at Harvard than Penn? That just doesn't seem right.

Penn waitlists applicants above their range to help with yield.

As one blog put it, that's like sending a letter to Scarlett Johansson telling her you won't be taking her to the Prom.

I understand YP but Penn is the school that does it? I thought all schools did YP. Why is Penn the only school (besides YS) with a lower acceptance rate than Harvard.

UVA is pretty egregious as well, and Michigan does it to a lesser extent.

jbagelboy wrote:Boalt actually isnt a sure bet, but everything else should be with "Why x" essays to dispel YP.

Forgive my ignorance, but it seems like you and others are suggesting Boalt is more difficult for me to get into than Columbia. Is there a particular reason for this? With Stanford looking very improbable, Berkeley is actually my first choice.

Berkeley is more "holistic," and conventional wisdom (seemingly supported by LSN data) is that they care more about softs/your story than others, so it is less of a sure thing. You're still probably in good shape there though.

Rainy wrote:

jbagelboy wrote:Boalt actually isnt a sure bet, but everything else should be with "Why x" essays to dispel YP.

Forgive my ignorance, but it seems like you and others are suggesting Boalt is more difficult for me to get into than Columbia. Is there a particular reason for this? With Stanford looking very improbable, Berkeley is actually my first choice.

Are you from California, did you apply to Cal early, did you go to a competitive college and do you have strong LoRs or a strong diversity statement? If yes, then you have just as strong chance at Berkeley as Columbia or UChicago. If you arent from CA and you dont have a very well rounded application or diversity qualification (LGBT/minority/female in STEM/ect), then Berkeley is tough to call because you are below their GPA median and they wont be impressed by a sky high LSAT. Berkeley is one of the few schools that can truly claim some degree of "holistic" admissions, and they place more value on academic rigor or unique experience than high lsat. For Columbia, on the other hand, you are above both medians and you went to a good undergrad, which basically means you're in barring C&F or epically terrible PS/LoRs.

Its not that one school is necessarily easier to get into, they just look for different qualities and as a result, Berkeley is generally more difficult to predict.

There are several people who were accepted at SLS with those numbers or lower in the last 2 cycles.

This person- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/TylerDurden; this person- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/usafgirl; this guy- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/jimbo89; this guy- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/iVinshe; this guy- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/hart4heisman; and this person- http://lawschoolnumbers.com/brewst

So it's definitely not impossible. I don't think it's the norm for people to get in with below 3.8 regardless of LSAT score. I'm sure you'll be in with a fighting chance if the rest of your application is strong, though. As others have said, your chances at HLS are probably better than at SLS because HLS's class size is so large and they care a lot about the LSAT.

Good luck!

Edit: Thanks guys!