Top Law Schools

3.82 from 40s US NEWS state school
175
Few ECs, study abroad, undergrad assistant for biz law class. Spent vast majority of time tutoring SATs and playing poker to make ends meet. No real proof of either though, not sure if saying anything about latter is a good idea. One good rec letter, other is probably filler. I'm a good writer but not sure how compelling PS can be. White but I did grow up in the hood if that counts for diversity value (lol).

Was just going to blanket top 10 and see what sticks. Would prefer to avoid NY if possible.

MikeJackson21 wrote:3.82 from 40s US NEWS state school
175
Few ECs, study abroad, undergrad assistant for biz law class. Spent vast majority of time tutoring SATs and playing poker to make ends meet. No real proof of either though, not sure if saying anything about latter is a good idea. One good rec letter, other is probably filler. I'm a good writer but not sure how compelling PS can be. White but I did grow up in the hood if that counts for diversity value (lol).

Was just going to blanket top 10 and see what sticks. Would prefer to avoid NY if possible.

Do you know DaRascal?

In any event, you're basically a lock for several top 10 schools. And you'll likely get substantial scholarship money from at least a couple. So your plan to "blanket top 10" is fine. And as long as you're blanketing the top 10, you may as well blanket the top 14 as well.

As for HYS, your below-average softs will hurt, particularly for Y and S. But H doesn't care that much about softs—you've got a good shot there with those numbers.

In short, apply to all the T14 and see what happens.

echo the above, you're in at hls if you put time/effort into a well rounded application and dont raise any red flags. y/s are probably not going to happen, i had similar gpa + higher lsat but also lacked good softs, and didnt get in to either (though you might, it's always worth a shot). you'll be in w/ money at many other schools, i'd blanket the t-14 at least. you might get an offer you can't refuse from one or more of them. good luck!

Any merit to retaking then? The LR/RC I had down cold from the start but I always struggled with LG got like -0/-1/-5 or something. I figure I could drill that up a few notches. I'm done w/ school by the end of summer. Just smoking pot and playing cards otherwise.

Because no one has touched on it yet--the poker thing could have merit if it was done legally and successfully.

Beyond that, I agree with everyone else that you're a lock at T10 and should get H.

RareExports wrote:Because no one has touched on it yet--the poker thing could have merit if it was done legally and successfully.

Agreed here. I can see that being a unique, interesting PS.

RunnerRunner wrote:

RareExports wrote:Because no one has touched on it yet--the poker thing could have merit if it was done legally and successfully.

Agreed here. I can see that being a unique, interesting PS.

The taxes may or may not all be in order though. The actual earning was 100% legit. I've been financially independent since sophomore year after my family went busto due to father's illness.

Vegas and the f*cking Mirage

MikeJackson21 wrote: Just smoking pot and playing cards otherwise.

Please don't admit to future plans of smoking pot ( especially if illegal where you live) .....You never know if Adcoms are looking

Smoking pot in the metaphorical sense. IE relaxing and not working/studying. I don't actually do the drugs.

Broncos15 wrote:

MikeJackson21 wrote: Just smoking pot and playing cards otherwise.

Please don't admit to future plans of smoking pot ( especially if illegal where you live) .....You never know if Adcoms are looking

Why would adcoms care if an applicant smoked pot or had "future plans of smoking pot"?

NoBladesNoBows wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

Broncos15 wrote:

MikeJackson21 wrote: Just smoking pot and playing cards otherwise.

Please don't admit to future plans of smoking pot ( especially if illegal where you live) .....You never know if Adcoms are looking

Why would adcoms care if an applicant smoked pot or had "future plans of smoking pot"?

In the metaphorical sense

Yeah, that was pathetic. The ironic thing is that I don't think an adcom would care if a student had spent a summer smoking pot. Probably the majority of law students—hell, probably the majority of adcoms—have smoked pot recreationally. But I think an adcom might be put off by an applicant weaseling out of a statement by later maintaining that it was really meant "in the metaphorical sense." Grow a pair, OP.

Lol you guys are uptight. You've never flippantly told somebody you were going to jerk off and smoke pot when asked what your plans were? I know it doesn't actually matter and that nobody is going to reverse engineer this post come fall because of some off the cuff reference to marihuana use

MikeJackson21 wrote:

RunnerRunner wrote:

RareExports wrote:Because no one has touched on it yet--the poker thing could have merit if it was done legally and successfully.

Agreed here. I can see that being a unique, interesting PS.

The taxes may or may not all be in order though. The actual earning was 100% legit. I've been financially independent since sophomore year after my family went busto due to father's illness.

It sounds like you have everything you need to write a great PS.

MikeJackson21 wrote:Lol you guys are uptight. You've never flippantly told somebody you were going to jerk off and smoke pot when asked what your plans were?

Yes, I have. But then I go home and jerk off and smoke pot.

I suppose you never actually jerk off either? Do you only jerk off in the metaphorical sense?

I'm pretty sure I got denied at Illinois based on my poker playing. There were C&F questions that Illinois mentioned via phone call. I think the phrasing was "the bar may have questions of an attorney entrusted with money gambling". I noted to them I was up by more than 10k big blinds and had duly declared it on my taxes but I'm pretty sure the legality went straight over their heads.

I'm sure the adcomms at the top 10s however will be more perceptive to actual nature of poker.

chingwoo wrote:I'm pretty sure I got denied at Illinois based on my poker playing. There were C&F questions that Illinois mentioned via phone call. I think the phrasing was "the bar may have questions of an attorney entrusted with money gambling". I noted to them I was up by more than 10k big blinds and had duly declared it on my taxes but I'm pretty sure the legality went straight over their heads.

I'm sure the adcomms at the top 10s however will be more perceptive to actual nature of poker.

Wait, were people ITT actually serious about the poker-themed personal statement? I assumed they were trolling.

OP: Do not write about your poker playing (or any other form of gambling) in your PS. Just don't. With your numbers, you are safely in at most T14s so long as you don't write something stupid in your PS. Writing about conduct that the ABA views as a serious vice for lawyers (e.g., drinking, gambling) is way too risky.

rpupkin wrote:
OP: Do not write about your poker playing (or any other form of gambling) in your PS. Just don't. With your numbers, you are safely in at most T14s so long as you don't write something stupid in your PS. Writing about conduct that the ABA views as a serious vice for lawyers (e.g., drinking, gambling) is way too risky.

+1.

SMOKE

WEED

EVERY

DAY

Mack.Hambleton wrote:SMOKE

WEED

EVERY

DAY

Preach.

Really though is there any merit to a retake? The LR/RC have come to me naturally (0 to 3 PT) but I still have issues with LG (-2 to -5, -4 acutal I think). I have issues with spatial reasoning and processing speed but the consensus seems that these can be hammered out with repetition. Would a 178+ get me significantly more money at somewhere like Chi?

MikeJackson21 wrote:Really though is there any merit to a retake? The LR/RC have come to me naturally (0 to 3 PT) but I still have issues with LG (-2 to -5, -4 acutal I think). I have issues with spatial reasoning and processing speed but the consensus seems that these can be hammered out with repetition. Would a 178+ get me significantly more money at somewhere like Chi?

It won't get you more money at Chicago. You're already well above their 75th and you'd have to have a higher GPA to be competitive for a Ruby or other huge schollies there. You'll likely get more money out of Columbia than out of UChi. As for there being merit to a retake: I suppose there is in the sense that higher is always better, and gives you slightly better odds at certain things. And hell, if you've got nothing better to do and are very confident in 178+, go for it! But is it necessary? No. You can get in anywhere with your numbers, at this point your application and softs are likely going to determine the rest.