Is anyone going to the SHU event at Simpson Thacher on the 15th?
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - GodspeedMUFC
As someone who has had both a cat and a dog I am well positioned to answer this question. It is really pretty simple to determine which is a better option. Are you demented or are you a normal sane person. The reason I ask is that demented people like cats and normal people like dogs. Cats I must admit can be cute and they are rather self-sufficient. However cats are sort of the animal version of Stewie from family guy in that they are perpetually thinking about killing you. It is very obvious from looking at them, even when they are enjoying your company, that deep down they would like nothing more then to claw your face out and then eat your rotting flesh.
Dogs on the other hand, perhaps because they need you to feed them and take them for walks etc..., will generally like you, want to have you around, and develop an instinct to protect you.
Now if you’re a normal person this will sound appealing to you... if you are demented it might not and it might fill some deeply placed need to live with an animal that wants you dead.
I am now boring myself so in order to summarize I will cite this fact... if you were to die your cats would start eating you the moment they realize they can. Dogs on the other hand will only eat you after many days and then only if they have no other food sources and cannot escape from your domicile. To quote a fantastically named web-site (swingadeadcat.com)
" The next time you're falling asleep on the couch with the television on, take a look at your cat. He's not watching you because he's enamored of you; he's checking to see if your chest is still moving. In the final analysis the only difference between you and kibble is most of the time you can get away -- right up until you can't."
As I am sure you have figured out it all depends where you want to be. It appears like you want to be in NYC... so go to Saint John's (yes Queens def sucks but it beats out Chicago any day of the week). If you want a shot at big firms you will have to be in top 15% at least likely somewhere between 5-10%. Good thing about SJU is that they do seem to have a lot of all around connections. If you don't get a job at BigLaw SJU has strong connections in local politics (DA's office) as well as w. various companies in the region.
I think you have a pretty good idea of the choice that is facing you... I don't think either school is per se better. It will pretty much depend on your preferences. The schools are in VERY different parts of Boston. BU is urban and BC is suburban. I attended BC undergraduate, but BU was my choice ahead of BC for law school. In my opinion and this is just my opinion I felt BC law was a bit of a "drink the law school kool- aid" type of place, where as BU was a little bit more eclectic and diverse. On the other hand what I felt to be shall we say overly conformist attitudes at BC many others see as collegial.
Having friends who are about to graduate at both institutions and speaking strictly from their expirences ... my friends at BC law have had an easier time finding top quality jobs, both at graduation and summer associate.
Good luck, but both places are great schools I don't think you can really make a wrong choice here.
Got into Brooklyn last week. Anyone else receive this 10lb package from them overnight priority mail. I wish they had offered me more money rather than spending whatever ridiculous amount of money (must be at least $50) it must have cost to send this thing. All of these documents could easily be, and likely are, available on line.
I am currently analyzing data of placement at top 80 NYC firms for graduates of Cardozo, Brooklyn, St. John's (and Seton Hall). I can tell you that so far (I am at about 30/80) these are the trends.
Cardozo- Very few partners comparatively. This is likely due to the fact that Cardozo only graduated its first class in 1979. The trends for associates are a little strange so far (this may be a reflection of the fact that the data sets are not complete) they have high (comparative) placement at firms that would be considered top tier of BigLaw, however overall associate placement lags significantly behind Brooklyn and is much more comparative to St. John's (so far).
Brooklyn- Dominant in comparison so far in terms of associates and nominally in the lead over St. John's in terms of partners.
St. John's- Very large community of partners (remember though this may be indicative of past job prospects as much as future prospects for advancement). Associate placement is stronger then I would have imagined although interesting trend of placement of large amount of associates at particular firm s (Simpson is the obvious one here, though there are others).
I will post results when they are finished.
From anecdotal sources I have heard that Cardozo is a really nice place to study law for whatever that is worth. (not much)
I def trust your experience over what I have garnered from half listening to questions at admitted students days.
I think the problem is that PT programs can vary so much from school to school, at some places they are intended to serve those who work during the day while at others they are essentially a mechanism for admitting students who may be attractive for one set of reasons, but have a low LSAT score or GPA (its my impression schools don't have to submit LSAT and UGPA info for students admitted into PT to USNWR, LSAC and others).
These differences can making comparing programs very difficult.
OP you should know that if you apply for regular FT programs often times if you don't meet the requirements for FT they will offer you admission to PT even if you didn't apply. This happened to me at a couple of my reaches.