This is something I have been very curious about, but I haven't really posted anything about it until now. I am curious to the effect location of undergrad has on a law school's decision to pursue a candidate.
That sounds like a jumbled mess, so let me provide an example. I attend WKU, which is not a super-well known school, but is a fairly well-respected public school in my region, and is also about 60 miles from Nashville. I realize that, given the same numbers, a Harvard degree would trump me, but suppose I was competing against someone from Eastern Michigan University (just an example)- would I be looked at more favorably for scholarships at Vanderbilt? Likewise, would the Eastern Michigan undergrad be looked at more favorable at UM?
It seems like location of undergraduate would be important because a law school would realize that a student would be more likely to stay closer to what they are used to. However, when dealing with schools with little national recognition, it may not make a difference. It is something to ponder, anyway....
I am not sure if I understand your question correctly, but if you are asking whether caliber of your school matters in the application, the answer is YES, according to Berkeley, UCLA, Hastings, Loyola and Iowa adcoms. Berkeley adcomm said in his words "3.5 GPA from UCLA is not the same as 3.5GPA from Calstate." I can only guess that this is generally true for schools across. If you are asking whether living in the region (or attended ug) of the law school you are applying to affects your chances, the answer is generally, No.