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 - qmmm
Pages: 1 2 3 4  6 7 8 9 10 ... 13
« on: July 08, 2007, 03:39:20 PM »
I suggested schools based on the fact that you seemed intent on staying in the Midwest -- although I grant that Nashville is a southern city.
Any of the T14 should allow you to find a position in Chicago, and the other posters are right that you have a good shot of getting into at least 1 of them. My guess is that Chicago, MI, and NU have the largest fraction of their classes taking positions in the Chicagoland area. With your numbers I think that you have a good shot of getting into at least one of these 3 schools.
The other Midwestern T1's also send people to Chicago, but you would probably have to do comparably better within your class since placement gets more regional as you go down the rankings. A lot of this is probably self selection; they choose a midwestern LS b/c they wanted to end up in Chicago. This affects how many offices interview on campus as well, so I don't think that it'd make a lot of sense to go to, for example, USC over WashU if you were sure that you wanted to work in the Midwest.
« on: July 08, 2007, 02:43:18 PM »
I'd also round out your application list with MI, Vandy, MN, IA, and WI. Although it certainly sounds like it'll come down to NU or WashU considering your situation and numbers. But it wouldn't be a bad idea to send out a couple of other apps in case one or more gives you money -- leverage can be a good thing.
As for whether it's stupid to quit working an go to law school, it depends on what you want and why you're switching fields. If it's only for the money, then you have to realize that the opportunity cost for you to go to law school is about $0.5M assuming that you're paying full price ($60k/yr), including interest of 7% paid back over 10yrs, and losing $0.3M in salary for 3 yrs. It would take quite a while, even with a big law position, to make that a financially beneficial career switch.
If you're doing it because of excitement and challenge of practicing the law, then go for it. Only you can know can make you happy.
« on: July 08, 2007, 11:48:09 AM »
I think that the general consensus of the board is that the vast majority of schools primarily look at the higher score regardless of the situation. Thus, I don't think that addendum is needed in this case.
« on: July 07, 2007, 05:27:35 PM »
I agree with bamf. To paraphrase one of my favorite movies, 'The More the Merrier', there are two types of people in this world: those that write in diaries everything that they wished that they did that day; and those who don't because there doing everything that they wanted to do that day.
That being said, I think that there is likely another problem: unreal expectations. If you've been lived in a culture that tells you repeatedly that achieving a law degree will lead to a six figure salary right out of law school, you're likely to believe that not only is it possible but that it's probable. Matthies is right, if that's why you went to law school in the first place you have to hustle; you either have to secure a position in a top school, be in the top 10% of your class, or pound the pavement. The point is that you have to set yourself apart from the herd in some manner. However, if you think that probable that you'll score the salary you desire simply by finishing law school, then you're likely not going to try to separate yourself from the herd. That's when reality comes crashing down and some people can't handle it.
EDIT: The six figure salary was an arbitrary number. Everyone has their own definition of wealth. I simply used six figures because that's sort of a baseline for biglaw in secondary legal markets.
« on: July 04, 2007, 12:20:31 PM »
Confused, you showed that when you study you can score higher that 9 out of 10 highly motivated and selective people on a standardized test. You don't need an addendum to tell an adcomm what a 163 means. That seems in line with your GPA.
« on: July 03, 2007, 11:03:10 PM »
Bearly, I think that you missed my point. I'll say it more clearly this time; your GPA and your LSAT score really aren't as different as you want to claim. Unless you can document something like dyslexia that makes timed exams particularly difficult, I really don't think that an addendum will have much, if any, importance.
Could you have gotten a few more points on the LSAT? Sure. If you want to make that claim, don't write the addendum; retake the exam.
You should put a lot of effort into you PS so that you can demonstrate why you had such a high GPA.
As a personal note, I scored 11 pts lower on the LSAT than my best practice exam. I still got into Boalt w/o an addendum. It's not the end of the world, because you really will get into some great schools.
« on: July 03, 2007, 10:32:49 PM »
First of all, you LSAT score isn't crappy. The score puts you in roughly the top 10% of all the test takers. Considering the self-selection involved, that really is quite a remarkable accomplishment.
If your SAT score was lower than 90th percentile, couldn't someone claim that your 90th percentile LSAT score was a fluke?
« on: June 26, 2007, 12:02:28 PM »
Sorry. I don't have that kind of info.
« on: June 25, 2007, 09:19:06 PM »
Oh. I see now.
Every loan institution has a different risk tolerance, so I do not think that you'll get the exact same interest rate at each lender. While I wouldn't expect that you'll find differences of several percent, even one percent would be worth your while. You should look around.
Pages: 1 2 3 4  6 7 8 9 10 ... 13