Law School Discussion

Show Posts

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 - sno

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 28
ucla and usc's a reach...possible, but reach...solid enough of an lsat, but the gpa's a bit low...loyola's pretty much a target in far as schools in ny, i don't know them as well so i'll leave that to others...

Choosing the Right Law School / Re: URGENT!! Loyola vs. USD
« on: June 30, 2007, 10:12:11 PM »
i agree w/pretty much everything aaron said...except the COL in sd/la ranges here just like it does in la...depends on the neighborhood and the actual place...i live in la jolla, i share a 3br condo with 2 other guys and i pay $600 a month (and no, it's not a *&^% hole)...i have friends within a quarter mile who have their own 1br and one with a studio paying about $1100...i have friends throughout the city who pay anywhere from $600 to $ just depends on the specific place as it does in la...

Law School Admissions / Re: Worth applying to HYS?
« on: June 30, 2007, 01:40:37 PM »
u can retake as bosco said, but i think your bigger bar is the gpa and not the lsat...personally, u have a shot...granted it's a slim shot, but a shot nonetheless...shoot out the apps...worst thing that happens u "waste" $200 (such a small drop in the $150k you're going to be spending in the next 3 years it's not even funny)...if u get in, totally worth it...but if you don't apply at all, u may be thinking "what if" the rest of your life because of $200...

The less prestigious degree and the big debt load both do the same thing: they reduce the number of opportunities you have.  Both close some doors, while the lack of debt or the prestigious degree open a lot of other ones.  Law students just need to be cognizant of that.  I think a lot of people have preconceived notions about this, and don't recognize that it's always going to be a trade off.

excellent post

very true, but also consider that you can pay off debt in five years while the name on your degree will be there forever.

Famous last words.

If you stay longer or cultivate an extravagant lifestyle and feel *obligated* to stay that's a different issue and probably indicative of problems you'd have in any field.

You can't pay off $150,000 loans in five years if you are an average student at a T1.  You probably won't get a job that allows you to do so.

Meh, depends on your debt load and grades.  If you're paying a lower in-state tuition and live very frugally it's not impossible/improbable.  I'm an "average" student, always have been, and expect to be "average" coming out of law school.  I also expect to discharge my debts in five years by living cheaply like I always have.

There is a point to limiting your options early on.  Neither one's the right answer, though.  Ultimately I elected to pay more (quite a lot more) to go to a T1 because I knew I DIDN'T want to work in biglaw and the more prestigious degree is going to afford me more options in the DOJ/gov't/possibly academia.  I realize that this means I'll have to "serve time" in biglaw, but there are worse things to do for a few years out of school.  I've know a couple people who went through med school and I'd take two or three years of biglaw over a residency.

yea, but chicago is quite different from a mid to low t1 in terms of job options when you graduate...

Law School Admissions / Re: Should I disclose speeding tickets?
« on: June 29, 2007, 01:18:54 PM »
don't they ask for an explanation along with the disclosure? if so, u don't need to make that the topic of your ps and just explain it as a part of the far as the speeding tickets go, i don't think you need to explain much...just a simple i just failed to check my speed probably would do...

edit: looking back at it, i didn't even explain the reasons for my doing 111 in a 70...just what happened u won't need much time/space for your speeding violations...and i'd probably advise against using that as a topic for your ps...unless it's the reason you decided on law or something...i mean, explaining past misconduct should be in the form of an addendum, not a ps where you should be trying to sell yourself as opposed to explaining your misdeeds...

Texas is known for its high salaries and low COL. Biglaw firms pay $135K+ to start so you don't even have to be going into biglaw to get to around $100K. I have quite a few friends aiming to go to Texas because they know it's a good way for them to pay their loans off quickly and still live a comfortable lifestyle.

Unless a candidate has higher grades and/or has some personal connections to TX, I'm doubtful to the career prospects of a 22-35 graduate getting a $100K+ job in TX.  Anecdotally, I've been told that an out-of-stater coming to TX has to have a better answer to the "why do you want to work in Dallas" question than "low cost of living and I like the weather."

I'm guessing that an out-of-state median candidate from a 22-35 school probably has the same career prospects as median to slightly-above median grads at SMU, Baylor, and Houston.  Median private sector salaries for those grads are roughly $70K-$80K (according to USNWR data).  Of course, I'm just BS-ing here.  What do you think?

That's the same as it is anywhere- what's your point? I doubt that the median salary in Texas for people coming from 25-35 is going to be the same as median from SMU/Baylor. My school's median salary is lower because people go to lower-cost/lower-paying markets, but it isn't anywhere near $70K.

this debate's gonna go it possible? yes...are there statistics to prove either position? nothing that's already been gathered (as far as i kno) unless people are willing to do the research themselves, this is all going to be speculation...imo, it's pretty 50/50 whether or not it's true...but let's forget the actual salary...i'm willing to bet it's easier to get a job in tx if you went to smu/baylor than if u went to a 25-35 word: networking

Law School Admissions / Re: $$ for Law School
« on: June 29, 2007, 10:32:00 AM »
mine's based on both...what that basically means is that to be even offered it i had to have the lsat/gpa to qualify me, and once offered i had to "need" it enough for them to actually give it to me...that probably differs by school and the award, but that's just one example...

Law School Admissions / Re: Should I disclose speeding tickets?
« on: June 29, 2007, 10:30:02 AM »
It's not that I mind disclosing the traffic violations, it's just that I would rather not show them past judgement errors if it isn't required. I have plenty of time to consider it and gather information, so I'm not too concerned.

well, my approach when i was applying was just simply "is this a violation the school is actually looking for when they ask for the disclosure based on the way the disclosure request was written?"...

don't worry about disclosing it...a speeding ticket, imo, is hardly a major judgment error...yes, you may have other things in your past that make you questionable, but i don't think a speeding ticket will make it worse...i mean, doctors, lawyers and judges get speeding tickets...i understand the notion of not wanting to show past judgment errors, but if the school's asking for it and you choose not to disclose, this rather minor past judgment error just became a present judgment error...if they find out, however unlikely, you won't be seen as "he's learned his lesson" you'll be seen as "he hasn't learned a thing and is still trying to cover his ass"

Law School Admissions / Re: Should I disclose speeding tickets?
« on: June 29, 2007, 10:21:01 AM »
lying on bar application would be different from lying on app.

it is, i agree, but the point is that a small situation could be made much worse by a lie/cover up

As a 3L, I can tell you the biggest flaws in this particular dilemma involve the perceptions regarding PI law.  If you are not successful in school or your school has a less than stellar reputation, you aren't just going to get the PI job of your dreams.  Having no interest in BIGLAW is great, but the idea that Y/H/S grads (or just plain higher ranked schools' grads) don't compete for those jobs is ridiculous.  The cache of your degree in your first job search matters in ALL fields, public and private.  Who cares if you have no debt, if your resume is never read by the recruiter at the job of your dreams because there are other numerically successful students from more highly regarded schools who will get the initial interviews?

i disagree with this...based on my assumption about op's position...what you say is true if you're looking for a job where there are a lot of people competing for them from many schools, but based on the op saying that there's really only 1 t3 that places well (and the fact that they were able to get into a t1) i'm assuming that the t3 is one of the few schools in that that i mean 2 or 3, possibly even the only one...if there are few schools in the state, then it's probably not a state with a huge legal market just drawing grads from all over to move there...thus most of the attorneys in the state probably went to a local, in-state school...if that's the case, then the significance of that t1 degree just went down significantly...many employers probably graduated from the school op is thinking about and they probably won't say "i'm not going to interview this guy, that school sucked"...and if they didn't go to that school, i'm sure they have a lot of experience working with alums from that school and i'll assume they're not bad experiences...since i don't know of any one school where the alums are so bad that people won't hire new alums...a lot of assumptions, i know, but i think they're all fair

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 28