Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham  (Read 4301 times)

General2010

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 701
    • View Profile
Re: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham
« Reply #10 on: March 05, 2007, 08:40:57 PM »
I will say when I went on a tour at W&L, my tour guide who was a 3L was starting at Kirkland & Ellis in NYC after graduation, and she said a lot of NYC firms recruit at W&L.
W&L Class of 2010

Journeyman

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1413
  • The road to life.
    • View Profile
Re: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham
« Reply #11 on: March 05, 2007, 08:47:54 PM »
Yea, I'm actually thinking more along Philly or Pittsburgh.  I'm not surprised about NYC though.

My guide was a 2L (or 3L) heading to NYC.  Hell, we may have had the same tour guide
IU-B '10

Journeyman, I am dumbfounded as to how you got into IU and W&L with your numbers. 155 LSAT and you applied to Vanderbilt? Honestly?

stsherri

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 123
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham
« Reply #12 on: March 05, 2007, 09:56:50 PM »
East Coast: W&L > ND
Chicago/Midwest: ND > W&L
West Coast: ND > W&L

Really?  You give W&L an edge on the east coast?  I would certainly have thought it had a distinct advantage in the SE, but not necessarily across the east.  Interesting.  I know W&L places heavily into Houston, Atlanta, Charlotte (all places I don't really want to go), and I think about 10% of their grads (or so I've heard) go to DC.  I guess I just would have assumed that ND would have better reach than W&L. 
W&L '10

ANBUDOM

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 236
    • View Profile
Re: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham
« Reply #13 on: March 05, 2007, 10:02:51 PM »
I am interested in a Clerkship after graduation, but have no strong preference for where I want to practice, I just know I will never want to live in NYC. So yes, I think cutting Fordham out of the equation would be smart. If for some reason i have a change of heart I can work my way into NYC rather than be "stuck" in it unsurely. I feel like Emory gives me more geographic mobility than W&L, am I wrong? Why the bias towards W&L? ;) inform me of its many virtues:).......... I live in PA right now and probably want to live in the surrounding are. Maryland, NJ, DE, NC, possibly some parts of VA but not as rural as Lexington.

If you're interested in practicing law in anywhere above Washington DC, I would not recommend W&L.  I don't know what job prospects are like at Emory but virtually all the 1L's in the top 15% of the class that are planning to practice in NY, NJ, or even Delaware is already getting ready to xfer.  I know the 1L job search is supposed to be hell for everyone outside the top 10 but when you hear a lot of judges and lawyers saying, "Why W&L?  Why not go to (insert name of local Tier 2/3 school here)?" it starts to get very annoying.  PM me if you want more info. 
testing testing 1 2 3

General2010

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 701
    • View Profile
Re: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham
« Reply #14 on: March 05, 2007, 10:22:11 PM »
East Coast: W&L > ND
Chicago/Midwest: ND > W&L
West Coast: ND > W&L

Really?  You give W&L an edge on the east coast?  I would certainly have thought it had a distinct advantage in the SE, but not necessarily across the east.  Interesting.  I know W&L places heavily into Houston, Atlanta, Charlotte (all places I don't really want to go), and I think about 10% of their grads (or so I've heard) go to DC.  I guess I just would have assumed that ND would have better reach than W&L. 

I would, basically just from what I've read on here. One thing to consider is also travel considerations--I've spoken with recruiters at Biglaw firms who say that if there are two borderline candidates, the one who will cost the firm $200 in travel expenses would get the interview offer over the person who cost a lot more (the flight from South Bend). Although, to the poster above me, I'm interested to here more stories about your friends trying to practice in the northeast. I have no desire to practice there, but I like to know that where I go to law school (if I end up at W&L) is respected nation-wide.
W&L Class of 2010

SugarJ

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 908
    • View Profile
Re: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham
« Reply #15 on: March 05, 2007, 10:22:40 PM »
I'd say all of those schools are regional, however great they are.

I researched Emory prospects a bit and they didn't look to promising for northeast (NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc.) Better for DC, and great for Atlanta/ the south.

Fordham is great in NYC - but not as good anywhere else - Boston and DC inclusive.

I'd say browse each school's website and see which and how many firms recruit there from cities you are interested in.

I've heard very good things about W&L and Fordham, but I have no personally anecdotes about Emory grads.

Does money play a factor? Has any given you any? Fordham doesn't give out much merit aid, and I think their max scholarship is $15,000 (besides possibly a few full-tuition). Emory, I have heard, gives out money. And W&L is very generous with their presents.
Cornell Class of 2011 (deferring for a year!)

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=30secondstolaw

Lenny

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
    • View Profile
Re: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham
« Reply #16 on: March 06, 2007, 09:17:37 AM »
I have no clue what ANBUDOM is talking about.  Every firm and every judge I talked to had very good things to say about W&L and its grads.  I don't want to throw stones, but it sounds to me that ANBUDOM is popping off in what is probably the most stressful time for law students - early spring of 1L year.  On average, about 10 students transfer out after 1L every year.  Their class rank varies, so its not like the top 10% just disappear.

I agree with most of what's been said regarding the interplay among Emory and W&L.  I think W&L is greater than or equal to Emory in all relevant markets, including the northeast.  This is becoming more so every year, as the school has only recently (last 7 or 8 years) been pushing hard to recruit from and send students to the northeast.  So, whatever historical advantage Emory may have had in that region is, I think, gone or quickly fading.  I would say that at least half of my friends are now practicing in points northward like Delaware, Ny, Pittsburg, Boston, Chicago, NJ, etc. 

I'm not going to take up the W&L v. ND issue because I have no anecdotal experience with ND, so its like the dog that did not bark.  I can't say anything about ND because I have never met anyone that went to ND law.

Alamo

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2557
    • View Profile
Re: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham
« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2007, 09:45:38 AM »
I know the 1L job search is supposed to be hell for everyone outside the top 10 but when you hear a lot of judges and lawyers saying, "Why W&L?  Why not go to (insert name of local Tier 2/3 school here)?" it starts to get very annoying.  PM me if you want more info. 

I'm not really looking in the northeast, so I don't have any firsthand experience with this, but don't you have a reason why you chose W&L as opposed to the local T2/3 school?  I don't think the choice is hard to defend, and I think that most reputable employers will be familiar with W&L.  It's a question that employers should ask of you, since it shows a willingness to go a bit south for a better education, and employers are probably thus worried about your geographic commitment to the region, since you will have a range of employment options open to you from W&L that you wouldn't have had from the local T2/3, which would've left you stuck in that region. 

FWIW, A 3L mentor of mine did a 1L summer with a firm in Boston, and he was only top 40%.  Much of the 1L job search seems to be about being a great interviewer, which I evidently am not.
I must admit that I may have been infected with society's prejudices and predilections and attributed them to God . . . and that in years hence I may be seen as someone who was on the wrong side of history.  I don't believe such doubts make me a bad Christian.  I believe they make me human . . .

ANBUDOM

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 236
    • View Profile
Re: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham
« Reply #18 on: March 06, 2007, 10:59:14 AM »
I know the 1L job search is supposed to be hell for everyone outside the top 10 but when you hear a lot of judges and lawyers saying, "Why W&L?  Why not go to (insert name of local Tier 2/3 school here)?" it starts to get very annoying.  PM me if you want more info. 

I'm not really looking in the northeast, so I don't have any firsthand experience with this, but don't you have a reason why you chose W&L as opposed to the local T2/3 school?  I don't think the choice is hard to defend, and I think that most reputable employers will be familiar with W&L.  It's a question that employers should ask of you, since it shows a willingness to go a bit south for a better education, and employers are probably thus worried about your geographic commitment to the region, since you will have a range of employment options open to you from W&L that you wouldn't have had from the local T2/3, which would've left you stuck in that region. 

FWIW, A 3L mentor of mine did a 1L summer with a firm in Boston, and he was only top 40%.  Much of the 1L job search seems to be about being a great interviewer, which I evidently am not.

having connections helps a whole lot too... which i certainly don't have  :(
testing testing 1 2 3

Journeyman

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1413
  • The road to life.
    • View Profile
Re: W&L v. Emory v. Fordham
« Reply #19 on: March 06, 2007, 11:13:04 AM »
So basically if I have any connections in Philly, I would be fine going to W&L...plus it's more portable degree than Rutgers-Camden.

Correct me if I'm wrong.
IU-B '10

Journeyman, I am dumbfounded as to how you got into IU and W&L with your numbers. 155 LSAT and you applied to Vanderbilt? Honestly?