Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are a few misconceptions that need to be addressed in this thread.
Concord Law and William Howard Taft are not accredited by the CA bar because they CAN NOT be accredited under current policy. The CA bar does not accredit correspondence/online law schools. It's safe to say that if this policy was changed, they would both achieve CA bar accreditation with little effort.
The above schools are currently accredited by federally recognized agencies, which brings a host of benefits, including participation in federal student loan and aid programs as well as widespread recognition by government agencies and other higher education institutions (excluding ABA law schools of course). Most CA bar accredited schools are not also accredited by a federally recognized agencies, and this is something that any school would get ASAP if they felt they could achieve it.
To address the concerns of a non ABA degree being "CA only", this is not as drastic as it might first appear. Most states, after a certain period of practice of law in CA (usually around five years) will allow a member of the CA bar to sit for their bar exam, whether or not the candidate has an ABA JD. And, lest anyone think otherwise, the ABA will happily invite any member of the CA bar to pay dues and become a full member, regardless of school.
This is great news! I had read a while back that after a certain amount of years, a CA attorney regardless of where they have graduated from, could sit for other bar exams across the nation.
I'm in my second year at a state-accredited law school, not ABA. My LSAT was 168. I was accepted into some ABA schools but declined for a variety of reasons...
I could not attend school full-time, so this ruled out Berkeley, Stanford and Hastings. USF, Santa Clara, and Golden Gate were my choices, but I declined.
...I feel the ABA should be done away with. I've learned that attending an ABA schools does not automatically make one a superior lawyer or more knowledgable about the law. Good luck!
You got a 168 on your LSAT and you "decided" to attend a non-ABA accredited school????.......riiiiiiiggggghhhhhttt you did. If I were you, I'd be a little more honest with the board and remove the extra 25 points you gave yourself on your LSAT.
With a score like that, you could have gotten into UCLA at about $10,000 a semester. And if you didnt want to go full-time, USF and Santa Clarita have part time programs.
Im going to a tier 2 lawschool right now, and the most annoying thing is when I hear people say they could have gotten into Berkeley, Stanford, Michigan, UCLA, Columbia....etc., but chose our quaint tier 2 law school instead. I love my school, it is a great lawschool and it is recognized throughout the nation. Although my job prospects are not as high as a Harvard/Stanford grad, who have their choice in any job anywhere, I will have little problems finding a job in the future, in fact Im currently working as a law clerk making good money. But if you could have gotten into a tier 1 law school, you would have! It’s a no-brainer.
It's a rarity that someone would voluntarily choose a tier 2 lawschool over a tier 1 (for money/time purposes). Everyones lives are different, we all have our own complications. But no one in their right minds voluntarily declines some of the best schools in the country: Berkeley, Stanford and Hastings, (tier 1); USF (tier2); Santa Clarita (tier 3); and even Golden Gate (tier 4), to go to anything lower than a tier 2 lawschool, much less a non-ABA no-name state approved lawschool! Does not happen! Anyone suggesting that they’ve done so is completely out of his/her mind!
BTW: When I reference tiers, I'm talking about the US News ranking of ABA approved lawschools and not CA's own tier rankings (which prior to the quoted post, I never knew existed).
I can understand how the competitiveness of lawschools can turn people off, but it is not a requirement that you try to outperform everybody. I know plenty of people who dont give a crap about being the top 15%. So long as they are doing decently, they know they can land a job. This is especially true of someone going to Stanford (for example). You can finish at the bottom of your class and still land a great job.
Logically, it makes absolutely no sense at all, no matter what type of job you’re trying to get with your J.D. Whether it’s a small lawfirm working 40 hours a week, to a huge corporate job, the better the lawschool (ranked) the more opportunities you will have the more money you will make.
A non-aba approved school is fools gold, as has been stated. Especially in California where you will be competing against lawschool grads from every corner of the country. Even in a small legal market like San Diego, you're resume is getting put in the bottom of the list after all 200 + ABA lawschool grads. And when they look at your non-ABA lawschool, they will stare at it confusingly before they slam dunk it into the waste basket.
THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE TO THE OP, SINCE YOU ARE LOOKING TO APPLY TO A LARGE CORPORATION. A tier 1 ABA lawschool is basically a guarantee. A tier 2 may require some extra effort, moreso if your school is lower in the rankings. A tier 3-4 lawschool – extra effort to “forget about it!”
I would suggest taking LSAT courses and making it your goal to hit the high numbers to get into a tier 1 law school. This is especially true with the big corporations that you are aspiring to work at. This is even true with small lawfirms, 40 hour a week attorney positions, whatever. Say hello to the government sector! The LSAT is not to be taken lightly! It is the most important test you will ever take (as stated by various professors in undergrad). Even moreso than the Bar. Because without an LSAT that can get you into lawschool, you dont even have an opportunity to take the Bar (most states require a J.D., though in CA you can take the Bar without a J.D., but try getting a job without one!) Note, as with many people, I would have honestly gone into another field of graduate study if I hadn’t been accepted to an ABA-approved lawschool!
Lastly, no one is saying the ABA makes you more knowledgeable about practicing law. If you go through an ABA approved school, which is again highly recommendable, you will basically be allowed to practice law anywhere in the US (pending you pass the bar in the respective state). Which is the way it should be. Non-ABA approved schools in CA teach you state specific material. So you will come out with no education on federal civil procedure and so forth which is basically a world of its own.
Last edited by wesside; 10-06-2008 at 12:02 AM..
Reason: edit
[color=black][font=Verdana]You got a 168 on your LSAT and you "decided"...
Thanks for bringing this post to my attention. Some clarifications. I was in my second year when I retook the test, not in my second year when I wrote this post. I thought at that time that I might transfer to an ABA school if I did pretty well, and I did very well, getting a 168. By the way, I took the test a total of five times. The first two times were in the 140s with little prep. I wasn't sure if the legal field was where I wanted to be and had some health issues. I waited two years before taking it again, scoring a 154. I waited another two years and occasionally studied. My fourth score I cancelled, taken after 1L. My fifth score was a 168. This was even lower than I practiced in the two weeks leading up to the test. My final practice score a few days before I took it was a 171. I became very comfortable with the test. I had a personal tutor. In preparation, I went through 27-28 timed practice tests. I worked hard for that score. All total, I played around with that test for 5 years and kept at it like doing crossword puzzles. Believe whatever makes you comfortable.
About transferring, my only option was to attend PT. In the bay area, this meant USF, GG, and SCU. We didn't want to move. Unlike you, I'm married with kids. I applied to these schools and was accepted at all of them. So what happened? We ultimately decided not to take on more debt as these schools are incredibly expensive. Two of them wanted me to start over and I wasn't willing to do this. I found out from talking to other patent attys that technical expertise and experience was more important than what school one attended, so I chose to stay where I was. I began working PT at the IP firm that I'm at now while in school. Such were my circumstances. I have an extraordinary technical background as a professional and an MSCS. Also, since CA is our home and where we intend on staying, what did I gain by incurring the enormous additional expense of starting over at an ABA just so I could say that I have an ABA law degree? Obviously, I'm someone who was and is in a position not to give a damn about the ABA designation. I didn't need the ABA like apparently you do. Turned out to be the best decision for me. I'm not knocking ABA schools. They are exceptional law schools, but in my particular case, I didn't need to attend one to do well in the area of law that I was interested in.
You sound like the typical ABA law student. Loudly pass judgment on others without knowing or caring about their particular situation. You know nothing about me but are pompous enough to call me a liar and proclaim that my true score was in the 140s because I didn't go to an ABA school. Such an attitude is one of the reasons why I couldn't stomach being around ABA law students. Incredibly annoying the immaturity. I don't overestimate someone's abilities because they attended Harvard and I certainly don't underestimate a person because they earned their degree from William Howard Taft. I wouldn't look down on you because you earned your degree from a "tier-2", favoring someone who went to Stanford. Maybe you would do this. Learning the law is not rocket science. It is a great achievement though for any person to pass the CA Bar no matter how they did it. It is an incredible test requiring an incredible effort by everyone who was fortunate to pass it. I find this false sense of superiority that you convey the ultimate turn-off. You attend a tier-2 ABA school, be proud of that fact. Don't project a sense of inadequacy because you are not at a tier-1. Don't be ungluded in the court room when opposing counsel is someone from Hastings. Don't you dare be so foolish as to underestimate a lawyer simply because they didn't go to an ABA school. Once you start practicing, what school you attended has little relevance. How well you represent your client matters most.
About your other points, thanks for your opinion. Everyone is different. USNews and World Report ranks law schools and many potential law students and potential employers live by these rankings. That is their perogative. It is not for me to say whether that is right or wrong because I don't walk in anyone's shoes. About non-ABA schools, they have their place. My guess is that you have never set foot in any of such schools and that you know nothing about them except through hearsay. Incredibly presumptious of you to tell others to stay away from such schools when you know nothing about them, correct? Get informed. Also, unless you talk to every employer, you haven't the slightest clue what they all will do with resumes from law students or law graduates. Everyone brings something different to the table, not just the name of the law school they attended. Also, I personally don't care for law firms who focus only on what school I attended. How short-sighted and shallow of them to judge me in that manner. I believe that if they don't hire me because I didn't go to Stanford, that's their problem, not mine.
Finally, I am an example of someone who didn't go to an ABA school who did quite well. Quit trying to justify the superiority of the ABA law degree because you are incurring a tremendous debt to earn it. IMO non-ABA schools have their place and before condemning such schools, learn more about them.
This is great news! I had read a while back that after a certain amount of years, a CA attorney regardless of where they have graduated from, could sit for other bar exams across the nation.
Do you have any links for further information?
This is true. Best to contact the state bar of the state you want to practice law in to determine their rules. Some allow non-ABA graduates to sit right away (CA, MA, WI, VT). Others require 3, 5, up to 10 years of practicing law in CA first.
Thanks for bringing this post to my attention. Some clarifications...
Quit trying to justify the superiority of the ABA law degree because you are incurring a tremendous debt to earn it. IMO non-ABA schools have their place and before condemning such schools, learn more about them.
Well it sounds like I was correct in my guess that your score was some 25 points lower than the 168 you posted. I wasn't necessarily trying to put a stink on non-ABA accredited lawschools, but rather stating the obvious: if you can get accepted into an ABA accredited lawschool, you take it. No one voluntarily chooses a non-accredited lawschool when they can get into higher programs. Your post sounded like you initially got accepted to Stanford, USF etc., but chose a non-ABA lawschool. Which is unheard of. Yes I was calling you a liar, but you really can't blame me for doing based on what your post was seemingly saying.
You yourself even thought about transferring. And I can understand the precarious situation after already being in school for a year. You've already paid two semesters worth of school, and you will lose those credits since an ABA school will not take them (assuming it were true that you could have transfered to Stanford, USF, which is another issue I wont get into). Some people would, some people wouldnt. There have been a few people at my school that transfered to Stanford, UCLA, and Ive already meet a few people from lower ranked lawschools here on campus (though non from an non-ABA school). But you acknowledge that if you get a chance, initially, to choose an ABA lawschool versus a non-ABA lawschool, you take the ABA lawschool.
While its cool that you didn't need to go to an ABA school, going to an ABA school is more than just about being able to say, "I went to an ABA school" while sipping wine at a cocktail party. Rather its about the doors it opens after you instantly finish school.
But Im not projecting a sense of inadequacy because I'm not going to Harvard, Stanford, UCLA. What I stated was that a tier 1 lawschool opens the doors instantly to job anywhere in the world instantly! For instance, there are databases open to law students that allows us to search and apply to every open position in the country as a summer law clerk or first year associate. However, if your lawschool is not on the list they flat out tell you to try some other time and they might consider you. Sometimes they blatantly tell you that they do not have current alumni from your school working there, so try when they do. Luckily, my school is on the list about 80% of the lists. The tier 1 schools are always on there. And Ive noticed that tier 3 and 4 lawschools in California, are on there maybe twice out of every ten times. Never have I seen a non-ABA accredited school on any list. Nothing short of being related to one of the attorneys will get you in, and still that might not get you in depending on the lawfirms policies.
But this is in no way trying to imply that a person from a "lower" school cant beat out those from "higher" schools. In fact, one of the partners at my lawfirm comes from a tier 4 lawschool and chews up the competition. I am simply saying that the higher the school, the more doors are instantly open. Who doesnt want that?
This is especially true to the OP who is hoping to get into Corporate law. Most corporations either have in-house counsel, or hire a lawfirm to do their contractual and defense work. The people/firms they hire are, 9 times out of ten, people from tier 1 lawschools, or high tier 2 lawschools, sometimes 3 and 4 (after practicing for a while). If you have an alumni in one of those places, your foot is in the door! You may not consider this your problem, but it sure as hell is if you're looking to get into this line of work. These are places that pay sumer lawclerks $20,000+ for the summer, and first year associates at $120,000+/year. They are so high in demand and popular with students and new attorneys that they have the ability to hand pick any person they want. They begin taking applications early in the fall semester for clerks in summer. I know classmates that have already applied to 30+ lawfirms already and its barely October!
All of what I say is more than just a mere "justification for incurring tremendous debt," but is more of a slap of reality to the OP and anyone thinking of getting into law as a career. These are the unspoken, yet real realities of practicing law.
In conclusion: You shoot for best possible school in the rankings. Dont believe me? Ask your undergrad professor. He will pretty much tell you every single thing I just mentioned here. If they say jump, you say, "how high?" And if you cant get in, you may want to consider alternatives to lawschool.
There is a big, BIG reason why the higher the lawschool ranking, the more selective they are - which in turn, why there is so much importance placed on a great GPA and LSAT (coined as the most important test you will take in your life in law). Take it very seriously.
Last edited by wesside; 10-06-2008 at 11:04 PM..
Reason: edit
Well it sounds like I was correct in my guess that your score was some 25 points lower than the 168 you posted...While its cool that you didn't need to go to an ABA school, going to an ABA school is more than just about being able to say, "I went to an ABA school" while sipping wine at a cocktail party. Rather its about the doors it opens after you instantly finish school...
No you weren't correct, but believe what makes you comfortable.
About the topic of this thread, we differ in how we view non-ABA schools. Such is life. I have the utmost respect for ABA law schools, but non-ABA schools are an excellent option for some.
Good luck to you in your legal studies and best of luck on the bar exam whenever you take it. Perhaps someday, you with your ABA law degree will be as successful as I have become.
No you weren't correct, but believe what makes you comfortable.
About the topic of this thread, we differ in how we view non-ABA schools. Such is life. I have the utmost respect for ABA law schools, but non-ABA schools are an excellent option for some.
Good luck to you in your legal studies and best of luck on the bar exam whenever you take it. Perhaps someday, you with your ABA law degree will be as successful as I have become.
Well you did mention you scored in the low 140's the first two times which was what I suspected based on you going to a non-ABA school. Be that as it may this was starting to turn into a pissing match, on a subject which really is not debatable. But if you are happy with what you have, thats great. GL.
Alexus, you have very unique and a compelling background, in that it qualifies you to practice a type of law that requires a technical background that few law students possess and that is highly lucrative and in-demand.
However, I don't think you will find the same situation for your classmates if you kept in touch with them. I have a feeling more of them either are contract attorneys doing document review, paralegals, or doing some non-legal work, than getting good jobs like being a patent attorney or having a lucrative practice.
I think good advice is still go to the best law school you can while balancing cost and location. That will overwhelmingly be an ABA-approved school.
I'm in my second year at a state-accredited law school, not ABA. My LSAT was 168. I was accepted into some ABA schools but declined for a variety of reasons. I did not want to incur the debt at my age (mid 40s) with 2 kids about to attend college in 1-3 years. My oldest is looking at Stanford, Yale, and Harvard. The second child is looking at UCLA, Berkeley. I have three kids, and both my wife and I work. I could not attend school full-time, so this ruled out Berkeley, Stanford and Hastings. USF, Santa Clara, and Golden Gate were my choices, but I declined. At my age, I didn't see any value in getting an ABA-blessed legal education and incurring the expense. I'm not interested in working for some big prestigious law firm, and I don't care for any culture that would look down on a person's credentials simply because they didn't attend one of the top ABA law schools. It's really ridiculous the culture now that says that every person who wants to be taken seriously, should attend an ABA law school. Most of the people think that if you don't go to an ABA, you won't be able to get a job with a top law firm. Other lawyers from ABA schools will look at you and laugh at your credentials. You will be a laughing stock, unable to find work. This may be true in some circles, but I consider this their problem, not mine.
I did a lot of research in this area before I decided to go to law school and before I decided which school to attend. In CA, there are 3 levels of law schools. The most respected are the ABA law schools. These of course are great law schools by all accounts. They have full-time professors, excellent facilities, huge law libraries. Upon obtaining your JD from one of these schools, you can immediately take the bar exam in ANY state. This is important, especially if you plan on leaving CA some day. There are only a few states that allow you to immediately take their state's bar exam if you didn't graduate from an ABA law school. Currently I believe these states are CA, Mass., Vermont, and Wisconsin. Other states require that you pass the bar in CA first, then practice law for a period of time (3-10 years depending on the state.) Law students who go to ABA schools usually all did pretty well on the LSAT and have pretty decent undergraduate credentials. If your circumstances allow you to go to one, then do so.
The second tier are the state-accredited law schools. These are law schools that are accredited by the state, but not the ABA. Recognize that before the ABA came into existence, all law schools were accredited by their states. I am very familiar with 2 of such schools in northern CA, and they are exceptional places to learn the law. The professors are not full-time, but they are practicing lawyers, judges, and legislators. I count among my professors federal and state judges, partners and associates in law firms, state legislators, former president of the CA Bar, lawyers who grade bar exams, and so forth. We learn the law using the same case books used by students at Hastings, Stanford, and Berkeley. These schools are far less expensive. Class sizes are smaller and the setting is more intimate. These schools offer part-time programs and cater to working professionals, people who want to obtain a law degree but not practice law, people who just want the extra legal knowledge to help them advance in their current jobs, people with kids, and so forth...people who otherwise would not be able to obtain a legal education. Many short-sighted people condemn these schools because the bar passage rates are much lower than for the graduates of ABA schools. They fail to recognize that graduates of these state-accredited schools have personal circumstances that prevent a larger share from studying thoroughly for the bar exam to pass the first time. Hard to focus on studying for such a hard exam when you have a family, a job, and responsibilities as opposed to the typical ABA student who is younger and has immensely reduced distractions. A high percentage eventually do eventually pass (>75%). I did well on the LSAT, but after sitting in on classes at Hastings and Santa Clara U, I found the non-ABA option to be better suited based on my circumstances. I know many from these schools who did pass the bar on the first try, so it's important to recognize that passing the bar exam is about the individual, not the school.
The third tier are the unaccredited schools, school that are not accredited by the ABA or the state. These include schools like Silicon Valley Law School, Concord Law School, and William Howard Taft. Of course these schools are condemned because they don't have the blessing of the ABA. Big, prestigious law firms will not be interested in you if you attend one of these schools. That's the current trend now and it is a critical reason for many why they don't take these schools seriously. You will be able to sit fo the CA bar exam after graduating from one of these schools, but of course you won't be able to take the bar exam in other state immediately (like the state-accredited schools above). Some employers discriminate as well, saying that you should have graduated from an "accredited" law school, which rules these schools out. I have a friend who worked with me as a software engineer. He has a Masters in Computer Science from a good school and he works full-time as an engineer. He earned his JD from William Howard Taft and passed the bar exam on the first try last year. He continues to work full-time, while being co-partner in a patent law firm that he has with a graduate friend from an ABA school. He's doing very well and just an example of someone who succeeded by going the non-traditional route. He's over 50 by the way. Depends on your circumstances and what you want to use the degree for.
A law degree is a valuable degree to have. I never cared for the culture that places school rankings above all else. I look down on any person who thinks they are better than someone because they went to Stanford and the other person went to Golden Gate. Incredible false sense of superiority here. I also don't care to get myself into billable hour hell slaving at some prestigious law firm at my age, competing against 20-somethings with no responsibilities or worries other than themselves. If you want to practice in a different state than CA, MA, WI, then go to an ABA school. You will get a fine legal education and be considered legit. However, if you live in CA and plan on remaining for the next 10 years or so, look at the state-accredited schools. They are tough schools with excellent professors and a more intimate setting to learn the law. They have many local connections and are respected locally. You will quietly get internship opportunities and job offers after you graduate, offers that are never advertised. Please contact Massachusetts School of Law (Massachusetts School of Law at Andover) and request an information packet. It is the most comprehensive one that I've seen from non-ABA schools, and lists over 700 things that you could do with your law degree besides practice law. Pretty eye-opening!
I currently work at an IP law firm. I have a BS in Applied Math and Comp Sci and an MS in Comp Sci. I have been a computer scientist for 20 years. I wanted to use my experience in law so I am doing patent law. Because of my circumstances, I don't need the ABA blessing to do what I do, or to do what I want to do with my JD. It's different for those who want to practice law with big, prestigious law firms or the typical 20-something with no experience.
Finally, there is some debate as to the relevance of the LSAT in determining success in law school. The ABA uses this score to exclude people as is their right. Non-ABA schools use this score to determine where you are so that they can tailor a program to bring you to a level so you can pass the bar exam. Different philosophy and I prefer the latter. Unaccredited schools don't require it. Even schools like MSL don't require it because they feel its an imprecise measure of one's potential. I tend to agree.
Sorry for making this so long, but I have much experience in this area and quite frankly, I feel the ABA should be done away with. I've learned that attending an ABA schools does not automatically make one a superior lawyer or more knowledgable about the law. Good luck!
Out of curiosity, are you planning on sitting for the patent bar? THAT'S a really tough one.
Alexus, you have very unique and a compelling background, in that it qualifies you to practice a type of law that requires a technical background that few law students possess and that is highly lucrative and in-demand.
However, I don't think you will find the same situation for your classmates if you kept in touch with them. I have a feeling more of them either are contract attorneys doing document review, paralegals, or doing some non-legal work, than getting good jobs like being a patent attorney or having a lucrative practice.
I think good advice is still go to the best law school you can while balancing cost and location. That will overwhelmingly be an ABA-approved school.
...word. I dont know much at all about patent law so I didnt want to speculate. But my general understanding was something to that effect.
My position was mainly that if the OP hoped to get into corporate law/defense work for big corporations, her ability to do dwindles down to virtual non-existence the further she goes down on the US News rankings of ABA law schools. The lower your school is, the better you have to do in lawschool to get into that field of law. But still, I know people from tier 4 lawschools that are on law review etc. and are getting burned by the big defense firms. Yet, people in somewhere in the middle at my lawschool seem to be getting in. I really, highly doubt that non-ABA schools are considered. Especially considering that you have to be able to practice law in all the 50 states, something you can only get if your ABA accredited.
Its just the way it is with these big corporate defense firms. They want students/recent grads from schools that are higher on the list. Its all about looking good and being able to boast the image that "our firm hires the best of the best."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
and you "decided" to attend a non-ABA accredited school????
.......riiiiiiiggggghhhhhttt you did. If I were you, I'd be a little more honest with the board and remove the extra 25 points you gave yourself on your LSAT.
Which is unheard of. Yes I was calling you a liar, but you really can't blame me for doing based on what your post was seemingly saying.
