This is also excellent advice. The prestige difference between Seton Hall and Rutgers is not sufficient to justify the cost of Seton Hall. There is no prestigious employer that recruits at one and not the other. And, yes, there are lots of lawyers who are miserable. It is a profession in which one works very hard and, depending on the job, may have to work long hours -- if the work doesn't appeal to you, after a while you'll hate it.
OT: Law school ?
- Thread starter JDNB
- Start date
Back in my day, Seton Hall was easier to get into. I was lucky. I did what @RU848789 advised and worked 2 years before law school. My wife supported me through law school and we used savings and had tuition remission as law review editor to graduate with money in the bank.
Last edited:
Overlooking 1 thing - headhunters. Son went to Rutgers got pushed into bankruptcy at 1st firm. After a year contacted by headhunter then again twice more after 8-10 months each with abt 80k raise each time. So maybe go to low cost law school and wait on the headhunters.
Daughter went to pace law and loved it small campus nice area in white plains also went with headhunter but hated the new firm and thankfully old firm upped their offer to come back. Nothing worse than going to a job you hate everyday.
Daughter went to pace law and loved it small campus nice area in white plains also went with headhunter but hated the new firm and thankfully old firm upped their offer to come back. Nothing worse than going to a job you hate everyday.
I think that actually that came afterward. The 200-800 scale was long ago, e.g. 1972 when I took the LSAT.
The schools are now equivalent in the LSAT scores and GPA of the entering class, even though Seton Hall is much more expensive. As with Villanova, the market evidently thinks that the extra money is worth spending.
Something on my phone keyboard is causing difficulty in typing/posting. Forgive all the typos. On vacation and posting on hiking breaks.
It's not exactly the same. Yes, the value of the name on the diploma diminishes as you progress in your career. But IMO, the bigger factor I notice is whether people go PT or FT. Almost everyone I've worked with with a PT MBA comes across as if they learned nothing and went through a box checking excercise.
Hazarding a guess what would you think?
At least most of the people I know that went straight from RU to law school went to Newark or Camden. The rest to SHU or NYC schools for the most part.
Don't know. As I say, perhaps Rutgers-NB has a plurality but it would still be a small share.
Good point on PT vs. FT. Definitely agree with this. I did the FT track for my RU MBA and the experience was vastly different than my work colleagues that did PT (at RU and other local universities).
Interesting article on a young man who seemed to be trying to make decisions to impress others, instead of finding his why and how in life. We often see family members living vicariously through the achievements of younger relatives and forget about them finding true happiness in life.
Some may say this is a unique case, but I have witnessed this with quite a few young people in the last several years.
"In 2018, after graduating from Harvard Law School, I landed my dream job at a top law firm in California. I was just 24 years old and making $200,000 a year, including bonuses.
From the outside, it looked like I was happy and thriving in my career.
But here's the biggest downside of success that no one talks about: the deep anxiety — and eventual depression — that often goes ignored."
"For much of my life, I worked endlessly to rack up achievements that I thought would make other people respect me more, whether it was being high school valedictorian or interning at the White House or graduating early.
I realized that if kept going this way — chasing prestige and trying to control everyone's opinion of me — I would completely lose my sense of self."
Some may say this is a unique case, but I have witnessed this with quite a few young people in the last several years.
"In 2018, after graduating from Harvard Law School, I landed my dream job at a top law firm in California. I was just 24 years old and making $200,000 a year, including bonuses.
From the outside, it looked like I was happy and thriving in my career.
But here's the biggest downside of success that no one talks about: the deep anxiety — and eventual depression — that often goes ignored."
"For much of my life, I worked endlessly to rack up achievements that I thought would make other people respect me more, whether it was being high school valedictorian or interning at the White House or graduating early.
I realized that if kept going this way — chasing prestige and trying to control everyone's opinion of me — I would completely lose my sense of self."
I'm sure you'd agree that anxiety and depression don't just happen among lawyers in firms like the one he joined. It's a problem throughout the profession. So is substance abuse. It's not necessarily a reason not to go to law school -- but it is a reason to think carefully about one's choices.
If he’s that down at age 28, he’s got way other issues other than law school. It appears it would have happened at any profession and isn’t particularly law related. I was 25 when I graduated and had a clerkship for a year. So I really was only practicing for two years at age 28. Not sure that’s long enough to be down on the profession unless you were down on it starting law school from the very beginning.
I loved the public sector but far less lucrative. Way less…Student loans took a decade and I shudder for current grads.
However much better life balance and like to think I did some good.
Last edited:
That article just seems like the person isn't into his chosen career path that took a long, long time to work for. You hear similar things a lot for medical school grads. Some end up not liking being docs. Kinda sucks after all that effort and cost, but it happens.
I can't compare law and other professions. I just can say that a lot of lawyers have anxiety/depression/substance abuse issues. It's not confined to young lawyers. It may be especially common among them because law school and law practice are so different. Even today, with the growth of law school legal clinics, many law students have a poor idea of what being a lawyer is like.
He seems to have found contentment in starting his own practice. Did anyone else notice that in the article?
I have rarely met a lawyer who loved working for a big firm.
I think the most happy lawyers I've met are the "tradeoff" types who work in house, government, public sector...and who work it financially versus slaving. Like, I hope the partners are happy but in my dealings with some of them they strike me as not very. I would definitely put the solos in the tradeoff bucket so long as they are not being worked to death. And we really need people to graduate law school and go back to their small town and do wills and divorces and things like that, even though it's not extremely lucrative.
The system as it is currently is untenable. It's set up as if most people will work forever in BigLaw when most people work never in BigLaw, including plenty from T14 schools, and plenty of those who do bailing the minute they can make the numbers work.
I hope that in the past 2+ years when people have been reflecting more on work-life balance that law is included.
Being a solo is definitely not for everyone. One controls one's own hours, but attracting and serving clients is hard work. There's a lot of anxiety and depression among those lawyers, too. These days a solo needs a specialty such as yours.
The biggest problem in the legal world is the lack of representation for the middle-class. The rich can afford lawyers and the poor can get legal services, but there's nothing for those in between. The reason is that it's not economical to build a practice on wills, divorces, etc. -- and specialization is necessary to do any of that well. There's no equivalent in the legal world of medical insurance, so ordinary people can't afford to have much to do with lawyers.
He started a specialty practice, not as a solo, but as a partner in a smaller start-up firm.
"I co-founded a law firm for content creators, where we help negotiate deals and protect intellectual property. Even though I’m making less than I did at my previous job, the work is energizing and the hours are better."
Good. But I suspect the hours are not that much better -- any private practice requires a lot of hard work.
Interesting call from my son tonite. He does large bankruptcy/restructuring for a lg ny firm. He got a lead to apply for a position in an asset mgmt firm in Philly. Wouldn’t technically be doing lawyer work(not really sure of what he’d be doing, neither is he until he makes call). Pay is 500k to 1 mil. Now making just under 500 k inc bonuses. Feeling burnt out works ton of hours, tedious complicated work. New place less hours less stress. Anyone have any input.
Supposedly it’s a common jump as they look for legal/bankruptcy exp.
Supposedly it’s a common jump as they look for legal/bankruptcy exp.
He might as well make the call. There's no law saying one has to do lawyer work forever.
It never hurts to kick the tires on an interview. Worst case he gets some practice interviewing.
I personally hated billing hours and could never imagine it. Typically an in house or JD preferred type position you're not going to do that. Some will even be closer to 9-5 but for 500k likely not lol.
One thing I will say- not sure where lives, but if he feels strongly about living in NYC or Northern NJ he may not like Philly. Do they offer flexibility? Work from home or only going to Philly once or twice a week?
There is *plenty* to like about Philly -- for one thing, the cost of housing is much less. And the area has a lot to offer either a single or an individual raising a family.
He’s making the call tm. Not crazy abt going to Philly but for that $ he will sacrifice lol. Said if offer is in the sixes he will accept but still wary, he doesn’t have a finance background but does have the legal bankruptcy/restructuring experience.
To be clear the guy that rec him is the head of his firms bankruptcy group and the finance group is a client. Thought is that he would funnel back all work to the supervisor (?).
He should check with a real lawyer, but I don't think there's a problem with funneling back work to the former firm so long as (a) the firm's work is good and the fee is normal; and (b) he doesn't get any compensation from the former firm for doing that.
He will always have the firm experience to rely on if he wants to get back into the world...but that is very rare.
It's also possible if he's not on the partner track that the boss still wants him to end up in a good place.
I am not saying it has nothing to offer. But it's not for everyone. Personally I'd be willing to make the trade off on COL to stay here, but that doesn't mean everyone would.
Right his 1st thought was am I being let go and did ask the partner who he’s pretty good friends with. Was told absol not but this is a huge opportunity and thought of him right away as a fit. Partner said he did same thing for few years but that group went under. He’s meeting with the partner Monday to get more details before he makes contact.