Importance of T14

J.H. Song

The common understanding among law school applicants is that if you want a reasonable shot at practicing "big law" you HAVE to get T14. My questions is, why 14? I understand that you have to draw a line at some point, but I'm just wondering why its 14. Would the difference (chances getting into big law firms) between Cornell (#13) and Georgetown (#14), if there is any, be significantly different from the difference between Georgetown and UT (#15)?

I understand that it seems silly, but many people I've talked to really seem to be putting a lot of emphasis on the idea of T14. So really, two questions, to whoever either has an answer or any opinion. I am currently in the running for most of T14. I am about 90% sure I would like to work in big law, and perhaps even internationally, so geography and regional strengths are really non-factors. Would it be unreasonable to choose UCLA #16 over say the #12, 13, or 14 schools if I just like UCLA better? Also, if 14 does happen to be the magic number, how do we account for the fact that these rankings DO change, and that what's 14 today may be 16 or 17 in 3 years?

nicole.hopkins

@"J.H. Song" said:
HAVE to get T14

this is literally completely false.

nicole.hopkins

all that you have to do to confirm or disprove this is pick a biglaw firm and look at where their associates went to school.

NYC12345

.

Petrichor

You don't need to go to a T14 for BigLol job, and even T14 grads strike out. But generally speaking your chances increase as the school's rank gets closer to 0.

DByrne07

I hope that's not true, b/c I like UF's and FSU's law schools, and both rank near the middle 40s, but are tops in Fla.....

J.H. Song

Makes sense that the higer the ranking the greater the chances at big law firms but back to my question, whats the significance of 14?? or is that just a common reference bearing no significance

Petrichor

@"J.H. Song" as far as I know the T14 refers to schools that are or were at one time in the top 10. UT was actually ranked 14th one time but it was not called a T14 since it was never in the top 10.

Pacifico

It generally has to do with national versus regional considerations. The average T14 graduate is much more likely to be able to get a job anywhere in the country than those outside the T14. This is what is known as "portability". There are multiple caveats to this however as certain schools produce significant amounts of different kinds of lawyers (e.g. Yale to academia, Georgetown to government/clerking, NU to big law, etc.)

A lot of that is just selection bias because in the case of GULC for example, people go there to be in DC and clerk and work in government so they don't have wicked high big law numbers not because the school sucks but because it's not what those kids want to do.

Now there are a handful of schools like Fordham that rank a bit lower but have better big law numbers in their respective markets. And then of course your ability to handle a debt load is also a major factor in where you should go.

The T14 is more an insurance policy for kids who would be top half of the class but not top 10% and still want big law or similar opportunities. The further away from the T14 you go, the higher in your class you need to rank to get big law, generally speaking.

katherinestein24

Have you worked at a big law firm? I recommend doing so before you resign yourself to taking on hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to go to a T14 where you (likely, unless your scores are great) won't get any scholarship money. I work at the top law firm in NYC and I do enjoy it but it is not for everyone and it is glamorized as much as demonized.

katherinestein24

Sorry I know that has nothing to do with your question but just a word of caution from someone in the trenches!

NYC12345

.

Pacifico

If she has time to post on 7Sage I'm guessing it's not Wachtell

That being said, the vast majority of people are in no position to just go and work at a big law firm before attending law school. While I definitely advise people to do their homework before choosing law school or any career path for that matter, the fact remains that gathering empirical evidence firsthand is not necessary or even the most practical way to do that for most people. And given the ridiculous cost of a legal education across the board, the only two decent and relatively common options to recover from that debt burden are big law or loan forgiveness. Until disruptive models of legal education come to the fore to provide a viable alternative to $100-$200k in debt then the status quo will likely be maintained for years and decades to come.

katherinestein24

Yes, one of those.

Best things: exposure to some of the biggest players in litigation/the prestige itself, the money, the intensity (as someone who thrives in that environment)

Worst things: the brutality of the hours is less about the number are more about the unpredictability (this goes all the way up the food chain), it can get VERY boring and repetitive and the hierarchy makes you feel like a cog in a machine

nicole.hopkins

@katherinestein24 said:
the brutality of the hours is less about the number are more about the unpredictability (this goes all the way up the food chain), it can get VERY boring and repetitive and the hierarchy makes you feel like a cog in a machine

Note to self: the fact that this makes me salivate might be something to explore in my journal. Masochism? Is that masochism I detect in myself?

I'm one of those family-free people so it's exciting to think about something filling up my time like that. Something other than rewatching Downton Abbey.

Pacifico

I've worked similar hours in the military and honestly it was definitely the unpredictability and being on call 24/7 for 2 hour recalls that was the worst of it... But triple my salary and I wouldn't give a shit.

nicole.hopkins

@Pacifico said:
But triple my salary and I wouldn't give a shit.

Also probably considerably less threat of bodily harm in Biglaw. Probably.

katherinestein24

It is Cravath, FYI. And I work on the busiest case team in Manhattan (i.e. we bill more hours than anyone -- I'm just on my 15 min lunch break right now!)

katherinestein24

Understood that I am extremely lucky to have had the opportunity for first-hand exposure, but I also think that exposure is what puts me in a position to caution people!

I actually vehemently disagree with this, and it's this kind of thinking that makes so many associates miserable.

"and given the ridiculous cost of a legal education across the board, the only two decent and relatively common options to recover from that debt burden are big law or loan forgiveness."

But we can get into that in a more private conversation, if interested!

nicole.hopkins

@katherinestein24 said:
I actually vehemently disagree with this

Why do you disagree with this? For fully self-supporting adults who do not have anyone to help pay for law school, how else are we supposed to pay our bills? And still be able to like, buy a modest starter home by the time we're 40?

NYC12345

.

NYC12345

.

katherinestein24

As a fully-self supporting adult who does not have anyone to help pay for law school, I think assuming that the only way to pay bills is to go into big law is silly. Two main reasons:

1) 160,000k - 190,000k a year as a starting salary is not necessary to "pay bills" or even pay back loans, even considering full tuition.
2) If the desire to go into big law stems from the desire to be able to pay off law school loans, that's some serious circular reasoning.

I'm mostly playing devils advocate here, but it comes from speaking with a lot of people who are the ones who took on hundreds of thousands in debt and are SO unhappy but can't leave because of the so-called "golden handcuffs."

katherinestein24

I'm not saying that working in big law is a bad idea, nor am I claiming that people only want to work in big law for the money. What I am claiming is that if the only reason you want to go to a T14 is because you want to work in big law, and the only reason you want to work in big law is to pay off the loans you took on to go to a T14, there is a circular reasoning that needs to ironed out. Think about why the statistics show so many lawyers as being unhappy. It seems like people like @nicole.hopkins and @Pacifico have thought out their decisions, so I am in no way discrediting that, but I do caution people who make assumptions about money/careers without openly and honestly considering what they are getting into!

nicole.hopkins

@katherinestein24 said:
the only way to pay bills

Correction—not "the only way to pay bills," but perhaps the most efficient way to service enormous debt within a short period of time. You know, so those of us who will be in our mid-thirties when we graduate can do other things with our dwindling youth.

Actually @Pacifico will really be in his LATE thirties at that point ...

Nilesh S

@"J.Y. Ping" wrote a really good response to @Litian.Chen on this issue a couple of years ago... here it is: http://7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/301/how-do-you-evaluate-your-lsat-upper-limit Litian Now goes to UT Austin School of Law and is SUPER happy... but that is besides the point... what is important is JY's analysis of the exact dilemma that you are dealing with @"J.H. Song"

nicole.hopkins

WHOA it's a @"Nilesh S" sighting!

Nilesh S

Lol @nicole.hopkins on does find time to emerge from the cracks of crushing 1L workload every now and then

nicole.hopkins

@"Nilesh S" said:
emerge from the cracks of crushing 1L workload

*pushes back into crack*

Just kidding! Hello, would you like a torta? Get it? Tort-themed foods?

blah170blah

T14 = schools that have never been ranked outside of 1-14. Sure, Duke can possible move down the rankings from 9 to 11, but it has never been ranked 15+. It's a metric that supposedly shows the stability of going to these schools as these have and (presumably) always will be the top 14 law schools in the US.

@alexandergreene93 I don't think Katherine's experience working in Wachtell will really give her a leg up in getting interviews for OCI. Those are pretty much all determined by grades. It could help her during the interviews because she could actually talk to associates about working at a firm and they might trust her ability to handle the hours moreso than someone who has never worked in a big law firm before.

Regional schools are risky unless you're dead set on staying in the area of your school and you're sure you can excel at the school. No matter where you go to school (YLS excluded), it seems your grades matter more and more thanks to the laws of supply and demand -- too many lawyers, not enough jobs. So if you're looking to go to UF or FSU, make sure you want to be in Florida and can excel at either one of those schools.

The logic behind T14 or bust, from my understanding, is that the lower in rankings you go, the more doors you close for yourself. Maybe down the line you realize you want to clerk or go public interest instead of working in big law. If you go to a T14 school, you have the flexibility to pursue multiple routes because of the name brand. Outside of the T14, T20, T25, T30, your chances to pursue something other than working at a law firm in your region becomes harder and harder.

katherinestein24

@alexandergreene93 sorry yes I agree with @blah170blah. The only reason I think it may help is that I work directly for two partners who are very influential and have expressed their recognition of my potential to come back, but besides that it won't matter haha

Nilesh S

@nicole.hopkins lol yeah I get it... 2 points well more like 3: (1) you'd be really REALLY happy in law school... (2) I don't have torts till next sem oh and (3) I have actually taught torts before

nicole.hopkins

@"Nilesh S" said:
I have actually taught torts before

Hahaha! Ummmmm unfair advantage ... ???

Pacifico

The T14 is not stable at all...while of course there are perennial mainstays, if you go back and check out the T14 before the 2000s there is some craziness going on.

Jonathan Wang

I'm pretty sure that's not true - the T14 is the T14 because it's been consistent for like 2 decades now. A quick google search gave me this link:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=213

The order varies, but the only ranking of the entire bunch where the top 14 wasn't exactly the same as the modern top 14 was 1987, which is functionally useless.

Of course, I can't be arsed to double check his data, so if his data is wrong then I'm obviously wrong too.

What IS variable is 15-25, where there's been tons of movement over the years.

Nilesh S

@nicole.hopkins one can wish and yes @"Jonathan Wang" that is correct... the only time that there was a variation was the first ranking of schools... that was 87... other than that, its always been stable...

Pacifico

The consistency has really been a product of the practices of USNWR IMO... And since 1987 was their first ranking it would be the outlier since I think schools made changes after that to game them somewhat, so they have definitely developed a consistency after that first time, but I have several misgivings over their practices that are likely better left to another discussion. So yes you're absolutely right that the consistency has been there in their rankings virtually since their inception, though how much those rankings translate to better outcomes across the board is still up for debate, though the notion of general portability still exists.

I had seen earlier rankings like these from 1975 and hadn't realized until you brought it up that it wasn't USNWR: http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2006/10/the_first_law_s.html

Much like the old school LSAT it is interesting to see how things have changed.

nicole.hopkins

@Pacifico said:
old school LSAT

Made up languages! General knowledge about Scottish poets! And pictures of doggies!

J.H. Song

Thank you for the clarification guys. I naively thought T14 simply meant Ranks 1-14. Makes more sense now.