Talk me out of getting an LLM

[Mr. Excellent]

So, here's the thing: I graduated from a top-tier law school in May of 2009, I'm admitted to the bar, and I've got a dull but well-paid job with no realistic prospects of being laid off in the foreseeable future. Professionally speaking, life is okay.

But - the job is boring. And I really, really miss being in school. I like school. I am a giant nerd. And while I was browsing the Intarwebs, I came across this: George Mason University's LLM in Law and Economics.

This thing is. SO. Cool. I mean, just look at it! Economic Theory of IP! A Torts seminar, with econ goodness! Regulated Industries, which looks like it's Admin Law with econ goodness! And a whole lot more - all at a top-tier law school just a hop, skip and jump from my apartment!

I really, really want to apply for this program. And when I spoke with the admissions office, they told me that with my grades and LSAT scores, I had a real chance of getting in. However, they also told me that I'd be kind of nuts to take on any more educational debt in this economy so long as I've got a job. And that's true. In fact, I can't think of much *practical* use for this program, other than the fact it's make me a better lawyer overall, with a keener grasp of policy. Still, it's a bad idea. Hell, I've trash-talked LLMs myself on this Board!

So, LawDopers (or anyone else) - talk me out of doing this! There's no rush - I'd be applying for the class starting in fall of 2011 - but I figured I should try to nip this in the bud.

But it's such a cool program!

[Oakminster]

I don't know that an LLM would make you a better lawyer. My understanding is that it's an academic-focused degree, possibly useful if you want to teach somewhere, and may grant deeper insight into a particular area of law...dunno if you practice in that area or not.

Also agree with the job = good, more debt = bad idea.

[anu-la1979]

I'd practice a little longer before rushing off for another degree.

Besides, you already outlined what the best argument against getting this degree would be-more debt for very little professional payoff. The only LL.M I know of that is somewhat acknowledged as having a decent rate of return is NYU's tax LL.M. Otherwise, I mostly just think of them as degrees foreign lawyers obtain to be able to sit for the bar.

[Rafe Hollister]

If you would get to study with Walter Williams, Economics professor emiritus at GMU, then you should do it.

[Kyla]

I though LLMs were for foreign-born lawyers who wanted to practice in the US. Is there really a point for US-born lawyers?

Also, it sounds horrible. Law AND economics, together? I think that might actually qualify as torture under the Geneva Conventions.

[neuroman]

What in the hell are you going to use an LLM for? I guess it's a socially acceptable way to avoid the real world for another year, but unless you are genuinely motivated to go into academia I would strongly recommend against this move.

Let me guess, by the way: you went straight to law school from undergrad? I'll share a secret with you: working at a real job is never going to be much fun, and the sooner you get used to it the better.

Sincerely,
Someone still getting used to it

[kathmandu]

Unless you want to teach law, I don't see this degree as advancing your career prospects. Plus, school shouldn't be used as an excuse for avoiding the real world.

I vote nay.

[Rand Rover]

How old are you? (My guess is 26, FWIW.)

Where do you want to be in 10 years? Where do you want to be in 20 years?

[NicePete]

Unless it's in Tax or you want to be a professor, why bother? And probably not even if it's in Tax.

[Duckster]

Originally Posted by kathmandu

Plus, school shouldn't be used as an excuse for avoiding the real world.

This. Time to cut the apron strings. Besides, no matter how cool it would be, you can't start doing cool things, let alone use the word again until you've spent at least 25 years in the real world.

[Oakminster]

Originally Posted by Duckster

This. Time to cut the apron strings. Besides, no matter how cool it would be, you can't start doing cool things, let alone use the word again until you've spent at least 25 years in the real world.

Unless you work in criminal or poverty law, in which case you age in dog-years.

[ReticulatingSplines]

Originally Posted by Mr. Excellent

- all at a top-tier law school

Since when is Mason a top tier law school? When I hear "top-tier" I think top 14. Mason's not even a top 40 school.

[Kyla]

Yeah, I just looked up Mason. US News & World Report has it at #42. That's not top-tier. And from what I understand, ranking is REALLY important for law schools. I'm a grad student (in policy, not law) at the University of Michigan, and I've heard that people in the law school regularly apply to transfer to other schools, because apparently the #9 ranked law school isn't good enough for them.

[Mr. Excellent]

Originally Posted by ReticulatingSplines

Since when is Mason a top tier law school? When I hear "top-tier" I think top 14. Mason's not even a top 40 school.

I believe US News considers the top fifty schools to be in the top tier of its rankings - though, of course, top 14 is more prestigious (as is top ten, top five, and so on).

[Mr. Excellent]

Originally Posted by kathmandu

Unless you want to teach law, I don't see this degree as advancing your career prospects. Plus, school shouldn't be used as an excuse for avoiding the real world.

I vote nay.

Well, it wouldn't be an excuse to avoid the real world - I'd be going part-time, while working.

Originally Posted by Kyla

I though LLMs were for foreign-born lawyers who wanted to practice in the US. Is there really a point for US-born lawyers?

Also, it sounds horrible. Law AND economics, together? I think that might actually qualify as torture under the Geneva Conventions.

I dunno - Richard Posner seems damn happy with his lot in life. Besides, GMU might teach me to graph things!

[NicePete]

Originally Posted by Kyla

Yeah, I just looked up Mason. US News & World Report has it at #42. That's not top-tier. And from what I understand, ranking is REALLY important for law schools.

Probably true, but I have no idea why. The curriculum of all law schools is virtually identical. And unless you're trying for a job on Wall Street or for a judicial clerkship, your law school pedigree is irrelevant after you land your first job and most likely irrelevant even before then.

You aren't going to learn anything at a top-tier law school that isn't available to you at a bottom tier school. The only reason to make the additional investment is to either feed your ego or to be considered for a certain type of job. If you aren't interested in either of those things, save your money.

[Rand Rover]

Originally Posted by NicePete

Probably true, but I have no idea why. The curriculum of all law schools is virtually identical. And unless you're trying for a job on Wall Street or for a judicial clerkship, your law school pedigree is irrelevant after you land your first job and most likely irrelevant even before then.

You aren't going to learn anything at a top-tier law school that isn't available to you at a bottom tier school. The only reason to make the additional investment is to either feed your ego or to be considered for a certain type of job. If you aren't interested in either of those things, save your money.

Agree entirely. The senior partner I work with the most went to a super-shitty law school, but he's got mad skillz (as the kids say, or used to say at least), so he makes about $3 million a year.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Why don't you just audit one of the courses and see if you actually enjoy it?

[magnusblitz]

Originally Posted by kathmandu

Plus, school shouldn't be used as an excuse for avoiding the real world.

UCLA Law just recently started a program for graduates to do an extra year and get an LLM degree. The whole thing is filled of classes aimed at getting you "real-world experience", but it's pretty obviously a "we know you can't find a job in this tough economy so just stay at school and pay us another $35,000 to stay out of the real world for another year." I'm wondering if a lot of employers will think that as well. I know if I was an employer I'd be very interested in why someone decided to stay in school and fork over money getting "real-world experience" instead of going into the real world and getting paid for it; bad economy or no.

I do say that as someone graduating in a couple weeks with no job lined up myself... so maybe I'm a bit biased, but I would say, if you've got a solid well-paying job... KEEP IT!

Originally Posted by Mr. Excellent

I believe US News considers the top fifty schools to be in the top tier of its rankings - though, of course, top 14 is more prestigious (as is top ten, top five, and so on).

True, but the Top 14 is pretty much a magical number, given that it's always been the same 14 schools in the top 14.

[ReticulatingSplines]

Originally Posted by NicePete

And unless you're trying for a job on Wall Street or for a judicial clerkship, your law school pedigree is irrelevant after you land your first job and most likely irrelevant even before then.

And getting your first job isn't important? That's why we choose the higher ranked schools--you've gotta start out pretty high. Because I've got news for you...you ain't lateraling from Bob Smith's Ambulance Chasers to Cravath, no matter how good you are at your job.

[Rand Rover]

Originally Posted by ReticulatingSplines

And getting your first job isn't important? That's why we choose the higher ranked schools--you've gotta start out pretty high. Because I've got news for you...you ain't lateraling from Bob Smith's Ambulance Chasers to Cravath, no matter how good you are at your job.

But geography is also a big factor here. Not everyone wants to work in New York City. There are lots of good regional firms that hire from the T14 schools and one or more of the local schools (typically only those in the top 10% or so of the class).

[NicePete]

Originally Posted by ReticulatingSplines

And getting your first job isn't important? That's why we choose the higher ranked schools--you've gotta start out pretty high. Because I've got news for you...you ain't lateraling from Bob Smith's Ambulance Chasers to Cravath, no matter how good you are at your job.

And I've got news for you. Not everyone wants to work for a white-shoe law firm. In fact, something like 90 - 95% of attorneys don't practice that way and most probably wouldn't if they were offered the opportunity to. Prestige doesn't correlate to quality of legal work or to quality of life. Plus, there's a vast range of practice between Bob Smith's and Cravath.

Nothing wrong with it, if that's what you want. But why play that game if you aren't really interested in the prize?

[AK84]

What do you want to do in your legal career.

Do you want to go into acedemia?
Do you have years of experience in a particular area and want to seal it? I don't think so.
Do you want to work in house in a certain industry?

If any of the above are true, then go for it, otherwise forget it.

You learn "law" on your feet practicing, not in a classroom, where you learn about law. My pupil masters favourite comment.

[ReticulatingSplines]

Originally Posted by NicePete

And I've got news for you. Not everyone wants to work for a white-shoe law firm. In fact, something like 90 - 95% of attorneys don't practice that way and most probably wouldn't if they were offered the opportunity to. Prestige doesn't correlate to quality of legal work or to quality of life. Plus, there's a vast range of practice between Bob Smith's and Cravath.

Nothing wrong with it, if that's what you want. But why play that game if you aren't really interested in the prize?

You made a blanket statement that your law school pedigree is largely "irrelevant." That's still wrong, no matter what figures you pull out of your ass about what attorneys would want to do.

[Queen Bruin]

Here is a helpful flowchart.


But hey, if you decide to go, can my husband have your job? We're willing to relocate anywhere on the globe for steady and dull.

[chappachula]

Originally Posted by Mr. Excellent

But it's such a cool program!

There comes a time in everyone's life when you stop enrolling in "programs" and start ,well,....ya know, actually doing something with your life.
And when you're doing it, you usually don't get to use the word "cool" to describe it.







(disclosure: I managed to delay maturity, and reach age 27 doing cool stuff, and without ever working a full-time job. But the last couple decades I haven't been enrolled in any program;--------just the same job, the same mortgage, and with the same spouse.
Not cool.
But not so bad, either
Give it a try.



(and besides, it's kinda nice knowing that you will never,ever,ever,ever have to sit for another exam.

[NicePete]

Originally Posted by ReticulatingSplines

You made a blanket statement that your law school pedigree is largely "irrelevant." That's still wrong, no matter what figures you pull out of your ass about what attorneys would want to do.

When's the last time a colleague, client or judge asked you where you went to law school? When's the last time you were intimidated by someone based solely on their pedigree?

[ivn1188]

Go for it. Please leave the market. Going back to school and racking up more debt for a mostly useless but fun degree? Totally worth it.

Though top tier is somewhat misleading. USNWR lists the top 100 schools as top tier, but no one actually considers DePaul or West Virginia U. as "top tier".

In all seriousness, don't be an idiot. There are literally thousands of recent grads from better schools with better grades who are smarter and more capable than you who would kill to have a steady job with Gov bennies. As much as Rand Rover would like to pretend otherwise, it's about 80% luck and timing, which you have apparently managed to match up.

This LLM idea is pretty dumb, but hey, more power to you if you want to give a job to someone who actually wants it.