<p>I'm currently going into my junior year as an accounting major at the Leventhal School of Accounting (Marshall) at USC. I have also always had my sights set on law school, but I'm still unsure of which particular area of law I want to practice. I've really enjoyed the tax class that I've taken so far, and am definitely interested in exploring more about tax law.</p>
<p>I came into SC with the maximum number of AP credits, thereby allowing me to graduate within 3 years, but of course college is freaking amazing so there's no way I'm staying any less than 4 years (grad date: May 2012). I have several options for what to do with the rest of my time at USC:</p>
<ol>
<li>the Progressive MBT program</li>
<li>double major in business law</li>
<li>double major in business law AND the MBT</li>
</ol>
<p>Option 2 will leave me a lot of room to take random classes, since I would only need to take 16 extra units for the double major beyond my accounting major. Note: Marshall does not explicitly offer a 'business law major', but a BS in Business Administration where students can design their own concentrations. My business law concentration would entail the following classes: Legal Environment of Business, Finance and Law, Real Estate Law, and International Business and Transactional Law.</p>
<p>Option 3 only came to mind recently with USC's new academic achievement award, which allows students pursuing 2 majors to take up to 20 units each semester without having to pay extra tuition (normally 18 u max). Choosing this option involves taking 20 units each semester starting with Spring 2011 (3 semesters).</p>
<p>Basically, which option will benefit me the most professionally?</p>
<p>I also want to be realistic with myself because I tend to be an overachiever and think that i can do everything, but I am already somewhat heavily involved on campus (Greek life, BAP, Student Honor Council, leadership positions, TA for intro acct) and I don't want to kill myself. I have a 3.83 cumulative and major GPA, and my practice LSAT scores have ranged in the mid 160s with NO studying.</p>
<p>i would take a few fun classes and enjoy college, a 3.8 and a an LSAT score of 160+ is great. You’ll definitely get into a Good law school.(doesnt have to be t14)</p>
<p>You do NOT need to take, and probably shouldn’t take, more business law than what is required by your accounting curriculum. I would take the MBT option. Make sure that you also take courses that will improve your critical thinking and writing. Philosophy and logic courses are very good for this.</p>
<p>As for the LSAT, it is a crucial test! Unlike undergrad admission,which needed a solid SAT and GPA to get into a top school, you can get into a top law school if you do extremly well on the LSAT even with a merely good GPA. In fact, I know people who got into T14 law schools with GPAs under 3.4, however, the reverse isn’t true. I know people with 3.8+ who bombed the LSAT and got only into second rate law schools. The LSAT is MUCH more important for law school than the SAT was for college,which should tell you something. Although each school has their own admission formula, generally the LSAT has three to four times the weight compared that of the GPA and sometimes more.</p>
<p>Let me use Baylor’s formula as an example. They multiply the GPA by 10 and add the LSAT score to it in order to get a final score. Thus a GPA of 3.9 and 160 on the LSAT would provide a score of 199. A 3.4 GPA would have the same score if they achieve 165 on the LSAT. In fact, Most schools will take a kid who has a 3.4 GPA but 170 on the LSAT over a kid that has a 3.9GPA and a 160 due to their lower score, assuming no overriding factors such as under represented minorities etc.</p>
<p>bottom line: Study like a dog for your LSAT. It really, really is that crucial.</p>
<p>Whisleblower1, GPA is king for most things except law school admssion. Even with that, A strong GPA is very important since it will allow for a lower LSAT score for admssion.</p>
<p>Just because you fail at life Whitleblower doesn’t mean everyone else will. Anyone makes a comment and you jump on them trying to call them out all the while you make yourself look worse and worse to the board. </p>
<p>@Tax guy, I enjoyed your post yet again. I took a sample LSAT test when I was 17 because my brother in law had it out. I was surprised how well I did. It is nice to know that law school is still and option even if it is one i never take up. I am aiming for a 3.6 GPA when I graduate. a few C’s in lower division and a handful of B’s prior to selecting a major are keeping me down. Sitting at a 3.25 right now with a bit less than half my units completed so there is still time.</p>
<p>You’re no slouch yourself, FootballBanker. Your skills in both football and banking will undoubtedly lead to a life of success. However, if you’d instead chosen Lacrosse, you would undoubtedly have had an even better ‘in’ with the old boys’ club. But for all I know, you got a better scholarship for football than you did for Lax.</p>
<p>If I had chosen to play soccer I undoubtedly would have received a full ride to my school of choice with my athletic ability. That being said (or typed), I went for the glory and pursued football and the NFL. If only I knew then what I know now. Thank who ever runs the Earth that I was injured in spring practice, did not finish my degree there in Physical Education, and was kicked out of my parents house. Football is all politics.</p>
<p>You could probably learn a lot about business and law school just by clicking on taxguy’s name, hitting STATITSICS and then going to the “Find all posts by taxguy”. Just read them in order until you hit like page 10 or wherever it stops. Chances are she answers one of your questions!</p>
<p>Explain; I wanna hear this. I always hear this and it just makes far too little sense. It’s not like it’s something where performance is irrelevant, i.e. school or the workplace. Football actually matters. It would be like a general picking favorites to go on black ops behind enemy lines.</p>
<p>@Whistle: At first your ■■■■■■■■ annoyed me, but now I find it very amusing and enjoyable. I seem to be watching a master at work… perhaps I can learn something.</p>
<p>@OP: Accounting -> law worked in The Firm. Maybe someday Tom Cruise will play you on the big screen. Make sure you get the movie rights ironed out now. </p>
<p>Seriously, option 3 is the best of both worlds but you would need to be able to handle the time commitment.</p>
<p>Law school does not have to be > T14. That being said, you’ll more than likely get a job if you go to a law school in a big city. (assuming the city isn’t filled with law schools, Dallas/Houston etc.)</p>
<p>The law school that I attend DOES have to be T14. Obviously I will apply to some safer schools as well, but I am aiming for the likes of Columbia/NYU (I want to be in a city!).</p>
<p>The thought just occurred to me…if, during the course of law school, I decide that I want to do tax law for sure, is an LLM absolutely necessary? If I must get an LLM in order to practice tax law, then would that be redundant of the MBT?</p>
<p>I think there’s a flowchart about this actually.</p>
<p>Basically, if you have a free ride and a good expectation of a job(i.e. there’s a law firm with the same name as you and it’s not a coincidence), then outside of the top 14 is okay. UTexas is #15 or 16 and has good placement in Texas, too. </p>
<p>There’s a whole blogger underground of people, mostly outside the T14, who are sitting on 150-200k in debt with worthless J.D.'s. You don’t want to be one.</p>
![http://whatthehealthmag.files.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2008/10/gpa_after.gif[/url]](http://whatthehealthmag.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/gpa_after.gif%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
