<p>Best</a> Law School Rankings | Law Program Rankings | US News</p>
<p>I don’t understand the ranking that well, every new ranking USNEWS methology keeps knocking University of Iowa further from top 25. Also this ranking caught me by surprised, I thought law school rankings was recently released late last year, but perhaps that was a different article.</p>
<p>The “Top 14” is not the top 14 law schools, but rather 14 schools that were–at some point or another–in the top 10. UT is not a Top 14 school, though it makes me grin that the gimmick still had an effect on some people.</p>
<p>The top 14 had also been unchanged for 20 years.</p>
<p>“The top 14 had also been unchanged for 20 years.”</p>
<p>And it won’t change this year.</p>
<p>T13 now. See ya GTown</p>
<p>The so-called T14 (which never included Texas; perhaps adding Texas now as a tie for 14 is US News’ spot of humor for the year) actually goes back before USNews starting ranking law schools. They were just considered even then to be your more nationally recognized top law schools.</p>
<p>good showing for michigan this year. berkeley fell a few spots but still in the top 10.</p>
<p>“good showing for michigan this year. berkeley fell a few spots but still in the top 10.”</p>
<p>Looking at Berkeley’s LSAT range, one has to wonder how long it can stay in the top 10. Beware Stanford; you don’t want to be like Berkeley.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Stanford is in absolutely no danger of that happening.</p>
<p>“Stanford is in absolutely no danger of that happening.”</p>
<p>No, but Stanford is in danger of dropping out of the top 3 (now it’s GPA can’t even match Y and H), with CLS being such a close 4th.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No danger of that either.</p>
<p>Why is everyone so down on Georgetown?</p>
<p>Anti-Catholicism? Because it’s a “Law Center” and not a “Law School?”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s very, very large.</p>
<p>Great news for UT which was already the top school in one of the top economies/legal markets in the country. Now it will expand its national range. UT should only continue moving up in these rankings (for what they are worth) under their new dean, formerly from NYU. He’s positioning the school to be THE place for practice in Latin America, one of the main markets in the 21st century. Not sure if they’ve formally announced the program yet, but they have established a program with ITAM, one of the most prestigious universities in Mexico (Pres. Calderon went there) so that students can attend their third year yet graduate from UT. If you attend a second year at ITAM for law, you will be licensed in Mexico. They are looking at similar programs in Argentina and Brazil. As a project finance attorney, the only places you do deals where English doesn’t govern the transaction documents are Spanish and Portuguese-speaking countries. Brilliant strategy on the part of UT Law!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Though English does govern some of the transactions there, China, Japan, and India are not Spanish or Portuguese-speaking countries.</p>
<p>Also, an interesting article on the developing legal market in Brazil: [Report</a> from Sao Paulo - Adam Smith, Esq.](<a href=“http://www.adamsmithesq.com/archives/2010/10/report-from-sao-paulo.html]Report”>http://www.adamsmithesq.com/archives/2010/10/report-from-sao-paulo.html)</p>
<p>Reading comprehension, my dear. I said the “transaction documents.” If you do deals in China, the financing docs will be in English and the English translation will control. The same goes for India and Pakistan, for example. I have heard from an in-house counsel for an oil company that Arabic governed the transaction documents on a deal she worked on in Saudi Arabia. Of course, they aren’t borrowing money! If you do deals in Brazil or Argentina, even if you are using an international lender, however, the controlling translation is typically Brazilian Portuguese (quite different from regular Portuguese) and Spanish, respectively.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Reading comprehension:
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That second sentence is a bit of a non sequitur, isn’t it’?</p>
<p>Additionally, if English is so pervasive, I find it surprising that US firms over there (who, you think, would handle mostly deals involving US clients and thus documents where English governs) have these requirements:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Lateral</a> Positions | Careers | Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP](<a href=“http://www.davispolk.com/careers/lateral-positions/]Lateral”>http://www.davispolk.com/careers/lateral-positions/)</p>
<p>But you’re right. Texas will have meteoric rise to the top! It’s only one way from here, and that’s UP. Let’s just start calling it Sixas.</p>
<p>I’m afraid you are missing the point. Yes, it is nice if your associates can translate and perhaps even negotiate in Mandarin or Japanese, but look at most of the partners in those offices. We definitely have native speakers in our Asian offices and even any European offices we have, but that doesn’t change the translation of the controlling documents in international financing transactions. (Since you brought up Japan, I worked on a deal with a major Japanese consortium as one of the project sponsors. The financing documents were all in English, as were the negotiations.) Having said that, language skills in growing markets are an asset these days, and if the dollar keeps tanking and becomes no longer the reserve currency, things may indeed change. Let me know after you’ve practiced a couple of decades.</p>