(revised 4/1/05)
FAQ:
Choosing a Law School
US News Rankings
The Admissions Process
Application Trends
Diversity
Academic Factors
Sample Essays of All
Sorts
Recs, Resumes,Essays and Addenda
How & When to Apply
Hearing from the
Law Schools
Recent News
Other Departments:
LSAT and Admissions
Services
Success Stories
| Contact Us |
With help from
Netscape Web
Tutorial
by Charlton D. Rose
and David Chang
The Admissions Process
| Maximizing the Rewards | |
Minimizing the Risks
Did you ever look at a grid in the Official Guide to Law Schools and see a cell reporting 28 applicants and 27 accepted, and wonder why that one person didn't make it? The odds are that the admissions officer was minimizing her risks. Once there is a weakness or problem in your file, the burden is on you to prove that the problem will not recur. Otherwise the risk of your embarrassing the school or dropping out may prevent you from being admitted.
Risk comes in many forms:
- It may be a matter of an arrest or conviction which the law school believes has not been sufficiently explained or repented.
- A professor may have "unrecommended" an applicant, by commenting on poor work habits or a cavalier attitude toward studies.
- Some students do their own "unrecommending" by completing the application carelessly or incompletely.
- The student may have failed to adequately explain a leave of absence or erratic grades.
These problems can lead the admissions officer to doubt the applicant's ability to keep up with the work.
Bad grades and leaves of absence
Often applicants want to hide problems which they believe show a weakness. One client of mine was urged by his friends to hide an alcoholic past. I gently pointed out that he couldn't; he had to explain a 1.25 gpa he had earned at his first college. He asked, "But won't they think I still have a drinking problem?" I reminded him that his current 3.5 gpa was proof that he didn't.
The worst possible signal in your file is an unexplained problem semester, or one which you are obviously glossing over. The admissions officer may be wondering, "What was wrong? Has the problem been resolved? Will it recur in law school? Are you hiding something you have a legal obligation to reveal?" If a leave of absence reflects a larger physical or emotional problem, it should be explained in a way that convinces the admissions committee that the problem is not likely to recur. You should explain that the sick relative no longer requires your presence at home every weekend. If you had a drug or alcohol problem, you should tell how long you have been sober.
Current success is the best proof that a problem is in the past. A recent problem is much more troublesome, and the applicant has a strong obligation to prove that the problem is solved permanently. If the admissions officer is not convinced, she may advise the applicant to wait a year or two and apply again.
What about a criminal record?
Most law schools will ask about criminal charges, but the actual wording of the question will vary. Some will ask only about convictions, while others will ask about arrests. Some law schools will require you to report even offenses committed while you were a juvenile, and even if the record has been expunged. Knowing the exact nature of the charges which were brought is essential to answering these questions correctly. If you were represented by a lawyer at the time you were accused of the crime, that lawyer can usually answer these questions. If you didn't have a lawyer then you should probably see one now.
Arrests should be explained honestly and completely, both in terms of the court proceedings and the circumstances which led you to have legal problems. Any dishonesty may leave you liable to further legal repercussions (including criminal charges or denial of the right to practice law). As with bad grades, law schools will look to see whether the underlying problem has been resolved. What have you learned that "reformed" you? Has marriage and the responsibility of a family overcome a tendency to drink and find yourself in the middle of brawls? If the offense was a response to an abusive family member, have you ended that relationship? This information will help the admissions committee feel confident that you will not cause further problems, to the detriment and perhaps scandal of the law school.
Even more important, overcoming a background in which crime and violence were commonplace solutions to life's problems can show great strength of character. A juvenile delinquent from a dysfunctional family or a ghetto who found athletics or the church choir has learned that life offers greater options than the ones we're raised with. A boy who stops stealing from trains after he falls on the track and loses both his arms has learned a lot more than that crime doesn't pay. These people will not only bring strength and determination to law school, they also will add a diversity that the mainstream person can rarely contribute. Why try to hide what may be your greatest strength?
And a final warning about omitting any arrests, even juvenile, even if expunged or sealed, from your file. At the Los Angeles Law Forum I asked three different admissions officers about this. All of them said the same thing: report it! Even if they don't care, the Board of Law Examiners may. And an omission can hurt you much more than the arrest ever did. As evidence, I offer this letter that showed up in my mailbox:
The above-named person has applied for admission to the practice of Law in North Carolina. As is required by law, this office is conducting an investigation into the applicant's fitness to become a lawyer.
Your name has been supplied as someone who knows the applicant. The Board of Law Examiners would appreciate your candid evaluation of the applicant's integrity, character and fitness to practice law.
* * * *
5. To your knowledge, has the applicant ever been charged or arrested for a violation of any law? If so, please indicate the time, place, nature of the incident and any other information which you may have.
* * * *
8. Do you know of others who may know the applicant and whom the Board may contact?
After completing the form for my former client, I sent it on to another person. Who knows where it will end up?
Nondisclosure?
Some guy sent me the following email:
"The California Bar Exam application specifically states that an applicant with a sealed or expunged juvenile record is not responsible for disclosing that information, provided that the applicant's record was sealed within California's jurisdiction. I just thought you would like to know that there may be some cases when a law school applicant may not need to inform a law school regarding an expunged or sealed record."
I still say you have to disclose it if the law school asks. What a law school requires has nothing at all to do with what the Bar Examiners require.
In October 2004, at one of the Law Forums, I was looking at new essay questions on New York Law School's application, and saw the following "arrest" question:
Have you ever, either as an adult or a juvenile, been cited, arrested, taken into custody, charged with, indicted, convicted or tried for, or pleaded guilty to, the commission of any felony or misdemeanor or the violation of any law, except for minor traffic violations, or been the subject of juvenile delinquency or youthful offender proceeding, or is any such action pending or expected to be brought against you?
Bill Perez, the Dean of Admissions, tells me that the language was lifted verbatim from the New York State Bar application. He also said:
- You must report any traffic violation with a fine of more than $200.
- You must report any auto accident in which you were charged with a moving violation.
- Any charge of failure to appear or loss of driver's license must be reported.
- You must report a record even if it has been expunged.
- "My lawyer said I don't have to..." will not be a valid defense either for the law school or for the Bar Examiners.
- No one knows exactly where the line is; when in doubt, disclose.
- The Florida Bar will exclude you just for failure to report on your law school application.
Did someone "unrecommend" you? Was it you?
Never badger a reluctant recommender into writing; they may write a letter saying, "I don't really know this student, but she insisted that I write." Or even worse, "He is obnoxious, pushy and won't take 'no' for an answer." When you ask an instructor for a recommendation, listen carefully to the instructor's answer. Hesitation or ambivalence tells you the teacher can't give you a good recommendation. In that case, you're better off choosing someone else.
Students "unrecommend" themselves either through arrogance or through carelessness. No matter how good you think you are, don't write anything that sounds like "you obviously want me." No matter how high your grades, the admissions committee may decide they don't need anyone with your attitude. The same is true of essays that take wealth and opportunity for granted. One admissions committee member I know told me she rejected an applicant for writing, "Every person in our society should avail themselves of the opportunity to see Europe." This sentence showed her the author had no understanding of the position of the underprivileged, and she decided the seat could be more wisely given to someone else.
Carelessness can be as bad as arrogance. Incomplete forms, sloppy papers, confusing answers, can be enough to keep you out of law school. The admissions committee, which decides the fate of discretionary applicants, is usually made up of faculty members. If the application looks like certain exam papers that give them migraine headaches, they may decide they can pass up the opportunity for next year's migraine.
Bad and Good Advice
If your prelaw advisor isn't asking about honor code and disciplinary code violations, arrests, and drug or alcohol problems, you're getting bad advice. If (s)he isn't taking the time to learn the cause of the problem as well as its outcome, you're getting bad advice. And if (s)he acts as if your infraction "ruins" your chances at any school without explaining why, you're getting bad advice. The advisor should also take the time to review your choice of recommenders, to assure that no one will "unrecommend" you.
When interviewing a client, I take particular care to determine whether there are any weaknesses in the file to be overcome. For any honor code, arrest, drug or alcohol related problems, I want to know the full story. What circumstances in the applicant's background led up to the problem? How have these circumstances changed, or how has the applicant escaped them? How long ago did the problem occur, and when is the last time the applicant had any problems? Is there any external evidence of a change in the applicant's behavior that we can point out -- improved grades, membership in AA, job advancement -- to lend credibility to the client's explanation?
I also take particular care to assure the client that a problem, especially a juvenile arrest, is not an insurmountable obstacle. In fact, juvenile arrests that cause people to reevaluate their priorities and goals can add something to the file rather than detract from it. Conversely, I try to warn clients that recent problems, especially those involving drugs, violence, or sexual misconduct, can have serious repercussions, and need to be addressed with total honesty and great delicacy. These problems must often be considered on a school-by-school basis, with differing outcomes based on regional or religious values.
And I spend time with each applicant reviewing the choice of recommenders, to assure that each recommendation will strengthen the client's file, rather than weaken it.