Top Ten Ranking Brian Leiter's Law School Rankings
Tags: buy inhalers, buy rhinocort, buy flovent, buy eye drops, buy flonase, buy nasonex, ventolin inhaler, buy periactin online, buy zyrtec,buy elocon cream,buy voltaren gel,buy tretinoin cream online,buy combivent

 ¶  Top 35 Law Faculties Based on Scholarly Impact, 2007
 ◊  Advertise Here!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Writing Essays

September 1, 2007

This is a ranking of the top 35 law faculties based on a standard "objective" measure of scholarly impact:  per capita citations to faculty scholarship.  Unlike earlier studies (see, e.g., the 2005 study), this study looked at citations for all tenure-stream members of the academic faculty (for 2007-08) from 2000 to the present.   Impact was measured using Westlaw's JRL database rather than TP-ALL, since the latter includes on-line versions of treatises (for example, Wright & Miller on Federal Practice & Procedure) and thus would artificially inflate the counts for schools at which these treatise authors teach.  Names were searched as,

Brian  /2  Leiter

except where multiple middle initials or similar factors made necessary a wider scope.  To guard against false positives with common names, ten to twenty of the "hits" were reviewed; the percentage that were false positives was then multiplied against the total number of hits returned, and that amount was subtracted from the citation total.   The citation counts were completed over the course of several days in early July 2007, thus obviating the need for adjustments in the counts to reflect changes in the size of the database.  All results were rounded to the nearest ten, to avoid illusory precision in the results and to make recording of the data simpler.  Cass Sunstein was used as the benchmark for determining the size of the database; schools wanting to undertake self-studies for comparison purposes should discount the results based on how much Sunstein's post 1999 citation total has increased since early July (he had 6,180 citations at that time).

Impact as measured by citations has important limitations as a proxy for scholarly reputation, and it is worth noting those in detail before going further.  Why might the correlation between impact and actual academic quality break down?  My colleague Richard Markovits aptly summarizes some of the problems:

Since many frequently cited articles are cited because they contain succinct statements of boilerplate propositions of law or of a particular academic approach to some set of issues, or because they fall squarely within a particular academic paradigm whose proponents make a practice of citing each other, the frequency of an author's citations has little to do with his influence, much less with the quality of his work.  ("The Professional Assessment of Legal Academics," 48 Journal of Legal Education, 417, 423-4 [1998].)

Although Professor Markovits leaps too quickly to his conclusion, he has certainly identified a genuine worry about the use of citations.  Indeed, we might identify six kinds of phenomena at work here which skew the correlation between citation and quality.

First, there is the industrious drudge:  the competent but uninspired scholar who simply churns out huge amounts of writing in his or her field.  Citation practices of law reviews being what they are, the drudge quickly reaches the threshold level of visibility at which one is obliged to cite his or her work in the obligatory early footnotes of any article in that field.  The work is neither particularly good, nor especially creative or groundbreaking, but it is there and everyone knows it is there and it must be duly acknowledged. 

Second, there is the treatise writer, whose treatise is standardly cited because like the output of the drudge it is a recognized reference point in the literature.  Unlike the drudge, the authors of leading treatises are generally very accomplished scholars, but with the devaluation of doctrinal work over the past twenty years, an outstanding treatise writer—with a few exceptions—is not necessarily highly regarded as a legal scholar.

Third, there is the "academic surfer," who surfs the wave of the latest fad to sweep the legal academy, and thus piles up citations because law reviews, being creatures of fashion, give the fad extensive exposure.  Any study counting citations, depending on when it is conducted, runs the risk of registering the "impact" of the fad in disproportion to its scholarly merit or long-term value or interest.

Fourth, there is work that is cited because it constitutes "the classic mistake":  some work is so wrong, or so bad, that everyone acknowledges it for that reason.  The citation and organizational preferences of student-edited law reviews exacerbate this problem.  Since the typical law-review article must first reinvent the wheel, by surveying what has come before, the classic mistake will earn an obligatory citation in article after article in a particular field, even though the point of the article may be to show how wrong the classic mistake is.  True, some authors of classic mistakes may have excellent reputations; but who among us aspires to be best remembered for a "grand" mistake?

Fifth, citation tallies are skewed towards more senior faculty, so that faculties with lots of "bright young things" (as the Dean of one famous law school likes to call top young scholars) won't fare as well, while faculties with once-productive dinosaurs will.  On the other hand, by looking only at citations since 2000, we have reduced the distorting effect of this factor.

Sixth, citation studies are highly field-sensitive.  Law reviews publish lots on constitutional law, and very little on tax.  Scholars in the public law fields or who work in critical theory get lots of cites; scholars who work on trusts, comparative law, and general jurisprudence do not.

So for all these reasons, one would expect scholarly impact to be an imperfect measure of scholarly quality.  But an imperfect measure may still be an adequate measure, and that is almost certainly true of citation rates as a proxy for impact as a proxy for reputation or quality.  I am confident that one will learn more about faculty quality at leading American law schools from the scholarly impact study, below, than from U.S. News. 

Three rankings are presented in what follows:  (1) a ranking by mean per capita scholarly impact; (2) a ranking by median per capita scholarly impact; and (3) a ranking by a combination of mean and media per capita scholarly impact (calculated by summing the normalized score for mean and median per capita impact, and dividing in half).  My inclination is to think that mean per capita impact is the best measure, since median impact can be affected simply by the addition or subtraction of one faculty member.  On the other hand, a school with a median rank much lower than the mean rank is one whose impact ranking is more heavily dependent on a minority of highly cited faculty (e.g., Georgetown, Northwestern); a school whose median rank is much higher than its mean rank is one where scholarly impact is more evenly spread across the faculty (e.g., Penn, Minnesota).  So the median ranking does provide information, and the amalgamated ranking, based on mean and median impact, helps guard against the distorting effect of having just a handful of faculty with enormously high citation counts on an otherwise low-cited faculty.

The first chart lists the mean, median, and alagmated results for each school for ease of reference.  The ranking by mean per capita impact also lists the ten most-cited scholars on the faculty (those over the age of 70 are marked with an *).

Some interpretive comments on the results. The top four faculties in scholarly impact-Yale, Chicago, Stanford, and Harvard-contain no surprises; these faculties have always dominated the results since I began doing these studies, though there is some jockeying for position between Yale and Chicago, on the one hand, and Stanford and Harvard, on the other.  Chicago, despite some recent faculty losses, still retains its strong position right behind Yale (and this is without counting any of the citations to Judges Easterbrook and Posner, who both still do some teaching there, but as part-time faculty they were excluded from the study).  Columbia and NYU continue to battle it out for the bottom of the top five, but do not seem to be closing the gap between them and the top four. 

Schools whose improvements in faculty quality in recent years are well-registered here include Duke (which has recovered handsomely from the doldrums that afflicted it at the turn of the century), Michigan, Vanderbilt, Illinois, and Arizona.  Duke's performance is perhaps especially notable.  Four of the ten most cited faculty at Duke are relatively recent additions (Curtis Bradley, Erwin Chemerinsky, Mitu Gulati, and Ernest Young), while Duke's high median citation score reflects other additions of productive and influential scholars to the faculty in the last 4-5 years, including Stuart Benjamin, Arti Rai, James Salzman, and Lawrence  Zelenak among others.  (Duke is, it should be noted, at risk currently of losing both Bradley and Chemerinsky, though may well end up retaining both of them.)  It is true that without Chemerinsky, Duke's mean per capita citation rate would drop noticeably, from 380 to 300, yet even without Chemerinsky, Duke would still rank 8th overall in mean impact.  (So, too, Pittsburgh gets a big boost in mean per capita impact from Richard Delgado, yet even without Delgado, Pitt would have been tied with the University of Iowa in mean per capita impact [and Pitt's median impact score is also quite respectable].) 

Virginia's faculty has taken something of a beating due to raids by other schools (esp. Harvard, Columbia, and Chicago), and those losses are reflected here, especially in the mean per capita impact figure (though note the stronger median citations figure for UVA, reflecting the depth of strength on that faculty).  Texas, though having taken some hits the last two years (e.g., Philip Bobbitt [who still teaches part-time at Texas, though didn't count in the study here], Douglas Laycock and Ronald Mann), still had a strong showing (two of its ten most-cited faculty are recent additions:  Bernard Black and Larry Sager).  USC's surprisingly weak showing is partly attributable to the loss of Chemerinsky, and partly to the fact that the school never quite recovered from the raids on its faculty in the 1990s (though I think most informed observers would still rate the quality of the faculty as in the top 20).  Wisconsin had the most startlingly weak showing for a school that, a generation ago, was solidly in the top twenty or so.  Chicago-Kent, George Mason, Cardozo, and San Diego, among others, continue to distinguish themselves as traditionally "regional" law schools with strong scholarly cultures that make a national impact.

Summary of the Three Rankings

School

Mean Rank

Median Rank

Mean & Median Rank

Yale University

  1

  1

  1

University of Chicago

  2

  3

  2

Stanford University

  3

  4

  4

Harvard University

  4

  2

  3

Columbia University

  5

  6

  6

New York University

  6

  4

  5

Univ. of California, Berkeley

  7

  8

  7

Duke University

  8

  7

  7

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

  9

15

13

Univ. of California, Los Angeles

10

13

12

University of Texas, Austin

10

  9

  9

Georgetown University

12

19

14

Northwestern University

12

21

17

Cornell University

14

11

10

Vanderbilt University

14

18

14

University of Pennsylvania

16

10

10

University of Illinois

17

16

18

University of Virginia

17

13

14

George Washington University

19

16

20

University of Arizona

20

22

21

George Mason University

21

24

23

University of Minnesota

21

12

18

University of Pittsburgh

21

24

23

Boston University

24

24

25

Emory University

24

24

25

University of California, Davis

24

not in top 35

28

Cardozo Law School/Yeshiva Univ.

27

19

21

Ohio State University

27

32

30

University of California, Hastings

27

32

30

University of San Diego

27

not in top 35

33

University of Southern California

27

23

27

University of Iowa

32

24

28

Fordham University

33

32

35

University of Colorado, Boulder

33

not in top 35

not in top 35

University of Florida, Gainesville

33

not in top 35

not in top 35

Washington & Lee University

33

32

35

Washington University, St. Louis

33

24

30

Chicago-Kent College of Law

not in top 35

24

33

Indiana University, Bloomington

not in top 35

24

not in top 35

I.  Ranking of Law Faculties by Mean Per Capita Scholarly Impact (Citations)

Rank

School

Normalized Score

Mean Per Capita Citations

Ten Most Cited Faculty (*faculty over 70) (more than ten listed means there were ties)

1

Yale University

100

790

B. Ackerman, A. Amar, I. Ayres, J. Balkin, R. Ellickson, W. Eskridge, O. Fiss, J. Macey, R. Post, P. Schuck

2

University of Chicago

  95

750

D. Baird, R. Epstein, W. Landes, S. Levmore, R. McAdams, M. Nussbaum, E. Posner, G. Stone, D. Strauss, C. Sunstein

3

Stanford University

  84

660

*L. Friedman, R. Gilson, L. Kramer, M. Lemley, L. Lessig, M. Polinsky, R. Rabin, D. Rhode, K. Sullivan, A. Sykes

4

Harvard University

  75

590

R. Fallon, *C. Fried, J. Goldsmith, L. Kaplow, Du. Kennedy, *F. Michelman, M. Minow, S. Shavell, L. Tribe, M. Tushnet

5

Columbia University

  54

430

J. Coffee, K. Crenshaw, M. Dorf, G. Fletcher, R. Gilson, J. Ginsburg, *K. Greenawalt, T. Merrill, *H. Monaghan, J. Raz, R. Scott

6

New York University

  53

420

*D. Bell, *R. Dworkin, B. Friedman, S. Issacharoff, *A. Miller, G. Miller, R. Pildes, S. Schulhofer, R. Stewart, J. Waldron

7

University of California, Berkeley

  49

390

*J. Choper, R. Cooter, *M. Eisenberg, A. Guzman, A. Harris, D. Farber, P. Frickey, R. Merges, P. Samuelson, F. Zimring

8

Duke University

  48

380

J. Boyle, C. Bradley, *P. Carrington, E. Chemerinsky, J. Cox, M. Gulati, J. Powell, J. Reichman, N. Vidmar, E. Young

9

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

  35

280

R. Eisenberg, S. Gross, R. Howse, J. Krier, D. Laycock, J. Litman, C. MacKinnon, M. Radin, S. Ratner, *J.J. White

10

University of California, Los Angeles

  34

270

R. Abel, S. Bainbridge, K. Crenshaw, J. Kang, R. Korobkin, L. LoPucki, N. Netanel, K. Stone, L. Stout, E. Volokh

 

University of Texas, Austin

  34

270

L. Baker, B. Black, F. Cross, S. Levinson, T. McGarity, L. Mullenix, L.A. Powe, J. Robertson, L. Sager, J. Westbrook

12

Georgetown University

  33

260

A. Aleinikoff, R. Barnett, D. Cole, *J. Jackson, V. Jackson, D. Langevoort, C. Lawrence, D. Luban, M. Matsuda, C. Menkel-Meadow, R. West

 

Northwestern University

  33

260

R. Allen, A. Alschuler, S. Calabresi, A. D'Amato, L. Epstein, A. Koppelman, F. McChesney, J. McGinnis, M. Redish, D. Roberts

14

Cornell University

  32

250

K. Clermont, T. Eisenberg, M. Heise, J. Henderson, R. Hillman, S. Johnson, D. Kysar, J. Rachlinski, S. Schwab, *R. Summers

 

Vanderbilt University

  32

250

M. Blair, J. Ely, C. Guthrie, L. Helfer, N. King, E. Rubin, S. Sherry, R. Thomas, R. Thompson, K. Viscusi

16

University of Pennsylvania

  30

240

M. Adler, A. Allen, C.E. Baker, S. Bibas, S. Burbank, S. Kreimer, G. Parchomovsky, P. Robinson, E. Rock, D. Skeel, P. Wagner

17

University of Illinois

  28

220

M. Finkin, T. Ginsburg, D. Hyman, J. Kesan, M. Moore, A. Morriss, L. Ribstein, L. Solum, C. Tabb, T. Ulen, C. Williams

 

University of Virginia

  28

220

K. Abraham, V. Blasi, J. Harrison, J. Jeffries, E. Kitch, M. Klarman, P. Mahoney, P. Stephan, J. Ryan, G.E. White

19

George Washington University

  27

210

N. Cahn, J. Duffy, I. Lupu, L. Mitchell, T. Morgan, S. Murphy, R. Pierce, J. Rosen, S. Saltzburg, M. Selmi, D. Solove

20

University of Arizona

  25

200

J. Anaya, J. Braucher, G. Chin, *D. Dobbs, D. Gantz, T. Massaro, M. Miller, C. Rose, T. Schneyer, D. Wexler

21

George Mason University

  24

190

D. Bernstein, E. Claeys, T. Hazlett, B. Kobayashi, N. Lund, T. Muris, D. Polsby, J. Rabkin, R. Rotunda, *G. Tullock, T. Zywicki

 

University of Minnesota

  24

190

B. Bix, D. Burk, T. Cotter, B. Feld, M. Fellows, R. Frase, B. Karkkainen, R. Painter, M. Tonry, D. Weissbrodt,

 

University of Pittsburgh

  24

190

R. Brand, D. Branson, R. Delgado, L. Frolik, D. Harris, A. Hellman, J. Lobel, A. Meisel, J. Mueller, T. Ross, J. Stefancic,

24

Boston University

  22

170

G. Annas, R. Bone, J. Fleming, T. Frankel, W. Gordon, K. Hylton, G. Lawson, T. Maclin, N. Moore, M. O'Rourke, W. Park

 

Emory University

  22

170

D. Bederman, *H. Berman, W. Buzbee, *W. Carney, M. Fineman, *P. Hay, M. Perry, P. Rubin, R. Schapiro, J. Witte

 

University of California, Davis

  22

170

D. Amann, V. Amar, K. Aoki, A. Brownstein, A. Chander, H. Doremus, B. Hing, E. Imwinkelried, K. Johnson, M. Sunder.

27

Cardozo Law School/Yeshiva University

  20

160

L. Brickman, D. Carlson, M. Hamilton, M. Herz, J. Hughes, M. Rosenfeld, B. Scheck, A. Sebok, S. Sterk, P. Verkuil, E. Zelinsky

 

Ohio State University

  20

160

D. Berman, J. Brudney, M. Chamallas, S. Cole, R. Colker, J. Dressler, D. Merritt, D. Oesterle, J. Powell, P. Shane, P. Swire

 

University of California, Hastings

  20

160

W. Dodge, D. Faigman, *G. Hazard, M. Kane, R. Marcus, C. Massey, U. Mattei, N. Newton, R. Park, N. Roht-Arriaza, J. Williams

 

University of San Diego

  20

160

L. Alexander, D. Dripps, *Y. Kamisar, D. McGowan, F. Partnoy, S. Prakash, M. Ramsey, M. Rappaport, S. Smith, *R. Speidel, F. Zacharias

 

University of Southern California

  20

160

J. Armour, M. Dudziak, S. Estrich, E. Garrett, G. Hadfield, E. McCaffery, R. Rasmussen, M. Spitzer, *C. Stone, C. Whitebread

32

University of Iowa

  19

150

*D. Baldus, R. Bezanson, S. Burton, A. Estin, H. Hovenkamp, M. Janis, M. Osiel, H. Sale, G. Wetlaufer, A. Wing,

33

Fordham University

  18

140

D. Capra, G. de Burca, M. Diller, J. Fisch, M. Flaherty, B. Green A. Greene, R. Pearce, J. Reidenberg, W. Treanor, B. Zipursky

 

University of Colorado, Boulder

  18

140

H. Bruff, R. Collins, D. Getches, L. Guruswamy, C. Mueller, R. Nagel, W. Pizzi, P. Schlag, P. Weiser, C. Wilkinson

 

University of Florida, Gainesville

  18

140

J. Harrison, B. Hernandez-Truyol, *J. Israel, R. Jerry, L. Noah, W. Page, J. Perea, L. Riskin, C. Slobogin, B. Woodhouse

 

Washington  & Lee University

  18

140

D. Brown, M. Drumbl, L. Johnson, M. Howard, T. Jost, R. Krotoszynski, D. Millon, R. Smolla, S. Sundby, R. Wilson

 

Washington University, St. Louis

  18

140

K. Brickey, A. Davis, B. Flagg, J. Haley, P. Joy, S. Legomsky, R. Levin, *D. Mandelker, L. Sadat, K. Syverud

 

Other School Studied (not ranked, since schools not studied may have performed comparably)

 

Brooklyn Law School

  17

130

M. Berger, A. Bernstein, N. Cohen, M. Garrison, S. Herman, N. Hunter, R. Karmel, G. Minda, E. Schneider, L. Solan, A. Twerski

 

Chicago-Kent College of Law

  17

130

L. Andrews, G. Dinwoodie, D. Gerber, H. Krent, C. Leslie, M. Malin, H. Perrit, M. Rosen, D. Tarlock, R. Wright

 

Florida State University

  17

130

F. Abbott, R. Atkinson, J. Dodge, S. Gey, A. Hirsch, W. Logan, J. Rossi, J. Ruhl, M. Seidenfeld, F. Teson

 

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

  17

130

J. Calmore, J. Conly, M. Crain, M. Gerhardt, T. Hazen, W. Marshall, H. Motomura, J. Orth, G. Postema, R. Rosen

 

Wake Forest University

  17

130

M. Curtis, M. Green, M. Hall, J. Knox, A. Palmiter, W. Parker, T. Roberts, S. Shapiro, M. Taylor, R. Wright

 

College of William & Mary

  15

120

P. Alces, N. Devins, J. Dwyer, T. Hardy, C. Koch, L. Malone, P. Marcus, A. Meese, J. Moliterno, M. Stein, *W. Van Alstyne

 

Indiana University, Bloomington

  15

120

J. Applegate, C. Bradley, F. Cate, D. Conkle, K. Dau-Schmidt, D. Fidler, C. Keyh, M. Leaffer, L. Lederman, L. Robel

 

University of Notre Dame

  15

120

J. Bauer, P. Bellia, R. Blakey, G. Bradley, M. Brinig, J. Finnis, N. Garnett, R. Garnett, J. Nagle, M. O'Connell, J. Tidmarsh,

 

Arizona State University

  14

110

K. Abbott, R. Clinton, I. Ellman, D. Karjala, D. Kaye, M. Kornhauser, J. Murphy, M. Saks, R. Tsosie, J. Weinstein

 

Rutgers University, Camden

  14

110

L. Bosniak, M. Carrier, J. Feinman, E. Maltz, D. Patterson, R. Rosenblatt, R. Singer, A. Stein, B. Stephens, R. Williams

 

Boston College

  13

100

M. Brodin, G. Brown, D. Coquillette, J. Garvey, K. Greenfield, J. Liu, Z. Plater, J. Repetti, C. Wells, D. Wirth, A. Yen

 

Rutgers University, Newark

  13

100

B. Bell, S. Colb, C. Dickerson, J. Dubin, G. Francione, A. Hyde, H. Latin, J. Leubsdorf, T. Perry, J. Pope, G. Thomas

 

University of Wisconsin, Madison

  11

  90

A. Althouse, P. Carstensen, R.A. Charo, H. Erlanger, L. Greene, H. Klug, N. Komesar, J. Larson, *S. Macaulay, E. Mertz, T. Palay, J. Rogers, D. Schwartz

II.  Ranking of Law Faculties by Median Per Capita Citations

Rank

School

Normalized Score

Median Per Capita Citations

1

Yale University

100

685

2

Harvard University

  56

380

3

University of Chicago

  47

320

4

New York University

  45

310

 

Stanford University

  45

310

6

Columbia University

  43

295

7

Duke University

  37

250

8

University of California, Berkeley

  36

245

9

University of Texas, Austin

  32

220

10

University of Pennsylvania

  31

210

11

Cornell University

  29

195

12

University of Minnesota

  26

180

13

University of California, Los Angeles

  25

170

 

University of Virginia

  25

170

15

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

  23

160

16

George Washington University

  22

150

 

University of Illinois

  22

150

18

Vanderbilt University

  21

145

19

Cardozo Law School/Yeshiva University

  20

135

 

Georgetown University

  20

140

21

Northwestern University

  19

130

22

University of Arizona

  17

115

23

University of Southern California

  16

110

24

Boston University

  15

100

 

Chicago-Kent College of Law

  15

100

 

Emory University

  15

100

 

George Mason University

  15

100

 

Indiana University, Bloomington

  15

100

 

University of Iowa

  15

105

 

University of Pittsburgh

  15

100

 

Washington University, St. Louis

  15

100

32

Fordham University

  13

  90

 

Ohio State University

  13

  90

 

University of California, Hastings

  13

  90

 

Washington & Lee University

  13

  90

 

Other School Studied (not ranked, since schools not studied may have performed comparably)

 

University of California, Davis

  12

  80

 

University of Florida, Gainesville

  12

  80

 

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

  12

  80

 

University of San Diego

  12

  80

 

Boston College

  11

  75

 

College of William & Mary

  11

  75

 

Wake Forest University

  11

  75

 

Brooklyn Law School

  10

  70

 

Florida State University

  10

  70

 

Rutgers University, Camden

  10

  70

 

University of Colorado, Boulder

  10

  70

 

University of Notre Dame

  10

  65

 

Arizona State University

    8

  55

 

Rutgers University, Newark

    7

  50

 

University of Wisconsin, Madison

    7

  50

III.  Ranking of Law Faculties by Mean and Median Per Capita Citations

Normalized score=sum of the normalized scores for mean and median per capita citations divided by two:  so mean and median citations get equal weight in this ranking.

Rank

School

Normalized Score

1

Yale University

100.0

2

University of Chicago

  71.5

3

Harvard University

  66.5

4

Stanford University

  64.5

5

New York University

  49.0

6

Columbia University

  48.5

7

Duke University

  42.5

 

University of California, Berkeley

  42.5

9

University of Texas, Austin

  33.0

10

Cornell University

  30.5

 

University of Pennsylvania

  30.5

12

University of California, Los Angeles

  29.5

13

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

  29.0

14

Georgetown University

  26.5

 

University of Virginia

  26.5

 

Vanderbilt University

  26.5

17

Northwestern University

  26.0

18

University of Illinois

  25.0

 

University of Minnesota

  25.0

20

George Washington University

  24.5

21

Cardozo Law School/Yeshiva University

  21.0

 

University of Arizona

  21.0

23

George Mason University

  19.5

 

University of Pittsburgh

  19.5

25

Boston University

  18.5

 

Emory University

  18.5

27

University of Southern California

  18.0

28

University of California, Davis

  17.0

 

University of Iowa

  17.0

30

Ohio State University

  16.5

 

University of California, Hastings

  16.5

 

Washington University, St. Louis

  16.5

33

Chicago-Kent College of Law

  16.0

 

University of San Diego

  16.0

35

Fordham University

  15.5

 

Washington & Lee University

  15.5

 

Other School Studied (not ranked, since schools not studied may have performed comparably)

 

Indiana University, Bloomington

  15.0

 

University of Florida, Gainesville

  15.0

 

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

  14.5

 

University of Colorado, Boulder

  14.0

 

Wake Forest University

  14.0

 

Brooklyn Law School

  13.5

 

Florida State University

  13.5

 

College of William & Mary

  13.0

 

University of Notre Dame

  12.5

 

Boston College

  12.0

 

Rutgers University, Camden

  12.0

 

Arizona State University

  11.0

 

Rutgers University, Newark

  10.0

 

University of Wisconsin, Madison

    9.0

 ◊  Site Sponsor