I have noticed that a few of you are facing the same dilemma. I'm planning to do an LLM focusing in business law (financial regs, corporate finance, transactions, etc). Surely, Chicago is unparalleled for its law and economics but I don't know so much about its business law.

Anyone have any inputs on the subject? The general view on the schools and cities would also be appreciated.

It is definitely a tough decision. Columbia and Chicago are too close in terms of reputation and quality. I am already admitted to Chicago and I still have no answer from Columbia. If I had an answer from Columbia though, I would personally choose Chicago. I'm very interested in Law and Economics and I really like the quarter system that Chicago has. It gives you the opportunity to have insights in many areas (by choosing more courses) and also gives you the chance to engage in independent research in a subject of you own choice with a professor of your own choice. It's so flexible and for a person like me who is still in an early stage of his career (I'm 23, graduated from Law School last July) is the best solution.
You'll have to take into consideration many factors though: 1) Size of classes and availability of classes. Would you like to study in a big class (Columbia) or you feel more comfortable in a small class (Chicago)? Does the Law School guarantees you'll have a place in the course of your choice or you might end up not being able to attend 2-3 courses, which were of first priority to you, just because they are very popular and there is no space? I think Chicago being a smaller school makes you feel more confident that you're going to secure a place in the class of your choice, whereas Columbia states clearly in it's website that you might not find a place in popular courses.
2) Do you want to study in quarters or semesters? If you want to have an insight in many fields Chicago would be better, but if you are certain that you want to focus in one area, then Columbia would do.
3) Which one is better for business law? I think Columbia is much stronger in this field.
4) What kind of career do you want to pursue? Chicago purports to offer an education which seems to enable you to pursue both an academic and a professional career. Columbia clearly identifies itself as a professional-oriented school and attracts people who want to work in a mega-firm afterwards.
5)What carrer chances do these 2 schools offer you? Both participate in the same job fair (along with Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Michigan and Virginia) which is considered to be the most prestigious for law firms which want to hire foreign lawyers.
6)Chicago metropolitan area or NYC? Both are great cities I suppose. Here it is a matter or personal taste...

I hope you make the best choice

Hi L&E-pil,
I agree with most of what you stated above, but, since so far, I made a different choice (Columbia over Chicago) I would like to try to contribute to this thread:

1) also Columbia guarantees (to the extent possible) to LL.M. students a preference in choosing classes, but like you correctly said in Chicago classes are much smaller (which is, of course, an asset!);
2) Columbia tends to reject newly graduates and this to me is a very important factor, as I am much older than you (28) and I have relevant working experience (5 years), I would prefer to end up in a class with people closer to my age (or even older) and with diverse professional backgrounds so that we can share comparable experiences;
3) I agree that Columbia is stronger in Business Law and in particular in Securities and Capital Markets Law. I've also been told that it is supposedly the best choice if you are interested in arbitration. On the other side Chicago is in a league of its own (also compared to other top law schools) when we are talking about Law & Economics: so, if this is your field of interest, don't even think about it and go with Chicago;
4) the career outlook is correct, if you are interested in pursuing an academic career Chicago maybe better but if you want to practise as a lawyer you should definitely go with Columbia (which has the strongest connections to NYC law firms);
5) I agree also with the job fair view, however, I would like to point out that since most of law firms that hire LL.M. students are located in NYC being there certainly eases when you got call-backs and you are requested to do a second interview (nonetheless if you are a good candidate law firms will pay for your trip to NYC!);
6) Chicago or NYC? only a matter of taste.

Good luck!
M.

Miki,
I think we agree on the attributes of each school and the significance that these characteristics may have.
I'd like to focus on your second point, the age issue. As you probably had the chance to see in the list with the names and the short biographical information of current LL.M Chicago students, Chicago also has many students, who have professional experience. However, one of my main concerns with regard to Columbia (if, of course, they offer me admission) is exactly what you've said: the presence of people, who have significant professional experience. As a fresh graduate I'm afraid I'd had problems to keep up with the rest of the class. I won't be able to understand the thoughts and queries of people who have seen what the legal practice looks like. For example, imagine a fresh graduate in a class where experienced professionals discuss state-of-the-art issues in securities!
Columbia should also have the best connections in the NYC market and this could end up being the most important function for an applicant, who aspires a career in a mega-law firm. But for me, this would be the least important issue, as my goal is to pursue PhD studies after the LL.M. So, Chicago being more academic oriented, seems to be better for my case.
Both of us though, I think, wait for Harvard, which is a place where most of our expressed misgivings are out of the question

As usual, L&E-pil, we share the same views especially when it comes to HLS being the best choice!
Good luck!
M.

Guys,

Just a short note to let you know that if Columbia is as Chicago (LL.M. can take any course offered to and with J.D. students) then: (i) LL.M. will be minority and (ii) J.D. do not have a clue about what the professor is speaking about then it is possible that a recently graduated foreign lawyer will know more than them...

Hi Rej,
since you have so far provided very useful advice to the benefit of all users of this internet website, can you please elaborate a little bit more your toughts?
Thank you
Miki

I am still waiting to hear from both Columbia and Chicago but if I will have the choice I will definitely choose Columbia!
Louis

Guys,

Thanks for the useful input. I have made my decision to go to Columbia due to the subjects I would like to focus. So, Miki, I would probably see you there!

Again, I'm also waiting for a response from HLS... So let's keep fingers crossed everyone!!!

Hi Samata,

I would like to pursue LL.M in global business law from CLS for the yr 2009-10. Can u pls tell me when the term starts and what is the due date for submission of applications

Miki,

I was just saying that in any LL.M. program where you are allowed to take the same classes as the JDs you will be faced with the reality that JDs don't have a clue of advanced legal issues as they have never worked but for their summer jobs. Thus, arguing that in Columbia (because they admit older LLSs -with working experience) you will be able to discuss advanced subjects is a misconception. For universities JDs are the most important students and classes are always aimed for them. An LLM is not though to get to know advanced issues (at least no a general LLM) but to get to know with some depth the US legal system. Don't fool yourselves...

Hi Samata,

I would like to pursue LL.M in global business law from CLS for the yr 2009-10. Can u pls tell me when the term starts and what is the due date for submission of applications