Study LSAT with us at HeyFutureLawyer.com

In this episode, Ben and Madeline jump into a question almost every LSAT student fixates on: when you should actually retake the LSAT. They react to a popular LSAT company’s retake advice, agree with most of it, and roast how obvious and poorly written it is, while still pulling out the core takeaway: if you have points left on the table and those points change your admissions or scholarship outcomes, retaking is usually the right move.

A big theme is “stop gambling.” Ben and Madeline talk about the slot-machine mindset, where someone keeps taking official LSATs hoping a higher score just appears, without changing preparation. They push a much simpler standard: don’t take the LSAT until your practice scores are where you want them, and if you retake, do it with a real plan instead of wishful thinking.

They also hit the money angle hard. Beyond admissions, they stress that higher LSAT scores often translate into better scholarship offers, which can dramatically change your debt and your life after graduation. Ben goes on a mini rant about how many applicants misunderstand student loan interest and underestimate how brutal it is to carry big law school debt into average-paying legal jobs.

Then the episode shifts into a real applicant scenario: a high-GPA student with a low-150s LSAT weighing offers from Lewis & Clark and Gonzaga, plus a waitlist at Seattle. Ben and Madeline walk through the real cost of attendance, explain why “outside scholarships” rarely move the needle, and argue that taking a year to raise the LSAT even modestly can be the difference between manageable debt and a long financial grind.

Finally, things get weird and entertaining: they read and dissect an infamous personal statement connected to the Epstein files, supposedly from a former Olympian trying to get into Harvard Law. It becomes a brutal lesson in why elite “facts” do not save bad writing, why trying to sound smart backfires, and why law school admissions is still a writing-and-precision game, especially for non-native English speakers.

Study LSAT with Us at Hey Future Lawyer

Nick Cohen on LinkedIn

Matador Solutions

Nick’s Email- nick@matadorsolutions.net

Cohen Injury Law Group

Nick Cohen joins the Hey Future Lawyer Podcast to break down an unconventional path to becoming an attorney while building a fast-growing legal marketing business. Nick is a partner at Cohen Injury Law Group in Los Angeles and the COO of Matador Solutions, a marketing partner and think tank serving more than 175 law firms nationwide.

We dig into why Nick chose a night program at Loyola Law School, what his weekly schedule looked like while working full-time, and why part-time students often end up more efficient and less cutthroat than the typical “1L culture” you hear about. Nick also gives the real trade-offs of night school, including the extra year, the lack of “summers off,” and why the financial upside can still make it the smartest choice.

Nick explains how small law firms actually get clients, why referrals are only one side of the game, and what “bottom-of-funnel” marketing looks like for lawyers who need high-intent cases coming in the door. We also talk about why so many firms get burned by snake-oil marketing vendors, how realistic timelines matter, and why “results in 3 months” is often a red flag.

On the law student side, Nick shares a no-nonsense approach to performing well in law school: crystal-clear writing, clean structure, and focusing on what actually moves the grade instead of spinning out on details. He’s strongly anti study groups, but gives a smarter alternative: one partner who thinks differently, independent prep, and then a targeted checklist review that catches blind spots.

Finally, we talk AI in the legal industry: what’s real, what’s hype, what tools still aren’t ready, and why “being human first” will become a major differentiator as tech accelerates. Nick closes with practical advice for aspiring lawyers: do not go to law school unless you feel good about a legal career, consider night programs for cost control, pay attention to bar pass rates, and choose schools that align with where you want to practice.

#HeyFutureLawyer #LawSchool #NightSchool #LoyolaLaw #LSAT #PreLaw #LawStudent #LawFirmMarketing #LegalMarketing #PersonalInjuryLaw #SmallLawFirm #Entrepreneurship #SEO #GoogleAds #AI #LegalTech #CareerAdvice #LawSchoolAdmissions

Study LSAT With Us

Ben Parker kicks off this episode of the Hey Future Lawyer Podcast on January LSAT score release day with a blunt message: treating a low LSAT score like “no big deal” is one of the most expensive mistakes a pre-law student can make. He frames it as “financial Darwinism” or “natural selection,” arguing that the consequences are predictable, avoidable, and largely driven by choices about prep, timing, and accountability.

He walks listeners through why low scores tend to funnel applicants into lower-outcome schools that can be financially predatory, especially when combined with late-cycle applications and full sticker tuition. To make it concrete, he uses an example of a bottom-tier law school and breaks down the cost of attendance, bar passage risk, likely employment outcomes, and what repayment actually looks like when you stack high debt against modest salaries.

From there, Ben shifts into the psychological side: the “comfort” culture that tells applicants they just need one yes, and how that mindset can become toxic when it ignores hard data. He argues that law school is only a “good deal” in two situations: you either get strong employment outcomes that justify the debt, or you keep debt low enough that a normal salary still leaves you financially free.

The episode also dives into Ben’s core LSAT philosophy: high scores are simple, not easy. His thesis is that most students waste time on prep that feels productive, but does not move the needle, and that consistent daily work beats almost everything else. He shares anecdotes from score release day messages, including a student who improved significantly by doing a large volume of real questions with consistent review, and contrasts that with students who study for months and barely move because they are stuck in “comfortable” methods.