Law School Recommendation Letter: Professor Sample
For professors writing a law school letter: what LSAC and Yale ask the letter to show, a labeled constructed sample, and the lines that weaken it.
Law School Recommendation Letter: Professor Sample
A professor's law school letter has to prove three things: how you know the student, one piece of their analytical work you saw up close, and where they stand in a group you name. LSAC's form asks for "the relative strength of the candidate within the reference group". Yale's tip sheet, last updated August 2026, asks for analytical ability, research and writing, and comparisons that are "genuine".
Our view: in law, the form that travels with every letter tells you which sentence matters most. A letter that never names its comparison group has skipped the one comparative question the LSAC form asks. Below is what LSAC and Yale publish, a constructed sample letter annotated against both, and the lines that weaken a law letter. You can test your own draft with a free review of the letter.
Every LSAC and Yale page quoted here was checked on November 3, 2026. How to upload the finished letter is a separate page: the LSAC letter upload guide for recommenders.
What law schools have published about the letter
Three official documents say what the letter is for. They are short, and they agree.
| Source | What it asks for, verbatim |
|---|---|
| LSAC Letter of Recommendation Form (the cover sheet on every letter) | "your candid appraisal of the applicant's ability, academic and otherwise, to study law, including qualities of mind and character, dedication, responsibility, and readiness for the rigors of advanced academic study" |
| Same form | "You may wish to include how well you know the candidate and in what capacity, your assessment of the relative strength of the candidate within the reference group in which she or he is being compared, and how the candidate will add to the diversity of the law school." |
| LSAC, Letters of Recommendation | "Letters that compare you to your academic peers are often the most useful." and "Most schools do not consider general, unreservedly praiseworthy letters helpful." |
| Yale Law School, Letters of Recommendation Tip Sheet (last updated 08.2026) | "Key skills include analytical ability, research and writing skills, and overall intellectual strengths." and "Letters that include details and examples are usually much more effective than letters that rely only on general statements." |
Yale's sheet is written to applicants ("Feel free to share this resource with your recommenders!"), and it is among the most specific published statements we found of what one law school wants from a letter. It also says what to leave out: "There is no need for recommenders to provide a detailed description of the course(s)," and letters should "not provide a detailed discussion of activities that are covered on your resume".
The countercase: if you supervised the student at work rather than in class, the comparison still matters, but your evidence is different. Yale says professional recommenders help most when they can speak to "the skills most relevant to the study of the law, including your relevant academic abilities". A letter from a TA or graduate instructor follows the professor pattern; see whether a TA can write a law school reference.
The five paragraphs, and what each must prove
No official length exists for a law letter. Yale and LSAC set none; our guide to recommendation letter length covers the norms. The word budgets below are our recommendation for a one-page letter.
- Basis (60–90 words). Course name, term, class size, your role, and what you graded. This answers LSAC's "how well you know the candidate and in what capacity" before the reader has to ask.
- One incident of analysis on paper (110–160 words). A specific paper, exam answer or project. What the student argued, what changed between drafts, what they did that others did not. This is Yale's "details and examples".
- Writing and research (60–100 words). How they write and how they handle sources. Name one weakness if it is true and you can bound it.
- Comparison (40–80 words). Your reference group with its size and time window, and the student's place in it. This answers "relative strength … within the reference group".
- Endorsement (25–50 words). A plain recommendation, with no school named in a general letter.
The diversity clause on the LSAC form is optional ("may wish to include"). Write it only from what you saw yourself.
Constructed sample letter, annotated
Constructed example, written by us, not a real letter, student or professor. Context (invented): a political science professor writes a general letter for a student who took two of their courses. The letter is 389 words, salutation and signature included.
Dear Admissions Committee,
I recommend Ananya Rao for admission to law school. I taught Ms. Rao twice at our university: in fall 2024 she was in my 18-student discussion section of Introduction to American Government, and in spring 2026 she took my upper-level seminar, Courts and State Constitutions, which enrolled 14 students. In the seminar I graded all of her written work, including a 25-page research paper, and met with her four times about drafts.
Her paper compared how two state supreme courts read the same free-speech clause after their legislatures amended it. Her first draft argued that one court had simply got it wrong. In our second meeting I asked her to make the other court's case as strongly as she could. She did not defend her draft. She went back to the legislative record, found the committee report that both courts had cited, and rebuilt the paper around a narrower question: which court had read that report more faithfully. Her final paper was the only one in the seminar that changed its thesis between drafts because of evidence, and its introduction said so in one sentence. With her permission, I will use her outline to show next spring's seminar how to narrow a research question.
Her writing is plain and exact. She defines a term before she uses it, and her citations let a reader check every claim. I checked six of them; each source said what she said it did. Her one weak point is speed under time pressure. On the timed final in the 2024 lecture course she ran out of time on the last essay and lost points there. In the seminar, with time to revise, that did not recur.
I have taught this seminar every spring since 2014, about 180 students in all. For written analysis I place Ms. Rao in the top five percent of that group. In seminar discussion she is in the top quarter; she is careful rather than quick, and she changes her position when someone gives her a reason to.
I recommend her for the study of law without reservation. If anything in her file raises a question about her writing that this letter does not answer, I am glad to be contacted at the address on the LSAC form.
Sincerely,
Dr. S. Menon Professor of Political Science
What each paragraph does, tied to the published wording:
| Paragraph | What it proves | Published line it answers |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Two courses, sizes, terms, graded work | Basis for judgment | LSAC form: "how well you know the candidate and in what capacity" |
| 2. The draft that changed because of evidence | Analysis, shown not claimed | Yale: "analytical ability, research and writing skills"; "details and examples" |
| 3. Checked citations; bounded weakness | Research and writing, with candour | LSAC form: "candid appraisal"; LSAC: "candor, detail, and objectivity" |
| 4. 180 students since 2014; top five percent in writing, top quarter in discussion | A comparison with a named group and window | LSAC form: "relative strength … within the reference group"; Yale: comparisons must be "genuine" |
| 5. Plain endorsement, no school named | Commitment that fits every school the letter goes to | LSAC FAQ: one "general" letter when the content is the same |
Two choices in the letter are deliberate. It splits the comparison (top five percent in writing, top quarter in discussion), because one top rank across everything is harder to believe. And it names one weakness with its limit. LSAC's applicant page says "Most schools do not consider general, unreservedly praiseworthy letters helpful."
Comparisons that hold up
Yale lists sample comparisons ("one of the top students in my career," "top 10%"; "a standard of deviation beyond") and adds: "It is important for these comparisons to be genuine; not every student can be 'the top' student."
A comparison holds up when a reader can picture the group. Give three things:
- The group: "students in this seminar", "the undergraduates I have supervised on theses".
- The window and size: "since 2014, about 180 students".
- The axis: writing, discussion, research. A student can rank differently on each, as the sample does.
If your group is small (an eight-person seminar, one term), say so and still place the student in it. A small, honest group is more useful than a large, vague one. The TA reference page works through the small-group case.
Context only you can give
Yale's tip sheet names two kinds of context a recommender can add:
- Awards. "If you received a significant award from your institution, especially if the recommender was involved in the selection process or it was awarded by the recommender's department, it can be helpful for the recommender to provide some context for the award."
- Hard courses. "It is far better for your recommender to describe your challenging coursework than for you to discuss this in an addendum."
Our recommendation for a weak term you witnessed: describe what you saw in your course (the grade dip, the recovery) in factual terms. Do not name a health, family or personal reason unless the student has asked you to. They may be explaining it themselves in an addendum, and two accounts that differ do more harm than one.
Lines that weaken a law letter
Constructed examples, written by us, not lines from real letters. Each pair shows a weak line and a revision.
- Adjectives without an incident.
- Weak: "Ananya is brilliant, hardworking and passionate about justice."
- Revised: "In her second draft she dropped her own thesis after reading the committee report, and said so in her introduction."
- A long course description.
- Weak: a paragraph on the seminar's reading list and history.
- Revised: "The seminar enrolled 14 students; I graded all of their written work." Yale: course descriptions "are fine if brief".
- A résumé recap.
- Weak: "She is also president of the mock trial team and volunteers at a legal clinic."
- Revised: cut it unless you saw it. Yale warns against this "especially true when your recommender does not have any firsthand knowledge of these experiences."
- A comparison with no group.
- Weak: "She is the best student I have ever taught."
- Revised: "Of the roughly 180 students in this seminar since 2014, I place her in the top five percent for written analysis."
- A hedge you never explain.
- Weak: "She did well, considering everything."
- Revised: state the fact you observed ("her grades fell in spring 2025 and recovered in fall 2025") or cut the line.
- A school name in a general letter.
- Weak: "She would be an excellent fit for Georgetown."
- Revised: "I recommend her for the study of law." A general letter goes to every school the applicant assigns it to.
When to say no
If you cannot describe one piece of the student's work in detail, the letter will be the kind LSAC says schools do not find helpful. Decline early. LSAC's recommender FAQ is direct about why speed matters: "If you choose not to complete the letter of recommendation, contact the applicant immediately," because "LSAC does not contact the applicant if you choose not to respond" (LSAC Applicant References FAQ). Wording for that email is in how to decline writing a recommendation letter.
What to ask the student for
- The paper or exam you graded, with your comments, so paragraph 2 has its incident.
- Their transcript line for your courses, and the term dates.
- A résumé, for your own reference. The LSAC form says: "Do not send supporting materials (e.g., résumés) with your letter. They will be returned to you."
- Their school list, their earliest deadline, and whether the letter is general or for one named school.
Do not ask the student to draft the letter. If a student offers a draft, the reasons to decline it are in asked to write your own letter of recommendation. The applicant-side view of the whole LSAC letter system is in our LSAC letters of recommendation guide, and the general method for any graduate letter is in how to write a letter of recommendation for a student.
Get a free review of the letter
Get a free Quick Review of your recommendation letter before you upload it. It uses GradPilot's general graduate school recommendation letter rubric (there is no law-specific letter rubric) and reads how you know the candidate, incidents instead of adjectives, comparisons that name their group, the case for graduate-level potential, and the strength of your endorsement. GradPilot's letter reviews aren't for a letter a student drafted for a recommender to submit as their own.
More law school application guides are in the law school essays hub.
Sources
Retrieved November 3, 2026, except where noted.
- LSAC, Letter of Recommendation Form, sample PDF (undated sample): recommender block quoted in full; no supporting materials.
- LSAC, Letters of Recommendation (undated): who writes the most effective letters, peer comparison, unreservedly praiseworthy letters.
- Yale Law School, Letters of Recommendation Tip Sheet (last updated 08.2026): key skills, details and examples, genuine comparisons, course descriptions, résumé recaps, awards and coursework context, professional recommenders.
- LSAC, JD Services FAQs (undated): one general letter when the content is the same.
- LSAC, Applicant References FAQs (undated): contact the applicant if declining; LSAC does not notify them.
Writing a law school recommendation letter?
Paste your letter. The free Quick Review shows what to strengthen against the public graduate recommendation letter rubric.