Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
utlaw2007
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby utlaw2007 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 4:52 pm

Well said lissjen, well said.

User avatar
BarbellDreams
Posts: 2256
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:10 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby BarbellDreams » Fri Dec 24, 2010 6:21 pm

Its not entirely fair to say that those going to a t17 and expecting biglaw will be disappointed, but I can't say it enough: Unless you A.) Have insane connections, B.) Plan on going to HYS or C.) Plan on going to to CCN and can guarantee top third, you should NOT have a "Biglaw or bust" mentality. Its just not smart. I have friends who took sticker at MVP and work midlaw for 70K, which after taxes isn't going to pay off your loans anytime soon. I have friends who thought they were gonna rock it at CCN, went there at sticker and finished below median, struck out at OCI for biglaw and now work midlaw for 85K while living in NY and dying under debt. I would have done the exact same thing as my friends did in their positions because it was a smart gamble, but it didn't end up paying off. Biglaw is always a gamble, you can't really ever guarantee it.

Check 0L threads about grade predictions and 1L threads about grade predictions. 0L threads go like this: "How easy is it to get biglaw if I'm top 10% from (insert school) here)?". 1L threads after exams are generally like this: "What type of job can I get if I'm at median from (insert school here)? The difference is most 0L's think they're gonna rock it at whatever school they go to and just have this assumption that they'll most likely be top 10% but they guess they'll settle for top third. Once you get out there, go through the grind of 1L and see what its really like, all that arrogance will be gone. Chances of you making top 10% aren't in your favor, and the fact that you think you have a "legal mind" and are just smarter than everyone will quickly disappear when you meet your classmates and realize they can legally analyze issues just as well as you and better. This happened to me when I came to law school, and I quickly went from "I'm gonna be top 10%" to "Dear god let me be above median". You think it won't happen to you but it will more times than not. Not getting biglaw is not the end of the world. If to you it is, you should either go to HYS or just skip law school entirely.

utlaw2007
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby utlaw2007 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 7:37 pm

Well said, Barbelldreams, well said. I sound like a broken record, but it's true.

utlaw2007
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby utlaw2007 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 7:47 pm

I just wanted to add that LSAT score is not a great predictor of where one finishes in the class. I've seen students who scored in the low 160's outperform 170 students in law school. The difference is that the LSAT doesn't measure one's ability to craft and articulate an argument, whereas, that's mostly what law school is. It only measures one's ability to pick apart arguments and apply rule sets in their most basic form to situations. Everyone at a top 17 school has superb reading comprehension. The legal issues and applicable concepts at a top 17 law school are a lot more complex than what one sees on the LSAT.

bigkahuna2020
Posts: 494
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:12 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby bigkahuna2020 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 8:02 pm

Duke, Cornell<Vanderbilt

I would say BC/BU/Fordham/GWU is as low as I'd go, but Cardozo gives you a 20% or so chance, esp with the 75k max debt, isn't a terrible choice

Temple and American def bat above their weight

User avatar
20160810
Posts: 19648
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:18 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby 20160810 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 9:57 pm

bigkahuna2020 wrote:Duke, Cornell<Vanderbilt

I would say BC/BU/Fordham/GWU is as low as I'd go, but Cardozo gives you a 20% or so chance, esp with the 75k max debt, isn't a terrible choice

Temple and American def bat above their weight

Cardozo gives you a 20% chance at biglaw? Have you been drinking antifreeze?

User avatar
Big Shrimpin
Posts: 2468
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby Big Shrimpin » Fri Dec 24, 2010 11:13 pm

SBL wrote:
bigkahuna2020 wrote:Duke, Cornell<Vanderbilt

I would say BC/BU/Fordham/GWU is as low as I'd go, but Cardozo gives you a 20% or so chance, esp with the 75k max debt, isn't a terrible choice

Temple and American def bat above their weight

Cardozo gives you a 20% chance at biglaw? Have you been drinking antifreeze?


Holiday lulz?

bigkahuna2020
Posts: 494
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:12 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby bigkahuna2020 » Sat Dec 25, 2010 4:56 am

SBL wrote:
bigkahuna2020 wrote:Duke, Cornell<Vanderbilt

I would say BC/BU/Fordham/GWU is as low as I'd go, but Cardozo gives you a 20% or so chance, esp with the 75k max debt, isn't a terrible choice

Temple and American def bat above their weight

Cardozo gives you a 20% chance at biglaw? Have you been drinking antifreeze?


http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1

#30-20.1%

utlaw2007
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby utlaw2007 » Sat Dec 25, 2010 7:43 am

I hate to rain on anyone's parade, but BigLaw does hire people from mid tier one schools. However, these people are usually not on the partnership track and they do not make any where near the 160k that is offered to associates on the partnership track. I have met some lawyers that have been in this situation. Some have been from mid tier 1 schools and others have been from bottom tier law schools. I wouldn't get my hopes up about that. I'm just being honest.

User avatar
lisjjen
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:19 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby lisjjen » Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:47 pm

There's such a thing as "partner track" at big law? I mean besides the top 5% at HYS.

I thought all junior associates at Biglaw did was weep, get whipped, and work endless hours in the back churning out busywork that partners would get the credit for, meanwhile getting cash instead of human emotion or sunlight.

utlaw2007
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby utlaw2007 » Sat Dec 25, 2010 5:10 pm

I was surprised when I first heard it, as well. But I met some lawyers who had shocked me when they told what law schools they had went to yet had worked at big firms. They told me they weren't on partnership track and did not make the big salaries. They also said they got treated worst than the partnership track associates. Most lawyers at big firms are largely partnership track attorneys. I just refuse to believe based on hiring criteria and law firm roster that Cordozo would have that much of their class get hired by biglaw. It just doesn't jive with what I experienced.

utlaw2007
Posts: 783
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby utlaw2007 » Sat Dec 25, 2010 5:11 pm

Most Texas BigLaw partners went to UT so there is hope outside of HYS.

User avatar
fish tacos
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:47 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby fish tacos » Sat Dec 25, 2010 5:48 pm

lisjjen wrote:Wow. A lot of really long posts that started blurring together. I just kinda skimmed to the bottom. I blame it on what facebook has done to our generation.

I think the conclusion I'm getting is if you like BBQ, go to UT. If you like cajun, go to Vandy. And if you like daylight, don't go into biglaw.



Cajun in Nashville? Um, no.

ksimon2007
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:23 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby ksimon2007 » Sat Dec 25, 2010 5:54 pm

fish tacos wrote:
lisjjen wrote:Wow. A lot of really long posts that started blurring together. I just kinda skimmed to the bottom. I blame it on what facebook has done to our generation.

I think the conclusion I'm getting is if you like BBQ, go to UT. If you like cajun, go to Vandy. And if you like daylight, don't go into biglaw.



Cajun in Nashville? Um, no.


My thought as well. I'm from Texas/Louisiana. Cajun food comes from the creole folks in Louisiana lol. I would note that I am quite interested in getting some Memphis BBQ.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby Grizz » Sat Dec 25, 2010 7:08 pm

ksimon2007 wrote:
fish tacos wrote:
lisjjen wrote:Wow. A lot of really long posts that started blurring together. I just kinda skimmed to the bottom. I blame it on what facebook has done to our generation.

I think the conclusion I'm getting is if you like BBQ, go to UT. If you like cajun, go to Vandy. And if you like daylight, don't go into biglaw.



Cajun in Nashville? Um, no.


My thought as well. I'm from Texas/Louisiana. Cajun food comes from the creole folks in Louisiana lol. I would note that I am quite interested in getting some Memphis BBQ.


Nash has good BBQ as well

User avatar
dresden doll
Posts: 6802
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby dresden doll » Sat Dec 25, 2010 7:41 pm

This question is impossible to answer categorically. Assuming no money, I'd probably go no lower than T10 (and even then I'd have to seriously think about it). Assuming full ride, I'd be much more liberal (definitely as low as UW-Madison if not lower than that).

Also, my answer changes depending on the region. I wouldn't dip lower than Fordham for NYC market but I would potentially go to SMU since the TX market is isolated, in relatively good shape and inclined to favor local grads.

User avatar
lisjjen
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:19 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby lisjjen » Sat Dec 25, 2010 8:13 pm

fish tacos wrote:Cajun in Nashville? Um, no.


Shows you how much of a Yankee I am.

2011Law
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby 2011Law » Sat Dec 25, 2010 8:35 pm

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=108528

EDIT: this shows the top 49 classes that place in the nlj250 and federal clerkships

HowdyYall
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 8:49 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby HowdyYall » Sat Dec 25, 2010 8:42 pm

utlaw2007 wrote: Here in Texas, it's like getting admitted to Harvard.


so true!

User avatar
lisjjen
Posts: 1242
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:19 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby lisjjen » Sat Dec 25, 2010 9:26 pm

HowdyYall wrote:
utlaw2007 wrote: Here in Texas, it's like getting admitted to Harvard.


so true!


Really? I'm trying to pick a school hoping for the best but expecting the worst. I'd love to think about what would happen if I graduated in the top 3rd of my class, but also want to consider what would happen if I finished in the bottom 3rd. Would I still be able to find work in Texas?

User avatar
BarbellDreams
Posts: 2256
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:10 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby BarbellDreams » Sat Dec 25, 2010 9:27 pm

dresden doll wrote:This question is impossible to answer categorically. Assuming no money, I'd probably go no lower than T10 (and even then I'd have to seriously think about it). Assuming full ride, I'd be much more liberal (definitely as low as UW-Madison if not lower than that).

Also, my answer changes depending on the region. I wouldn't dip lower than Fordham for NYC market but I would potentially go to SMU since the TX market is isolated, in relatively good shape and inclined to favor local grads.


With a fullride scholly the LOWEST you'd be willing to go is Wisconsin? Wow, the selectivity of TLS have really picked up since my time haha.

User avatar
dresden doll
Posts: 6802
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby dresden doll » Sat Dec 25, 2010 11:34 pm

BarbellDreams wrote:
dresden doll wrote:This question is impossible to answer categorically. Assuming no money, I'd probably go no lower than T10 (and even then I'd have to seriously think about it). Assuming full ride, I'd be much more liberal (definitely as low as UW-Madison if not lower than that).

Also, my answer changes depending on the region. I wouldn't dip lower than Fordham for NYC market but I would potentially go to SMU since the TX market is isolated, in relatively good shape and inclined to favor local grads.


With a fullride scholly the LOWEST you'd be willing to go is Wisconsin? Wow, the selectivity of TLS have really picked up since my time haha.


The question is premised on the idea that I'm 'biglaw or bust' (btw, I never was). If I thought that nothing but biglaw would make me happy, I certainly wouldn't go to a school where Biglaw recruitment never happens, full ride or not. Those three years of my life are irretrievable.

Besides, even with a full ride, I'd still need the loans to cover COL. So, yeah, I wouldn't be taking full ride Hofstra for the pleasure of ~60k in debt + absolutely minuscule chance of ever getting Biglaw. At least Madison is the number one school in its state.

User avatar
artichoke
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:20 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby artichoke » Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:17 am

SBL wrote:
hokie wrote:--LinkRemoved--

I would say Cooley; they are ranked 12th in 2008's Judging the Law Schools above Stanford, Chicago, and Penn so I would venture to say "if Cooley's what you're rockin', then BigLaw's a knockin'" 8)

I don't ban people for lame Cooley jokes, but sometimes I'm tempted to.

We get it. They're a bad law school that pretends they're a good law school. Congratulations on not being fooled. Looks like you have to get up pretty early in the morning to pull one over on ol' hokie.


To be fair, I never get tired of Cooley jokes, no matter how bad... Could have something to do with going to UG right around that area...

User avatar
megaTTTron
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:26 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby megaTTTron » Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:20 am

artichoke wrote:
SBL wrote:
hokie wrote:--LinkRemoved--

I would say Cooley; they are ranked 12th in 2008's Judging the Law Schools above Stanford, Chicago, and Penn so I would venture to say "if Cooley's what you're rockin', then BigLaw's a knockin'" 8)

I don't ban people for lame Cooley jokes, but sometimes I'm tempted to.

We get it. They're a bad law school that pretends they're a good law school. Congratulations on not being fooled. Looks like you have to get up pretty early in the morning to pull one over on ol' hokie.


To be fair, I never get tired of Cooley jokes, no matter how bad... Could have something to do with going to UG right around that area...


+1,000. You don't get it until you have a friend go to Cooley and cite their own rankings. And you go to Chicago.

User avatar
Big Shrimpin
Posts: 2468
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Lowest you would go if you wanted BigLaw

Postby Big Shrimpin » Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:44 am

bigkahuna2020 wrote:
SBL wrote:
bigkahuna2020 wrote:Duke, Cornell<Vanderbilt

I would say BC/BU/Fordham/GWU is as low as I'd go, but Cardozo gives you a 20% or so chance, esp with the 75k max debt, isn't a terrible choice

Temple and American def bat above their weight

Cardozo gives you a 20% chance at biglaw? Have you been drinking antifreeze?


http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1

#30-20.1%


LOL! Future readers: be advised...

Public Service Announcement:

The "go to" survey was based upon 2009 grads...2009 grads did OCI in 2007 - aka the "boomtimes" - and summered in 2008, right before the economiclypse...

It is now 2010 (not for long). We have been in an atrocious biglaw hiring environment for a while, and the landscape has not improved significantly (although there has arguably been an uptick since last year, it's still horrendous out there)...not even CLOSE to the 2007-level golden years. Until we see concrete evidence of a surging comeback, I would venture to guess that most biglaw attorneys would be hesitant to predict a sharp reversal in the next few years. Thus, aspiring biglaw candidates, if you care to preserve any semblance of pride and/or self-dignity in your future biglaw endeavors, it behooves you to inquire further before taking for granted outdated information because such unfortunate reliance will only hurt you when you decide to matriculate with delusions of biglaw employment, models, and bottles.

Just remember - many of you will also be simulatenously signing yourself up for indentured-servitude to Uncle Sam.

For the non-T10 cohort: contrary to popular belief, it's not that easy (read, very hard) to "work harder" than (depending upon your skool, but with particular emphasis on TT schools in legal markets already inundated with other lawlskools) 90-95 percent of your classmates, thereby setting yourself up for a great shot at a coveted biglaw gig in this biglaw-buyer's market. Unless you're going to HYS (barring some other absurd resume bullet point...and I understand that there is "play in the joints"...lol...wrt the rest of the T10 and class rank and firm hiring etc...), don't "count" on biglaw. To do so would be silly. It's a dice roll. Some of us got lucky. Others, notwithstanding excellent credentials, didn't. As a collective however, all that we can do now is warn the next group.

In sum, the road to a successful biglaw career is gilded with the souls of the unwitting and tolled by the liars that built it. Do your homework. Don't be a parrot. Etc... Merry Christmas.
Last edited by Big Shrimpin on Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:47 am, edited 1 time in total.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 20171lhopeful, Bing [Bot], joezze and 6 guests