Big Law

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
handlesthetruth
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:42 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby handlesthetruth » Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:14 am

thecilent wrote:
handlesthetruth wrote:
thecilent wrote:Stopping by to say I wouldn't want to live anywhere in the country besides manhattan. It's worth it to me to pay 1800 for a studio to live there. Wouldn't want to be anywhere else. (but also I am pretty east coast biased.)


Have you lived anywhere else? A smaller city for instance? (chicago doesn't count)

Yeah I've lived in a smaller city pretty much my whole life.


Fair enough. As long as u don't like money that much...

Also, could've just been a crappy smaller city

Aqualibrium
Posts: 2011
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:57 am

Re: Big Law

Postby Aqualibrium » Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:18 am

HOW TO HAVE THE MOST ACCURATE PICTURE OF WHAT "BIGLAW" IS

Things you'll need:

NLJ250, AMLAW 100, VAULT 100

Directions

1. Place NLJ250 and AMLAW 100 side by side. Cross out any firms on NLJ250 that are not on AMLAW100.

2. Place NLJ250 and V100 side by side. Cross out any firms on NLJ250 that are not on V100.

3. Consolidate the remaining firms on all three lists, accounting for duplicates.

4. Enjoy

(I think you get my point (hint, one of the ingredients really isn't necessary))

marmot8
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:19 am

Re: Big Law

Postby marmot8 » Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:55 am

does where you went to school affect your chance at making partner, or is it all about getting in the door and then working your ass off?

Skyhook
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:30 am

Re: Big Law

Postby Skyhook » Mon Apr 18, 2011 10:46 am

FiveSermon wrote:They also put gravy on everything. It's revolting.


Yes. Gravy on everything at every mealtime.
How could anyone like the place?
No-one should tolerate gravy or even those who like gravy.
Gravy is revolting. Experts agree that gravy and gravy-related sauces have no place in food.

Indeed, the people were pricks, probably because they didn't hang themselves because of the shitty weather, and spent too much time eating terrible food smothered in gravy. And paying way too much for it...

User avatar
Aberzombie1892
Posts: 1907
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:56 am

Re: Big Law

Postby Aberzombie1892 » Mon Apr 18, 2011 10:57 am

marmot8 wrote:does where you went to school affect your chance at making partner, or is it all about getting in the door and then working your ass off?


Not in the slightest. If you are able to get in the door, your chances are making partner are the same as everyone else who starts with you. I really wouldn't even consider thinking about becoming a partner at a larger firm (60+) attorneys until you were at least a senior associate (5 years). Any given person won't last that long to begin with.

Slevin Kelevra 2011
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:55 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby Slevin Kelevra 2011 » Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:52 pm

Aqualibrium wrote:HOW TO HAVE THE MOST ACCURATE PICTURE OF WHAT "BIGLAW" IS

Things you'll need:

NLJ250, AMLAW 100, VAULT 100

Directions

1. Place NLJ250 and AMLAW 100 side by side. Cross out any firms on NLJ250 that are not on AMLAW100.

2. Place NLJ250 and V100 side by side. Cross out any firms on NLJ250 that are not on V100.

3. Consolidate the remaining firms on all three lists, accounting for duplicates.

4. Enjoy

(I think you get my point (hint, one of the ingredients really isn't necessary))


This is probably correct. However, I think most people use NLJ250 as biglaw because it is an inclusive list. Any Vault or AMLaw firm is going to be listed. The problem is a number of small know-name firms with under 250 attorneys are going to be listed as well.

youngbuck
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:08 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby youngbuck » Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:52 pm

voltage88 wrote:
HeavenWood wrote:
Sandro wrote:and a lower salary in a place that has a lot lower relative COL is really a higher salary , atleast some people think of it that way.


I'd much rather live on 130k in Pittsburgh than 160k in Manhattan.


I'd much rather live on 130K in Manhattan than 160k in Pittsburgh lol I guess it's a matter of preference. I'd be willing to sacrifice 30K to live in New York than to live in a small Midwest town on the decline...Sorry 'burghers! :lol:


After living in Pittsburgh for the last 4 years I definitely agree with you on this except for the fact that Pittsburgh is not in the "midwest."

But, I am planning to live in a small midwest town for the next three years (not sure if MSP is considered on the decline or not).

HeavenWood
Posts: 2915
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby HeavenWood » Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:53 pm

youngbuck wrote:
voltage88 wrote:
HeavenWood wrote:
Sandro wrote:and a lower salary in a place that has a lot lower relative COL is really a higher salary , atleast some people think of it that way.


I'd much rather live on 130k in Pittsburgh than 160k in Manhattan.


I'd much rather live on 130K in Manhattan than 160k in Pittsburgh lol I guess it's a matter of preference. I'd be willing to sacrifice 30K to live in New York than to live in a small Midwest town on the decline...Sorry 'burghers! :lol:


After living in Pittsburgh for the last 4 years I definitely agree with you on this except for the fact that Pittsburgh is not in the "midwest."

But, I am planning to live in a small midwest town for the next three years (not sure if MSP is considered on the decline or not).


Culturally speaking, Pittsburgh is the gateway to the Midwest. It's definitely not "East Coast."

Also, Check yo PMs.

User avatar
handlesthetruth
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:42 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby handlesthetruth » Mon Apr 18, 2011 2:00 pm

youngbuck wrote:
voltage88 wrote:
HeavenWood wrote:
Sandro wrote:and a lower salary in a place that has a lot lower relative COL is really a higher salary , atleast some people think of it that way.


I'd much rather live on 130k in Pittsburgh than 160k in Manhattan.


I'd much rather live on 130K in Manhattan than 160k in Pittsburgh lol I guess it's a matter of preference. I'd be willing to sacrifice 30K to live in New York than to live in a small Midwest town on the decline...Sorry 'burghers! :lol:


After living in Pittsburgh for the last 4 years I definitely agree with you on this except for the fact that Pittsburgh is not in the "midwest."

But, I am planning to live in a small midwest town for the next three years (not sure if MSP is considered on the decline or not).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_U ... ical_Areas
(looks at number 16) :| :arrow: :?:

youngbuck
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:08 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby youngbuck » Mon Apr 18, 2011 2:21 pm

handlesthetruth wrote:
youngbuck wrote:
voltage88 wrote:
HeavenWood wrote:
I'd much rather live on 130K in Manhattan than 160k in Pittsburgh lol I guess it's a matter of preference. I'd be willing to sacrifice 30K to live in New York than to live in a small Midwest town on the decline...Sorry 'burghers! :lol:


After living in Pittsburgh for the last 4 years I definitely agree with you on this except for the fact that Pittsburgh is not in the "midwest."

But, I am planning to live in a small midwest town for the next three years (not sure if MSP is considered on the decline or not).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_U ... ical_Areas
(looks at number 16) :| :arrow: :?:


Sorry, I was kind of making fun of the fact that the previous poster called Pittsburgh a "small midwest town" and a statement like that usually makes me think like 10K people. Just difficult to display sarcasm on a message board.

User avatar
handlesthetruth
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:42 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby handlesthetruth » Mon Apr 18, 2011 2:23 pm

youngbuck wrote:Sorry, I was kind of making fun of the fact that the previous poster called Pittsburgh a "small midwest town" and a statement like that usually makes me think like 10K people. Just difficult to display sarcasm on a message board.



ahhh fail on my part.

apologies

User avatar
predent/prelaw
Posts: 136
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:43 am

Re: Big Law

Postby predent/prelaw » Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:34 pm

Patriot1208 wrote:I'm just referring to the ability to dig blow out of a hookers asshole with my tongue.

damn I would slap that ho for wasting my shit

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Big Law

Postby ahduth » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:09 pm

Slevin Kelevra 2011 wrote:
Aqualibrium wrote:HOW TO HAVE THE MOST ACCURATE PICTURE OF WHAT "BIGLAW" IS

Things you'll need:

NLJ250, AMLAW 100, VAULT 100

Directions

1. Place NLJ250 and AMLAW 100 side by side. Cross out any firms on NLJ250 that are not on AMLAW100.

2. Place NLJ250 and V100 side by side. Cross out any firms on NLJ250 that are not on V100.

3. Consolidate the remaining firms on all three lists, accounting for duplicates.

4. Enjoy

(I think you get my point (hint, one of the ingredients really isn't necessary))


This is probably correct. However, I think most people use NLJ250 as biglaw because it is an inclusive list. Any Vault or AMLaw firm is going to be listed. The problem is a number of small know-name firms with under 250 attorneys are going to be listed as well.


This is basically what I was saying with my initial post. Although V100 seems silly to me. Associate prestige? We care what you think, why?

AmLaw is billings, and I guess when I think big I think money. Too much time working as an accountant I guess.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby 09042014 » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:21 pm

1) You idiots should stop using linear cost of living calculators. They are not accurate at higher levels of income, especially for somene living alone, and with significant debt. 40K in chicago might equal 75K. But 80K doesn't equal 150K.

No a person with a 160K big law salary doesn't have the same QOL than a partner in NYC (300K) has.

2) When people talk about big law they mean firms that pay a lot (depends on the market), and has a lot of associates (again relative to the market). A lot of people also lump in boutiques.

youngbuck
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:08 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby youngbuck » Mon Apr 18, 2011 11:00 pm

If you can go to the bank and be invited into their private banking department or whatever that particular bank calls it solely on the basis that you are a lawyer at firm X, then your firm is a biglaw firm. Otherwise, it's not. ;)

BeenDidThat
Posts: 704
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:18 am

Re: Big Law

Postby BeenDidThat » Mon Apr 18, 2011 11:51 pm

Pittsburgh = Appalachia or Ohio River Valley Definitely not East Coast. Definitely not Midwest.

Trust me. I'm an expert.

HeavenWood
Posts: 2915
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby HeavenWood » Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:33 am

BeenDidThat wrote:Pittsburgh = Appalachia or Ohio River Valley Definitely not East Coast. Definitely not Midwest.

Trust me. I'm an expert.


Appalachia and the Ohio River Valley can be justifiably classified as the gateway to the Midwest. Trust me. I'm also an expert.

BeenDidThat
Posts: 704
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:18 am

Re: Big Law

Postby BeenDidThat » Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:50 am

HeavenWood wrote:
BeenDidThat wrote:Pittsburgh = Appalachia or Ohio River Valley Definitely not East Coast. Definitely not Midwest.

Trust me. I'm an expert.


Appalachia and the Ohio River Valley can be justifiably classified as the gateway to the Midwest. Trust me. I'm also an expert.


True, but you were challenging the guy who challenged the other guy who called PGH the Midwest. We aren't talking about the history of Anglo incursion into North America.

HeavenWood
Posts: 2915
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby HeavenWood » Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:50 am

BeenDidThat wrote:
HeavenWood wrote:
BeenDidThat wrote:Pittsburgh = Appalachia or Ohio River Valley Definitely not East Coast. Definitely not Midwest.

Trust me. I'm an expert.


Appalachia and the Ohio River Valley can be justifiably classified as the gateway to the Midwest. Trust me. I'm also an expert.


True, but you were challenging the guy who challenged the other guy who called PGH the Midwest.


And I in turn thought you were challenging me. I apologize, sir.

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Big Law

Postby ahduth » Tue Apr 19, 2011 1:12 am

HeavenWood wrote:
BeenDidThat wrote:
HeavenWood wrote:
BeenDidThat wrote:Pittsburgh = Appalachia or Ohio River Valley Definitely not East Coast. Definitely not Midwest.

Trust me. I'm an expert.


Appalachia and the Ohio River Valley can be justifiably classified as the gateway to the Midwest. Trust me. I'm also an expert.


True, but you were challenging the guy who challenged the other guy who called PGH the Midwest.


And I in turn thought you were challenging me. I apologize, sir.


Are you guys arguing over who has the authority to say whether or not Pittsburgh is in the Midwest?

As a Chicagoan, I most definitely do NOT consider Pittsburgh as part of the Midwest. How far is it from the Mississippi? I guess I also CBF to really care very much either, now that I think about it. We'll take all of Pittsburgh except for Ben Roethlisberger. That guy is a scumbag.

BeenDidThat
Posts: 704
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:18 am

Re: Big Law

Postby BeenDidThat » Tue Apr 19, 2011 1:14 am

ahduth wrote:Are you guys arguing over who has the authority to say whether or not Pittsburgh is in the Midwest?

As a Chicagoan, I most definitely do NOT consider Pittsburgh as part of the Midwest. How far is it from the Mississippi? I guess I also CBF to really care very much either, now that I think about it. We'll take all of Pittsburgh except for Ben Roethlisberger. That guy is a scumbag.


No. We are both relevant authorities. We were just slightly confused on what we were jousting about. That confusion has been resolved.

As for Chicago, you most definitely do NOT get to claim any part of Pittsburgh, no matter how bad the Bears are.

rolandgill
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 3:01 am

Re: Big Law

Postby rolandgill » Tue Apr 19, 2011 3:15 am

Big Law = Lots of money, no life, boring work

bigben
Posts: 703
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 2:44 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby bigben » Tue Apr 19, 2011 3:43 pm

YaSvoboden wrote:
bigben wrote:
JusticeHarlan wrote:
Aberzombie1892 wrote:Also, ~30% of the salaries on that bimodal distribution chart land between $130,000-$60,000. So to say that there are not a lot of jobs in that range isn't really accurate.

You have to factor in the response rate, though. The '09 chart had fewer than 20K graduates reporting, out of about 45K, so your 30% probably drops below 15%.

http://www.nalp.org/salarydistrib

Correct! Finally someone got this right.


I honestly don't know how much lawyers actually make, but are we assuming that everyone that didn't report is at 40k (or I guess 160, but who wouldn't want to report that?) Otherwise that 15% makes no sense.

Well for one thing, the chart excludes EVERYONE who is unemployed, and I believe it also excludes everyone who took a job that did not require bar admittance.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18402
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby bk1 » Tue Apr 19, 2011 3:45 pm

bigben wrote:Well for one thing, the chart excludes EVERYONE who is unemployed, and I believe it also excludes everyone who took a job that did not require bar admittance.


I'm pretty sure it also doesn't include the legion of grads who are employed part time.

bigben
Posts: 703
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 2:44 pm

Re: Big Law

Postby bigben » Tue Apr 19, 2011 3:48 pm

bk1 wrote:
bigben wrote:Well for one thing, the chart excludes EVERYONE who is unemployed, and I believe it also excludes everyone who took a job that did not require bar admittance.


I'm pretty sure it also doesn't include the legion of grads who are employed part time.

These things together would account for a lot of the ~60% of grads whose salaries aren't included in the graph. On top of that it is safe to assume a serious reporting bias for those making 160k vs those making 40k or unemployed.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Dante181 and 2 guests