Some hiring data by states (NALP)

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby 09042014 » Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:08 pm

I'm pretty sure I'm going to bid both DLA piper and Cadwalader.

User avatar
bjsesq
TLS Poet Laureate
Posts: 13383
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:02 am

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby bjsesq » Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:08 pm

Desert Fox wrote:I'm pretty sure I'm going to bid both DLA piper and Cadwalader.


No to Cad, but a definite yes to DLA. Not even joking this time.

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

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby 09042014 » Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:10 pm

bjsesq wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:I'm pretty sure I'm going to bid both DLA piper and Cadwalader.


No to Cad, but a definite yes to DLA. Not even joking this time.


I'm not joking either.

User avatar
bjsesq
TLS Poet Laureate
Posts: 13383
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:02 am

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby bjsesq » Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:12 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
bjsesq wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:I'm pretty sure I'm going to bid both DLA piper and Cadwalader.


No to Cad, but a definite yes to DLA. Not even joking this time.


I'm not joking either.


The thing is, I'm not even sure it is a safe bet. Looking at past results, DLA seems to look for a specific range of GPA's, and you can bet there will be a fuckload of bids on them because they are still Vault ranked and not necessarily GPA selective. Who the fuck knows about Cadwalader. It's an outhouse that doesn't seem to know it.

User avatar
XxSpyKEx
Posts: 1741
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:48 am

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby XxSpyKEx » Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:47 pm

Look at the google spreadsheet guys. The numbers are fucked up the numbers for Chicago (not sure if he did this for other cities as well - very briefly glanced at this). I just briefly glanced at it to figure out why his numbers are different than the ones I calculated for 2010 last year, and I noticed OP is double counting and including positions that aren't in Chicago. He pulled the Kirkland collective form (which includes SA in Kirkland Chicago AND other cities) AND he counted Kirkland Chicago separately. I don't know if he did this with other firms, but those numbers are seriously off because adding the the Kirkland collective form adds 68 SA positions in Chicago that were not there in 2010 (because he already counted the 32 from Kirkland's Chicago form). In 2011, using Kirkland's collective form adds 130 SA positions in Chicago that are not there this summer (2011)!! Just pulling out the Kirkland collective form, the numbers drop to 330 in Chicago. Don't know if he double counted other firms by including their collective forms as well (only looked at this briefly), but I would be careful in using this information for anything important (such as OCI bidding).

EDIT- here's what I had for Chicago from 2008-2010:

Law firm name
2008 2009 2010 [2L SA class]

Baker & McKenzie LLP – Chicago
2 8 4

Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.
5 3 3

Barnes & Thornburg LLP
3 0 0

BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE
7 12 1

BRYAN CAVE LLP – CHICAGO
6 3 2

Butler Rubin Saltarelli & Boyd LLP
1 1 1

Chapman and Cutler LLP
10 9 7

DLA Piper LLP (US)
18 7 5

Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
12 5 4

DYKEMA (Dykema Gossett PLLC) - CHICAGO OFFICE
6 3 2

FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY
7 1 0

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP- CHICAGO
21 9 4

Goldberg Kohn Ltd.
8 1 1

Greenberg Traurig, LLP
6 7 3

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP
18 7 8

Holland & Knight LLP – Chicago
6 4 2

JENNER & BLOCK LLP
40 46 16

JONES DAY – CHICAGO
17 21 8

K&L Gates LLP - Chicago, IL
10 13 3

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
29 15 5

KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP – Chicago
54 52 32

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP – CHICAGO
25 20 9

Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP – Chicago
11 2 2

Lovells LLP
7 4 2

Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP
4 2 4

MAYER BROWN LLP
71 46 11

McAndrews, Held & Malloy, Ltd.
7 4 4

McDermott Will & Emery LLP
14 14 8

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP
9 9 9

McGuireWoods LLP – Chicago
8 11 4

Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
2 2 1

Miller Shakman & Beem LLP
2 1 0

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
5 3 0

Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
19 10 0

NIXON PEABODY LLP - Chicago, IL
2 1 2

Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP
14 5 5

Perkins Coie LLP
4 3 1

Pircher, Nichols & Meeks
3 3 3

Quarles & Brady LLP
3 3 0

Reed Smith – Chicago
6 6 2

Ropes & Gray LLP
0 6 5

Schiff Hardin LLP
12 21 8

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP – CHICAGO
9 6 0

Shefsky & Froelich Ltd
2 1 1

SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP – CHICAGO
75 43 20

SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP - CHICAGO
57 33 9

Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP
43 14 6

Thompson Coburn LLP
3 1 1

Ungaretti & Harris LLP
6 4 3

Vedder Price, P.C.
10 5 0

WILDMAN, HARROLD, ALLEN & DIXON LLP
14 17 3

Winston & Strawn LLP
67 54 22

2008 SA total= 809

2009 SA total= 581

2010 SA total= 256

2010 SA/ 2009 SA = 256/581= 44% of the SAs that were available in 2009 were available in 2010

2010 SA/2008 SA = 256/809 = 31.6% of the SAs that were available in 2008 were available in 2010
Last edited by XxSpyKEx on Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
NYC Law
Posts: 1569
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:33 pm

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby NYC Law » Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:50 pm

XxSpyKEx wrote:Look at the google spreadsheet guys. The numbers are fucked up the numbers for Chicago (not sure if he did this for other cities as well - very briefly glanced at this). I just briefly glanced at it to figure out why his numbers are different than the ones I calculated for 2010 last year, and I noticed OP is double counting and including positions that aren't in Chicago. He pulled the Kirkland collective form (which includes SA in Kirkland Chicago AND other cities) AND he counted Kirkland Chicago separately. I don't know if he did this with other firms, but those numbers are seriously off because adding the the Kirkland collective form adds 68 SA positions in Chicago that were not there in 2010 (because he already counted the 32 from Kirkland's Chicago form). In 2011, using Kirkland's collective form adds 130 SA positions in Chicago that are not there this summer (2011)!! Just pulling out the Kirkland collective form, the numbers drop to 330 in Chicago. Don't know if he double counted other firms by including their collective forms as well (only looked at this briefly), but I would be careful in using this information for anything important (such as OCI bidding).


See the disclaimer, I've added this mostly impacts Illinois data as there's only the multi-form available, along with what the growth rate would be if the multi-forms were removed.

User avatar
XxSpyKEx
Posts: 1741
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:48 am

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby XxSpyKEx » Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:54 pm

NYC Law wrote:
XxSpyKEx wrote:Look at the google spreadsheet guys. The numbers are fucked up the numbers for Chicago (not sure if he did this for other cities as well - very briefly glanced at this). I just briefly glanced at it to figure out why his numbers are different than the ones I calculated for 2010 last year, and I noticed OP is double counting and including positions that aren't in Chicago. He pulled the Kirkland collective form (which includes SA in Kirkland Chicago AND other cities) AND he counted Kirkland Chicago separately. I don't know if he did this with other firms, but those numbers are seriously off because adding the the Kirkland collective form adds 68 SA positions in Chicago that were not there in 2010 (because he already counted the 32 from Kirkland's Chicago form). In 2011, using Kirkland's collective form adds 130 SA positions in Chicago that are not there this summer (2011)!! Just pulling out the Kirkland collective form, the numbers drop to 330 in Chicago. Don't know if he double counted other firms by including their collective forms as well (only looked at this briefly), but I would be careful in using this information for anything important (such as OCI bidding).


See the disclaimer, I've added this mostly impacts Illinois data as there's only the multi-form available, along with what the growth rate would be if the multi-forms were removed.


Kirkland has both a multi-form available and a form for Kirkland Chicago alone... You included both in calculating the 460 number.

EDIT- This doesn't really impact the growth rate because you included the collective form in both the 2010 and 2011 calculations. But it does significantly effect the calculation of the total number of SAs in Chicago (i.e. the legal SA hiring market is substantially smaller than the numbers here suggest). Just something people should keep in mind when using the information for things, such as OCI bidding.

User avatar
fanmingrui
Posts: 194
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:59 pm

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby fanmingrui » Thu Jul 28, 2011 2:03 pm

Desert Fox wrote:Jesus Kirkland + Sidley is like 25% of the market in Chicago.

I'd take an offer from Jesus Kirkland any day.

User avatar
XxSpyKEx
Posts: 1741
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:48 am

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby XxSpyKEx » Thu Jul 28, 2011 2:06 pm

fanmingrui wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:Jesus Kirkland + Sidley is like 25% of the market in Chicago.

I'd take an offer from Jesus Kirkland any day.


Well, so would the other 2000 applicants (or whatever the ridiculously high number is) :lol:

OnceUponAMemo
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:25 pm

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby OnceUponAMemo » Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:19 pm

XxSpyKEx wrote:
fanmingrui wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:Jesus Kirkland + Sidley is like 25% of the market in Chicago.

I'd take an offer from Jesus Kirkland any day.


Well, so would the other 2000 146,000 applicants per day (or whatever the ridiculously high number is) :lol:


Jesus is so selective.

http://answers.ask.com/Science/Other/how_many_people_die_every_day

User avatar
Cupidity
Posts: 2214
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:21 pm

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby Cupidity » Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:39 pm

Numbers for Weil NY appear to be double counted?

User avatar
Cupidity
Posts: 2214
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:21 pm

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby Cupidity » Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:43 pm

It appears for most firms you counted their global form at the location of their main office ie: Bingham McCutchen Total Office SA's = 43; and also their regional form; Bingham Boston SA's = 11. Those 43 aren't in Boston, they represent the Boston SA's and all other offices combined.

The gains you think you are seeing in the data are largely illusory.

User avatar
ndirish2010
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:41 pm

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby ndirish2010 » Tue Aug 02, 2011 4:01 pm

The gains are there, they just aren't what the OP would have you believe. Believe it or not, 330 for Chicago is good compared to last summer.

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

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby ahduth » Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:07 pm

bjsesq wrote:
stratocophic wrote:Oh you want Chicago? Just do K&E's home office, bro, that's easy to get right?


K&E= McDonalds of litigation. Not like DLA Piper. Go big or go home, baby.


McDonald's of litigation? I should start learning about these firms if I do decide to head back to Chicago. I knew I was going to have to bid on Kirkland and Sidley if I had the grades, but is "McDonald's" a good or bad thing...

User avatar
FeelTheHeat
Posts: 5203
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:32 am

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby FeelTheHeat » Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:13 pm

90 SA positions for Florida?

LET'S GOOOOOO WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

GatorStudent
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:12 pm

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby GatorStudent » Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:22 pm

FeelTheHeat wrote:90 SA positions for Florida?

LET'S GOOOOOO WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


Dude, don't get your hopes up too much. Many of those are going to people in the T14, not UF students, although UF'll get some of them.

User avatar
FeelTheHeat
Posts: 5203
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:32 am

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby FeelTheHeat » Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:30 pm

GatorStudent wrote:
FeelTheHeat wrote:90 SA positions for Florida?

LET'S GOOOOOO WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


Dude, don't get your hopes up too much. Many of those are going to people in the T14, not UF students, although UF'll get some of them.


I seem to have forgotten my sarcasm sticker at home :?

GatorStudent
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:12 pm

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby GatorStudent » Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:36 pm

FeelTheHeat wrote:
GatorStudent wrote:
FeelTheHeat wrote:90 SA positions for Florida?

LET'S GOOOOOO WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


Dude, don't get your hopes up too much. Many of those are going to people in the T14, not UF students, although UF'll get some of them.


I seem to have forgotten my sarcasm sticker at home :?


Oops, my bad! Carry on.

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Some hiring data by states (NALP)

Postby quakeroats » Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:37 pm

FeelTheHeat wrote:
GatorStudent wrote:
FeelTheHeat wrote:90 SA positions for Florida?

LET'S GOOOOOO WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


Dude, don't get your hopes up too much. Many of those are going to people in the T14, not UF students, although UF'll get some of them.


I seem to have forgotten my sarcasm sticker at home :?


How are things looking at UF these days?




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: carlos_danger, Google Adsense [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests