The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
Rahviveh

Gold
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby Rahviveh » Sun Apr 20, 2014 10:45 pm

daryldixon wrote:
jbagelboy wrote:
banjo wrote:
daryldixon wrote:It is impossible to know because we have no data about who specifically "wanted" biglaw and how they went about trying to get it.


At CLS OCS tells us what percent of OCI participants got at least one offer out of OCI. 85% for c/o 2012, 92% for c/o 2013, and 86% for c/o 2015. I've never seen an actual figure for c/o 2014, but I've heard it was lower.

We also have a brand new list that compares anticipated and actual outcomes: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=227978

Forgot to add that we also get a list of every firm people bid on, # of screeners, # of callbacks, # of accepted callbacks, # of offers, and # of accepted offers. If you search around TLS you can find a link to this.


Right, hence, 10-15% strike-out for people that wanted big law (and since people who go to offices/large firms not at OCI aren't counted in this data, it's always a smudge lower than that striking out in the end). I know Chicago can post the same range, and I'm giving Harvard and Stanford the benefit of the doubt that they can too due to the deference we give those schools on TLS (and as I said above, I wouldn't be surprised if Stanford had even lower strike-out rates).

daryl: just admit you were wrong and we can move past it this is a silly point.

I am not wrong and you have conveniently refused to argue all of the other points I made to dispute your crappy arguments.

OCI participation doesn't necessarily equate to the number of people that wanted or got big law. Those figures are leaving out the no-offers, cold offers, or people that wanted big law but chose not to participate in OCI. Also we have no data from the other top schools regarding OCI performance and Columbia is arguably the top big law producing school in the t14.


There is similar data available for Uchi. Last year someone calculated the list that OCS gives us, and 77% of 2L's for c/o 2013 (not just OCI participants) were working at NLJ250 firms. Yes, that leaves out no-offers, but it also leaves out people going to boutiques or who don't care about OCI. I don't know what the numbers are like for other schools, but I'm guessing they are similar.

daryldixon

Bronze
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 3:55 am

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby daryldixon » Sun Apr 20, 2014 10:54 pm

Rahviveh wrote:
daryldixon wrote:
jbagelboy wrote:
banjo wrote:At CLS OCS tells us what percent of OCI participants got at least one offer out of OCI. 85% for c/o 2012, 92% for c/o 2013, and 86% for c/o 2015. I've never seen an actual figure for c/o 2014, but I've heard it was lower.

We also have a brand new list that compares anticipated and actual outcomes: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=227978

Forgot to add that we also get a list of every firm people bid on, # of screeners, # of callbacks, # of accepted callbacks, # of offers, and # of accepted offers. If you search around TLS you can find a link to this.


Right, hence, 10-15% strike-out for people that wanted big law (and since people who go to offices/large firms not at OCI aren't counted in this data, it's always a smudge lower than that striking out in the end). I know Chicago can post the same range, and I'm giving Harvard and Stanford the benefit of the doubt that they can too due to the deference we give those schools on TLS (and as I said above, I wouldn't be surprised if Stanford had even lower strike-out rates).

daryl: just admit you were wrong and we can move past it this is a silly point.

I am not wrong and you have conveniently refused to argue all of the other points I made to dispute your crappy arguments.

OCI participation doesn't necessarily equate to the number of people that wanted or got big law. Those figures are leaving out the no-offers, cold offers, or people that wanted big law but chose not to participate in OCI. Also we have no data from the other top schools regarding OCI performance and Columbia is arguably the top big law producing school in the t14.


There is similar data available for Uchi. Last year someone calculated the list that OCS gives us, and 77% of 2L's for c/o 2013 (not just OCI participants) were working at NLJ250 firms. Yes, that leaves out no-offers, but it also leaves out people going to boutiques or who don't care about OCI. I don't know what the numbers are like for other schools, but I'm guessing they are similar.

Unless it is official data released by your school it is meaningless to cite it here.

User avatar
Rahviveh

Gold
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby Rahviveh » Sun Apr 20, 2014 10:56 pm

daryldixon wrote:Unless it is official data released by your school it is meaningless to cite it here.


It is official data my friend

daryldixon

Bronze
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 3:55 am

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby daryldixon » Sun Apr 20, 2014 10:57 pm

Rahviveh wrote:
daryldixon wrote:Unless it is official data released by your school it is meaningless to cite it here.


It is official data my friend

Do you have a link?

User avatar
Rahviveh

Gold
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby Rahviveh » Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:03 pm

daryldixon wrote:
Rahviveh wrote:
daryldixon wrote:Unless it is official data released by your school it is meaningless to cite it here.


It is official data my friend

Do you have a link?


viewtopic.php?f=23&t=187451

Someone did c/o 2014 too, but I can't find it right now

daryldixon

Bronze
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 3:55 am

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby daryldixon » Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:27 pm

Rahviveh wrote:
daryldixon wrote:
Rahviveh wrote:
daryldixon wrote:Unless it is official data released by your school it is meaningless to cite it here.


It is official data my friend

Do you have a link?


viewtopic.php?f=23&t=187451

Someone did c/o 2014 too, but I can't find it right now

Unless I am missing something this does not look official.

NYSprague

Silver
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby NYSprague » Mon Apr 21, 2014 12:05 am

Can't you tell who got biglaw in some other way? Like LST data? I don't understand this.

Has this devolved again into an argument that the debt is fine because biglaw is almost certain? What if you are in the 10% who don't get biglaw? What is the backup plan?

Statistics are great until you're the T6 grad with no job and your school fellowship runs out. Or you worked at Weil Boston, or Brown Rudnick or planned on Dewey.
You can't assume it will never happen to you. So figure out what you will do if that is you. Because it does happen and will continue to happen.

I don't care what you do as long as you go with as much information as possible. I know that 0Ls have almost always overestimated how fast they will pay back debt, how long they will last in biglaw, etc. just try to understand the real downside risk.

User avatar
Rahviveh

Gold
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:02 pm

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby Rahviveh » Mon Apr 21, 2014 12:39 am

NYSprague wrote:Can't you tell who got biglaw in some other way? Like LST data? I don't understand this.

Has this devolved again into an argument that the debt is fine because biglaw is almost certain? What if you are in the 10% who don't get biglaw? What is the backup plan?

Statistics are great until you're the T6 grad with no job and your school fellowship runs out. Or you worked at Weil Boston, or Brown Rudnick or planned on Dewey.
You can't assume it will never happen to you. So figure out what you will do if that is you. Because it does happen and will continue to happen.

I don't care what you do as long as you go with as much information as possible. I know that 0Ls have almost always overestimated how fast they will pay back debt, how long they will last in biglaw, etc. just try to understand the real downside risk.


sunynp you've been posting here for years telling 0L's not to go to law school, don't tell us now that you don't care about what they do :mrgreen: (welcome back)

daryldixon

Bronze
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 3:55 am

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby daryldixon » Mon Apr 21, 2014 1:27 am

daryldixon wrote:
Workingtitle wrote:I'm an 0L, and have a question:

My current plan is to try for BigLaw, even though I know it will probably be miserable, with the rationale that in a few years I could exit out for somewhere that would be better (smaller firm, government job, est).

It seems like people earlier were indicating this was a bad idea, so can someone coalesce this for me please? Why is this thinking flawed?

Also, practicing BigLaw attorneys: Do you really not have ANY friends? Is it really that bad? Any practicing BigLaw attorney want to chime in that you actually have some friends?

1. Trying for biglaw doesn't mean you will get it. Even at a t14 you still have a 20-40% chance at failure.
2. If you have to take out more than 100k in student loans, you won't be able to pay them off before you leave big law.
3. The exit options aren't guaranteed either. You actually get no marketable skills in your first several years of big law. You won't interact with a client, you won't go to court, and you probably won't even take a deposition. No one will want to hire you except other big law firms or mid law firms that do similar mind numbing "paper litigation".


Just to summarize the last page:
Despite their best efforts, no one has been able to successfully disprove these three reasons why 0Ls should not plan on going into biglaw and then lateraling out into something better after a few years.

lecsa

Bronze
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 2:36 pm

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby lecsa » Mon Apr 21, 2014 3:10 am

daryldixon wrote:
Rahviveh wrote:
daryldixon wrote:
Rahviveh wrote:It is official data my friend

Do you have a link?


viewtopic.php?f=23&t=187451

Someone did c/o 2014 too, but I can't find it right now

Unless I am missing something this does not look official.



This is the official thread for class of 2013. Not sure what kind of stats people were posting in this thread (except they look wrong and made up).

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=226198

NYSprague

Silver
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby NYSprague » Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:25 am

Rahviveh wrote:
NYSprague wrote:Can't you tell who got biglaw in some other way? Like LST data? I don't understand this.

Has this devolved again into an argument that the debt is fine because biglaw is almost certain? What if you are in the 10% who don't get biglaw? What is the backup plan?

Statistics are great until you're the T6 grad with no job and your school fellowship runs out. Or you worked at Weil Boston, or Brown Rudnick or planned on Dewey.
You can't assume it will never happen to you. So figure out what you will do if that is you. Because it does happen and will continue to happen.

I don't care what you do as long as you go with as much information as possible. I know that 0Ls have almost always overestimated how fast they will pay back debt, how long they will last in biglaw, etc. just try to understand the real downside risk.


sunynp you've been posting here for years telling 0L's not to go to law school, don't tell us now that you don't care about what they do :mrgreen: (welcome back)

I guess I do care.

User avatar
jbagelboy

Diamond
Posts: 10276
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby jbagelboy » Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:48 am

daryldixon wrote:
daryldixon wrote:
Workingtitle wrote:I'm an 0L, and have a question:

My current plan is to try for BigLaw, even though I know it will probably be miserable, with the rationale that in a few years I could exit out for somewhere that would be better (smaller firm, government job, est).

It seems like people earlier were indicating this was a bad idea, so can someone coalesce this for me please? Why is this thinking flawed?

Also, practicing BigLaw attorneys: Do you really not have ANY friends? Is it really that bad? Any practicing BigLaw attorney want to chime in that you actually have some friends?

1. Trying for biglaw doesn't mean you will get it. Even at a t14 you still have a 20-40% chance at failure.
2. If you have to take out more than 100k in student loans, you won't be able to pay them off before you leave big law.
3. The exit options aren't guaranteed either. You actually get no marketable skills in your first several years of big law. You won't interact with a client, you won't go to court, and you probably won't even take a deposition. No one will want to hire you except other big law firms or mid law firms that do similar mind numbing "paper litigation".


Just to summarize the last page:
Despite their best efforts, no one has been able to successfully disprove these three reasons why 0Ls should not plan on going into biglaw and then lateraling out into something better after a few years.


edited to be less mean. I just woke up, I have con law in 10 minutes and it irritates me when people don't pay attention and repost themselves for no apparent reason.

I got bored of the conversation about placement power but you were told directly CLS official numbers that ranges between 85-92% success rate among those targeting big law, largely concentrated at firms with near 100% offer rates to SA's - with any no-offers balanced by those headed to offices/firms not recorded in the survey, and it's silly to assume HYS and Chicago can't hit a similar range. As already stated, #2 and #3 are gross exaggerations, and #3 is demonstrably false since former V20 attorneys are scattered throughout F500 in-house counsel, finance, strategy, USAO, academia, and other good exit ops. I think you raised some valid critiques of 0L mannerisms but nothing that hasn't already been stated more accurately and more eloquently by other practicing attorneys in this thread.

daryldixon

Bronze
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 3:55 am

Re: The fundamental problem with practicing lawyers

Postby daryldixon » Mon Apr 21, 2014 11:36 pm

jbagelboy wrote:
daryldixon wrote:
daryldixon wrote:
Workingtitle wrote:I'm an 0L, and have a question:

My current plan is to try for BigLaw, even though I know it will probably be miserable, with the rationale that in a few years I could exit out for somewhere that would be better (smaller firm, government job, est).

It seems like people earlier were indicating this was a bad idea, so can someone coalesce this for me please? Why is this thinking flawed?

Also, practicing BigLaw attorneys: Do you really not have ANY friends? Is it really that bad? Any practicing BigLaw attorney want to chime in that you actually have some friends?

1. Trying for biglaw doesn't mean you will get it. Even at a t14 you still have a 20-40% chance at failure.
2. If you have to take out more than 100k in student loans, you won't be able to pay them off before you leave big law.
3. The exit options aren't guaranteed either. You actually get no marketable skills in your first several years of big law. You won't interact with a client, you won't go to court, and you probably won't even take a deposition. No one will want to hire you except other big law firms or mid law firms that do similar mind numbing "paper litigation".


Just to summarize the last page:
Despite their best efforts, no one has been able to successfully disprove these three reasons why 0Ls should not plan on going into biglaw and then lateraling out into something better after a few years.


edited to be less mean. I just woke up, I have con law in 10 minutes and it irritates me when people don't pay attention and repost themselves for no apparent reason.

I got bored of the conversation about placement power but you were told directly CLS official numbers that ranges between 85-92% success rate among those targeting big law, largely concentrated at firms with near 100% offer rates to SA's - with any no-offers balanced by those headed to offices/firms not recorded in the survey, and it's silly to assume HYS and Chicago can't hit a similar range. As already stated, #2 and #3 are gross exaggerations, and #3 is demonstrably false since former V20 attorneys are scattered throughout F500 in-house counsel, finance, strategy, USAO, academia, and other good exit ops. I think you raised some valid critiques of 0L mannerisms but nothing that hasn't already been stated more accurately and more eloquently by other practicing attorneys in this thread.


#3 is not demonstrably false. All #3 asserts is that exit options aren't guaranteed. They aren't. The rest of #3 tries to explain why those options aren't guaranteed. Your anecdotal assertion that there are people that have had good exit options from big law does not "guarantee" exit options for anyone else (e.g. the 0L I was responding to).

#2 is not an exaggeration. It is my opinion. There maybe some people that are able to pay off their 150k loans in 5 years. Maybe they live with their parents or they have a working SO that pays for living expenses. But the average person will struggle to pay off more than 100k in loans before they leave big law. 3-5 year attrition is alive and well in most markets. My firm (V20) has a 70%ish attrition rate by the end of the fourth year in its two biggest offices. They don't publish that figure (most firms don't) but it was part of a presentation on diversity that they recently gave. I have heard that rate is similar or worse at peer firms. Maybe it is better at lower ranked firms or firms in smaller markets but I wouldn't bet on it.

#1 was about the entire T14. Your argument only applied to the T5 and you still have no objective way of proving that figure. The OCI figures cited by others are not official and do not take into account cold offers, no offers, and people that wanted or were seeking big law but didn't participate in the OCI (or just didn't respond to a survey). Honestly, if you struck out at OCI would you want to report that to a survey?



Return to “Choosing a Law School?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests