Top Law Schools

Mattalones wrote:

icydash wrote:

Mattalones wrote:

romothesavior wrote:Alright, I agree. Let's just all chillax and have a beer. Sorry if you took offense to any of my posts, but let's just drop it.

APPLAUSE

Side Note: You know what I thought was funny the whole time? It was that people on here kept saying, "show me data," while there was a pole on top of each-and-every page that said most people on the thread would go to a school outside T14 for biglaw (I know it wasn't 100% relavent to the little tiff here, but it was close and no one used it ... Ah, that's funny )

Haha I actually did use it about 3/4 down the second page:

icydash wrote: The numbers the rest of TLS has thus far provided us just backs up what I'm saying. 52% of people who have voted on this poll have told the OP to continue down his corporate law career path even if he goes to an outside of T14 school.

You may not like what I'm saying, but it's the truth, and the majority of people who have voted agree with me that it's not T14 or death.

Oh, man ... I blatantly got caught skimming ... There was just so much banter. Anyway, I stand corrected.

haha np

icydash wrote:
#2: edited. I don't feel like fighting any more. I think the main confusion came from everyone thinking I was talking about T2/T3 schools, and I was talking about schools outside of the T14 (which I repeatedly wrote over and over on pretty much every post since the beginning of the second page, so I'm not sure how the confusion happened, but it is what it is.)

#3: You're right. I'm wrong. If I think about this any more I'm going to killself.

are you serious?! i dont want to keep restarting this, but you are blowing my mind lol. okay, i admit my post was ridiculously long, but in it i detail and outline the WHOLE logic of why ppl are arguing w/ you and HOW they kept thinking you were talking about T2/T3 schools. you dont need to think any more, just read my post lol. it's like a goddamn road map.

the short of it? you started the argument by talking and bringing in T2/T3 examples...in fact, you even said T2/T3 in one post, here:

icydash wrote: My brother, coming out of Albany law school, got a job in a medium NYC corporate law/litigation firm-- starting salary ABOVE big law.

These kinds of jobs exist all over...

...there are still plenty of small/mid-sized firms (my dads being one of them) that hire T2/T3 grads to do corporate work, pay pretty well and also have partnership tracks.

see how you used a T2/T3 school as an example and said those jobs exist all over? then later on you mentioned plenty of firms that hire T2/T3 grads for said jobs? (it was soon after the first point, so you cant blame people for linking up your example w/ the latter statement) ...and when ppl kept attacking you, you stopped mentioning it and just said outside of T14...but you made no reference to the fact that you changed a FUNDAMENTAL part of your argument (and the part ppl have trouble w/)...do you see how the confusion happened now? dont hedge your comments, or if you do, ADMIT TO THEM.

really though, read my long ass post; it can be a learning experience since you still seem so perplexed as to how all the confusion occurred

Mattalones wrote:

romothesavior wrote:Alright, I agree. Let's just all chillax and have a beer. Sorry if you took offense to any of my posts, but let's just drop it.

APPLAUSE

Side Note: You know what I thought was funny the whole time? It was that people on here kept saying, "show me data," while there was a pole on top of each-and-every page that said most people on the thread would go to a school outside T14 for biglaw (I know it wasn't 100% relavent to the little tiff here, but it was close and no one used it ... Ah, that's funny )

on your sidenote: first off, the vote is pretty close; 48% to 52% (T14 or better or outside T14), but even then the notion that biglaw or corporate law is possible outside of the T14 is a very realistic idea. that could mean T15, T25, T50. i dont think it should be a reasonable expectation outside of the T50 though (for argument's sake, we'll say between T15 to T50 it can still be reasonably expected, at least regionally)

thats the problem some of us had w/ icydash's earlier comments. he was talking about T2/T3 schools and made it seem like it could be a reasonable expectation for these students to get these jobs. if he had simply said such a job exists (1+) for a T2/T3 student or if he had said outside the T14 or T50 from the start...no one would have called him out on it.

icydash wrote:

Mattalones wrote:

romothesavior wrote:Alright, I agree. Let's just all chillax and have a beer. Sorry if you took offense to any of my posts, but let's just drop it.

APPLAUSE

Side Note: You know what I thought was funny the whole time? It was that people on here kept saying, "show me data," while there was a pole on top of each-and-every page that said most people on the thread would go to a school outside T14 for biglaw (I know it wasn't 100% relavent to the little tiff here, but it was close and no one used it ... Ah, that's funny )

Haha I actually did use it about 3/4 down the second page:

icydash wrote: The numbers the rest of TLS has thus far provided us just backs up what I'm saying. 52% of people who have voted on this poll have told the OP to continue down his corporate law career path even if he goes to an outside of T14 school.

You may not like what I'm saying, but it's the truth, and the majority of people who have voted agree with me that it's not T14 or death.

In that case, you apparently spent the last couple of days arguing against a "TLS law of physics" which wasn't really a TLS law of physics.

DoubleChecks - I am having a hard time believing he's an engineer. I mean, you laid everything out so beautifully and he still doesn't get it. At first I thought he was a flame or an arrogant bastard who can't ever admit that he messed up, but now I'm convinced that he really doesn't get it. Oh dear. One day you and I might find him on the other side of the table in a conference room somewhere. Imagine negotiating a deal with that guy

Unemployed wrote:DoubleChecks - I am having a hard time believing he's an engineer. I mean, you laid everything out so beautifully and he still doesn't get it. At first I thought he was a flame or an arrogant bastard who can't ever admit that he messed up, but now I'm convinced that he really doesn't get it. Oh dear. One day you and I might find him on the other side of the table in a conference room somewhere. Imagine negotiating a deal with that guy

lol oh man i would not want to imagine that -- the stuff of nightmares, but it could be worse. ive seen posters that were much more belligerent, and i have the damnest feeling that he's just not reading half of my posts haha

Yeah. Not going to read any of that. Anything after the truce me and Romo called = being completely discarded.

icydash wrote:Yeah. Not going to read any of that. Anything after the truce me and Romeo called = being completely discarded.

convenient lol, esp. since romo came into the thing much later -- leaving the rest of us high and dry! haha

that and my long post came before the truce (:O fair game? lol)

it's okay if you dont read it though; it hardly matters at this point, opinions formed (by all) are pretty hard to change at this level, but dont worry about it, just an online forum anyways

DoubleChecks wrote:

icydash wrote:Yeah. Not going to read any of that. Anything after the truce me and Romeo called = being completely discarded.

convenient lol, esp. since romo came into the thing much later -- leaving the rest of us high and dry! haha

that and my long post came before the truce (:O fair game? lol)

it's okay if you dont read it though; it hardly matters at this point, opinions formed (by all) are pretty hard to change at this level, but dont worry about it, just an online forum anyways

don't waste your time with him

he's either delusional to not understand why his first couple of posts were complete bull or just too arrogant to admit he f'ed up


I personally wouldn't take the gamble getting biglaw on law schools outside the top 30 or so UNLESS I got a full scholly. With the economy the way it is, I can see alot of people outside the top 30 not even getting any jobs let alone biglaw anymore.

DoubleChecks: after rereading your long post several times, I see how you read the statements and why they appear the way they do to you/others. I also noticed that you've taken the statements out of the context of the previous (and following) posts, which is why they appear confusing.

Maybe this will help clear it up. Here is my line of reasoning:

The initial thing I said was this:

icydash wrote:Honestly, you can also not work in "big law," take an initial 20k a year pay cut, have a life and still be extremely happy/well off in a small/mid-sized firm....You can also still practice corporate law and eventually make partner/a ludicrous amount of money.

To which someone replied:

Na_Swatch wrote: that's a great fictional job you have there...

in reality nothing like that exists [....]

And then there was the picture from South Parks' imaginationland.

All of this came with no explination, so it appeared people where basically saying the job I made up was BS and nothing like that existed.

To this I responded:

icydash wrote:My brother, coming out of Albany law school, got a job in a medium NYC corporate law/litigation firm-- starting salary ABOVE big law.

These kinds of jobs exist all over -- most of you guys just don't know it because you're 0Ls speculating. I know it because my father, who is a senior partner at a firm for over 30 years in NYC (also from Albany Law School), my uncle whose now a judge (St. Johns Law School), [.....]

Basically saying, "yes, these jobs actually *do* exist, here's family proof to show it. You probably disagree because you're 0Ls speculating, but I have family in the industry so I know what I'm talking about." I showed the schools my family went to in order to show that you can in fact get these kinds of jobs coming out of non-T14 schools.

I also then immediately posted after the aformentioned post:

icydash wrote:Which part of my statement are you guys having trouble believing? The fact that there are small/medium sized firms with a partnership track where one can practice corporate law...And you get paid more money as you work your way up to partner? There are like thousands of them -- Why is this so hard to believe?

...Pretty much showing that the issues/questions mentioned in this post where the ones I was trying to solve with the previous post.


Then we get off topic about if my brother had help or not getting his job.

--------------------------------------------------

Let me give another analogy:

Say I come up to you, and say: "Honestly, you can not work at Autozone, still have a good car repair job and make a decent living."

To which you respond: "No way, that's a fantasy job, jobs like that don't exist."

To which I respond: "Uhh yes they do. My brother just got a job at Toms Car Garage making 50k a year. These kinds of jobs exist all over. You have no idea what you're talking about because you're not in the car industry, but my whole family is, so i do."


....When you read this, do you come out with the impression that there are literally tons of Toms Car Garage jobs where you can make 50k a year all over (how you seem to read it), or just good car repair jobs where you can make decent money all over (I obviously read it this way)?

This whole thread is really dumb, but here's the linchpin:

icydash wrote:My brother, coming out of Albany law school, got a job in a medium NYC corporate law/litigation firm-- starting salary ABOVE big law.

I don't believe this.

I know of exactly ONE lit boutique that hires first year associates and pays above-market. They hire very, very few first years, almost always from Yale or Harvard. You prove that such a place exists, and you'll have won this argument in my view.

Renzo wrote:This whole thread is really dumb, but here's the linchpin:

icydash wrote:My brother, coming out of Albany law school, got a job in a medium NYC corporate law/litigation firm-- starting salary ABOVE big law.

I don't believe this.

I know of exactly ONE lit boutique that hires first year associates and pays above-market. They hire very, very few first years, almost always from Yale or Harvard. You prove that such a place exists, and you'll have won this argument in my view.

We already proved this place exists. In fact the exact biography of my brother on the firms website was posted in this thread, and an admin removed it (personal information being posted by others is not cool).... but not before a lot of people saw it no doubt (I know both Doritos and Grond saw it and posted replies on it, which where subsequently removed or edited).

And yes this whole thread is really dumb

icydash wrote:Let me give another analogy:

Say I come up to you, and say: "Honestly, you can not work at Autozone, still have a good car repair job and make a decent living."

To which you respond: "No way, that's a fantasy job, jobs like that don't exist."

To which I respond: "Uhh yes they do. My brother just got a job at Toms Car Garage making 50k a year. These kinds of jobs exist all over. You have no idea what you're talking about because you're not in the car industry, but my whole family is, so i do."


....When you read this, do you come out with the impression that there are literally tons of Toms Car Garage jobs where you can make 50k a year all over (how you seem to read it), or just good car repair jobs where you can make decent money all over (I obviously read it this way)?

For me, it's the former. "these kinds of jobs" = the Toms Car Garage job. "all over" = literally tons, or at least plentiful. Sorry, agree with DoubleChecks.

Renzo wrote:This whole thread is really dumb, but here's the linchpin:

icydash wrote:My brother, coming out of Albany law school, got a job in a medium NYC corporate law/litigation firm-- starting salary ABOVE big law.

I don't believe this.

I know of exactly ONE lit boutique that hires first year associates and pays above-market. They hire very, very few first years, almost always from Yale or Harvard. You prove that such a place exists, and you'll have won this argument in my view.

Skimfail, not that I blame you.

adh07d wrote: Skimfail, not that I blame you.

To be honest, I think I read more carefully than was warranted by this thread. When the posts start incorporating multiple multi-layer quotes, the thread's gone to hell.

I feel like this thread had just signed its "Do not recessutate" form, only to be placed on life support and make an incredible turnaround. Now the beast is back out!

Renzo wrote:

adh07d wrote: Skimfail, not that I blame you.

To be honest, I think I read more carefully than was warranted by this thread. When the posts start incorporating multiple multi-layer quotes, the thread's gone to hell.

Haha truth. Yeah sorry about the multiple layer quotes and ridiculousness of this thread. Apparently we all have way too much free time.

...And with that, I'm going to the bar.

icydash wrote:

Renzo wrote:

adh07d wrote: Skimfail, not that I blame you.

To be honest, I think I read more carefully than was warranted by this thread. When the posts start incorporating multiple multi-layer quotes, the thread's gone to hell.

Haha truth. Yeah sorry about the multiple layer quotes and ridiculousness of this thread. Apparently we all have way too much free time.

...And with that, I'm going to the bar.

Icydash, I ought to give you more credit. Go to the bar? That's exactly what I did last night when this thread went all haywire.

icydash wrote:DoubleChecks: after rereading your long post several times, I see how you read the statements and why they appear the way they do to you/others. I also noticed that you've taken the statements out of the context of the previous (and following) posts, which is why they appear confusing.

Maybe this will help clear it up. Here is my line of reasoning:

The initial thing I said was this:

icydash wrote:Honestly, you can also not work in "big law," take an initial 20k a year pay cut, have a life and still be extremely happy/well off in a small/mid-sized firm....You can also still practice corporate law and eventually make partner/a ludicrous amount of money.

To which someone replied:

Na_Swatch wrote: that's a great fictional job you have there...

in reality nothing like that exists [....]

And then there was the picture from South Parks' imaginationland.

All of this came with no explination, so it appeared people where basically saying the job I made up was BS and nothing like that existed.

To this I responded:

icydash wrote:My brother, coming out of Albany law school, got a job in a medium NYC corporate law/litigation firm-- starting salary ABOVE big law.

These kinds of jobs exist all over -- most of you guys just don't know it because you're 0Ls speculating. I know it because my father, who is a senior partner at a firm for over 30 years in NYC (also from Albany Law School), my uncle whose now a judge (St. Johns Law School), [.....]

Basically saying, "yes, these jobs actually *do* exist, here's family proof to show it. You probably disagree because you're 0Ls speculating, but I have family in the industry so I know what I'm talking about." I showed the schools my family went to in order to show that you can in fact get these kinds of jobs coming out of non-T14 schools.

I also then immediately posted after the aformentioned post:

icydash wrote:Which part of my statement are you guys having trouble believing? The fact that there are small/medium sized firms with a partnership track where one can practice corporate law...And you get paid more money as you work your way up to partner? There are like thousands of them -- Why is this so hard to believe?

...Pretty much showing that the issues/questions mentioned in this post where the ones I was trying to solve with the previous post.


Then we get off topic about if my brother had help or not getting his job.

--------------------------------------------------

Let me give another analogy:

Say I come up to you, and say: "Honestly, you can not work at Autozone, still have a good car repair job and make a decent living."

To which you respond: "No way, that's a fantasy job, jobs like that don't exist."

To which I respond: "Uhh yes they do. My brother just got a job at Toms Car Garage making 50k a year. These kinds of jobs exist all over. You have no idea what you're talking about because you're not in the car industry, but my whole family is, so i do."


....When you read this, do you come out with the impression that there are literally tons of Toms Car Garage jobs where you can make 50k a year all over (how you seem to read it), or just good car repair jobs where you can make decent money all over (I obviously read it this way)?

your analogy is a pretty poor one, but i wont get into it -- just reference starsong's post for mainly what im thinking. and it is really hard to compare autozone work to biglaw work lol, totally diff setup where the analogy would not be accurate.

that being said, you're arguing a part of the argument that i was fine with! lol what about all the other things that everyone got into later? like i said in my long post, i kinda thought you were in the 'right' from your very first post. it was your first 'response' post using your family as an example and saying those jobs exist all over that it started going to hell.

lets not even use an analogy, let us just use what was said:

icy - you dont have to be in biglaw to get a job that does corporate work, make biglaw $$$, and lets you stay on the partnership track [okay, this part is a bit tough to swallow, but boutique firms and such firms do exist, though i dont know how many of them there are...so up until here, i wasnt against you]

to back the above statement up when 2 ppl said it was imaginary, you used FAMILY (anecdotal) evidence and using ppl from a T2/T3 school (albany)...to make matters worse, you said these jobs exist all over (implying these jobs for these grads exist all over since all your examples used T2/T3 grads...later on you even said plenty of these firms hire T2/T3 grads)

now that is where i have to disagree w/ you. clearly they exist, but it is so difficult and hard for a T2/T3 grad to get the job your brother did (we'll ignore connections or even how hard someone will work after getting it) that it becomes a moot point -- almost all T2/T3 grads ITE (in this economy) will NOT get these jobs...you saying they are all over implies they can

that is basically the prob i have w/ your argument

and yeah i have a lot of free time on my hands lol, but i enjoy this: no one is name calling or using threats or racial slurs, so i sorta look forward to seeing ppl's comments and icy's responses haha

wayyy too drunk to respond. this trial will reconvene in seven to 10 hours.

unless tis happens
--ImageRemoved--

if you don't hear from me in 24 hours, call tha police! happy st. patricks dayyyyy!

icydash wrote:

wayyy too drunk to respond. this trial will reconvene in seven to 10 hours.

unless tis happens
--ImageRemoved--

if you don't hear from me in 24 hours, call tha police! happy st. patricks dayyyyy!

I think the cats won the argument for you. Now, stop it and play nice, kids.

DoubleChecks wrote: your analogy is a pretty poor one, but i wont get into it -- just reference starsong's post for mainly what im thinking. and it is really hard to compare autozone work to biglaw work lol, totally diff setup where the analogy would not be accurate.

+1
This is really the heart of the problem. First-year associate compensation in the legal sector is very unique. Few industries have a bimodal salary distribution model, which by definition means that there are very few opportunities between the two extremes. Most law students, unfortunately, fail to grasp how serious this is...

So icydash, that's what we were reacting to. I'm sure you agree that the bimodal salary distribution model = vast majority of law students simply will not be making at or near $160k...

"...'a' coprorate attorney..." and the "in BigLaw" portion is redundant b/c corporations typically don't deal with small firms.

starsong wrote:

DoubleChecks wrote: your analogy is a pretty poor one, but i wont get into it -- just reference starsong's post for mainly what im thinking. and it is really hard to compare autozone work to biglaw work lol, totally diff setup where the analogy would not be accurate.

+1
This is really the heart of the problem. First-year associate compensation in the legal sector is very unique. Few industries have a bimodal salary distribution model, which by definition means that there are very few opportunities between the two extremes. Most law students, unfortunately, fail to grasp how serious this is...

So icydash, that's what we were reacting to. I'm sure you agree that the bimodal salary distribution model = vast majority of law students simply will not be making at or near $160k...

I am aware of the bimodel distribution, but I have heard that it is fairly common for government jobs and PI jobs (still difficult to get sometimes, I am not arguing this) to move up pretty fast. I have heard that 2-4 years later a person will pass the 100k mark. I don't know if this is true, so I now posit my impression to discussion.

Flanker1067 wrote:I am aware of the bimodel distribution, but I have heard that it is fairly common for government jobs and PI jobs (still difficult to get sometimes, I am not arguing this) to move up pretty fast. I have heard that 2-4 years later a person will pass the 100k mark. I don't know if this is true, so I now posit my impression to discussion.

The bimodal model holds true for first-year compensation. 2-4 years in biglaw = $200k+, so there's still a serious differential there.