If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )

Should You Go To Law School for Corp Law if its not YHS?

Yes, but only if its YHS
8
4%
Yes, but only if its CCN or above
14
6%
Yes, but only if its a T14
81
38%
Yes, even if its outside the T14
113
52%
 
Total votes: 216

User avatar
Mickey Quicknumbers
Posts: 2177
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby Mickey Quicknumbers » Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:39 am

icydash wrote:And apparently you're still not catching my drift along with the rest of the posters who have voted in the poll. No one is saying it's not better to go to a top school. I'm just saying you still have a good shot if you happen to fall outside of the T14. It's not ideal, but life throws you curve balls and you deal with it.

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.



wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong

icydash
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:53 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby icydash » Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:40 am

adh07d wrote:
icydash wrote:And apparently you're still not catching my drift along with the rest of the posters who have voted in the poll. No one is saying it's not better to go to a top school. I'm just saying you still have a good shot if you happen to fall outside of the T14. It's not ideal, but life throws you curve balls and you deal with it.

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.



wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong

Back that up. You're a 2010 applicant / 0L just like I am, except I have extensive family/friends in the industry saying otherwise. Where are you getting your data from?
Last edited by icydash on Mon Mar 15, 2010 4:03 am, edited 4 times in total.

icydash
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:53 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby icydash » Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:55 am

Unemployed wrote:I don't understand how your judge uncle, partner father, and his colleagues figure into this discussion. Have you considered the possibility that the legal market and the hiring practices within changed significantly since they were looking for their first jobs 30+ years ago?


Not only have I considered this, but we talk about it at length in previous posts. Please read all the posts before making a comment on the thread. To reiterate briefly, how these people figure into this discussion is: earlier someone had posted:

Na_Swatch wrote:
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.
....
But back from my tangent: you can still get into a decent school and practice corporate law with your stats. Obviously, it wouldn't hurt to study harder and improve your LSAT score, but your life isn't over.


that's a great fictional job you have there...

in reality nothing like that exists for those getting straight out of law school


So I rebutted, giving several examples of past and present attorneys that defy the "TLS laws of physics"

SandyC877
Posts: 297
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:27 am

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby SandyC877 » Mon Mar 15, 2010 4:01 am

Dear OP:

There's more to life than working for a wage at biglaw and whoring for school rankings.

User avatar
Mickey Quicknumbers
Posts: 2177
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby Mickey Quicknumbers » Mon Mar 15, 2010 5:29 am

icydash wrote:Back that up. You're a 2010 applicant / 0L just like I am, except I have extensive family/friends in the industry saying otherwise. Where are you getting your data from?


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

there are 180+ schools outside the T-14 and only 6 of them are looking at a better than 1/3 chance of biglaw, I don't consider that a good shot at all but I guess it really depends on what you meant by that.

User avatar
SteelReserve
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:46 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby SteelReserve » Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:37 am

Back that up. You're a 2010 applicant / 0L just like I am, except I have extensive family/friends in the industry saying otherwise. Where are you getting your data from?


Very well, I'll back it up. You seem like a nice guy with good intentions and I am sick of 0L children on TLS running around saying "T14 or die teehee"

That being said, I will back it up. As a general rule, you will not practice corporate law coming from a non-elite school. Big firms do corporate law and work for corporations. Big firms do not hire anything but the top students and connected kids. At my T2 this year, less than 5% of the students got SA positions. This 5% rule is pretty much universal for T2s this year.

You cannot point to me 'small' firms that do corporate work, because corporations hire big firms. I'm assuming what OP means by 'corporate work' is not 'incorporating small businesses'

I suspect you have no idea how exceptional your brother's circumstances are. Forget just the family phone call and legal connections (which off the bat is something most don't have); I cannot think of a single person in law school that worked for the same firm before, during, and after law school. Not one. It is such an extraordinary scenario that you just don't realize how rare his situation is and how lucky he was to even have the opportunity to work hard. Worse yet, you've allowed your own anecdotal experience to guide your opinion on something you really don't know about, and then you're trying to spread this misguided view on an internet forum because, and I quote, 'you're sick of T14 or nothing nonsense'


I'm sick of it too, but I'm not going to quibble with the truth and the reality for everyone else who doesn't have these golden connections. Clearly you have not read any legitimate employment stats. Again, somewhere on this forum was a large graph charting biglaw outcomes. The reason the T14 is the T14 is because they routinely place more than half their grads in biglaw. Outside some strong exceptional schools like Fordham, the dropoff outside T14 was dramatic, eventually hitting top 10% for TTs in the BOOM years.

But you don't have to take the word of me, a 2L on LR who went through OCI and has been researching this stuff for years. Just go look at some big firms websites and count the number of T2 kids that got in. Check for LR credentials, etc.

User avatar
Unemployed
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:35 am

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby Unemployed » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:40 pm

icydash wrote:
Unemployed wrote:I don't understand how your judge uncle, partner father, and his colleagues figure into this discussion. Have you considered the possibility that the legal market and the hiring practices within changed significantly since they were looking for their first jobs 30+ years ago?


Not only have I considered this, but we talk about it at length in previous posts. Please read all the posts before making a comment on the thread. To reiterate briefly, how these people figure into this discussion is: earlier someone had posted:

Na_Swatch wrote:
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.
....
But back from my tangent: you can still get into a decent school and practice corporate law with your stats. Obviously, it wouldn't hurt to study harder and improve your LSAT score, but your life isn't over.


that's a great fictional job you have there...

in reality nothing like that exists for those getting straight out of law school


So I rebutted, giving several examples of past and present attorneys that defy the "TLS laws of physics"


Uh... I guess you don't understand the nature of my objection, even though you've supposedly considered it. You are not rebutting anything when the examples you cite (father, uncle, father's partners) are from decades ago, when the legal market wasn't so saturated. Heck, back then, you could probably apprentice your way to a law degree. Until you show us that the market hasn't changed significantly since the days when your father was a fresh law school grad, you haven't really "talked about it at length."
Last edited by Unemployed on Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rand M.
Posts: 1033
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:24 am

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby Rand M. » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:45 pm

I thought this was going to be another thread where HYSCCNers, or at least T14 congratulated themselves on being masters of the universe. I didn't see things unfolding like this.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby DoubleChecks » Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:12 pm

SteelReserve wrote:
Back that up. You're a 2010 applicant / 0L just like I am, except I have extensive family/friends in the industry saying otherwise. Where are you getting your data from?


Very well, I'll back it up. You seem like a nice guy with good intentions and I am sick of 0L children on TLS running around saying "T14 or die teehee"

That being said, I will back it up. As a general rule, you will not practice corporate law coming from a non-elite school. Big firms do corporate law and work for corporations. Big firms do not hire anything but the top students and connected kids. At my T2 this year, less than 5% of the students got SA positions. This 5% rule is pretty much universal for T2s this year.

You cannot point to me 'small' firms that do corporate work, because corporations hire big firms. I'm assuming what OP means by 'corporate work' is not 'incorporating small businesses'

I suspect you have no idea how exceptional your brother's circumstances are. Forget just the family phone call and legal connections (which off the bat is something most don't have); I cannot think of a single person in law school that worked for the same firm before, during, and after law school. Not one. It is such an extraordinary scenario that you just don't realize how rare his situation is and how lucky he was to even have the opportunity to work hard. Worse yet, you've allowed your own anecdotal experience to guide your opinion on something you really don't know about, and then you're trying to spread this misguided view on an internet forum because, and I quote, 'you're sick of T14 or nothing nonsense'


I'm sick of it too, but I'm not going to quibble with the truth and the reality for everyone else who doesn't have these golden connections. Clearly you have not read any legitimate employment stats. Again, somewhere on this forum was a large graph charting biglaw outcomes. The reason the T14 is the T14 is because they routinely place more than half their grads in biglaw. Outside some strong exceptional schools like Fordham, the dropoff outside T14 was dramatic, eventually hitting top 10% for TTs in the BOOM years.

But you don't have to take the word of me, a 2L on LR who went through OCI and has been researching this stuff for years. Just go look at some big firms websites and count the number of T2 kids that got in. Check for LR credentials, etc.


+1

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby DoubleChecks » Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:14 pm

Unemployed wrote:
icydash wrote:
Unemployed wrote:I don't understand how your judge uncle, partner father, and his colleagues figure into this discussion. Have you considered the possibility that the legal market and the hiring practices within changed significantly since they were looking for their first jobs 30+ years ago?


Not only have I considered this, but we talk about it at length in previous posts. Please read all the posts before making a comment on the thread. To reiterate briefly, how these people figure into this discussion is: earlier someone had posted:

Na_Swatch wrote:
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.
....
But back from my tangent: you can still get into a decent school and practice corporate law with your stats. Obviously, it wouldn't hurt to study harder and improve your LSAT score, but your life isn't over.


that's a great fictional job you have there...

in reality nothing like that exists for those getting straight out of law school


So I rebutted, giving several examples of past and present attorneys that defy the "TLS laws of physics"


Uh... I guess you don't understand the nature of my objection, even though you've supposedly considered it. You are not rebutting anything when the examples you cite (father, uncle, father's partners) are from decades ago, when the legal market wasn't so saturated. Heck, back then, you could probably apprentice your way to a law degree. Until you show us that the market hasn't changed significantly since the days when your father was a fresh law school grad, you haven't really "talked about it at length."


+1 again

that being said, icy, you keep hedging your comments a bit, and it is starting to look like something closer and closer to the truth lol. you say we shouldnt take what you say so literally, but as an inspiring lawyer on an internet law forum, you should realize HOW you type something and the words you use matter quite a bit, esp. when the comments you are saying can be worlds diff if you take out a single world, i.e. instead of a "good shot" you said "a shot" -- then id be like, okay yeah sure.

icydash
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:53 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby icydash » Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:35 pm

SteelReserve wrote:
Back that up. You're a 2010 applicant / 0L just like I am, except I have extensive family/friends in the industry saying otherwise. Where are you getting your data from?


Very well, I'll back it up. You seem like a nice guy with good intentions and I am sick of 0L children on TLS running around saying "T14 or die teehee"

That being said, I will back it up. As a general rule, you will not practice corporate law coming from a non-elite school. Big firms do corporate law and work for corporations. Big firms do not hire anything but the top students and connected kids. At my T2 this year, less than 5% of the students got SA positions. This 5% rule is pretty much universal for T2s this year.

You cannot point to me 'small' firms that do corporate work, because corporations hire big firms. I'm assuming what OP means by 'corporate work' is not 'incorporating small businesses'

I suspect you have no idea how exceptional your brother's circumstances are. Forget just the family phone call and legal connections (which off the bat is something most don't have); I cannot think of a single person in law school that worked for the same firm before, during, and after law school. Not one. It is such an extraordinary scenario that you just don't realize how rare his situation is and how lucky he was to even have the opportunity to work hard. Worse yet, you've allowed your own anecdotal experience to guide your opinion on something you really don't know about, and then you're trying to spread this misguided view on an internet forum because, and I quote, 'you're sick of T14 or nothing nonsense'


I'm sick of it too, but I'm not going to quibble with the truth and the reality for everyone else who doesn't have these golden connections. Clearly you have not read any legitimate employment stats. Again, somewhere on this forum was a large graph charting biglaw outcomes. The reason the T14 is the T14 is because they routinely place more than half their grads in biglaw. Outside some strong exceptional schools like Fordham, the dropoff outside T14 was dramatic, eventually hitting top 10% for TTs in the BOOM years.

But you don't have to take the word of me, a 2L on LR who went through OCI and has been researching this stuff for years. Just go look at some big firms websites and count the number of T2 kids that got in. Check for LR credentials, etc.


1. I absolutely realize how rare/lucky it is that my brother was able to work at the same firm all throughout law school. The point was to show that there are options in smaller/medium sized firms that pay well and do do corporate law (so no, you can do corporate law without going to biglaw).

2. As mentioned above, there are a few non-"big law" firms that do corporate work. You guys just assume that by corporate work, that means fortune 500 companies, biglaw, etc. There are a lot of ways to practice corporate law without going into biglaw, or being a whore for a fortune 500. Corporate law is a style of law and doesn't mean any particular company type. It's like saying "you can't practice IP law because you didn't go to a T14 school that biglaw would hire from." There are still tons of mid/smaller sized IP firms, and to think the quoted statement is true is just wrong.

3. Of course they routinely place more grads (see your bolded wording above). No one is disputing this. Read my past posts. However, as a previous poster mentioned looking at these stats:
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1
Normally, outside of the T14, for schools ranked 15-23, you have a 30% shot at biglaw. For schools ranked 24-36 (give or take) you have a 20% shot biglaw. I don't know about you, but a 1/3 to 1/5 shot at biglaw if you basically don't suck in law school (come out as top 20/30%) is a pretty good shot. Barring biglaw, you could probably get into a boatload of smaller firms who still do corporate work.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby DoubleChecks » Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:44 pm

icydash wrote:
SteelReserve wrote:
Back that up. You're a 2010 applicant / 0L just like I am, except I have extensive family/friends in the industry saying otherwise. Where are you getting your data from?


Very well, I'll back it up. You seem like a nice guy with good intentions and I am sick of 0L children on TLS running around saying "T14 or die teehee"

That being said, I will back it up. As a general rule, you will not practice corporate law coming from a non-elite school. Big firms do corporate law and work for corporations. Big firms do not hire anything but the top students and connected kids. At my T2 this year, less than 5% of the students got SA positions. This 5% rule is pretty much universal for T2s this year.

You cannot point to me 'small' firms that do corporate work, because corporations hire big firms. I'm assuming what OP means by 'corporate work' is not 'incorporating small businesses'

I suspect you have no idea how exceptional your brother's circumstances are. Forget just the family phone call and legal connections (which off the bat is something most don't have); I cannot think of a single person in law school that worked for the same firm before, during, and after law school. Not one. It is such an extraordinary scenario that you just don't realize how rare his situation is and how lucky he was to even have the opportunity to work hard. Worse yet, you've allowed your own anecdotal experience to guide your opinion on something you really don't know about, and then you're trying to spread this misguided view on an internet forum because, and I quote, 'you're sick of T14 or nothing nonsense'


I'm sick of it too, but I'm not going to quibble with the truth and the reality for everyone else who doesn't have these golden connections. Clearly you have not read any legitimate employment stats. Again, somewhere on this forum was a large graph charting biglaw outcomes. The reason the T14 is the T14 is because they routinely place more than half their grads in biglaw. Outside some strong exceptional schools like Fordham, the dropoff outside T14 was dramatic, eventually hitting top 10% for TTs in the BOOM years.

But you don't have to take the word of me, a 2L on LR who went through OCI and has been researching this stuff for years. Just go look at some big firms websites and count the number of T2 kids that got in. Check for LR credentials, etc.


1. I absolutely realize how rare/lucky it is that my brother was able to work at the same firm all throughout law school. The point was to show that there are options in smaller/medium sized firms that pay well and do do corporate law (so no, you can do corporate law without going to biglaw).

2. As mentioned above, there are a few non-"big law" firms that do corporate work. You guys just assume that by corporate work, that means fortune 500 companies, biglaw, etc. There are a lot of ways to practice corporate law without going into biglaw, or being a whore for a fortune 500. Corporate law is a style of law and doesn't mean any particular company type. It's like saying "you can't practice IP law because you didn't go to a T14 school that biglaw would hire from." There are still tons of mid/smaller sized IP firms, and to think the quoted statement is true is just wrong.

3. Of course they routinely place more grads (see your bolded wording above). No one is disputing this. Read my past posts. However, as a previous poster mentioned looking at these stats:
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1
Normally, outside of the T14, for schools ranked 15-23, you have a 30% shot at biglaw. For schools ranked 24-36 (give or take) you have a 20% shot biglaw. I don't know about you, but a 1/3 to 1/5 shot at biglaw if you basically don't suck in law school (come out as top 20/30%) is a pretty good shot. Barring biglaw, you could probably get into a boatload of smaller firms who still do corporate work.


See, this is what I mean by you hedging your comments. It's really misleading.

1. you never made it seem as if your brother was rare or lucky, you made him sound like a very "realistic" possibility, and all you needed was hard work

2. this really depends on your definition of corporate law. if it is stuff like mergers and acquisitions, iunno if small firms do that. if you meant the lifestyle, well yeah maybe. once again, this definition (read another thread a few weeks ago that argued about biglaw definition -- here you sound like you're using corporate law interchangeably w/ biglaw) may be variable.

3. you know, i did go read your past posts, and some of them contradict and conflict w/ themselves (at least in the meaning). for example, here you mention schools ranked 24-36 and their %shot at biglaw. that's nice, but one of the comments that got this going (not THE comment, but an early one) was about your brother (and even your dad) that got these amazing opportunities (which you implied were quite realistic for most others in the situation to expect, as long as they worked hard), but he (they) went to albany law school. last time i checked, albany isnt in 24-36. its T3 i believe? so the msg you gave is very diff from whatever you're trying to defend here.

icydash
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:53 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby icydash » Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:56 pm

DoubleChecks wrote:
icydash wrote:
SteelReserve wrote:
Back that up. You're a 2010 applicant / 0L just like I am, except I have extensive family/friends in the industry saying otherwise. Where are you getting your data from?


Very well, I'll back it up. You seem like a nice guy with good intentions and I am sick of 0L children on TLS running around saying "T14 or die teehee"

That being said, I will back it up. As a general rule, you will not practice corporate law coming from a non-elite school. Big firms do corporate law and work for corporations. Big firms do not hire anything but the top students and connected kids. At my T2 this year, less than 5% of the students got SA positions. This 5% rule is pretty much universal for T2s this year.

You cannot point to me 'small' firms that do corporate work, because corporations hire big firms. I'm assuming what OP means by 'corporate work' is not 'incorporating small businesses'

I suspect you have no idea how exceptional your brother's circumstances are. Forget just the family phone call and legal connections (which off the bat is something most don't have); I cannot think of a single person in law school that worked for the same firm before, during, and after law school. Not one. It is such an extraordinary scenario that you just don't realize how rare his situation is and how lucky he was to even have the opportunity to work hard. Worse yet, you've allowed your own anecdotal experience to guide your opinion on something you really don't know about, and then you're trying to spread this misguided view on an internet forum because, and I quote, 'you're sick of T14 or nothing nonsense'


I'm sick of it too, but I'm not going to quibble with the truth and the reality for everyone else who doesn't have these golden connections. Clearly you have not read any legitimate employment stats. Again, somewhere on this forum was a large graph charting biglaw outcomes. The reason the T14 is the T14 is because they routinely place more than half their grads in biglaw. Outside some strong exceptional schools like Fordham, the dropoff outside T14 was dramatic, eventually hitting top 10% for TTs in the BOOM years.

But you don't have to take the word of me, a 2L on LR who went through OCI and has been researching this stuff for years. Just go look at some big firms websites and count the number of T2 kids that got in. Check for LR credentials, etc.


1. I absolutely realize how rare/lucky it is that my brother was able to work at the same firm all throughout law school. The point was to show that there are options in smaller/medium sized firms that pay well and do do corporate law (so no, you can do corporate law without going to biglaw).

2. As mentioned above, there are a few non-"big law" firms that do corporate work. You guys just assume that by corporate work, that means fortune 500 companies, biglaw, etc. There are a lot of ways to practice corporate law without going into biglaw, or being a whore for a fortune 500. Corporate law is a style of law and doesn't mean any particular company type. It's like saying "you can't practice IP law because you didn't go to a T14 school that biglaw would hire from." There are still tons of mid/smaller sized IP firms, and to think the quoted statement is true is just wrong.

3. Of course they routinely place more grads (see your bolded wording above). No one is disputing this. Read my past posts. However, as a previous poster mentioned looking at these stats:
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1
Normally, outside of the T14, for schools ranked 15-23, you have a 30% shot at biglaw. For schools ranked 24-36 (give or take) you have a 20% shot biglaw. I don't know about you, but a 1/3 to 1/5 shot at biglaw if you basically don't suck in law school (come out as top 20/30%) is a pretty good shot. Barring biglaw, you could probably get into a boatload of smaller firms who still do corporate work.


See, this is what I mean by you hedging your comments. It's really misleading.

1. you never made it seem as if your brother was rare or lucky, you made him sound like a very "realistic" possibility, and all you needed was hard work

2. this really depends on your definition of corporate law. if it is stuff like mergers and acquisitions, iunno if small firms do that. if you meant the lifestyle, well yeah maybe. once again, this definition (read another thread a few weeks ago that argued about biglaw definition -- here you sound like you're using corporate law interchangeably w/ biglaw) may be variable.

3. you know, i did go read your past posts, and some of them contradict and conflict w/ themselves (at least in the meaning). for example, here you mention schools ranked 24-36 and their %shot at biglaw. that's nice, but one of the comments that got this going (not THE comment, but an early one) was about your brother (and even your dad) that got these amazing opportunities (which you implied were quite realistic for most others in the situation to expect, as long as they worked hard), but he (they) went to albany law school. last time i checked, albany isnt in 24-36. its T3 i believe? so the msg you gave is very diff from whatever you're trying to defend here.

1. Again, the point of bringing my father, uncle and brother into the conversation was to show that, in response to someone earlier saying (more or less) "nobody outside of the T14 can do corporate work and get paid well", this is not the case. I used my brother as a current example, and my uncle/dad as past examples. I'm aware that since the legal market was different 30 years ago, it may be different for recent grads. However, I do know specifically that my dads firm (which has a bunch of T2/T3 grads as partners as previously mentioned), along with specifically two other NYC firms (and I suspect many more) who have partners from similar prestige schools and do corporate work, do in fact hire T2/T3s (as it would be pretty hypocritical of these partners not to).

2. Smaller/mid sized firms do do M&A.

3. Again, the point of using my family was to show good opportunities for the grads outside the T14. Not any specific tier of schools, individual school, specific starting salary amount, etc etc... Gosh I feel like I have to put a disclaimer on my posts...or just start rereading them because I guess they haven't been read the way I had intended.

User avatar
Blindmelon
Posts: 1708
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:13 am

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby Blindmelon » Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:05 pm

I know of a few people who aren't T14 who got biglaw jobs.

Vanderbilt and UCLA still puts some people out there. So yea, outside the T14 you still have a shot.

User avatar
Unemployed
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:35 am

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby Unemployed » Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:37 pm

icydash wrote:Gosh I feel like I have to put a disclaimer on my posts...or just start rereading them because I guess they haven't been read the way I had intended.


I think it would have been a lot easier for all of us if you had just said:

1. Oops, I guess I was wrong about some things I said; or
2. Oops, I guess I need to communicate better

instead of defensively backpedaling until your initial posts became meaningless. I'm glad we finally ended up at #2 though :wink:

icydash
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:53 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby icydash » Mon Mar 15, 2010 4:19 pm

Unemployed wrote:
icydash wrote:Gosh I feel like I have to put a disclaimer on my posts...or just start rereading them because I guess they haven't been read the way I had intended.


I think it would have been a lot easier for all of us if you had just said:

1. Oops, I guess I was wrong about some things I said; or
2. Oops, I guess I need to communicate better

instead of defensively backpedaling until your initial posts became meaningless. I'm glad we finally ended up at #2 though :wink:

Yeah I guess I didn't make it clear that most of the specific details I gave about my family where meant as a rebuttal to this:
Na_Swatch wrote:
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.

[.....]

But back from my tangent: you can still get into a decent school and practice corporate law with your stats. Obviously, it wouldn't hurt to study harder and improve your LSAT score, but your life isn't over.


that's a great fictional job you have there...

in reality nothing like that exists for those getting straight out of law school


(and then I think someone also posted a picture of imaginationland from South Park)

Basically what these posters had insinuated was that my statement about not practicing in "big law" and still doing corporate work/getting paid well was totally ludacris ....and there was no way these kinds of jobs existed. I was simply trying to show that these jobs do in fact exist and I wasn't making it up.

User avatar
Unemployed
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:35 am

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby Unemployed » Mon Mar 15, 2010 4:36 pm

icydash wrote:
Unemployed wrote:
icydash wrote:Gosh I feel like I have to put a disclaimer on my posts...or just start rereading them because I guess they haven't been read the way I had intended.


I think it would have been a lot easier for all of us if you had just said:

1. Oops, I guess I was wrong about some things I said; or
2. Oops, I guess I need to communicate better

instead of defensively backpedaling until your initial posts became meaningless. I'm glad we finally ended up at #2 though :wink:

Yeah I guess I didn't make it clear that most of the specific details I gave about my family where meant as a rebuttal to this:
Na_Swatch wrote:
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.

[.....]

But back from my tangent: you can still get into a decent school and practice corporate law with your stats. Obviously, it wouldn't hurt to study harder and improve your LSAT score, but your life isn't over.


that's a great fictional job you have there...

in reality nothing like that exists for those getting straight out of law school


(and then I think someone also posted a picture of imaginationland from South Park)

Basically what these posters had insinuated was that my statement about not practicing in "big law" and still doing corporate work/getting paid well was totally ludacris ....and there was no way these kinds of jobs existed. I was simply trying to show that these jobs do in fact exist and I wasn't making it up.


Haha - actually I was the imaginationland poster. That was in response to "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...." I wasn't so much objecting to the possibility that there exist jobs that pay $140k (this is sort of the new market rate for biglaw anyway), but your assertion that by taking a 20k pay cut, you coud "have a life." What, you don't think your brother's working hard for his money? Lawyers making 50k are still working very hard for their money. And they generally don't have a life, just like their biglaw counterparts.

But yes, if you are trying to tell us that it's possible to be successful coming out of a non-T14 law school, that's entirely accurate.

NYC2013
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 7:49 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby NYC2013 » Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:14 pm

Problems with arguments in this thread:
It is very difficult to find a small/medium size firm job out of school. The best track for that is to work Big Law for a few years then switch to a smaller firm started by former partners at your firm. Smaller firms do not pay more (they may have higher salaries but not earnings after bonuses).
The school you went to does matter after graduation; recruiting clients is much easier if you have a high-profile ivy league degree than a regional degree. You are judged based on performance, but having your prestigious degree does matter.

In terms of big law vs medium law for corporate work, true the big law work is more prestigious, but that's for a reason. You are able to work on high-profile ideas, get many perks, in more, and meet more influential people. You also open up more career opportunities for when you retire from corporate work through the connections you will make at Big Law (academia, government, and non-profit work, and also the opportunity to sit on boards of random companies and collect a paycheck for traveling to meetings at nice resort [at least pre-financial crisis]).

Working at Big Law does matter, and those jobs are hard to get outside of top tier schools.
YHS are not the only schools that are sure things if you work hard to get a big law job...Columbia, Chicago, and NYU (CCN) also place great.
Beyond that though you never know what you're getting yourself into when you agree to all that debt

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby DoubleChecks » Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:18 pm

icydash wrote:1. Again, the point of bringing my father, uncle and brother into the conversation was to show that, in response to someone earlier saying (more or less) "nobody outside of the T14 can do corporate work and get paid well", this is not the case. I used my brother as a current example, and my uncle/dad as past examples. I'm aware that since the legal market was different 30 years ago, it may be different for recent grads. However, I do know specifically that my dads firm (which has a bunch of T2/T3 grads as partners as previously mentioned), along with specifically two other NYC firms (and I suspect many more) who have partners from similar prestige schools and do corporate work, do in fact hire T2/T3s (as it would be pretty hypocritical of these partners not to).

2. Smaller/mid sized firms do do M&A.

3. Again, the point of using my family was to show good opportunities for the grads outside the T14. Not any specific tier of schools, individual school, specific starting salary amount, etc etc... Gosh I feel like I have to put a disclaimer on my posts...or just start rereading them because I guess they haven't been read the way I had intended.


again, this is the problem I (and possibly many other posters have) w/ your comments. to back up your statement, you use examples that are NOT the norm, yet they are implied to be the norm. that is the problem.

if you had said it is simply possible, and that ppl in T2/T3's have a SHOT (not a "good" shot) at biglaw, then id say, yeah i agree. all your early posts make it seem as if someone going to a T2/T3 can "reasonably expect" a biglaw job ITE. that's bad advice, esp. when you consider actual current job statistics, not anecdotal evidence you are using. i mean, sure SOME (1+) of them will get such a job, but they are not the norm.

you should have just owned up and said you worded your comments badly, that you actually meant to say x (some of your later comments i dont have a problem with and i think are more reflective of reality), but instead you just said no we read your earlier posts wrong, and that you actually said x.

we dont need a disclaimer, we just need you to be more clear. now to be fair, your very first post was a pretty safe comment (excluding the be happy and have a life part :P jk), and the ppl who quoted it afterwards and attacked it -- well, let's say you could have initially defended yourself better and seemed more in the "right." unfortunately, your first defensive post was poorly done and kind of took your argument off on a tangent...and in a direction you wouldnt want it to go lol.

icydash
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:53 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby icydash » Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:46 pm

DoubleChecks wrote:
icydash wrote:1. Again, the point of bringing my father, uncle and brother into the conversation was to show that, in response to someone earlier saying (more or less) "nobody outside of the T14 can do corporate work and get paid well", this is not the case. I used my brother as a current example, and my uncle/dad as past examples. I'm aware that since the legal market was different 30 years ago, it may be different for recent grads. However, I do know specifically that my dads firm (which has a bunch of T2/T3 grads as partners as previously mentioned), along with specifically two other NYC firms (and I suspect many more) who have partners from similar prestige schools and do corporate work, do in fact hire T2/T3s (as it would be pretty hypocritical of these partners not to).

2. Smaller/mid sized firms do do M&A.

3. Again, the point of using my family was to show good opportunities for the grads outside the T14. Not any specific tier of schools, individual school, specific starting salary amount, etc etc... Gosh I feel like I have to put a disclaimer on my posts...or just start rereading them because I guess they haven't been read the way I had intended.


again, this is the problem I (and possibly many other posters have) w/ your comments. to back up your statement, you use examples that are NOT the norm, yet they are implied to be the norm. that is the problem.

if you had said it is simply possible, and that ppl in T2/T3's have a SHOT (not a "good" shot) at biglaw, then id say, yeah i agree. all your early posts make it seem as if someone going to a T2/T3 can "reasonably expect" a biglaw job ITE. that's bad advice, esp. when you consider actual current job statistics, not anecdotal evidence you are using. i mean, sure SOME (1+) of them will get such a job, but they are not the norm.

you should have just owned up and said you worded your comments badly, that you actually meant to say x (some of your later comments i dont have a problem with and i think are more reflective of reality), but instead you just said no we read your earlier posts wrong, and that you actually said x.

we dont need a disclaimer, we just need you to be more clear. now to be fair, your very first post was a pretty safe comment (excluding the be happy and have a life part :P jk), and the ppl who quoted it afterwards and attacked it -- well, let's say you could have initially defended yourself better and seemed more in the "right." unfortunately, your first defensive post was poorly done and kind of took your argument off on a tangent...and in a direction you wouldnt want it to go lol.


While some of this is certainly my fault for wording things poorly, a lot of it still comes back to people not fully reading what I'm saying. With regards to the "good shot" statement, the exact thing I said was:

"No one is saying it's not better to go to a top school. I'm just saying you still have a good shot if you happen to fall outside of the T14."

This is entirely true, and I stand by it no matter how you want to read it. I back it up later on with this post:
"Of course they [the t14] routinely place more grads. No one is disputing this. Read my past posts. However, as a previous poster mentioned looking at these stats:
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1
Normally, outside of the T14, for schools ranked 15-23, you have a 30% shot at biglaw. For schools ranked 24-36 (give or take) you have a 20% shot biglaw. I don't know about you, but a 1/3 to 1/5 shot at biglaw if you basically don't suck in law school (come out as top 20/30%) is a pretty good shot. Barring biglaw, you could probably get into a boatload of smaller firms who still do corporate work."

Also, I didn't realize I worded my comments badly until I started hearing some of these posts and realized people did not understand what I was saying the way I meant them too. I wish it had been sooner, too, but it is what it is. When I realized this, I did own up to it.

blsingindisguise
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:08 am

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby blsingindisguise » Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:26 pm

Ok, what you are still missing: there just aren't a "boatload of smaller firms" where one can do corporate work right out of school. These firms just aren't that common. Sure, there are some midsized firms that handle M&A, securities, etc. But most don't tend to hire a lot of fresh graduates (from any school) because they want people who can hit the ground running. These places don't run huge associate training programs like the big guys do because they can't afford it. And if they do they're going to be looking for top candiadtes (the ones that pay six-figures, anyway) - either people from T14s or people at the top of their class at lower ranked schools.

icydash
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:53 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby icydash » Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:49 pm

blsingindisguise wrote:Ok, what you are still missing: there just aren't a "boatload of smaller firms" where one can do corporate work right out of school. These firms just aren't that common. Sure, there are some midsized firms that handle M&A, securities, etc. But most don't tend to hire a lot of fresh graduates (from any school) because they want people who can hit the ground running. These places don't run huge associate training programs like the big guys do because they can't afford it. And if they do they're going to be looking for top candiadtes (the ones that pay six-figures, anyway) - either people from T14s or people at the top of their class at lower ranked schools.


Uh...just doing a quick search on a single website I came up with 511 New York City law firms that handle stuff under the umbrella of what's considered corporate law:
--LinkRemoved--

I'm sure if I looked harder, I could come up with many, many more.

Now, undoubtedly some of those are going to be biglaw firms, etc -- I just skimmed through them quickly. A lot of what I saw where small/mid-sized non-biglaw firms (414 of them had less than 100 people), though. I'm sure this website only has a tiny fraction of the firms that do this kind of work throughout NYC. Thus, most likely, there are a significant amount of them around...like I said....

The firms I personally know of *do* hire fresh graduates, and you work your way up like in any other law firm, starting with bitch work etc. Every year they hire a new wave of graduates who train/learn under supervising associates...this is the reality of how most law firms that I know of operate. If this is not the overall reality of small/midsized (non big-law firms), I would love to learn what the overall reality is...as long as you have proof to back it up.

Coming straight out of law school the high percentage of the time you're going to do bitch work, regardless of the firm. This is where you learn, train, etc... No special training programs necessary/most firms don't have a special "training program" and do just fine with their new associates. Then after a few years, you work your way up to being able to handle your own cases/do corporate work.

Where are you getting your data from?

blsingindisguise
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:08 am

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby blsingindisguise » Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:18 pm

287 of those firms are smaller than 10 people dude. How many new graduates do you think they hire each year? Most aren't even going to hire one per year. Then another hundred are smaller than 50. I intern at a 40-attorney firm right now that's hired exactly two people out of school in the last five years. That leaves about 28 "corporate" firms that are less than 100 attys but still of a realistic size to regularly hire significant numbers of new graduates.

My "data" is coming from my own job searching, from talking to MANY lawyers in the industry, from my career services office, from my professors, from my internships, etc.

icydash
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:53 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby icydash » Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:31 pm

blsingindisguise wrote:287 of those firms are smaller than 10 people dude. How many new graduates do you think they hire each year? Most aren't even going to hire one per year. Then another hundred are smaller than 50. I intern at a 40-attorney firm right now that's hired exactly two people out of school in the last five years. That leaves about 28 "corporate" firms that are less than 100 attys but still of a realistic size to regularly hire significant numbers of new graduates.

My "data" is coming from my own job searching, from talking to MANY lawyers in the industry, from my career services office, from my professors, from my internships, etc.

My data is coming from online sources, MANY lawyers/family in the industry, friends in law school, and personal internships as well. My brother works for a corporate firm (less than 50 people) that regularly hires 4-5 people out of LS every year. Perhaps we're looking in different regions/cities/etc, but at this point for the most part it seems like we're both using personal knowledge as our "proof" for the most part. Until you can find me a source, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: If You Want to be an Corporate Attorney in BigLaw...

Postby romothesavior » Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:47 pm

ITT: icydash makes absurd claims based on anecdotal evidence that is both incredibly irrelevant (relatives in the legal market 30 years ago) and drawn from far too small of a sample size. Other posters call him out on it, and he then claims, "That wasn't what I meant."




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot] and 4 guests