The GULC OCI Thread

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:56 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
partner potential, game-winning potential.


just curious, is that phrase part of your "absolutely stunning interview presentation?"

:lol:

With the winning personality on presentation in this thread, I am shocked OCI went poorly.


You know, you're absolutely right to be shocked, because the way people conduct themselves on anonymous Internet forums is usually directly correlated and consistent with how they conduct themselves in professional interviews.

Well spotted!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:27 pm

Hogan Lovells (IP) DC +

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:37 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Hogan Lovells (IP) DC +


is that for a CB or an offer?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:38 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
partner potential, game-winning potential.


just curious, is that phrase part of your "absolutely stunning interview presentation?"

:lol:

With the winning personality on presentation in this thread, I am shocked OCI went poorly.


You know, you're absolutely right to be shocked, because the way people conduct themselves on anonymous Internet forums is usually directly correlated and consistent with how they conduct themselves in professional interviews.

Well spotted!


Ty, ty. I'm just poking fun since you came off as a bit....hostile/entitled in your first post. No worries though brother.

To answer your question, journal is useful b/c it's another indicator firms can rely on. It's hard to cull through the thousands of applications and candidates, and firms use indicators like these as short-hand for potential for success.

Might be accurate, might not. But that's how it is. Thus, it's prudent for students to do their research and be aware of what firms are looking for. A basic level of diligence would reveal that journal is important and one should work hard to get on the main one or at least a journal.

Remember that it doesn't matter what you think of your professional development strategy. What matters is what the hiring committee thinks. That ship has sailed for you w/ regards to the journal, but I would keep that in the back of your head in the future.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:31 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Hogan Lovells (IP) DC +


is that for a CB or an offer?

CB.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:32 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Ty, ty. I'm just poking fun since you came off as a bit....hostile/entitled in your first post. No worries though brother.

To answer your question, journal is useful b/c it's another indicator firms can rely on. It's hard to cull through the thousands of applications and candidates, and firms use indicators like these as short-hand for potential for success.

Might be accurate, might not. But that's how it is. Thus, it's prudent for students to do their research and be aware of what firms are looking for. A basic level of diligence would reveal that journal is important and one should work hard to get on the main one or at least a journal.

Remember that it doesn't matter what you think of your professional development strategy. What matters is what the hiring committee thinks. That ship has sailed for you w/ regards to the journal, but I would keep that in the back of your head in the future.


Major assumption noted in bold that is actually refuted by my earlier posts. Note that I repeatedly stated a clear level of awareness of the imputed significance of journal. That it is something we're all told to aspire to, that it is important, that employers like it. Did anyone tell you that being on the main journal was going to triple or quadruple your chances of a big firm callback, even over someone with better grades than you? I certainly was never told it carries that kind of weight. "Firms like it, firms care about it, they were all on journal themselves." I've heard all that stuff. I never heard that you will be utterly outboxed, even over others with shittier grades and interviewing skills.

And if I sound entitled, that's because I bring everything I was told firms care about (grades, interpersonal, writing), with the exception of main journal - not due to inability but due to a focus on becoming a practitioner, not an epic bluebook user. I'm the person they claim they are looking for. Anyone who doesn't believe that about themselves, I have some thoughts about why you too lack the results you hoped for. And before anyone gets the idea that I expressed such disdain for journal in an interview, my posts should indicate a level of sensitivity to the importance of appearances, even if I check that sense at the login page to online forums.

Anyway, of the three callbacks I've got banked, I plan on getting two offers. Entitled to, even. :D

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:36 pm

Also, I would note that, in reference to secondary journal, it has been the experience of my comrades who felt compelled to take something when main journal didn't work that they are no better (on the surface; can't speak to statistical significance) than anyone who is not on any journal and is otherwise taking full advantage of the opportunities available in law school. The two aspects of main journal that they are getting to experience are the drudgery and the hours.

So take that for what it's worth. IMO, it's a. go for main journal, b. failing that, do whatever you want, but do something to a high level.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:44 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Anyway, of the three callbacks I've got banked, I plan on getting two offers. Entitled to, even. :D

Fingers crossed eh? Good luck to you.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Anyway, of the three callbacks I've got banked, I plan on getting two offers. Entitled to, even. :D

Fingers crossed eh? Good luck to you.


I'll take the luck, but I prefer to view the world as a. if it worked out, it's because I did it right, b. if it failed, it's because I didn't do it well enough. Takes a lot of the helplessness and nervousness out of life, leaving only analysis of room for improvement. Sure, there's a place for random variation in this calculus, but all you can ever control is putting yourself in the best position to succeed.

Here, I should have pushed actual lawyers to tell me the truth about the significance of main and the Office of Career Services for numbers on the ratio of screens/CBs, controlled for main journal v. not. I foolishly relied on their expertise and full disclosure when they told me, "journal is definitely important and it will improve your chances, but as long as you have a good reason for why you're doing what you're doing and how that will help you become a strong practitioner, you should be fine."

I suppose on the other hand that, if an offer develops out of these three CBs, then they were right, weren't they? Somehow I think they knew that's not what I was asking.

Still interested, as we gallivant across these tangents, in other experiences of journal v. no journal when compared to others of lower grade points or social acuity.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 5:04 pm

I lack main journal and have between 10-15 callbacks, 3 with vault 10 firms.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 5:05 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I lack main journal and have between 10-15 callbacks, 3 with vault 10 firms.


To which my response is, are you in the t5-10% or did you target easily gettable firms (GPA-wise)?

If you have some other confounding factor that I haven't mentioned, state it.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 5:06 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I lack main journal and have between 10-15 callbacks, 3 with vault 10 firms.


GPA?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 5:07 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I lack main journal and have between 10-15 callbacks, 3 with vault 10 firms.


GPA?


Also, how is it that one is uncertain of their total to the tune of 5 callbacks? I could see someone saying 14-15 CBs, or something like that, but saying 10-15 is suspicious. Are you possibly counting some chickens before they've called?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 5:10 pm

My GPA is between 3.5 and 3.7. I am either top 10 or top 15%. I attended one of HYS for undergrad.

I am vague for obvious reasons.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 5:13 pm

Anonymous User wrote:My GPA is between 3.5 and 3.7. I am either top 10 or top 15%. I attended one of HYS for undergrad.

I am vague for obvious reasons.


Can hardly see how such vagueness as to number of callbacks could possibly be identifying, since it's something I would expect a great many to fudge.

Actually, same to GPA.

And it's the last point that stands out to me.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 5:23 pm

not to mention firms have no idea how many callbacks individual candidates have and this is anonymous. Revealing exact gpa might be revealing but number of callbacks is not. face it GULC OCI was bloodbath for anyone outside top third not IP.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 07, 2010 6:18 pm

Anonymous User wrote:not to mention firms have no idea how many callbacks individual candidates have and this is anonymous. Revealing exact gpa might be revealing but number of callbacks is not. face it GULC OCI was bloodbath for anyone outside top third not IP.


I think the point trying to be made here is that top 1/3 itself was no guarantee of avoiding the bloodbath.

Which I think is what many of us were counting on and has since proven false.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:not to mention firms have no idea how many callbacks individual candidates have and this is anonymous. Revealing exact gpa might be revealing but number of callbacks is not. face it GULC OCI was bloodbath for anyone outside top third not IP.


I think the point trying to be made here is that top 1/3 itself was no guarantee of avoiding the bloodbath.

Which I think is what many of us were counting on and has since proven false.

Yeah. It's been worse than anyone predicted.

User avatar
bwv812
Posts: 548
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:18 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby bwv812 » Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:33 pm

.
Last edited by bwv812 on Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:44 pm

bwv812 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:not to mention firms have no idea how many callbacks individual candidates have and this is anonymous. Revealing exact gpa might be revealing but number of callbacks is not. face it GULC OCI was bloodbath for anyone outside top third not IP.


I think the point trying to be made here is that top 1/3 itself was no guarantee of avoiding the bloodbath.

Which I think is what many of us were counting on and has since proven false.

Yeah. It's been worse than anyone predicted.

I really doubt it's as bad as or worse than last year. This is not to say that it's any good at all, but at least people knew there was a reasonable chance it would be this bad and were more prepared to pursue alternate avenues.


Agreed on both points. I definitely wasn't trying to insinuate it was the bloodbath of 2009 all over again.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 08, 2010 5:50 pm

Any offers out there yet?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Sep 09, 2010 9:18 am

A friend just got a P. Boggs (DC) CB yesterday... so it's not totally over yet.

edited for dc

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:17 pm

Anyone received dings from:
Latham NY
Dewey NY
Ropes Boston/NY
Freshfields NY
Fried Frank NY
Sidley NY
Morgan Lewis NY
Kirkland SF (especially interested in this as possibly my best interview, but not looking good now)
Howrey DC

If you have heard, please include how (snail mail/email). Seems like a lot of silence...

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 12, 2010 2:36 pm

^
Freshfields and Sidley rejections; email for the former, letter for the latter

FWIW - 3.3, secondary journal, we

Anonymous User
Posts: 273107
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: The GULC OCI Thread

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 12, 2010 2:59 pm

Anyone hear anything from Dechert DC?




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.