Boston - CBs Round 2

(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: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:12 am

Did any other schools have Boston firms solicit resumes recently? I guess certain firms classes aren't filled yet - which seems odd. I know people with callbacks this week with some pretty great firms. At least 3 bigfirms are also doing OCI again at BU - theres hope left for Boston people I guess? Good luck all!

EDIT: clicked the Anon button by accident.

User avatar
KMaine
Posts: 862
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:57 pm

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby KMaine » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:07 am

Just out of curiosity, do you mind saying what firms? I don't see how it would be any problem for you to do so, espicially with the anon. feature. Thanks.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:11 am

KMaine wrote:Just out of curiosity, do you mind saying what firms? I don't see how it would be any problem for you to do so, espicially with the anon. feature. Thanks.


Skadden and K&L just sent out a request for resumes and started doing CBs again. I guess their yield was lower than they expected? I know a few people with offers from both, but no one that accepted them. I know both are only taking a few people, so maybe those they offered accepted elsewhere.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:40 am

I had a callback with Choate in the past 2 weeks.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:47 am

Anonymous User wrote:I had a callback with Choate in the past 2 weeks.


Yea makes sense.. I know of about 7-8 BU people that got offers there and I think only 1 accepted. Great firm - so no idea how that happened.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:03 am

Wow, does anyone else secretly hate when firms do this? I was rejected from every firm in Boston I interviewed with.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:39 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I had a callback with Choate in the past 2 weeks.


Yea makes sense.. I know of about 7-8 BU people that got offers there and I think only 1 accepted. Great firm - so no idea how that happened.


My guess would be that they didn't have a summer program last year may have scared some people off. And I've heard mixed things concerning the amount of hours they work.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 8:54 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I had a callback with Choate in the past 2 weeks.


Yea makes sense.. I know of about 7-8 BU people that got offers there and I think only 1 accepted. Great firm - so no idea how that happened.


My guess would be that they didn't have a summer program last year may have scared some people off. And I've heard mixed things concerning the amount of hours they work.


I think that could have explained it for some people. I didn't see it as such a negative. They gave offers to a high percentage of their summers in 2009, decided not to have a summer class in 2010 because they were not sure that they could give people a decent shot at a permanent position. Now, they are having a smaller class in 2011, more confident that they will be able to offer a high percentage of the summer class.

I do think they gave offers to strong candidates who also had offers at some of the bigger name firms in town. TBH, it would be tough to pass up Ropes with the better exit options and 100% offer rate. I think Choate just may have offered high, hoping they could sway some of the stronger candidates their way.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:58 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I do think they gave offers to strong candidates who also had offers at some of the bigger name firms in town. TBH, it would be tough to pass up Ropes with the better exit options and 100% offer rate. I think Choate just may have offered high, hoping they could sway some of the stronger candidates their way.

Choate does this every year. They did it in 2007, 2008, 2009... They were as selective as WilmerHale or Ropes, but they aren't as good of a firm. Accordingly, lots of their candidates did not accept..at least at my school.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:23 pm

Can anybody comment on the selectivity of Boston firms? From my own experience interviewing and researching this is my take:

Tier 1:Wilmer; Ropes; Goodwin; Bingham
Tier 2: Choate; FoleyHoag; Goulston
Tier 3: Mintz, Brown Rudnick; EAPD; Holland & Knight; Nixon; K&L Gates
Tier 4: Hinckley; other good mid sized firms.

*Note: I am not imputing strength of practice with selectivity, although I admit that there is likely a strong correlation.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:38 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Can anybody comment on the selectivity of Boston firms? From my own experience interviewing and researching this is my take:

Tier 1:Wilmer; Ropes; Goodwin; Bingham
Tier 2: Choate; FoleyHoag; Goulston
Tier 3: Mintz, Brown Rudnick; EAPD; Holland & Knight; Nixon; K&L Gates
Tier 4: Hinckley; other good mid sized firms.

*Note: I am not imputing strength of practice with selectivity, although I admit that there is likely a strong correlation.

Can you talk a little about why you wouldn't put BR and K&L in the second tier?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:46 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Can anybody comment on the selectivity of Boston firms? From my own experience interviewing and researching this is my take:

Tier 1:Wilmer; Ropes; Goodwin; Bingham
Tier 2: Choate; FoleyHoag; Goulston
Tier 3: Mintz, Brown Rudnick; EAPD; Holland & Knight; Nixon; K&L Gates
Tier 4: Hinckley; other good mid sized firms.

*Note: I am not imputing strength of practice with selectivity, although I admit that there is likely a strong correlation.

Can you talk a little about why you wouldn't put BR and K&L in the second tier?


No reason really. Maybe I would. These things tend to be amorphous anyway. I guess I'd substitute Goulston for Brown and K&L and add S&W to tier 3?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:52 pm

It seems really tough to talk about selectivity being low when firms have summer classes of 3-5 people. I bet the people they get will wind up having pretty amazing credentials.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:It seems really tough to talk about selectivity being low when firms have summer classes of 3-5 people. I bet the people they get will wind up having pretty amazing credentials.


OP here

I'm not suggesting selectivity is low at any of these firms: it isn't. These places are brutally difficult to get into. We're just splitting hairs at the point. I'd like to get some other input here.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:01 pm

Anecdotal - Top 25% T-14, Boston ties:
Tier 1: (as referenced above): 3 interviews, 0CB
Tier 2: 1 interview, 1 CB, 1 Offer
Tier 3: 2 interviews, 2 CB, 1 ding, 1 withdrawn
Tier 4: 2 interviews, 2 Cb, 1 ding, 1 offer

Don't think I really got the hang of the screeners until 2/3 of the way through, so my results may not be representative.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:27 pm

I don't think you can list firm selectivity in Boston that easily.

If I had to, I'd put Ropes/Wilmer/Bingham/Goodwin at top (prob Ropes/Wilmer slightly above other two), and then the rest are somewhat grouped together, other than midsized and those firms way below market ($125k or less).

Classes in Boston are so small outside those top 4 firms (and even within those except Ropes). Plus the number of firms in Boston is relatively small. Most people end up with 1, maybe 2 offers among firms that pay market or close to market. From my experience, a lot of the "selectivity" is personality based so it's not like a candidate from Foley Hoag got better grades than a candidate from Mintz, Nixon or Brown. In fact, some of my classmates ended up at the same Boston firms with vastly different grades, work experience, etc. Though, I will say I went to a Boston school...it may be different for schools out of state (I have no idea).

OCI is all over the map. Knowing their backgrounds, some of the better candidates ended up at the same firm as some of the weaker candidates. It doesn't break down into selectivity categories in Boston like it does in NYC. It's silly to try.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Nov 02, 2010 11:45 am

Anonymous User wrote:Can anybody comment on the selectivity of Boston firms? From my own experience interviewing and researching this is my take:

Tier 1:Wilmer; Ropes; Goodwin; Bingham
Tier 2: Choate; FoleyHoag; Goulston
Tier 3: Mintz, Brown Rudnick; EAPD; Holland & Knight; Nixon; K&L Gates
Tier 4: Hinckley; other good mid sized firms.

*Note: I am not imputing strength of practice with selectivity, although I admit that there is likely a strong correlation.


Anybody else have something to add here?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Nov 02, 2010 1:14 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Can anybody comment on the selectivity of Boston firms? From my own experience interviewing and researching this is my take:

Tier 1:Wilmer; Ropes; Goodwin; Bingham
Tier 2: Choate; FoleyHoag; Goulston
Tier 3: Mintz, Brown Rudnick; EAPD; Holland & Knight; Nixon; K&L Gates
Tier 4: Hinckley; other good mid sized firms.

*Note: I am not imputing strength of practice with selectivity, although I admit that there is likely a strong correlation.


Anybody else have something to add here?


I would put Bingham and perhaps GP slightly below Ropes/Wilmer. For those with multiple offers of these four, I know that many went to Ropes (no idea why - maybe perception that unusually large increase in class size = most successful).

Also keep in mind that Weil and Skadden each take a small summer class at their Boston offices. Those I know w/offers from one of these two also had offers at Ropes/Wilmer, so perhaps the same "tier" as far as selectivity (but reputation in Boston not as strong as the natives).

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

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Blindmelon » Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:50 pm

Selectivity isn't prestige. Bingham, Weil, Skadden are the most probably just because of their tiny class sizes. That doesn't map to Boston prestige which is (in rough order): Ropes/Wilmer/Goodwin/Skadden/Bingham/Foley/Choate, etc.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Nov 02, 2010 3:07 pm

Blindmelon wrote:Selectivity isn't prestige. Bingham, Weil, Skadden are the most probably just because of their tiny class sizes. That doesn't map to Boston prestige which is (in rough order): Ropes/Wilmer/Goodwin/Skadden/Bingham/Foley/Choate, etc.


Blindmelon: You seem to be quite the authority on this (and I'm being serious here). Would you mind doing an unofficial rank of top 20 or so Beantown law firms?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Nov 02, 2010 3:19 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Blindmelon wrote:Selectivity isn't prestige. Bingham, Weil, Skadden are the most probably just because of their tiny class sizes. That doesn't map to Boston prestige which is (in rough order): Ropes/Wilmer/Goodwin/Skadden/Bingham/Foley/Choate, etc.


Blindmelon: You seem to be quite the authority on this (and I'm being serious here). Would you mind doing an unofficial rank of top 20 or so Beantown law firms?


If you want a Top 11 prestige ranking for Boston, you can go to Vault and look under regional rankings for Boston. They are pretty close to Blindmelon's. Not sure how you would get to 20. I am not sure there are 20 Boston firms with more than a handful of SA's (in fact, Weil, Skadden, N/P, Mintz Levin, and many others have around 5 or fewer SA's).

User avatar
McBean
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 10:41 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby McBean » Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:02 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Blindmelon wrote:Selectivity isn't prestige. Bingham, Weil, Skadden are the most probably just because of their tiny class sizes. That doesn't map to Boston prestige which is (in rough order): Ropes/Wilmer/Goodwin/Skadden/Bingham/Foley/Choate, etc.


Blindmelon: You seem to be quite the authority on this (and I'm being serious here). Would you mind doing an unofficial rank of top 20 or so Beantown law firms?


If you want a Top 11 prestige ranking for Boston, you can go to Vault and look under regional rankings for Boston. They are pretty close to Blindmelon's. Not sure how you would get to 20. I am not sure there are 20 Boston firms with more than a handful of SA's (in fact, Weil, Skadden, N/P, Mintz Levin, and many others have around 5 or fewer SA's).



Someone should post these so that I don't have to pay $9.95.

concurrent fork
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 9:40 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby concurrent fork » Tue Nov 02, 2010 4:33 pm

McBean wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Blindmelon wrote:Selectivity isn't prestige. Bingham, Weil, Skadden are the most probably just because of their tiny class sizes. That doesn't map to Boston prestige which is (in rough order): Ropes/Wilmer/Goodwin/Skadden/Bingham/Foley/Choate, etc.


Blindmelon: You seem to be quite the authority on this (and I'm being serious here). Would you mind doing an unofficial rank of top 20 or so Beantown law firms?


If you want a Top 11 prestige ranking for Boston, you can go to Vault and look under regional rankings for Boston. They are pretty close to Blindmelon's. Not sure how you would get to 20. I am not sure there are 20 Boston firms with more than a handful of SA's (in fact, Weil, Skadden, N/P, Mintz Levin, and many others have around 5 or fewer SA's).



Someone should post these so that I don't have to pay $9.95.


Vault's Boston rankings:
1. Ropes
2. Wilmer
3. Goodwin
4. Skadden
5. Bingham
6. Foley Hoag
7. Choate
8. Mintz
9. Goulston
10. Nixon

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

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Blindmelon » Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:04 pm

I disagree strongly with Vault though, at least for Weil. You can't place it within the rankings given that the office is so small and specialized. If you were into PE, I could see someone taking Weil over even Ropes.

I also tend to think that outside of Ropes/Wilmer/Goodwin it doesn't matter all that much between Skadden/Bingham/Choate/FoleyHoag. In fact, if you discount class size as a factor, those four are likely as selective as each other.

These firms are also selective in different ways - Ropes tends to prefer Harvard types, GP tends to look at Harvards as well as top 10-20% at schools like BC/BU, and Wilmer seems to be a mixed bag of Harvard and a random assortment of others (class rank seems to matter less for them for some reason).

FoleyHoag also seems to have informal grade cut-offs, while Choate seems to look past grades if the person is a good fit (although they still pull Ropes level people away).

In sum, Boston is a weird market - mostly because its small and has some national names (Ropes/Wilmer/GP/Skadden) while also housing some extremely good (some would argue and I don't disagree that these are on-par with the Boston big-3) Boston-centric firms like Foley/Choate... so its hard to really *rank them in terms of anything.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273142
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Boston - CBs Round 2

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:12 pm

Thoughts on Holland & Knight? About 10 FL offices huh? But solid presence in BOS, CHI, NY, LA. Summer class of 3 last year in BOS huh? Yikes. Any word on this year's class?




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.