CLS bid list range Forum
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 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.
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 5:05 pm
CLS bid list range
For the purposes of 1L EIP/OCI the handbooks provided by CLS only grade firm prestige by the percentage of offers extended to Stone Scholars (~top 28% class rank for 1L's) and above, which means they are largely useless for people who are in that range. So, I'm wondering if people with a better sense of the NYC firm landscape than I can offer some advice. Operating under the assumption that I will accept an offer from the best firm that extends one, I'm hoping someone can tell me what firms are truly out of reach, and which are shots worth taking.
I am near the bottom end of Stone Scholars, so figure roughly top quarter of my class, and strong 1L summer work (SDNY Judicial Internship). Otherwise, little or no worthwhile work experience.
Any input is appreciated-- thanks.
I am near the bottom end of Stone Scholars, so figure roughly top quarter of my class, and strong 1L summer work (SDNY Judicial Internship). Otherwise, little or no worthwhile work experience.
Any input is appreciated-- thanks.
-
- Posts: 2777
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
Truly out of reach: Wachtell, Boies, Susman
Reaches: CSM, S+C, DPW, maybe STB. Place these towards the bottom of the list because they tend to be underbid.
Targets: Skadden, Paul Weiss, Debevoise, Weil, Cleary, K+E. You could probably get at least one of these (something in the NYC V10).
The rest of your bids should be used on less selective firms you think you'd like to work at. You could bid satellite offices of V15 firms like Covington, Sidley, Gibson. Or the larger NY firms back in the lower Vault. Or smaller offices or firms that might pay market but have better QoL. I hesitate to call these safeties because I've heard of Stone Scholars striking out before.
Reaches: CSM, S+C, DPW, maybe STB. Place these towards the bottom of the list because they tend to be underbid.
Targets: Skadden, Paul Weiss, Debevoise, Weil, Cleary, K+E. You could probably get at least one of these (something in the NYC V10).
The rest of your bids should be used on less selective firms you think you'd like to work at. You could bid satellite offices of V15 firms like Covington, Sidley, Gibson. Or the larger NY firms back in the lower Vault. Or smaller offices or firms that might pay market but have better QoL. I hesitate to call these safeties because I've heard of Stone Scholars striking out before.
- chinny123
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:06 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
Would you put the "less selective" firms at the top of your bid list (considering that they will more likely be overbid), the targets more to the middle and then the reaches at the bottom? I'm pretty much in the same position as OP, ~25% at CLS.
-
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
I generally agree with this but I wouldn't even characterize CSM as a reach. Many people who got offers there were not particularly high up in the class (i.e., barely stone or not even), and they were so undersubscribed this year that they actually went back later in the season looking for more people.timbs4339 wrote:Truly out of reach: Wachtell, Boies, Susman
Reaches: CSM, S+C, DPW, maybe STB. Place these towards the bottom of the list because they tend to be underbid.
Targets: Skadden, Paul Weiss, Debevoise, Weil, Cleary, K+E. You could probably get at least one of these (something in the NYC V10).
The rest of your bids should be used on less selective firms you think you'd like to work at. You could bid satellite offices of V15 firms like Covington, Sidley, Gibson. Or the larger NY firms back in the lower Vault. Or smaller offices or firms that might pay market but have better QoL. I hesitate to call these safeties because I've heard of Stone Scholars striking out before.
Also, GDC is quite grade-selective. Probably more selective than most of the firms in the "targets" list.
-
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:48 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
GDC NY? No. It is the least selective of any firm in the target list.imchuckbass58 wrote:I generally agree with this but I wouldn't even characterize CSM as a reach. Many people who got offers there were not particularly high up in the class (i.e., barely stone or not even), and they were so undersubscribed this year that they actually went back later in the season looking for more people.timbs4339 wrote:Truly out of reach: Wachtell, Boies, Susman
Reaches: CSM, S+C, DPW, maybe STB. Place these towards the bottom of the list because they tend to be underbid.
Targets: Skadden, Paul Weiss, Debevoise, Weil, Cleary, K+E. You could probably get at least one of these (something in the NYC V10).
The rest of your bids should be used on less selective firms you think you'd like to work at. You could bid satellite offices of V15 firms like Covington, Sidley, Gibson. Or the larger NY firms back in the lower Vault. Or smaller offices or firms that might pay market but have better QoL. I hesitate to call these safeties because I've heard of Stone Scholars striking out before.
Also, GDC is quite grade-selective. Probably more selective than most of the firms in the "targets" list.
Covington NY, on the other hand, is somewhat more selective than those targets.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- GeePee
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:35 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
I'm not sure Boies Schiller is "truly out of reach" for OP. A reach, sure, but I wouldn't say OP has 0 shot from CLS with top 1/4 grades.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: CLS bid list range
what should the bid list be for someone whose high stone (top 10-15%)?
Is there any firm that is completely out of reach?
Is there any firm that is completely out of reach?
-
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
Well, I'm basing this off the Kent-Stone list from 2009, where GDC NY gave offers to 90% stone scholars (excluding transfers). Compare that to Paul Weiss at 68%, Cleary at 74%, STB at 74%, Skadden at 63%, Weil at 60%, Debevoise at 62%, and Kirkland at 57%.seriouslyinformative wrote:
GDC NY? No. It is the least selective of any firm in the target list.
Covington NY, on the other hand, is somewhat more selective than those targets.
Plus, literally everyone for whom I know such things who was at the GDC offer event this year (i.e., 2010) was either Law Review and/or Stone. I'm sure there were a couple who weren't, but none that I knew.
-
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:48 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
Well, I'm just basing this off of the mean/median GPA stats from other T10 schools, where GDC NY took an average 3.35. Compare that to Paul Weiss at 3.55, Cleary at 3.65, Simpson at 3.55, Skadden at 3.55, Weil at 3.3, Kirkland at 3.45, and Debevoise at 3.6.Well, I'm basing this off the Kent-Stone list from 2009, where GDC NY gave offers to 90% stone scholars (excluding transfers). Compare that to Paul Weiss at 68%, Cleary at 74%, STB at 74%, Skadden at 63%, Weil at 60%, Debevoise at 62%, and Kirkland at 57%.
-
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:03 am
Re: CLS bid list range
Would anyone at CLS be willing to send me their gpa info for firms?
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: CLS bid list range
This notwithstanding, GDC isn't nearly as grade-crazy as people make them out to be. People are working there this summer who have just-above median grades at Columbia. GDC NY is by far the least grade-selective of the offices though, including satellites.imchuckbass58 wrote:Well, I'm basing this off the Kent-Stone list from 2009, where GDC NY gave offers to 90% stone scholars (excluding transfers). Compare that to Paul Weiss at 68%, Cleary at 74%, STB at 74%, Skadden at 63%, Weil at 60%, Debevoise at 62%, and Kirkland at 57%.seriouslyinformative wrote:
GDC NY? No. It is the least selective of any firm in the target list.
Covington NY, on the other hand, is somewhat more selective than those targets.
Plus, literally everyone for whom I know such things who was at the GDC offer event this year (i.e., 2010) was either Law Review and/or Stone. I'm sure there were a couple who weren't, but none that I knew.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: CLS bid list range
Is GDC really of the same caliber as the other names being thrown around for the target range? I've hardly ever heard it spoken in the same breath as Paul Weiss, Skadden, etc.
-
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:48 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
It isn't.Anonymous User wrote:Is GDC really of the same caliber as the other names being thrown around for the target range? I've hardly ever heard it spoken in the same breath as Paul Weiss, Skadden, etc.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
For litigation, it is (yes, including in NY). For corporate, it's not.seriouslyinformative wrote:It isn't.Anonymous User wrote:Is GDC really of the same caliber as the other names being thrown around for the target range? I've hardly ever heard it spoken in the same breath as Paul Weiss, Skadden, etc.
- thesealocust
- Posts: 8525
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
It's fine to want a good firm, but understand that the world of law firms isn't ordinal. You can't just stretch them from first to last. There are firms with strengths and weaknesses, firms strong everywhere but the best at nothing, etc. Don't walk into this process obsessed with prestige. It matters, but MUCH less than the people you work with on a daily basis and the kind of work available at your chosen office.CLS2013 wrote:For the purposes of 1L EIP/OCI the handbooks provided by CLS only grade firm prestige . . . Operating under the assumption that I will accept an offer from the best firm that extends one
-
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:48 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
Hello Gibson Dunn summer associate. Troll hats should be put in coat check.imchuckbass58 wrote:For litigation, it is (yes, including in NY). For corporate, it's not.seriouslyinformative wrote:It isn't.Anonymous User wrote:Is GDC really of the same caliber as the other names being thrown around for the target range? I've hardly ever heard it spoken in the same breath as Paul Weiss, Skadden, etc.
- thesealocust
- Posts: 8525
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
For the purposes of moving beyond anecdotes, here are the NY litigation rankings from Chambers:
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/USA/Editorial/43209
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/USA/Editorial/43209
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: CLS bid list range
Wow, that was unwarranted, considering that imchuckbass is NOT in fact at Gibson Dunn (or even litigation) this summer and is usually one of the more helpful posters on TLS.seriouslyinformative wrote:Hello Gibson Dunn summer associate. Troll hats should be put in coat check.imchuckbass58 wrote:For litigation, it is (yes, including in NY). For corporate, it's not.seriouslyinformative wrote:It isn't.Anonymous User wrote:Is GDC really of the same caliber as the other names being thrown around for the target range? I've hardly ever heard it spoken in the same breath as Paul Weiss, Skadden, etc.
Thanks, this is useful.thesealocust wrote:For the purposes of moving beyond anecdotes, here are the NY litigation rankings from Chambers:
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/USA/Editorial/43209
-
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
Not at GDC. In fact, working at one of the other firms listed above.seriouslyinformative wrote:Hello Gibson Dunn summer associate. Troll hats should be put in coat check.imchuckbass58 wrote:For litigation, it is (yes, including in NY). For corporate, it's not.seriouslyinformative wrote:It isn't.Anonymous User wrote:Is GDC really of the same caliber as the other names being thrown around for the target range? I've hardly ever heard it spoken in the same breath as Paul Weiss, Skadden, etc.
Thanks for adding something concrete.thesealocust wrote:For the purposes of moving beyond anecdotes, here are the NY litigation rankings from Chambers:
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/USA/Editorial/43209
I'm not going to argue with Chambers. I guess I would just point out that a lot of GDC's interesting non-appellate litigation is run out of New York (the facebook case, the Chevron case, the project runway litigation, etc). Certainly your exit options won't be constrained by doing litigation at GDC NY versus many of the above firms.
-
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
To elaborate on this, for this third category you might want to also look into:timbs4339 wrote:
The rest of your bids should be used on less selective firms you think you'd like to work at. You could bid satellite offices of V15 firms like Covington, Sidley, Gibson. Or the larger NY firms back in the lower Vault. Or smaller offices or firms that might pay market but have better QoL. I hesitate to call these safeties because I've heard of Stone Scholars striking out before.
-Patterson Belknap (very lit heavy and not well-known nationally, but great rep in NY, lots of interesting work, very smart people, and very good QoL)
-WilmerHale
-Quinn (only lit and has a distinct/polarizing personality, but some people love it)
-Ropes & Gray
-Cahill Gordon
-Willkie Farr & Gallagher
-
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:48 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
The Gibson trolls always parrot this as if they have it committed to memory. "Interesting" cases doesn't mean that the litigation department is particularly good. TTT firms handle interesting litigation cases all the time (Orrick handled the Bratz/Mattel suit; is Orrick suddenly a really good litigation firm? No. And they even beat Quinn). I'll grant that the LA office is top tier, though still a notch below the firms above. The NYC office, though, is nowhere near the top. The only people I hear argue for that is you and people actually working at Gibson.I guess I would just point out that a lot of GDC's interesting non-appellate litigation is run out of New York (the facebook case, the Chevron case, the project runway litigation, etc).
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 1245
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
No, but winning litigation department of the year is generally a good indication that the litigation department is particularly good.seriouslyinformative wrote:The Gibson trolls always parrot this as if they have it committed to memory. "Interesting" cases doesn't mean that the litigation department is particularly good. TTT firms handle interesting litigation cases all the time (Orrick handled the Bratz/Mattel suit; is Orrick suddenly a really good litigation firm? No. And they even beat Quinn). I'll grant that the LA office is top tier, though still a notch below the firms above. The NYC office, though, is nowhere near the top. The only people I hear argue for that is you and people actually working at Gibson.I guess I would just point out that a lot of GDC's interesting non-appellate litigation is run out of New York (the facebook case, the Chevron case, the project runway litigation, etc).
http://www.law.com/jsp/law/LawArticleFr ... 2437356128
-
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:48 pm
Re: CLS bid list range
That's the second link trolls have up their sleeves. Again, while I concede the LA/DC offices are top notch, NYC is not. Sorry bro.imchuckbass58 wrote:No, but winning litigation department of the year is generally a good indication that the litigation department is particularly good.seriouslyinformative wrote:The Gibson trolls always parrot this as if they have it committed to memory. "Interesting" cases doesn't mean that the litigation department is particularly good. TTT firms handle interesting litigation cases all the time (Orrick handled the Bratz/Mattel suit; is Orrick suddenly a really good litigation firm? No. And they even beat Quinn). I'll grant that the LA office is top tier, though still a notch below the firms above. The NYC office, though, is nowhere near the top. The only people I hear argue for that is you and people actually working at Gibson.I guess I would just point out that a lot of GDC's interesting non-appellate litigation is run out of New York (the facebook case, the Chevron case, the project runway litigation, etc).
http://www.law.com/jsp/law/LawArticleFr ... 2437356128
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login