Name firms who no-offered 2011 SA's

(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.
RW65
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:58 pm

Re: Name firms who no-offered 2011 SA's

Postby RW65 » Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:31 pm

f7 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Debevoise NYC no offered 1 person.

TBF, I heard that he earned it.


What does someone have to do to be the only no offer out of a class of ~55?

Machine Spirit
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 7:36 pm

Re: Name firms who no-offered 2011 SA's

Postby Machine Spirit » Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:43 pm

RW65 wrote:
f7 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Debevoise NYC no offered 1 person.

TBF, I heard that he earned it.


What does someone have to do to be the only no offer out of a class of ~55?


Use your imagination.

Generally, it's going to have to be particularly egregious conduct. Merely messing up on something, or turning in a somewhat shoddy memo, isn't going to cause problems. Firms generally have lower expectations for the actual capabilities of their SAs, and it's not like any of their work product is billable anyway; most often, everything is written off by the supervising partner.

The usual suspects are obvious: absurd drinking at parties, showing up to work hungover, skipping out early, showing up late, not turning in assignments, having a terrible personality/attitude (and really, it would have to be an abomination of a personality), etc.

I'd imagine that the 1/55th either performed some incredible social faux pas at a firm event, or just didn't turn in even somewhat presentable work product. Those are the two usual reasons.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Name firms who no-offered 2011 SA's

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:06 pm

I don't know about really famous biglaw firms.

I remember hearing the hiring partners of a mid-sized firm (or regional biglaw based in minnesota) who told us that they had 2 SAs for the summer of 2009 at a local office and they planned to offer only one of them in the end. so, regardless of how well the two of them performed and presented themselves, one of them would be no-offered.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Name firms who no-offered 2011 SA's

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:15 pm

Machine Spirit wrote:
RW65 wrote:
f7 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Debevoise NYC no offered 1 person.

TBF, I heard that he earned it.


What does someone have to do to be the only no offer out of a class of ~55?


I'd imagine that the 1/55th either performed some incredible social faux pas at a firm event, or just didn't turn in even somewhat presentable work product. Those are the two usual reasons.


I'd add that at Debevoise (and other firms), as a matter of policy they will warn you in your mid-summer review and give you a chance to correct it before they give out no-offers. So it's not like it's out of the blue, or that you might not know anything's wrong.

Also, several people at PW seem to believe that the firm cold offered at least one SA this summer.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Name firms who no-offered 2011 SA's

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Nov 16, 2011 10:26 pm

I've heard the same re PW.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.