2013 UVA OGI Thread Forum

[olive16]

However, I wouldn't consider yourself screwed if you miss out on Coif.

Obvious statement is obvious. 90% of the class doesn't get Coif, and (far) less than 90% get nojerb pwned.

Old meme is old. But true point.

[Law Sauce]

I think doing 4 markets might be stretching it. Maybe cut it down to 3.

Same guy here, not arguing with you, just picking your brain. I appreciate the feedback. Any reason why you think applying to more markets hurts your overall odds of getting a good job? In my 1L mind I don't see why it hurts my overall odds as long as the firms I apply to are reasonable for my grades and I can make a good case for that firm and that city. I could see why this would hurt my odds of getting a job in a specific market since I will have less bids to go around for each one.

Or if there isn't a particular reason, have you just seen things go poorly for people who have bid on a bunch of different cities?

I agree with desertlaw. I'm actually not quite sure why, but when they asked me why I wanted to be in City X, they also asked what other cities I applied to. Going through a whole thing about how you really want to be in City X, and then have to say you are applying to Cities W, Y and Z too isn't great. You could lie, I guess, but lying in an interview like that is a morally gray area and could also bite you in the ass.

e: scooped

I disagree with desertlaw and 5ky here. I targeted 5 cities at OGI last year (and actually interviewed for 6). My wife and I really hadn't decided where we wanted to end up and had decent stories for a lot of place. I ended with offers in 4 cities and choosing a city that I almost did not even interview for. So I would suggest doing place you are interested. It actually is a really good way to visit these cities and get a better sense of where you want to live (this opportunity is actually very valuable to you). Of course you should still maximize your chances of getting a job and plan accordingly. Mass mail may be a good to diversify and see what the interest is.

About telling a firm where you are interviewing when asked. It would be pretty dumb to recite a list of all the places that you have interviewed for or applied. When asked, I told them about a city close to them and the city closest to where I was from. Often I may mention NY as a backup. It is not lying to tell tell them where you are applying without giving them an exclusive list. I guess if they pressed you and said, "anywhere else?" I'd probably give them more info, but I wouldn't say more than one or two cities when they ask (its understandable that you may shoot resumes to everyplace you can think of). Really they dont care, they just want to know that you want to be in their city legitimately; as long as that is true, you don't have to say a lot.

Edit: the only downside with so many cities is obviously a lower number of interviews per city possibly, but you can always get around this if there is interest in you by mailing, asking people for additional interviews at lunch or though one of the more formal processes, making some other connection with someone at the firm, visiting the city and asking for interviews, etc. Additionally, for me scheduling callbacks in different places was kind of crazy and it may take a while to get everything in, but thats fine, just be prepared to do whatever you have to in terms of travel

[Law Sauce]

But I also definitely plan on applying to New York/Texas/Chicago.

The Chicago bids here might be a waste, unless you have real ties—meaning you have lived there or have family that lives there.

Some markets, particularly Chicago and Boston, are very picky about ties. They don't want to waste callbacks on people who are using them as a safety because they couldn't fill out their bids with firms in other cities. And both markets have lots of big firms that will have their pick of legitimately interested applicants, so they don't have to take a chance on candidates with shaky ties. That's why they ask about where else you have applied, and while you can offer the standard "in this economy ..." answer, they hear that from everyone and pretty much see right through it.

Not correct, I am in Chicago this summer after never having lived here or having any connection to the city besides having a wife who is from the midwest generally. Its true they will ask you about it, but if you can answer the question, you should be ok (you definitely should spend time thinking of the most convincing answer to this to all your cities). All this is the same for anywhere you apply (yes, even NY).

I'm not sure why more UVA people don't try for Chicago. Its probably a little harder to get than NY and less natural than DC, but it is an awesome city for a lot of reasons and a great place to practice. Also, it should be very possible to at least get interviews since not a ton of UVA people try for it.

[Law Sauce]

So I feel as if the 3.7X crowd is fairly over represented on TLS.

My grades are in the upper 3.7X range. Good grades in UG, but I don't have a particular marketable UG degree (not accounting or IP secure).

I'm aiming for DC and the Richmond market. I've contacted the big three firms in Richmond, but my only ties with the state are attending UVA and spending time in Virginia when I was younger. Any suggestions on what I might be able to do to convince a Richmond firm that I really want to work in the state?

Also, any suggestions for firms in the DC area that are not billable hour monsters. I'm married and have no problem working long hours, but I'd prefer to not work seven days a week.

- Honorable Penguin

I've heard people with 3.7x have had trouble in smaller markets without ties because those firms think you are just using them as a safety. So I'd reach out to alumni at those firms and try to convince them you're really interested in Richmond and why.

This is probably correct for most small markets but probably not as big of an issue for Richmond because Richmond is so competitive for UVA people. Richmond firms want and can get people with GPAs that high because so many UVA people want to go to Richmond. They may be suspicious of your desire to be there without great ties, but your GPA won't be the issue. It will actually help you there. (I know someone last year with no ties who got a top Richmond firm, so it is possible, although he is good at making a great connection with the Virginia crowd).

Sorry for all the posts. I'm late to the thread and reacting to stuff as I'm reading though. I think it's helpful to have more perspectives.

[5ky]

But I also definitely plan on applying to New York/Texas/Chicago.

The Chicago bids here might be a waste, unless you have real ties—meaning you have lived there or have family that lives there.

Some markets, particularly Chicago and Boston, are very picky about ties. They don't want to waste callbacks on people who are using them as a safety because they couldn't fill out their bids with firms in other cities. And both markets have lots of big firms that will have their pick of legitimately interested applicants, so they don't have to take a chance on candidates with shaky ties. That's why they ask about where else you have applied, and while you can offer the standard "in this economy ..." answer, they hear that from everyone and pretty much see right through it.

Not correct, I am in Chicago this summer after never having lived here or having any connection to the city besides having a wife who is from the midwest generally. Its true they will ask you about it, but if you can answer the question, you should be ok (you definitely should spend time thinking of the most convincing answer to this to all your cities). All this is the same for anywhere you apply (yes, even NY).

I'm not sure why more UVA people don't try for Chicago. Its probably a little harder to get than NY and less natural than DC, but it is an awesome city for a lot of reasons and a great place to practice. Also, it should be very possible to at least get interviews since not a ton of UVA people try for it.

Having a wife from the Midwest is a pretty good tie, though. They overstated what kind of ties you need for Chicago, but it's hard to crack if you have no connection to Chicago/midwest.

[Law Sauce]

How many interviews are you allowed to keep this year?

23 I think?

If your GPA is over 3.6, 3.65 or so, then your bid list will be almost entirely irrelevant, because you won't be participating in the lottery, unless you decline so many you drop below the limit in hopes of getting a lottery interview with your favorite firm. That's not something I did, but I suppose it's not that risky, KD's admonitions about a bird in hand being better.

But even if you want to do that, nothing more than your very top few will matter at all.

One more thing from my experience. With that GPA, you should get a good number of preselections (although possibly not if you target only elite firms in DC or NY). But even though you should be above the limit with preselects it is not uncommon to turn some down in order to open up a space or two for lottery picks. In that respect only ordering for 3.6+ people's bid list does matter. (I know I found it helpful, though probably not a big issue or a game changer; its easy to get too disappointed or too cocky during OGI, both can cripple you, so avoid both).

[Law Sauce]

But I also definitely plan on applying to New York/Texas/Chicago.

The Chicago bids here might be a waste, unless you have real ties—meaning you have lived there or have family that lives there.

Some markets, particularly Chicago and Boston, are very picky about ties. They don't want to waste callbacks on people who are using them as a safety because they couldn't fill out their bids with firms in other cities. And both markets have lots of big firms that will have their pick of legitimately interested applicants, so they don't have to take a chance on candidates with shaky ties. That's why they ask about where else you have applied, and while you can offer the standard "in this economy ..." answer, they hear that from everyone and pretty much see right through it.

Not correct, I am in Chicago this summer after never having lived here or having any connection to the city besides having a wife who is from the midwest generally. Its true they will ask you about it, but if you can answer the question, you should be ok (you definitely should spend time thinking of the most convincing answer to this to all your cities). All this is the same for anywhere you apply (yes, even NY).

I'm not sure why more UVA people don't try for Chicago. Its probably a little harder to get than NY and less natural than DC, but it is an awesome city for a lot of reasons and a great place to practice. Also, it should be very possible to at least get interviews since not a ton of UVA people try for it.

Having a wife from the Midwest is a pretty good tie, though. They overstated what kind of ties you need for Chicago, but it's hard to crack if you have no connection to Chicago/midwest.

Sure, thats correct.

Its definitely true that if you can't make some connection to the area at all (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri or even Iowa) then Chicago would be really tough. This is generally true for everywhere besides NY and DC. Besides those two, I wouldn't say Chicago is any harder than anywhere else is this respect. I would think that other places like florida, colorado, probably most places in California other than LA and maybe SF, etc. are worse for this than Chicago.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the burst of posts, Law Sauce.

[5ky]

Its definitely true that if you can't make some connection to the area at all (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri or even Iowa) then Chicago would be really tough. This is generally true for everywhere besides NY and DC. Besides those two, I wouldn't say Chicago is any harder than anywhere else is this respect. I would think that other places like florida, colorado, probably most places in California other than LA and maybe SF, etc. are worse for this than Chicago.

Yeah I agree with that. But the anon looked like he/she was just spamming major markets, and adding in Chicago as your 5th city isn't a great idea if you don't have ties. I think we're in agreement in general

Chicago is also a relatively small market for the amount of people trying to get there, so it's just tough in general

[Law Sauce]

Raised in NJ. All WE in NJ. NJ College. Resume screams NJ. There are 3 NJ Firms coming. I plan to Mass Mail the others.

Have you thought about Delaware firms at all? IIRC the Delaware firms had pretty low bid to interview ratios, and while I am not that familiar with Delaware firms, I know that people have gotten good jobs there without being from the state. I imagine you being from the next state over would be pretty compelling since it is such a small state.

You might also think about a few Philly firms. They are also going to have lower bid to interview ratios, and your ties to NJ might transfer over to Philly pretty well. However, I am not certain about this and am happy to have someone else correct me.

I think you are correct about ties to NJ transferring to Philly. I interview heavily in Philly and DE and NJ ties would be fine for Philly. Its just all about the selling you do. Say something like, "I love the area, but I feel that Philly is a more attractive place for a young professional to live than Jersey" or something like that. You may get a laugh.

Also, re: DE. Wilmington, DE is an awesome place to practice law (quality of work, hours, quality of legal work). Unfortunately is not really a happening city at all. Interestingly and maybe surprisingly, I would say that ties to DE are not all that important. It may be a little more toward the DC/NY side of the spectrum in that respect. However, it is crucial that you show a strong interest in corporate governance and alternate entity governance stuff (it is the premier place for this work in the country) and be able to have at least some reason that you would be ok with living there (want a smaller market to have kids or whatever). Without that interest and good grades, you do probably need very strong ties. One other note (something that I misjudged): At least the guy I interviewed with for Skadden DE did not care about ties at all. I talked about why I would like to live there (basically, I am married and said I wanted a place where I could have a house and have kids) and he did not care about that at all. For them, I'd focus on the quality of the work instead.

[Law Sauce]

Its definitely true that if you can't make some connection to the area at all (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri or even Iowa) then Chicago would be really tough. This is generally true for everywhere besides NY and DC. Besides those two, I wouldn't say Chicago is any harder than anywhere else is this respect. I would think that other places like florida, colorado, probably most places in California other than LA and maybe SF, etc. are worse for this than Chicago.

Yeah I agree with that. But the anon looked like he/she was just spamming major markets, and adding in Chicago as your 5th city isn't a great idea if you don't have ties. I think we're in agreement in general

Chicago is also a relatively small market for the amount of people trying to get there, so it's just tough in general

Agreed on all counts except to continue to point out that Chicago is overhyped as a small market. While nothing like NY or even DC, it is much bigger market than people give it credit for. It's bigger probably than Boston/Philly/Houston/Dallas/maybe SF. Probably smaller than LA, but its not like anywhere other than NY or DC is really that huge of a legal market. Sorry to be so argumentative about this. We are really not disagreeing much if at all.

[Law Sauce]

Thanks for the burst of posts, Law Sauce.

No problem. I cant stand to watch anytime the Heat go on a mini-run.

[Law Sauce]

- Order of the Coif is a huge honor (~3.63+ at end of 3L)

Not really OGI related, but does anyone know if this number is correct? Historical data points?

[Law Sauce]

So just how much can we slack off after OGI? If one were above 3.6 with heavy studying but got enough test knowledge that they're a bit over 50% sure they could work a fraction of the amount - maybe 1-2 hours a day and still swing a 3.3 cumulative. If one say had a mid 3.6 GPA coming in, and then went 3.1-3.2 from hereon out is this okay?

If the only benefit of keeping strong grades after OGI is pride and looking smart then I'd much rather spend this time chillaxing and being happier?

For what it's worth, on the morning the hiring committee at my firm met to decide which summers to make offers to, one of the partners came to ask me for an updated copy of my transcript. My GPA had actually gone up since OGI. I cannot say that they would have no offered me if I had fallen to median, but I can say that I felt much more confident knowing that my grades were better and not worse.

I can see absolutely nothing to be gained by slacking off after OGI. First, law school is only three years, and when you work "hard," it's really not all that hard, and nothing like life at a big law firm. Second, too many things can change between OGI and graduation. Your firm could decide to cut staff and revoke the offers it made to its summer associates (see class of 2010). Your firm could fold (see Dewey). Do you want to be hitting the non-existent 3L hiring market with a 3.3 when you could have had a 3.6?

Third, and most important, your law school GPA will be your law school GPA for the rest of your life. It will matter to a lot of future employers, though not all. Say you decide you want to work at the DOJ ten years after graduation—they very much care about grades. Or maybe you want to lateral to a firm in a different city. They are going to want to see your grades. Don't cut off future options just because you really want to iron man Feb Club.

I actually kind of agree with this (and disagree a little). I think people lost some value by throwing in the towel in the fall. You should still try. It's actually a really easy semester to do well in, so take advantage of this. Its all about the mindset, you can do nothing for 3 months, but you should know that you are gonna go all out for the last 3 weeks. It's really not such a hard life (you don't really need to do much to be fully prepared come exams, just learn how to be more efficient than last year). Its true that it is likely not going to hurt you to have lower grades, but why would not prefer to do that. It can only help to get good ones.

[Anonymous User]

So just how much can we slack off after OGI? If one were above 3.6 with heavy studying but got enough test knowledge that they're a bit over 50% sure they could work a fraction of the amount - maybe 1-2 hours a day and still swing a 3.3 cumulative. If one say had a mid 3.6 GPA coming in, and then went 3.1-3.2 from hereon out is this okay?

If the only benefit of keeping strong grades after OGI is pride and looking smart then I'd much rather spend this time chillaxing and being happier?

For what it's worth, on the morning the hiring committee at my firm met to decide which summers to make offers to, one of the partners came to ask me for an updated copy of my transcript. My GPA had actually gone up since OGI. I cannot say that they would have no offered me if I had fallen to median, but I can say that I felt much more confident knowing that my grades were better and not worse.

I can see absolutely nothing to be gained by slacking off after OGI. First, law school is only three years, and when you work "hard," it's really not all that hard, and nothing like life at a big law firm. Second, too many things can change between OGI and graduation. Your firm could decide to cut staff and revoke the offers it made to its summer associates (see class of 2010). Your firm could fold (see Dewey). Do you want to be hitting the non-existent 3L hiring market with a 3.3 when you could have had a 3.6?

Third, and most important, your law school GPA will be your law school GPA for the rest of your life. It will matter to a lot of future employers, though not all. Say you decide you want to work at the DOJ ten years after graduation—they very much care about grades. Or maybe you want to lateral to a firm in a different city. They are going to want to see your grades. Don't cut off future options just because you really want to iron man Feb Club.

I actually kind of agree with this (and disagree a little). I think people lost some value by throwing in the towel in the fall. You should still try. It's actually a really easy semester to do well in, so take advantage of this. Its all about the mindset, you can do nothing for 3 months, but you should know that you are gonna go all out for the last 3 weeks. It's really not such a hard life (you don't really need to do much to be fully prepared come exams, just learn how to be more efficient than last year). Its true that it is likely not going to hurt you to have lower grades, but why would not prefer to do that. It can only help to get good ones.

Okay, seriously, you guys need to quit making it sound like it's a walk in the park to get good grades. You guys are treating this like it's guaranteed that everyone will get good grades if they put in minimal effort which is patently ridiculous. If you want to maintain a 3.6, you're going to pretty much have to do what it took to get a 3.6 in the first place. There are enough people gunning for Coif that if you're taking substantive, useful classes, you're going to have to do the work day in and day out to maintain a 3.6. If you're the type of person who can walk into the last three weeks of finals and score a 3.6, more power to you. But giving this advice to the other 85% of the school who can't do it is pretty dumb. Either that or it's some kind of poorly veiled humble brag.

[Law Sauce]

So just how much can we slack off after OGI? If one were above 3.6 with heavy studying but got enough test knowledge that they're a bit over 50% sure they could work a fraction of the amount - maybe 1-2 hours a day and still swing a 3.3 cumulative. If one say had a mid 3.6 GPA coming in, and then went 3.1-3.2 from hereon out is this okay?

If the only benefit of keeping strong grades after OGI is pride and looking smart then I'd much rather spend this time chillaxing and being happier?

For what it's worth, on the morning the hiring committee at my firm met to decide which summers to make offers to, one of the partners came to ask me for an updated copy of my transcript. My GPA had actually gone up since OGI. I cannot say that they would have no offered me if I had fallen to median, but I can say that I felt much more confident knowing that my grades were better and not worse.

I can see absolutely nothing to be gained by slacking off after OGI. First, law school is only three years, and when you work "hard," it's really not all that hard, and nothing like life at a big law firm. Second, too many things can change between OGI and graduation. Your firm could decide to cut staff and revoke the offers it made to its summer associates (see class of 2010). Your firm could fold (see Dewey). Do you want to be hitting the non-existent 3L hiring market with a 3.3 when you could have had a 3.6?

Third, and most important, your law school GPA will be your law school GPA for the rest of your life. It will matter to a lot of future employers, though not all. Say you decide you want to work at the DOJ ten years after graduation—they very much care about grades. Or maybe you want to lateral to a firm in a different city. They are going to want to see your grades. Don't cut off future options just because you really want to iron man Feb Club.

I actually kind of agree with this (and disagree a little). I think people lost some value by throwing in the towel in the fall. You should still try. It's actually a really easy semester to do well in, so take advantage of this. Its all about the mindset, you can do nothing for 3 months, but you should know that you are gonna go all out for the last 3 weeks. It's really not such a hard life (you don't really need to do much to be fully prepared come exams, just learn how to be more efficient than last year). Its true that it is likely not going to hurt you to have lower grades, but why would not prefer to do that. It can only help to get good ones.

Okay, seriously, you guys need to quit making it sound like it's a walk in the part to get good grades. You guys are treating this like it's guaranteed that everyone will get good grades if they put in minimal effort which is patently ridiculous. If you want to maintain a 3.6, you're going to pretty much have to do what it took to get a 3.6 in the first place. There are enough people gunning for Coif that if you're taking substantive, useful classes, you're going to have to do the work day in and day out to maintain a 3.6. If you're the type of person who can walk into the last three weeks of finals and score a 3.6, more power to you. But giving this advice to the other 85% of the school who can't do it is pretty dumb. Either that or it's some poorly veiled kind of humble brag.

Ok I was exaggerating that you could do nothing for 3 months. You certainly should go to class, follow along, skim enough of the reading to understand, keep a basic outline of your notes and the class, and do whatever you have to to keep understanding what is going on and be ready to make a big push a few weeks out. But thats not a lot of work in the day-to-day. Its basically like doing nothing (no nights, weekends, or even off days really). I mean you can't do nothing, but you also definitely do not need to work like a 1L to get your 1L results because you know what you are doing now and you are more efficient. Its all about how good you are at writing the exam in the end anyway. If you did well, you already know how to do this. If you didnt do so well, then yea it will take a lot of work to figure this out and do better. *Of course, this advice is not for everyone.

[Anonymous User]

For what it's worth, on the morning the hiring committee at my firm met to decide which summers to make offers to, one of the partners came to ask me for an updated copy of my transcript. My GPA had actually gone up since OGI. I cannot say that they would have no offered me if I had fallen to median, but I can say that I felt much more confident knowing that my grades were better and not worse.

I can see absolutely nothing to be gained by slacking off after OGI. First, law school is only three years, and when you work "hard," it's really not all that hard, and nothing like life at a big law firm. Second, too many things can change between OGI and graduation. Your firm could decide to cut staff and revoke the offers it made to its summer associates (see class of 2010). Your firm could fold (see Dewey). Do you want to be hitting the non-existent 3L hiring market with a 3.3 when you could have had a 3.6?

Third, and most important, your law school GPA will be your law school GPA for the rest of your life. It will matter to a lot of future employers, though not all. Say you decide you want to work at the DOJ ten years after graduation—they very much care about grades. Or maybe you want to lateral to a firm in a different city. They are going to want to see your grades. Don't cut off future options just because you really want to iron man Feb Club.

I actually kind of agree with this (and disagree a little). I think people lost some value by throwing in the towel in the fall. You should still try. It's actually a really easy semester to do well in, so take advantage of this. Its all about the mindset, you can do nothing for 3 months, but you should know that you are gonna go all out for the last 3 weeks. It's really not such a hard life (you don't really need to do much to be fully prepared come exams, just learn how to be more efficient than last year). Its true that it is likely not going to hurt you to have lower grades, but why would not prefer to do that. It can only help to get good ones.

Okay, seriously, you guys need to quit making it sound like it's a walk in the part to get good grades. You guys are treating this like it's guaranteed that everyone will get good grades if they put in minimal effort which is patently ridiculous. If you want to maintain a 3.6, you're going to pretty much have to do what it took to get a 3.6 in the first place. There are enough people gunning for Coif that if you're taking substantive, useful classes, you're going to have to do the work day in and day out to maintain a 3.6. If you're the type of person who can walk into the last three weeks of finals and score a 3.6, more power to you. But giving this advice to the other 85% of the school who can't do it is pretty dumb. Either that or it's some poorly veiled kind of humble brag.

Ok I was exaggerating that you could do nothing for 3 months. You certainly should go to class, follow along, skim enough of the reading to understand, keep a basic outline of your notes and the class, and do whatever you have to to keep understanding what is going on and be ready to make a big push a few weeks out. But thats not a lot of work in the day-to-day. Its basically like doing nothing (no nights, weekends, or even off days really). I mean you can't do nothing, but you also definitely do not need to work like a 1L to get your 1L results because you know what you are doing now and you are more efficiently. *Of course, this advice is not for everyone.

Everyone else knows what they are doing too. Maybe I'm just scarred from my experience as a graduate of the Class of 2012, but my grades actually went *down* during 2L and 3L despite a significant amount of greater effort. I was just shy of a 3.6 after 1L, but I finished with just above a 3.4. Granted, I got totally screwed with an arbitrary B- in one class that I shouldn't have been in to begin with, but for the most part I just got pwnd during 2L by all of the unemployed people from the Class of 2011 who were literally in the FIGHT OF THEIR LIVES to improve their GPAs and get a job. Hopefully the mentality has changed since then, but I just wanted to give you my cautionary tale before you waltz into 2L and 3L finals thinking a large chunk of your classmates don't give a fuck anymore.

[5ky]

This thread is veering dangerously away from its purpose

[Anonymous User]

Okay, to get the thread kind of back on track: I had around a 3.6 at OGI and got an offer from a firm that might not have hired me with a 3.4 (what I finished with). The point is that I didn't get fired because my GPA went down and you should consider that when making your bid list: the vast majority of the selective biglaw firms only care about your 1L grades (when hiring you at OGI).

[Anonymous User]

back on track - my bad bringing up the grades falling question. however, just walk in the park and cram 3 weeks out is a bad plan. it's a forced curve - someone always loses.

[Anonymous User]

OGI Question - If I want to bid on some secondary markets as safeties but I have no ties to those markets/cities, what should I write on the cover letter?

Something like "City X has good practice in ABC, and I really want to do ABC"?

[5ky]

OGI Question - If I want to bid on some secondary markets as safeties but I have no ties to those markets/cities, what should I write on the cover letter?

Something like "City X has good practice in ABC, and I really want to do ABC"?

bidding on a secondary market w/o any ties is the exact opposite of a safety

[Anonymous User]

So I have what might seem like an odd question: Is there any place that I can go to find out what the normal start dates are for law firms in DC and Richmond? The reason that I ask is that I heard some firms have fairly late start dates for associates, think October. Is that normal in DC? Richmond? NYC?

- Honorable Penguin

[5ky]

So I have what might seem like an odd question: Is there any place that I can go to find out what the normal start dates are for law firms in DC and Richmond? The reason that I ask is that I heard some firms have fairly late start dates for associates, think October. Is that normal in DC? Richmond? NYC?

- Honorable Penguin

October is not a "fairly late" start date. That's a month later than the earliest start dates possible, since in all likelihood you wouldn't start before September. And it just differs by firms, you'll have to run individual searches. There are threads where people talk about their start dates.

[Anonymous User]

So I have what might seem like an odd question: Is there any place that I can go to find out what the normal start dates are for law firms in DC and Richmond? The reason that I ask is that I heard some firms have fairly late start dates for associates, think October. Is that normal in DC? Richmond? NYC?

- Honorable Penguin

October is not a "fairly late" start date. That's a month later than the earliest start dates possible, since in all likelihood you wouldn't start before September. And it just differs by firms, you'll have to run individual searches. There are threads where people talk about their start dates.

An extra 30 days + of living on borrowed money sounds like a pretty expensive proposition (not all of us are single and can live in a basement on ramen noodles). Paying for rent and groceries on my credit card is not really an option. So yeah, October sounds "fairly late" when all the firms in the market where I currently am in start people in September and August.

- Honorable Penguin