Columbia EIP 2017

(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.
User avatar
Kummel
Posts: 3422
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 11:55 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Kummel » Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:56 pm

GoneSouth wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
RSN wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:By my calculation, I'm at a 3.408 (B+/B+/B+ | A (3 cr)/A- (4 cr)/B+ (3 cr)/B (4 cr)). I think Stone is 3.41 - any chance they round?

Assuming they don't, how much will that 0.002 matter? Will certain firms be out of reach because of it?

Interested in Chicago (from the Midwest). Anyone know if I have decent chance at Skadden/Latham/K&E/Sidley's Chicago offices at EIP? Mayer Brown?

Thanks for the help!

-oh hello


Sorry for the bump. Under "Honors and Prizes" on Lawnet, my transcript says "Harlan Fiske Stone." This is wrong, right? 3.41 is a hard cut off?


If your Lawnet transcript says Stone, seems like a pretty fair bet that you're Stone. Congrats!


Wow, that's awesome. Thanks! For future reference to anyone interested, they must use three decimal places rather than two.


Weird, my 2L honors aren't on there yet. I didn't think they ran things early for 1Ls


Did all your grades come in on time? / Did you take 15 credits graded of Law?

User avatar
RSN
Posts: 961
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby RSN » Mon Jun 26, 2017 11:41 pm

DCfilterDC wrote:
GoneSouth wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
RSN wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:By my calculation, I'm at a 3.408 (B+/B+/B+ | A (3 cr)/A- (4 cr)/B+ (3 cr)/B (4 cr)). I think Stone is 3.41 - any chance they round?

Assuming they don't, how much will that 0.002 matter? Will certain firms be out of reach because of it?

Interested in Chicago (from the Midwest). Anyone know if I have decent chance at Skadden/Latham/K&E/Sidley's Chicago offices at EIP? Mayer Brown?

Thanks for the help!

-oh hello


Sorry for the bump. Under "Honors and Prizes" on Lawnet, my transcript says "Harlan Fiske Stone." This is wrong, right? 3.41 is a hard cut off?


If your Lawnet transcript says Stone, seems like a pretty fair bet that you're Stone. Congrats!


Wow, that's awesome. Thanks! For future reference to anyone interested, they must use three decimal places rather than two.


Weird, my 2L honors aren't on there yet. I didn't think they ran things early for 1Ls


Did all your grades come in on time? / Did you take 15 credits graded of Law?


Mine definitely showed up earlier than last year, but I got all my grades pretty early also. My guess is the new registrar tweaked the system for Kent/Stone so it runs every few days rather than in a single batch once all grades are done like last year.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 1:03 am

How does Journal notification work? If you don't get LR, how/when do you find out? Also, when are LR calls? Can they be any time during the day?

TheoO
Posts: 623
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 1:28 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby TheoO » Tue Jun 27, 2017 1:16 am

Each journal sends an email with a list of people who got on the journal. I assume LR would message you first.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 8:21 am

Anon'ing to not link my username and journal membership, but Law Review calls went out yesterday. Secondary journal notifications I believe are today. There will be an email to the whole school with the Law Review list today or tomorrow.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 9:31 am

Anonymous User wrote:Anon'ing to not link my username and journal membership, but Law Review calls went out yesterday. Secondary journal notifications I believe are today. There will be an email to the whole school with the Law Review list today or tomorrow.


I look forward to seeing the names of everyone who beat me.

Also, law and social problems went out.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:04 am

A kent who missed LR. What will firms take away from this? That I suck at writing?

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:16 am

Anonymous User wrote:A kent who missed LR. What will firms take away from this? That I suck at writing?


This was me last year. Nobody is going to care (except maybe places like Wachtell, Boies, and Williams & Connolly). You will have plenty of offers, bid aggressively, and start reaching out to try to get pre-EIP interviews.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

GoneSouth
Posts: 309
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:00 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby GoneSouth » Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:18 am

DCfilterDC wrote:
GoneSouth wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
RSN wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:By my calculation, I'm at a 3.408 (B+/B+/B+ | A (3 cr)/A- (4 cr)/B+ (3 cr)/B (4 cr)). I think Stone is 3.41 - any chance they round?

Assuming they don't, how much will that 0.002 matter? Will certain firms be out of reach because of it?

Interested in Chicago (from the Midwest). Anyone know if I have decent chance at Skadden/Latham/K&E/Sidley's Chicago offices at EIP? Mayer Brown?

Thanks for the help!

-oh hello


Sorry for the bump. Under "Honors and Prizes" on Lawnet, my transcript says "Harlan Fiske Stone." This is wrong, right? 3.41 is a hard cut off?


If your Lawnet transcript says Stone, seems like a pretty fair bet that you're Stone. Congrats!


Wow, that's awesome. Thanks! For future reference to anyone interested, they must use three decimal places rather than two.


Weird, my 2L honors aren't on there yet. I didn't think they ran things early for 1Ls


Did all your grades come in on time? / Did you take 15 credits graded of Law?


I've had all my grades in for weeks now and I took more than 15 creds. Any other 2Ls have theirs already?

Edit: I don't have the CR yet for my major writing credit (even though I do have it for the Supervised Research Credit for the same paper). Would that really be holding things up though? Major writing credit is a zero-credit thing so I don't think it affects honors.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:33 am

Anonymous User wrote:A kent who missed LR. What will firms take away from this? That I suck at writing?


Another Kent who missed LR checking in. Going for transactional and not pretending to be a good writer so hoping it won't be a huge deal.

This was me last year. Nobody is going to care (except maybe places like Wachtell, Boies, and Williams & Connolly). You will have plenty of offers, bid aggressively, and start reaching out to try to get pre-EIP interviews.
Anonymous User wrote:A kent who missed LR. What will firms take away from this? That I suck at writing?

I was under the impression Wachtell, at least, didn't care about LR - can anyone weigh in?

Speaking of, any news on Business Law Review?

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:38 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:A kent who missed LR. What will firms take away from this? That I suck at writing?

Another Kent who missed LR checking in. Going for transactional and not pretending to be a good writer so hoping it won't be a huge deal.

This was me last year. Nobody is going to care (except maybe places like Wachtell, Boies, and Williams & Connolly). You will have plenty of offers, bid aggressively, and start reaching out to try to get pre-EIP interviews.
Anonymous User wrote:A kent who missed LR. What will firms take away from this? That I suck at writing?

I was under the impression Wachtell, at least, didn't care about LR - can anyone weigh in?

Speaking of, any news on Business Law Review?


This happens every year (Kents not on LR). Doesn't seem to impact their performance at top firms. People land at Wachtell, Munger, Boies, ect. in that position all the time.

User avatar
Kummel
Posts: 3422
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 11:55 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Kummel » Tue Jun 27, 2017 12:01 pm

GoneSouth wrote:
I've had all my grades in for weeks now and I took more than 15 creds. Any other 2Ls have theirs already?

Edit: I don't have the CR yet for my major writing credit (even though I do have it for the Supervised Research Credit for the same paper). Would that really be holding things up though? Major writing credit is a zero-credit thing so I don't think it affects honors.


I've had mine for over a week, and grades came in on the last day.

They don't do honors calculations until your transcript is complete so if it's sitting on your transcript but it's blank in the credit section then it'll be held up.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 12:52 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:A kent who missed LR. What will firms take away from this? That I suck at writing?


Another Kent who missed LR checking in. Going for transactional and not pretending to be a good writer so hoping it won't be a huge deal.

This was me last year. Nobody is going to care (except maybe places like Wachtell, Boies, and Williams & Connolly). You will have plenty of offers, bid aggressively, and start reaching out to try to get pre-EIP interviews.
Anonymous User wrote:A kent who missed LR. What will firms take away from this? That I suck at writing?

I was under the impression Wachtell, at least, didn't care about LR - can anyone weigh in?

Speaking of, any news on Business Law Review?

Business Law Review is out via email.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 1:51 pm

Hey, question.

So I'm doing pre-EIP bidding for a number of offices in my home market. I'm scheduling callbacks at a couple, but waiting on others. For the ones I'm waiting on: should I avoid bidding their New York offices? I worry that I'll look flaky if I do so, and end up torching myself at both places.

TheoO
Posts: 623
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 1:28 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby TheoO » Tue Jun 27, 2017 2:00 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:A kent who missed LR. What will firms take away from this? That I suck at writing?


This was me last year. Nobody is going to care (except maybe places like Wachtell, Boies, and Williams & Connolly). You will have plenty of offers, bid aggressively, and start reaching out to try to get pre-EIP interviews.


Probably not.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 2:28 pm

Can anyone speak to whether LR has any additive value? i.e., if I'm very low Stone, can I afford to be a little more aggressive with my bid list than normal because of having made law review? Are there any specific firms where this will help?

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 2:29 pm

.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 2:55 pm

Is there a list of firms somewhere that will do pre-eip interviews? I ask to avoid the awkward response that "As you know, Columbia prohibits....."

Also, anyone know if Human Rights Review already went out?

-Badger King

TheoO
Posts: 623
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 1:28 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby TheoO » Tue Jun 27, 2017 3:59 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Can anyone speak to whether LR has any additive value? i.e., if I'm very low Stone, can I afford to be a little more aggressive with my bid list than normal because of having made law review? Are there any specific firms where this will help?


LR has very strong additive value. It's going to give you a higher level of safety to experiment out. Besides the maybe hard floor firms like Sullcrom, you are likely good for the rest (DPW, Skadden, etc.). I can't speak exactly to Cravath, or anything, but I wouldn't be surprised if you're competitive for it. Then you also have the v20s. You'll be good.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 4:14 pm

Low Stone grades; 3.44; Secondary Journal; Non-URM

I'm below SullCrom's hard floor, but I went to two events, including an affinity event, and had a follow up phone call with a senior associate I know was filed with recruiting. And then I figured I might as well take a flier on Cravath.

~Half-Grey Eyebrow

1. Debevoise (3)
2. Weil (4)
3. Milibank (6)
4. Paul Weiss (9)
5. SullCrom (10)
6. Gibson Dunn (10)
7. Cleary (10)
8. Davis Polk (11)
9. Akin Gump (11)
10. Fried Frank (13)
11. Orrick (15)
12. Linklaters (17)
13. Paul Hastings (19)
14. Cravath (19)
15. Pillsbury (20)
16. Shearman (20)
17. Simpson Thatcher (22)
18. Hogan (24)
19. Cadwalader (26)
20. Arnold & Porter (26)
21. Schulte (27)
22. Clifford Chance (27)
23. Freshfields (28)
24. Latham Chicago (N/A)
25. Mayer Brown Chicago (N/A)
26. Skadden Chicago (N/A)
[Applying Sidley Chicago directly]
[Applying Kirkland Chicago directly]
[Applying Ropes Chicago directly]

OFF BOARD

Cahill (9)
Proskauer (3)
Willike Farr (9)
White and Case (5)
Dechert (19)
Goodwin (13)

Latham (13)
Ropes (6)
Sidley (2)
Skadden (10)

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 5:47 pm

HRLR calls are going/went out

TheoO
Posts: 623
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 1:28 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby TheoO » Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:33 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Low Stone grades; 3.44; Secondary Journal; Non-URM

I'm below SullCrom's hard floor, but I went to two events, including an affinity event, and had a follow up phone call with a senior associate I know was filed with recruiting. And then I figured I might as well take a flier on Cravath.

~Half-Grey Eyebrow

1. Debevoise (3)
2. Weil (4)
3. Milibank (6)
4. Paul Weiss (9)
5. SullCrom (10)
6. Gibson Dunn (10)
7. Cleary (10)
8. Davis Polk (11)
9. Akin Gump (11)
10. Fried Frank (13)
11. Orrick (15)
12. Linklaters (17)
13. Paul Hastings (19)
14. Cravath (19)
15. Pillsbury (20)
16. Shearman (20)
17. Simpson Thatcher (22)
18. Hogan (24)
19. Cadwalader (26)
20. Arnold & Porter (26)
21. Schulte (27)
22. Clifford Chance (27)
23. Freshfields (28)
24. Latham Chicago (N/A)
25. Mayer Brown Chicago (N/A)
26. Skadden Chicago (N/A)
[Applying Sidley Chicago directly]
[Applying Kirkland Chicago directly]
[Applying Ropes Chicago directly]

OFF BOARD

Cahill (9)
Proskauer (3)
Willike Farr (9)
White and Case (5)
Dechert (19)
Goodwin (13)

Latham (13)
Ropes (6)
Sidley (2)
Skadden (10)


Wait, you don't have the last 3 firms in there, why exactly? Skadden, Latham and Ropes are all very much within your grade range.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301579
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jun 27, 2017 6:39 pm

TheoO wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Low Stone grades; 3.44; Secondary Journal; Non-URM

I'm below SullCrom's hard floor, but I went to two events, including an affinity event, and had a follow up phone call with a senior associate I know was filed with recruiting. And then I figured I might as well take a flier on Cravath.

~Half-Grey Eyebrow

1. Debevoise (3)
2. Weil (4)
3. Milibank (6)
4. Paul Weiss (9)
5. SullCrom (10)
6. Gibson Dunn (10)
7. Cleary (10)
8. Davis Polk (11)
9. Akin Gump (11)
10. Fried Frank (13)
11. Orrick (15)
12. Linklaters (17)
13. Paul Hastings (19)
14. Cravath (19)
15. Pillsbury (20)
16. Shearman (20)
17. Simpson Thatcher (22)
18. Hogan (24)
19. Cadwalader (26)
20. Arnold & Porter (26)
21. Schulte (27)
22. Clifford Chance (27)
23. Freshfields (28)
24. Latham Chicago (N/A)
25. Mayer Brown Chicago (N/A)
26. Skadden Chicago (N/A)
[Applying Sidley Chicago directly]
[Applying Kirkland Chicago directly]
[Applying Ropes Chicago directly]

OFF BOARD

Cahill (9)
Proskauer (3)
Willike Farr (9)
White and Case (5)
Dechert (19)
Goodwin (13)

Latham (13)
Ropes (6)
Sidley (2)
Skadden (10)


Wait, you don't have the last 3 firms in there, why exactly? Skadden, Latham and Ropes are all very much within your grade range.


The issue is that I'm applying to all 3 in Chicago right now. Like, they all have my resume and are looking at me. I'm worried that if I bid them in New York 1) it won't be allowed or 2) I'll look like I'm waffling between two markets.

TheoO
Posts: 623
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 1:28 am

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby TheoO » Wed Jun 28, 2017 1:59 pm

Try and see what OCS says, then. You may be able to inform their recruiting that you are interested in both the NY and Chicago offices. Typically, firms will specify if they only accept bidding for one or multiple offices.

Also, maybe I am less risk-averse for stone people, but I feel like stone don't strike out (in that havn't seen any who has). I've seen underperformance, but recruiting continues for a while after and firms often have more need, so if you don't get your right firm now, it's not the end. Give yourself some breathing room. I doubt a stone will be forced to cadwalader, fried frank or orrick. White & Case and Willkie are more reasonable.

JFO1833
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2014 2:06 pm

Re: Columbia EIP 2017

Postby JFO1833 » Wed Jun 28, 2017 2:35 pm

TheoO wrote:. I doubt a stone will be forced to cadwalader, fried frank or orrick. White & Case and Willkie are more reasonable.


I have mixed feelings about this sentiment. Even if this is true, having offers from these firms on the table is not necessarily a bad thing. In some cases, the right firm may not be the highest vault ranked and the chance to consider different offers may be valuable. In doing the call back process and giving a lower ranked firm a chance you may find you like it better.

Additional offers might also be helpful if you have unusual interests and may want to split firms or offices. Different firms have different policies on these kinds of things and the more options on the table, the more likely you can find a combination that will work.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.