SEO Corporate Law

(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
JustE
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 8:49 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby JustE » Thu Apr 26, 2012 2:43 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Yeahh...so let's discuss something else.

For people who hope to get in for NYC, what kind of housing are you looking at?


LOL at the last two pages. Lets try to chill out, guys.

I'm looking for a summer sublet somewhere near the firm. Hopeing to find something on CL.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:11 pm

If I did research on my interviewer, such as what programs she was involved with and things of that nature is it appropriate to bring them up in a positive light...in other words will it sound like I am dedicated and did my research...or will it come off creepy

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:22 pm

Anonymous User wrote:If I did research on my interviewer, such as what programs she was involved with and things of that nature is it appropriate to bring them up in a positive light...in other words will it sound like I am dedicated and did my research...or will it come off creepy



Depends how "thorough" the research. If it's info that is on the SEO staff profiles I can't imagine why it would be a bad idea to bring it up (it shows you actually perused the SEO site). If you're pulling info from an FBI file then it might be a bit much.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:26 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:If I did research on my interviewer, such as what programs she was involved with and things of that nature is it appropriate to bring them up in a positive light...in other words will it sound like I am dedicated and did my research...or will it come off creepy



Depends how "thorough" the research. If it's info that is on the SEO staff profiles I can't imagine why it would be a bad idea to bring it up (it shows you actually perused the SEO site). If you're pulling info from an FBI file then it might be a bit much.

Yeah it was from the SEO profile...thanks

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:29 pm

Does any one have any good ideas of what questions to ask the interviewer?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:50 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:If I did research on my interviewer, such as what programs she was involved with and things of that nature is it appropriate to bring them up in a positive light...in other words will it sound like I am dedicated and did my research...or will it come off creepy



Depends how "thorough" the research. If it's info that is on the SEO staff profiles I can't imagine why it would be a bad idea to bring it up (it shows you actually perused the SEO site). If you're pulling info from an FBI file then it might be a bit much.

Yeah it was from the SEO profile...thanks


Errr... I always find it's better to ask questions that lead into things that you happened to read about than to randomly bring the topics up (this can be weird). Also, keep in mind that in your first interview, there might not be an opportunity for you to ask off topic questions/get to know your interview. They'll want to know about you. They're not really gonna want to talk about their undergrad experience, past occupations, or anything else you'll find on their profile. Also keep in mind they're in a rush. You'll have 20mins to wow them. Keep it on topic.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 4:28 pm

Going to withdraw my application if I don't hear anything in the next few days. This is crazy.

Good luck everyone!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 4:30 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Does any one have any good ideas of what questions to ask the interviewer?


+1

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 4:47 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Going to withdraw my application if I don't hear anything in the next few days. This is crazy.

Good luck everyone!


Well, there's only two that matter.

"When should I receive a decision on my file?"

Follow-up question:

"You do realize the program starts May 25th, right?"

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:15 pm

Just wondering, does anyone know if skype interviewees need to submit their LORs and official transcripts before the interview as well? The FAQ isn't really helpful for people doing virtual interviews.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:51 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Just wondering, does anyone know if skype interviewees need to submit their LORs and official transcripts before the interview as well? The FAQ isn't really helpful for people doing virtual interviews.



(This is just personal and common sense based opinion and it's not based on any personal knowledge of the internal SEO structure.) But, considering the time crunch and the speed at which SEO will need to make a decision on your file... I would advise you to submit those ASAP so that SEO will be able to make a decision quickly after your interview. Anything that would make them hesitate with making a decision on your file would not be positive at such a late juncture. Good luck with the interview!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 8:21 pm

Everyone needs to calm down. They are doing what they can I'm sure

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 8:30 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Everyone needs to calm down. They are doing what they can I'm sure


I don't believe you.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 8:58 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Everyone needs to calm down. They are doing what they can I'm sure


I don't believe you.




+1

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 10:04 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Everyone needs to calm down. They are doing what they can I'm sure


I don't believe you.




+1


+8

annieq
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 4:20 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby annieq » Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:20 pm

I just got a Skype interview yesterday too... what is this mythical list of interview questions I am reading about? How much can they cover in "15-20 minutes"?! If someone has the list, please PM. Thanks!!

azntwice
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 6:46 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby azntwice » Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:28 pm

alum here. seems like SEO is really behind on its schedule this year. but actually just wanted to put in my two cents and point out that the bankruptcy of dewey & leboeuf is probably what's causing it -- the firm is one of the major supporters of the SEO program and i wouldn't be surprised if its going under has changed a lot of what's going on with SEO. sit tight and good luck guys.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:47 pm

.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Fri Apr 27, 2012 12:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:56 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:SEO alum here and while I certainly got frustrated at time during the program, you have to realize what they're doing is for your own good.

Anonymous User wrote:SEO is almost paranoid in its dealings and goes way overboard. Also, it's easy to justify their infatuation with T10 etc., that's understandable, but how does one explain the fact that they make the ladies "straighten" their hair?


This is a blatant exaggeration. The SEO team never once asked anyone to straighten their hair. One consultant came in and recommended girls change their hair to fit more into the corporate model, but SEO never once even advocated this advice, much less enforced it. There was a HUGE uproar about this and SEO was very embarrassed by the consultant, they won't have her back again. If anyone chose to straighten, perm, or get a weave/wig, it was completely their own choice. One of my best friends in the program has the most beautiful natural hair ever. Constantly well kept. Partners would compliment her on it all the time. SEO isn't going to tell her shit about it.

They are very strict about things that ol' biglaw partners bitch about. Most of their rules came about when partners would call the director and complain about unshaven guys, messy hair, blue shirts, black suits, etc. After going through the 1L firm process and SEO, I can tell you that some partners are EXTREMEEEELY conservative. SEOs policies are structured so that you'll be dressed appropriately for even the most strict partners--therefore never making a sartorial faux pas.

Their misplaced infatuation with stamping out all forms of "ghettoness" is amusing. You'd think they were dealing with kindergartners.


they have to be strict because otherwise people would do whatever the fuck they want to do. they gave us ONE free day during CLI (and just asked that we came presentable and business casual) and people came in spagetti straps and flipflops (dafuq?!!?!). people of color are notoriously late. what do you think would happen if people weren't held accountable for being on time? also, i certainly wouldn't want to be part of a program where its members were known for dressing sloppily, lazily, and completely out of sync with expectations. It sucks while you're doing it, but it's completely necessary for those older conservative partners that will snatch a job out of your hands because you look messy (not shaven or wearing something crazy).

The whole irony is the fact that they interview you on random campuses and once announced rejections on a public forum. Yeah, that's professional. If they're reading this they should realize there is a growing contingent of disillusioned alums out there. I mean it pays but we're not talking SA money here. In fact, one is almost better off finding a position on one's own without the albatross. In time, they'll start instructing candidates on how and when to breathe in a corporate environment.


Good luck finding a 0L summer associate position. Also, they'll tell you how and when to breathe in a corporate environment if it's going to cost you a job because you're doing it wrong.


get over your entitled and privileged self and understand that these people are doing what's best for you. it's not a torture camp--it's to solve the problem why there's so little people of color in biglaw. just based off your complaints, and some behavior of SEOs when they loosened up the reigns--i can see why they have to be this way.




*slow clap*

Alum here. I swear people find the most ridiculous things to complain about. This isn't about you, it's about people of color and fixing a huge problem with the legal profession.


And by the way...you're getting paid obscene amounts of money to really do nothing that they couldn't have a summer associate do.


jeez how far back is this from?? it's not even from this year's applicant class, why are you bringing it up?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Apr 27, 2012 12:32 am

Sorry, I must have misclicked on the page

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Apr 27, 2012 12:35 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:SEO alum here and while I certainly got frustrated at time during the program, you have to realize what they're doing is for your own good.

Anonymous User wrote:SEO is almost paranoid in its dealings and goes way overboard. Also, it's easy to justify their infatuation with T10 etc., that's understandable, but how does one explain the fact that they make the ladies "straighten" their hair?


This is a blatant exaggeration. The SEO team never once asked anyone to straighten their hair. One consultant came in and recommended girls change their hair to fit more into the corporate model, but SEO never once even advocated this advice, much less enforced it. There was a HUGE uproar about this and SEO was very embarrassed by the consultant, they won't have her back again. If anyone chose to straighten, perm, or get a weave/wig, it was completely their own choice. One of my best friends in the program has the most beautiful natural hair ever. Constantly well kept. Partners would compliment her on it all the time. SEO isn't going to tell her shit about it.

They are very strict about things that ol' biglaw partners bitch about. Most of their rules came about when partners would call the director and complain about unshaven guys, messy hair, blue shirts, black suits, etc. After going through the 1L firm process and SEO, I can tell you that some partners are EXTREMEEEELY conservative. SEOs policies are structured so that you'll be dressed appropriately for even the most strict partners--therefore never making a sartorial faux pas.

Their misplaced infatuation with stamping out all forms of "ghettoness" is amusing. You'd think they were dealing with kindergartners.


they have to be strict because otherwise people would do whatever the fuck they want to do. they gave us ONE free day during CLI (and just asked that we came presentable and business casual) and people came in spagetti straps and flipflops (dafuq?!!?!). people of color are notoriously late. what do you think would happen if people weren't held accountable for being on time? also, i certainly wouldn't want to be part of a program where its members were known for dressing sloppily, lazily, and completely out of sync with expectations. It sucks while you're doing it, but it's completely necessary for those older conservative partners that will snatch a job out of your hands because you look messy (not shaven or wearing something crazy).

The whole irony is the fact that they interview you on random campuses and once announced rejections on a public forum. Yeah, that's professional. If they're reading this they should realize there is a growing contingent of disillusioned alums out there. I mean it pays but we're not talking SA money here. In fact, one is almost better off finding a position on one's own without the albatross. In time, they'll start instructing candidates on how and when to breathe in a corporate environment.


Good luck finding a 0L summer associate position. Also, they'll tell you how and when to breathe in a corporate environment if it's going to cost you a job because you're doing it wrong.


get over your entitled and privileged self and understand that these people are doing what's best for you. it's not a torture camp--it's to solve the problem why there's so little people of color in biglaw. just based off your complaints, and some behavior of SEOs when they loosened up the reigns--i can see why they have to be this way.




*slow clap*

Alum here. I swear people find the most ridiculous things to complain about. This isn't about you, it's about people of color and fixing a huge problem with the legal profession.


And by the way...you're getting paid obscene amounts of money to really do nothing that they couldn't have a summer associate do.


jeez how far back is this from?? it's not even from this year's applicant class, why are you bringing it up?


It is from this year's applicant class. Maybe one or two months ago. I'm pretty sure they only started the anonymous posting option this year so that makes it pretty obvious.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:17 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:SEO alum here and while I certainly got frustrated at time during the program, you have to realize what they're doing is for your own good.

Anonymous User wrote:SEO is almost paranoid in its dealings and goes way overboard. Also, it's easy to justify their infatuation with T10 etc., that's understandable, but how does one explain the fact that they make the ladies "straighten" their hair?


This is a blatant exaggeration. The SEO team never once asked anyone to straighten their hair. One consultant came in and recommended girls change their hair to fit more into the corporate model, but SEO never once even advocated this advice, much less enforced it. There was a HUGE uproar about this and SEO was very embarrassed by the consultant, they won't have her back again. If anyone chose to straighten, perm, or get a weave/wig, it was completely their own choice. One of my best friends in the program has the most beautiful natural hair ever. Constantly well kept. Partners would compliment her on it all the time. SEO isn't going to tell her shit about it.

They are very strict about things that ol' biglaw partners bitch about. Most of their rules came about when partners would call the director and complain about unshaven guys, messy hair, blue shirts, black suits, etc. After going through the 1L firm process and SEO, I can tell you that some partners are EXTREMEEEELY conservative. SEOs policies are structured so that you'll be dressed appropriately for even the most strict partners--therefore never making a sartorial faux pas.

Their misplaced infatuation with stamping out all forms of "ghettoness" is amusing. You'd think they were dealing with kindergartners.


they have to be strict because otherwise people would do whatever the fuck they want to do. they gave us ONE free day during CLI (and just asked that we came presentable and business casual) and people came in spagetti straps and flipflops (dafuq?!!?!). people of color are notoriously late. what do you think would happen if people weren't held accountable for being on time? also, i certainly wouldn't want to be part of a program where its members were known for dressing sloppily, lazily, and completely out of sync with expectations. It sucks while you're doing it, but it's completely necessary for those older conservative partners that will snatch a job out of your hands because you look messy (not shaven or wearing something crazy).

The whole irony is the fact that they interview you on random campuses and once announced rejections on a public forum. Yeah, that's professional. If they're reading this they should realize there is a growing contingent of disillusioned alums out there. I mean it pays but we're not talking SA money here. In fact, one is almost better off finding a position on one's own without the albatross. In time, they'll start instructing candidates on how and when to breathe in a corporate environment.


Good luck finding a 0L summer associate position. Also, they'll tell you how and when to breathe in a corporate environment if it's going to cost you a job because you're doing it wrong.


get over your entitled and privileged self and understand that these people are doing what's best for you. it's not a torture camp--it's to solve the problem why there's so little people of color in biglaw. just based off your complaints, and some behavior of SEOs when they loosened up the reigns--i can see why they have to be this way.




*slow clap*

Alum here. I swear people find the most ridiculous things to complain about. This isn't about you, it's about people of color and fixing a huge problem with the legal profession.


And by the way...you're getting paid obscene amounts of money to really do nothing that they couldn't have a summer associate do.




It is from this year's applicant class. Maybe one or two months ago. I'm pretty sure they only started the anonymous posting option this year so that makes it pretty obvious.


touché

User avatar
Fujin11
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:18 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Fujin11 » Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:31 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Just wondering, does anyone know if skype interviewees need to submit their LORs and official transcripts before the interview as well? The FAQ isn't really helpful for people doing virtual interviews.



(This is just personal and common sense based opinion and it's not based on any personal knowledge of the internal SEO structure.) But, considering the time crunch and the speed at which SEO will need to make a decision on your file... I would advise you to submit those ASAP so that SEO will be able to make a decision quickly after your interview. Anything that would make them hesitate with making a decision on your file would not be positive at such a late juncture. Good luck with the interview!




Does their website even still work for anyone? I tried to do some quick updates after I got the interview email and all I got was a section invalid deadline has passed error

Anyone else experiencing something similar? Because at this point I couldn't get them a rec/ transcript even if I wanted to

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:49 am

azntwice wrote:alum here. seems like SEO is really behind on its schedule this year. but actually just wanted to put in my two cents and point out that the bankruptcy of dewey & leboeuf is probably what's causing it -- the firm is one of the major supporters of the SEO program and i wouldn't be surprised if its going under has changed a lot of what's going on with SEO. sit tight and good luck guys.


This is super credited. I bet a lot of money, plans, and people have fallen through--not to mention curriculum and other things that Dewey helped provide.

Also, it would suck if 4 of you future interns ITT had to be cut because of Dewey's impending collapse. I loved the 4 Dewey interns--that would've been sad :(

Anonymous User
Posts: 273478
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Apr 27, 2012 9:20 am

Here's to hearing some good news today!!




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.