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
1212
Posts: 208
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 2:23 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby 1212 » Tue May 08, 2012 8:15 pm

My group was private, so anyone could see the group and who was in it. Only members could see posts. Therefore, cross checking the members of the group with the list of admitted students (which I don't have, obvs) would easily identify the individuals who weren't admitted.

Posts on TLS regarding firm placement and the subsequent waves of calls and emails tipped them off, it took very minimal effort and no input from me or other admits to identify the problem children.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue May 08, 2012 8:21 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Can someone please explain the above then?


SEO does check the forum. That's one possibility

Which would only lend support to the claim that admit(s) did pass along names, and that SEO cares enough about maintaining secrecy to be contemplating punitive measures...

User avatar
Neatrends
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:33 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Neatrends » Tue May 08, 2012 8:22 pm

Has anyone in the t14 been rejected?

law12type
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:12 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby law12type » Tue May 08, 2012 8:41 pm

1212 wrote:SEO is not attempting to censor us, the suggestion that they are is what's ridiculous to me.


I can't speak to your experience but SEO did monitor this thread last year and they definitely tried to censor it.

They specifically spoke to applicants about taking down information that was posted here. They are also very sensitive to complaints that are posted in this thread. They chastised interns for being "unprofessional" by posting criticisms or questions in this thread.

IMO, the way to deal with the complaints and inquiries that get posted in this thread is to improve the candidate selection process and be more transparent about the way they hire interns. It is ridiculous to get mad at someone for posting about your company when you solicited these applicants, you got their hopes up, and then you are unresponsive to their email and telephone inquiries.

I have mixed feelings about SEO overall but I am probably most disappointed by their efforts to monitor/censor this thread.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue May 08, 2012 8:45 pm

This thread gets less and less helpful the longer it goes on with this stuff

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue May 08, 2012 8:52 pm

Soo any new admissions go out today??

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue May 08, 2012 10:14 pm

What kind of things will we need to do to get situated with our firms (will there be prior paper work, additional interviews, meet and greets before hand, etc.)?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue May 08, 2012 11:38 pm

I must admit that I am equally surprised that SEO would remove someone from consideration because of something that took place on Facebook. Just like people would "stalk" TLS forums like "In at Harvard 2015", etc. out of curiosity and anxiousness, having a Facebook group that is created by applicants seems like an obvious place for someone to go who is anxious about the process and wanting to know the latest. You don't see universities like Stanford or Harvard rejecting people because they are on TLS or LSN.

Anyways, congrats to all those who got in!

User avatar
hoopydoodie
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:02 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby hoopydoodie » Tue May 08, 2012 11:49 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Can someone please explain the above then?


SEO does check the forum. That's one possibility

Which would only lend support to the claim that admit(s) did pass along names, and that SEO cares enough about maintaining secrecy to be contemplating punitive measures...


People, the point here is that admitted students do not know who the other admitted students are and who the people frontin' like they were in are. WE DON'T KNOW. This has nothing to do with SEO admits "snitching" on anyone. In all honesty, though, it's uncool, unprofessional, and uncute to join a small, private facebook group in order to get a better handle of what's going on in the admissions process. It's like trying to join the locked LinkedIn network of your prospective employer before you get hired...who does that? What was going on in that thread was of no business to anyone not accepted. Hate on SEO all you want (like someone said a few pages back---if they bother you that much, withdraw your application.) They were protecting their admits from posting sensitive information and that's why we were alerted to the invasion of privacy.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Wed May 09, 2012 12:02 am

Anonymous User wrote:I must admit that I am equally surprised that SEO would remove someone from consideration because of something that took place on Facebook. Just like people would "stalk" TLS forums like "In at Harvard 2015", etc. out of curiosity and anxiousness, having a Facebook group that is created by applicants seems like an obvious place for someone to go who is anxious about the process and wanting to know the latest. You don't see universities like Stanford or Harvard rejecting people because they are on TLS or LSN.

Anyways, congrats to all those who got in!


First of all, there's no way you can possibly know that SEO removed anyone from consideration due to Facebook. More than likely anyone who hasn't been notified about an acceptance at this point wasn't high on the priority list. Secondly, there's a HUGE difference between checking out/posting actively on TLS and LSN and essentially posing as an admit in order to get access to information.

CNN just had a segment on how people inappropriately using social media leads to them not getting jobs. If it really is the case that you or anyone else got dinged for sketchily joining a facebook group, then you're lucky it's just SEO and no something that really matters, like your 2L summer job. Employers monitor social media. Welcome to 2012.

User avatar
Guchster
Posts: 1205
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 9:38 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Guchster » Wed May 09, 2012 12:04 am

See my post about using discretion and good judgment in using the internet ITT.

If you snuck into the fb group, relax... you're probably not permabanned from SEO. It does reflect somewhat poorly on your character, judgment, and integrity--but I don't think you're going to be an auto-reject for being a quasi dishonest striver.

However, in terms of leaking information and gossiping about the process--this is exactly the type of information that SEO DOES want to be kept out of still-in-the-running applicant hands (for reasons mentioned above). If you're unsure how to use this thread, pretend this thread is about your firm--under the assumption that partners monitor it to ensure private and sensitive information is not disclosed to the public when it's not ready yet and highly sensitive to misinterpretation. If you were looking to be hired by this firm--no matter how difficult the process might be--would you semi-publicly shit on them here, knowing they're going to read it?

To the seemingly SEO alum above that spoke about censorship: those confusions dealt with misunderstandings and misrepresentations. Basically, SEO just doesn't want you putting words in their mouth--nor disclosing certain information that makes still-in-the-running people unnecessarily panic.

Basically, people get in trouble for the internetz AT THIS TIME EVERY YEAR--when acceptances/firm placements happen/which schools people got in from/etc. Disclosure of some private info, could paint a distorted picture about the larger scheme of things (i.e., which schools people got in from, or which firms get people placed at) and make some of you poor waiting folk panic when in all honesty there probably is no reason to, yet (i.e., people saying "all acceptances have been doled out already," like last year).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Wed May 09, 2012 12:23 am

law12type wrote:
1212 wrote:SEO is not attempting to censor us, the suggestion that they are is what's ridiculous to me.


I can't speak to your experience but SEO did monitor this thread last year and they definitely tried to censor it.

They specifically spoke to applicants about taking down information that was posted here. They are also very sensitive to complaints that are posted in this thread. They chastised interns for being "unprofessional" by posting criticisms or questions in this thread.

IMO, the way to deal with the complaints and inquiries that get posted in this thread is to improve the candidate selection process and be more transparent about the way they hire interns. It is ridiculous to get mad at someone for posting about your company when you solicited these applicants, you got their hopes up, and then you are unresponsive to their email and telephone inquiries.

I have mixed feelings about SEO overall but I am probably most disappointed by their efforts to monitor/censor this thread.


Alum here. It has nothing to do with censoring. If you all would just use the information to self-soothe, I'm sure they wouldn't care what the hell you posted on here. But when you post shit and it causes them to get 100 phone calls and emails in one day, freaking out, to the point where they have to stop answering their phones, then it interferes with their ability to do their jobs. They're very open with applicants, admits and alums about their process. They always say is it's an individual process, meaning it doesn't matter how it worked for Joe Schmoe, it will be different for you. Counting how many days/hours/minutes it took for him to be accepted will do you no good; it will drive you crazy, and if you use the time to bug them, it will drive them crazy as well. While they could care less if you go crazy, they presumably care if you drive them up the wall.

Now, if you still don't understand the difference between censoring and what they do, then it is clear why you didn't get accepted last year, and why you're still bitter and posting on here.

User avatar
Guchster
Posts: 1205
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 9:38 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Guchster » Wed May 09, 2012 12:30 am

Anonymous User wrote:
law12type wrote:
1212 wrote:SEO is not attempting to censor us, the suggestion that they are is what's ridiculous to me.


I can't speak to your experience but SEO did monitor this thread last year and they definitely tried to censor it.

They specifically spoke to applicants about taking down information that was posted here. They are also very sensitive to complaints that are posted in this thread. They chastised interns for being "unprofessional" by posting criticisms or questions in this thread.

IMO, the way to deal with the complaints and inquiries that get posted in this thread is to improve the candidate selection process and be more transparent about the way they hire interns. It is ridiculous to get mad at someone for posting about your company when you solicited these applicants, you got their hopes up, and then you are unresponsive to their email and telephone inquiries.

I have mixed feelings about SEO overall but I am probably most disappointed by their efforts to monitor/censor this thread.


Alum here. It has nothing to do with censoring. If you all would just use the information to self-soothe, I'm sure they wouldn't care what the hell you posted on here. But when you post shit and it causes them to get 100 phone calls and emails in one day, freaking out, to the point where they have to stop answering their phones, then it interferes with their ability to do their jobs. They're very open with applicants, admits and alums about their process. They always say is it's an individual process, meaning it doesn't matter how it worked for Joe Schmoe, it will be different for you. Counting how many days/hours/minutes it took for him to be accepted will do you no good; it will drive you crazy, and if you use the time to bug them, it will drive them crazy as well. While they could care less if you go crazy, they presumably care if you drive them up the wall.


TCR

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Wed May 09, 2012 12:40 am

Anonymous User wrote:What kind of things will we need to do to get situated with our firms (will there be prior paper work, additional interviews, meet and greets before hand, etc.)?


No interviews or meet and greets. Seems like most firms will ask for basic hiring paperwork and will conduct a background check before putting you on the payroll.

law12type
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:12 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby law12type » Wed May 09, 2012 1:55 am

Anonymous User wrote:
law12type wrote:
1212 wrote:SEO is not attempting to censor us, the suggestion that they are is what's ridiculous to me.


I can't speak to your experience but SEO did monitor this thread last year and they definitely tried to censor it.

They specifically spoke to applicants about taking down information that was posted here. They are also very sensitive to complaints that are posted in this thread. They chastised interns for being "unprofessional" by posting criticisms or questions in this thread.

IMO, the way to deal with the complaints and inquiries that get posted in this thread is to improve the candidate selection process and be more transparent about the way they hire interns. It is ridiculous to get mad at someone for posting about your company when you solicited these applicants, you got their hopes up, and then you are unresponsive to their email and telephone inquiries.

I have mixed feelings about SEO overall but I am probably most disappointed by their efforts to monitor/censor this thread.


Alum here. It has nothing to do with censoring. If you all would just use the information to self-soothe, I'm sure they wouldn't care what the hell you posted on here. But when you post shit and it causes them to get 100 phone calls and emails in one day, freaking out, to the point where they have to stop answering their phones, then it interferes with their ability to do their jobs. They're very open with applicants, admits and alums about their process. They always say is it's an individual process, meaning it doesn't matter how it worked for Joe Schmoe, it will be different for you. Counting how many days/hours/minutes it took for him to be accepted will do you no good; it will drive you crazy, and if you use the time to bug them, it will drive them crazy as well. While they could care less if you go crazy, they presumably care if you drive them up the wall.

Now, if you still don't understand the difference between censoring and what they do, then it is clear why you didn't get accepted last year, and why you're still bitter and posting on here.

But that is censorship. It is the same as if we were all standing in a group IRL and they told us we weren't allowed to talk to each other about the admissions process. The phones argument is a complete exaggeration. They only respond to negative information that was posted here.

The entire reason any sort of a panic happens at all is because they have a crappy admissions process. It moves very slowly and it isn't as organized as it needs to be. Telling an applicant in May that applied to your program in December that you still aren't sure if they will have a job in three weeks is sort of ridiculous.

It isn't all their fault but I think they should take the criticism they get in this thread and from alums and make changes. Instead their response is to chastise people who talk about their program in public.

Also, you should check last years posts to find out whether or not I am also an ALUM :wink: .

User avatar
RonnyDworkin
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 12:01 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby RonnyDworkin » Wed May 09, 2012 8:48 am

Hopefully, SEO will finalize most of their decisions today. I had an initial interview earlier in March and a follow-up a few weeks after. I'm still waiting for a decision, but I'm sending good vibes to everyone out there. :D

I'll be traveling out of the country for personal reasons and won't be back until next week; I already notified SEO about this before. So hopefully whether it's good or bad news (hopefully it's good :P ), I'll get a voicemail.


Good luck everyone! I know the process seems frustrating, but I'm sure they're doing all they can right now to move applications.

User avatar
hyakku
Posts: 604
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:35 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby hyakku » Wed May 09, 2012 9:16 am

law12type wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
law12type wrote:
1212 wrote:SEO is not attempting to censor us, the suggestion that they are is what's ridiculous to me.


I can't speak to your experience but SEO did monitor this thread last year and they definitely tried to censor it.

They specifically spoke to applicants about taking down information that was posted here. They are also very sensitive to complaints that are posted in this thread. They chastised interns for being "unprofessional" by posting criticisms or questions in this thread.

IMO, the way to deal with the complaints and inquiries that get posted in this thread is to improve the candidate selection process and be more transparent about the way they hire interns. It is ridiculous to get mad at someone for posting about your company when you solicited these applicants, you got their hopes up, and then you are unresponsive to their email and telephone inquiries.

I have mixed feelings about SEO overall but I am probably most disappointed by their efforts to monitor/censor this thread.


Alum here. It has nothing to do with censoring. If you all would just use the information to self-soothe, I'm sure they wouldn't care what the hell you posted on here. But when you post shit and it causes them to get 100 phone calls and emails in one day, freaking out, to the point where they have to stop answering their phones, then it interferes with their ability to do their jobs. They're very open with applicants, admits and alums about their process. They always say is it's an individual process, meaning it doesn't matter how it worked for Joe Schmoe, it will be different for you. Counting how many days/hours/minutes it took for him to be accepted will do you no good; it will drive you crazy, and if you use the time to bug them, it will drive them crazy as well. While they could care less if you go crazy, they presumably care if you drive them up the wall.

Now, if you still don't understand the difference between censoring and what they do, then it is clear why you didn't get accepted last year, and why you're still bitter and posting on here.

But that is censorship. It is the same as if we were all standing in a group IRL and they told us we weren't allowed to talk to each other about the admissions process. The phones argument is a complete exaggeration. They only respond to negative information that was posted here.

The entire reason any sort of a panic happens at all is because they have a crappy admissions process. It moves very slowly and it isn't as organized as it needs to be. Telling an applicant in May that applied to your program in December that you still aren't sure if they will have a job in three weeks is sort of ridiculous.

It isn't all their fault but I think they should take the criticism they get in this thread and from alums and make changes. Instead their response is to chastise people who talk about their program in public.

Also, you should check last years posts to find out whether or not I am also an ALUM :wink: .


viewtopic.php?f=23&t=184550


This is a thread directly above yours. It details how many graduating 3Ls still don't know their start date. For us, we might lose a summer if this doesn't work out; they have to essentially place their life on hold until they find out. This is just how the world works, sometimes everything cant be expedited and tailored for every individual in a process that wants to feel included at every step of the way.

Moreover, if you don't think TLS gets some adcoms pissed you're extraordinarily naive or completely blind to how crazy some people really seem to be up here. In a completely unrelated matter to SEO, I had an admissions officer essentially beg me not to reveal our correspondence on any "online message boards" because last time someone did that they got bombarded by calls and emails for days that slowed up their admissions process. This wasn't anyone at SEO trying to "censor" me, this was an assistant dean with years of experience and this is obviously a growing trend as people online (read: TLS) find new ways to be crazily neurotic.

And I don't see how your analogy makes sense. It's more like a bunch of non admitted students showing up to an ASW. I don't see how this makes sense in this particular context as it would never make sense in any other context.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Wed May 09, 2012 11:55 am

law12type wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
law12type wrote:
1212 wrote:I can't speak to your experience but SEO did monitor this thread last year and they definitely tried to censor it.

They specifically spoke to applicants about taking down information that was posted here. They are also very sensitive to complaints that are posted in this thread. They chastised interns for being "unprofessional" by posting criticisms or questions in this thread.

IMO, the way to deal with the complaints and inquiries that get posted in this thread is to improve the candidate selection process and be more transparent about the way they hire interns. It is ridiculous to get mad at someone for posting about your company when you solicited these applicants, you got their hopes up, and then you are unresponsive to their email and telephone inquiries.

I have mixed feelings about SEO overall but I am probably most disappointed by their efforts to monitor/censor this thread.


Alum here. It has nothing to do with censoring. If you all would just use the information to self-soothe, I'm sure they wouldn't care what the hell you posted on here. But when you post shit and it causes them to get 100 phone calls and emails in one day, freaking out, to the point where they have to stop answering their phones, then it interferes with their ability to do their jobs. They're very open with applicants, admits and alums about their process. They always say is it's an individual process, meaning it doesn't matter how it worked for Joe Schmoe, it will be different for you. Counting how many days/hours/minutes it took for him to be accepted will do you no good; it will drive you crazy, and if you use the time to bug them, it will drive them crazy as well. While they could care less if you go crazy, they presumably care if you drive them up the wall.

Now, if you still don't understand the difference between censoring and what they do, then it is clear why you didn't get accepted last year, and why you're still bitter and posting on here.

But that is censorship. It is the same as if we were all standing in a group IRL and they told us we weren't allowed to talk to each other about the admissions process. The phones argument is a complete exaggeration. They only respond to negative information that was posted here.

The entire reason any sort of a panic happens at all is because they have a crappy admissions process. It moves very slowly and it isn't as organized as it needs to be. Telling an applicant in May that applied to your program in December that you still aren't sure if they will have a job in three weeks is sort of ridiculous.

It isn't all their fault but I think they should take the criticism they get in this thread and from alums and make changes. Instead their response is to chastise people who talk about their program in public.

Also, you should check last years posts to find out whether or not I am also an ALUM :wink: .


http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 3&t=184550


This is a thread directly above yours. It details how many graduating 3Ls still don't know their start date. For us, we might lose a summer if this doesn't work out; they have to essentially place their life on hold until they find out. This is just how the world works, sometimes everything cant be expedited and tailored for every individual in a process that wants to feel included at every step of the way.

Moreover, if you don't think TLS gets some adcoms pissed you're extraordinarily naive or completely blind to how crazy some people really seem to be up here. In a completely unrelated matter to SEO, I had an admissions officer essentially beg me not to reveal our correspondence on any "online message boards" because last time someone did that they got bombarded by calls and emails for days that slowed up their admissions process. This wasn't anyone at SEO trying to "censor" me, this was an assistant dean with years of experience and this is obviously a growing trend as people online (read: TLS) find new ways to be crazily neurotic.

And I don't see how your analogy makes sense. It's more like a bunch of non admitted students showing up to an ASW. I don't see how this makes sense in this particular context as it would never make sense in any other context.



This is a different poster from the one you're responding too (have to add these disclaimers!).

You say: "For us, we might lose a summer if this doesn't work out; they have to essentially place their life on hold until they find out.:

I totally agree. The only thing I would say though is why should we accept something without questioning it or at least trying to constructively criticize it? I'm not saying lets bash the crap out of SEO, but if there is area for improvement, I don't see why people shouldn't air those grievances.

Anyway, I don't want to be in the middle of another one of these epic debates. I was accepted and I am extremely happy. But I have to admit that especially towards the last couple weeks before I heard back, I was feeling the same things complained about by some here.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Wed May 09, 2012 12:31 pm

For those of you in the same boat as me and still waiting to hear back--

I called the SEO office. They told me that they are still working through files, but that everyone still waiting should hear back tomorrow or Friday latest, and that we'll be notified either way.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Wed May 09, 2012 12:46 pm

Is anyone with no follow up still waiting? Has anyone with no follow up already been accepted??

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Wed May 09, 2012 1:11 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Is anyone with no follow up still waiting? Has anyone with no follow up already been accepted??


I had an interview in late January, have not had a follow-up, and am still waiting.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273104
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Wed May 09, 2012 1:13 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Is anyone with no follow up still waiting? Has anyone with no follow up already been accepted??


I havent had a follow up, but i was one of the people in the last batch of initial interviews

User avatar
hyakku
Posts: 604
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:35 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby hyakku » Wed May 09, 2012 1:24 pm

This is a different poster from the one you're responding too (have to add these disclaimers!).

You say: "For us, we might lose a summer if this doesn't work out; they have to essentially place their life on hold until they find out.:

I totally agree. The only thing I would say though is why should we accept something without questioning it or at least trying to constructively criticize it? I'm not saying lets bash the crap out of SEO, but if there is area for improvement, I don't see why people shouldn't air those grievances.

Anyway, I don't want to be in the middle of another one of these epic debates. I was accepted and I am extremely happy. But I have to admit that especially towards the last couple weeks before I heard back, I was feeling the same things complained about by some here.


Yea, the quote system on this site is strange to me lol, a couple of times I've read someone responding to a "quote" of mine and I'm baffled.

And yea, I mean go ahead and constructively criticize. To be honest, it doesn't bother me as I don't care either way and it doesn't affect me. If I think there's something I can say or do to improve the program after my time there, I'll let them know, but right now I'm not going to waste time criticizing something I don't even understand.

I guess I'm more confused at the thread because it's not like people have always gotten jobs through the internet, or had access to facebook groups and forums. But now people put it like its impossible to do anything without some extra tool, and if they don't have access to what they think will give them the leg up they get pissed off. That doesn't make sense to me. It's not as if when we go to apply to jobs there are going to be forum groups telling people what works best to get into Cravath.

Or shit, maybe there will be at the rate we're going. :lol:

Edit: Sorry for bringing us way off topic on the idea of internet technology and jobs in the future, random thought that crossed my head.

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

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby JustE » Wed May 09, 2012 6:05 pm

Just got dinged. I'm actually really happy I can finally move forward with my summer plans. I never felt entitled about it, but the delays in the notifications this year made this much more stressful than it should have been.

mcdeeremitch
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:16 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby mcdeeremitch » Wed May 09, 2012 6:10 pm

JustE wrote:Just got dinged. I'm actually really happy I can finally move forward with my summer plans. I never felt entitled about it, but the delays in the notifications this year made this much more stressful than it should have been.


+1




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.