SMU 2010!

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11728
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby kalvano » Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:29 pm

adrib wrote:so, it sounds like everyone was mostly dressed casual instead of business casual? i want to go casual to the UT ASD, but i'm scared. what are y'all doing?



I wore khakis and a polo and was almost over-dressed.

chrisokc
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:43 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby chrisokc » Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:40 pm

All the correspondence from the school stated casual attire. To me, casual means jeans. If you want to go by the book, jeans aren't really less causual than khaki pants. Business casual should really rule out khakis. Business casual means one step below a suit - that's where your talking sweater vests or sports jackets with dress slacks.

I would probably avoid shorts and t-shirts at any event like this. However, if the school indicates it's causual, I wouldn't be too concerned with my choice of clothing. And really, a nice, plain-black or gray t-shirt wouldn't be out of the question. I would avoid the Slayer and Twisted Sister concert t-shirts though, and make sure your jeans didn't come from Hot Topic.

Just my opinion.

User avatar
Sangiovese
Posts: 206
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby Sangiovese » Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:08 pm

Sounds like the ASD was a success for you full time folks. Any other part timers going to the dinner on Tuesday? I'm planning on it but not sure yet since I haven't heard back from them. I called last week to RSVP and had to leave a message and so far haven't heard anything, but I'm figuring they were just really busy getting ready for the ASD.

User avatar
fathergoose
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:36 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby fathergoose » Sat Mar 20, 2010 2:13 pm

chrisokc wrote:
fathergoose wrote:And the slide of percentages at the end, was that the percent of the total class or the percent of the people employed or the percent people employed in legal jobs.

I find it somewhat hard to believe that a quarter of the 2009 class was making big law money.

I've heard that usually when schools give employment percentages, it is for just those employed - in any kind of job.


So of the 97% employed from the class of 2009, a full quarter made big law money?

That would be impressive.

keg411
Posts: 5935
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby keg411 » Sat Mar 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Sounds like the ASD was really really good. C'mon SMU, show me some <3 soon!

chrisokc
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:43 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby chrisokc » Sat Mar 20, 2010 2:43 pm

fathergoose wrote:
chrisokc wrote:
fathergoose wrote:And the slide of percentages at the end, was that the percent of the total class or the percent of the people employed or the percent people employed in legal jobs.

I find it somewhat hard to believe that a quarter of the 2009 class was making big law money.

I've heard that usually when schools give employment percentages, it is for just those employed - in any kind of job.


So of the 97% employed from the class of 2009, a full quarter made big law money?

That would be impressive.

I think that's right. SMU is ranked highly on the number of grads in the big firms. Higher than a lot of schools "ranked" higher than it in US News. To me, the only measure of a school is based on the job that I get afterward. I do not care about how "friendly" the faculty is, or how pretty the grounds are.

cafloyd12
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:35 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby cafloyd12 » Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:01 pm

chrisokc wrote:
fathergoose wrote:
chrisokc wrote:
fathergoose wrote:And the slide of percentages at the end, was that the percent of the total class or the percent of the people employed or the percent people employed in legal jobs.

I find it somewhat hard to believe that a quarter of the 2009 class was making big law money.

I've heard that usually when schools give employment percentages, it is for just those employed - in any kind of job.


So of the 97% employed from the class of 2009, a full quarter made big law money?

That would be impressive.

I think that's right. SMU is ranked highly on the number of grads in the big firms. Higher than a lot of schools "ranked" higher than it in US News. To me, the only measure of a school is based on the job that I get afterward. I do not care about how "friendly" the faculty is, or how pretty the grounds are.


Yeah, I don't really find it hard to believe. NLJ has them ranked 28th for placement into the NLJ 250. I don't know how they get those numbers, but one would think it would be fairly reliable given the fact that it's an unaffiliated third party. I think they had them at like 23% of the class going into biglaw.

On a lighter note, I agree about friendly faculty/aesthetically pleasing campus being a moot point. However, I did find the campus to be pretty stunning.

On an even lighter note, I fell in love with every female I saw while I was there. I had always heard that SMU had a very attractive female presence, but I apparently underestimated the validity of that claim.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11728
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby kalvano » Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:09 pm

So many national and multi-national firms have a big presence in Dallas, it's not surprising to me at all that they place very well in what is essentially Biglaw.

I was surprised at how much time they spent talking about how mobile an SMU degree is.


While I agree somewhat about faculty versus job placement, I don't want to go somewhere where I will be miserable for 3 years. I think quality of life has to enter in to the equation somewhere.

User avatar
FunkyJD
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:38 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby FunkyJD » Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:16 pm

cafloyd12 wrote:On a lighter note, I agree about friendly faculty/aesthetically pleasing campus being a moot point. However, I did find the campus to be pretty stunning.

On an even lighter note, I fell in love with every female I saw while I was there. I had always heard that SMU had a very attractive female presence, but I apparently underestimated the validity of that claim.

Yes, the uh, quality of life at SMU is high. You could do a hell of a lot worse.

chrisokc
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:43 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby chrisokc » Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:23 pm

FunkyJD wrote:
cafloyd12 wrote:On a lighter note, I agree about friendly faculty/aesthetically pleasing campus being a moot point. However, I did find the campus to be pretty stunning.

On an even lighter note, I fell in love with every female I saw while I was there. I had always heard that SMU had a very attractive female presence, but I apparently underestimated the validity of that claim.

Yes, the uh, quality of life at SMU is high. You could do a hell of a lot worse.

The whole part of town is sweet. Cool restaurants and bars, Northpark Mall, close to downtown and all it offers...

chrisokc
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:43 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby chrisokc » Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:40 pm

I think the faculty tried to put it as kindly as possibly when they were talking about mobility. SMU places really, really well in Dallas. If you're going to be unhappy in Dallas, SMU may not be your best bet. A lot of people don't seem to grasp this very easily. If you want to work in Houston, go to UH. If you want to work in Chicago, at least go to Illinois. However, if you want to work in Chicago, you get to compete with Univ. of Chicago, Northwestern, and WUSTL. If you want to work in NY, aside from needing your head examined, you get to compete with all the big dogs. Guess what? SMU is the only school in Dallas. Try to find me a larger market that just has one school. Sure, UT is there, but they aren't RIGHT there. UT is going to be less personal, and more competitive. SMU is going to be more personal, smaller, and strategically positioned to provide some unique benefits to those seeking employment in Dallas. I truly believe that.

User avatar
FunkyJD
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:38 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby FunkyJD » Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:51 pm

chrisokc wrote:I think the faculty tried to put it as kindly as possibly when they were talking about mobility. SMU places really, really well in Dallas. If you're going to be unhappy in Dallas, SMU may not be your best bet. A lot of people don't seem to grasp this very easily. If you want to work in Houston, go to UH. If you want to work in Chicago, at least go to Illinois. However, if you want to work in Chicago, you get to compete with Univ. of Chicago, Northwestern, and WUSTL. If you want to work in NY, aside from needing your head examined, you get to compete with all the big dogs. Guess what? SMU is the only school in Dallas. Try to find me a larger market that just has one school. Sure, UT is there, but they aren't RIGHT there. UT is going to be less personal, and more competitive. SMU is going to be more personal, smaller, and strategically positioned to provide some unique benefits to those seeking employment in Dallas. I truly believe that.

+1.

I think I'm going to be more upset if I get WL'd or rejected by SMU than I was when I was WL'd by UT. I may not end up going to SMU even if I am accepted, but as Dallas is one of the three legal markets that interests me, I really would like to have the option to consider.

keg411
Posts: 5935
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby keg411 » Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:00 pm

FunkyJD wrote:
chrisokc wrote:I think the faculty tried to put it as kindly as possibly when they were talking about mobility. SMU places really, really well in Dallas. If you're going to be unhappy in Dallas, SMU may not be your best bet. A lot of people don't seem to grasp this very easily. If you want to work in Houston, go to UH. If you want to work in Chicago, at least go to Illinois. However, if you want to work in Chicago, you get to compete with Univ. of Chicago, Northwestern, and WUSTL. If you want to work in NY, aside from needing your head examined, you get to compete with all the big dogs. Guess what? SMU is the only school in Dallas. Try to find me a larger market that just has one school. Sure, UT is there, but they aren't RIGHT there. UT is going to be less personal, and more competitive. SMU is going to be more personal, smaller, and strategically positioned to provide some unique benefits to those seeking employment in Dallas. I truly believe that.

+1.

I think I'm going to be more upset if I get WL'd or rejected by SMU than I was when I was WL'd by UT. I may not end up going to SMU even if I am accepted, but as Dallas is one of the three legal markets that interests me, I really would like to have the option to consider.


+1 (substitute UT WL for UGA WL)

User avatar
UTL_plz
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:48 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby UTL_plz » Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:37 pm

I believe i read an article recently saying that UNT would soon roll out with a law school. I don't think it will be able to compete with SMU, but it will be a public good since it will offer a great education for a public school price.

User avatar
FunkyJD
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:38 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby FunkyJD » Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:41 pm

UTL_plz wrote:I believe i read an article recently saying that UNT would soon roll out with a law school. I don't think it will be able to compete with SMU, but it will be a public good since it will offer a great education for a public school price.

Man. I just wonder if we need more law schools. I would rather the cash have gone towards boosting UT-Arlington or another Texas school up to tier-one research university status; or shoring up the University of Houston Law Center so the poor kids down there don't have to pay higher tuition.

Stephanie13
Posts: 426
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:50 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby Stephanie13 » Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:42 pm

This ASD has only made my choice between SMU and WUSTL more difficult.

chrisokc
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:43 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby chrisokc » Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:02 pm

UTL_plz wrote:I believe i read an article recently saying that UNT would soon roll out with a law school. I don't think it will be able to compete with SMU, but it will be a public good since it will offer a great education for a public school price.

Fortunately for us, we'll hit the job market first.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11728
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby kalvano » Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:15 pm

chrisokc wrote:I think the faculty tried to put it as kindly as possibly when they were talking about mobility. SMU places really, really well in Dallas. If you're going to be unhappy in Dallas, SMU may not be your best bet. A lot of people don't seem to grasp this very easily. If you want to work in Houston, go to UH. If you want to work in Chicago, at least go to Illinois. However, if you want to work in Chicago, you get to compete with Univ. of Chicago, Northwestern, and WUSTL. If you want to work in NY, aside from needing your head examined, you get to compete with all the big dogs. Guess what? SMU is the only school in Dallas. Try to find me a larger market that just has one school. Sure, UT is there, but they aren't RIGHT there. UT is going to be less personal, and more competitive. SMU is going to be more personal, smaller, and strategically positioned to provide some unique benefits to those seeking employment in Dallas. I truly believe that.



The two 3L's leading our tour talked at length about this. They said that yes, UT is a more renowned school, but it still doesn't compare in Dallas. They said that SMU is so tightly woven in with the Dallas legal market that UT just can't compare because it's several hours away.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11728
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby kalvano » Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:17 pm

UTL_plz wrote:I believe i read an article recently saying that UNT would soon roll out with a law school. I don't think it will be able to compete with SMU, but it will be a public good since it will offer a great education for a public school price.



I think it will be a better choice than Texas Wesleyan. UNT has a much broader alumni base, and a better name in the region.

I doubt it will be true competition for SMU for a long time, if ever, but I think it will be a decent choice for people staying in Dallas.

Fyre182
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 3:48 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby Fyre182 » Sun Mar 21, 2010 9:20 am

why do people believe that more than 5% of SMU will actually have BIGLAW salaries? Or, anyone other than the top 5% will ever be employed at one of the BIGLAW firms in texas V&E, Baker Botts, L&W etc.

why are people suggesting that SMU will place better than UT-- even in Dallas?

I am disillusioned

A simple search on V & E's page will show the huge disparity between the two schools.

http://www.velaw.com/lawyers/lawyersear ... p=&id=1134

http://www.velaw.com/lawyers/lawyersear ... p=&id=1134

Note that almost all of the SMU grads working for V&E are coif (meaning top 5% grads), many are LR presidents etc. We are talking roughly 5-10 students a year that will ever have a shot.

Notice that the UT list is almost half Partners. Notice that the disparity is 210 to 30. The disparity is even larger at other firms, check them yourself.

I repeat, I am disillusioned

I have also considered that the search may find undergraduate institutions. This was fruitless, every single person I clicked on from UT was a UT Law grad.

chrisokc
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:43 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby chrisokc » Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:44 am

Fyre182 wrote:why do people believe that more than 5% of SMU will actually have BIGLAW salaries? Or, anyone other than the top 5% will ever be employed at one of the BIGLAW firms in texas V&E, Baker Botts, L&W etc.

why are people suggesting that SMU will place better than UT-- even in Dallas?

I am disillusioned

A simple search on V & E's page will show the huge disparity between the two schools.

http://www.velaw.com/lawyers/lawyersear ... p=&id=1134

http://www.velaw.com/lawyers/lawyersear ... p=&id=1134

Note that almost all of the SMU grads working for V&E are coif (meaning top 5% grads), many are LR presidents etc. We are talking roughly 5-10 students a year that will ever have a shot.

Notice that the UT list is almost half Partners. Notice that the disparity is 210 to 30. The disparity is even larger at other firms, check them yourself.

I repeat, I am disillusioned

I have also considered that the search may find undergraduate institutions. This was fruitless, every single person I clicked on from UT was a UT Law grad.

Hey, man, don't be so disillusioned. I just searched Baker Botts Dallas office - 32 vs. 33 attorneys for the two schools in question. Also, you might want to check some of the firms based in Dallas - Haynes & Boone, Thompson & Knight...

User avatar
DeSilentio2728
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:38 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby DeSilentio2728 » Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:50 am

Fyre182 wrote:why do people believe that more than 5% of SMU will actually have BIGLAW salaries? Or, anyone other than the top 5% will ever be employed at one of the BIGLAW firms in texas V&E, Baker Botts, L&W etc.

why are people suggesting that SMU will place better than UT-- even in Dallas?

I am disillusioned

A simple search on V & E's page will show the huge disparity between the two schools.

http://www.velaw.com/lawyers/lawyersear ... p=&id=1134

http://www.velaw.com/lawyers/lawyersear ... p=&id=1134

Note that almost all of the SMU grads working for V&E are coif (meaning top 5% grads), many are LR presidents etc. We are talking roughly 5-10 students a year that will ever have a shot.

Notice that the UT list is almost half Partners. Notice that the disparity is 210 to 30. The disparity is even larger at other firms, check them yourself.

I repeat, I am disillusioned

I have also considered that the search may find undergraduate institutions. This was fruitless, every single person I clicked on from UT was a UT Law grad.


Check the data before you come in here with that shizznit:

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1

http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/20080414 ... trends.pdf

chrisokc
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:43 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby chrisokc » Sun Mar 21, 2010 11:59 am

Fyre182 wrote:why do people believe that more than 5% of SMU will actually have BIGLAW salaries? Or, anyone other than the top 5% will ever be employed at one of the BIGLAW firms in texas V&E, Baker Botts, L&W etc.

why are people suggesting that SMU will place better than UT-- even in Dallas?

I am disillusioned

A simple search on V & E's page will show the huge disparity between the two schools.

http://www.velaw.com/lawyers/lawyersear ... p=&id=1134

http://www.velaw.com/lawyers/lawyersear ... p=&id=1134

Note that almost all of the SMU grads working for V&E are coif (meaning top 5% grads), many are LR presidents etc. We are talking roughly 5-10 students a year that will ever have a shot.

Notice that the UT list is almost half Partners. Notice that the disparity is 210 to 30. The disparity is even larger at other firms, check them yourself.

I repeat, I am disillusioned

I have also considered that the search may find undergraduate institutions. This was fruitless, every single person I clicked on from UT was a UT Law grad.

Hell, L&W doesn't even have a Dallas office.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11728
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby kalvano » Sun Mar 21, 2010 12:00 pm

UT in NLJ250 placement scores right about their respective USNWR ranking.

SMU easily beats their USNWR ranking.


UT places 16th in hiring, SMU places 28th.

User avatar
fathergoose
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:36 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby fathergoose » Sun Mar 21, 2010 12:01 pm

Anybody with one post and the username "fyre" is gonna be a flame.

SMU isn't HYS and it won't get you onto the supreme court but it gives you a damn good shot at Big Law in Dallas.




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: canafsa, cocozhang9950, finaciardi, Google Adsense [Bot], rikkebukh and 5 guests