HLS vs SLS for NYC Forum

[koalacity]

If you want NYC, bear in mind that firms in NYC are mostly unselective when it comes to HYS and even CCN. The only real exception is WLRK, maybe S&C. Cravath will go down to median and slightly below for HYSCCN, and so will nearly everyone else. So whether H or S places better in NYC is theoretical.

If NYC is unselective among HYS, then I could just go to HLS and straight P (or 1 or 2H) my way to Skadden, DPW, Cravath? Or would I need to be someone who isn't a K-JD with average interviewing skills?

Also, there's no real advantage to YLS vs HLS among V10?

FWIW, I've been reading through the older posts in the Harvard Students Answering Questions thread recently, and it seems like success at EIP (save for a small number of grade-selective firms) is largely dependent on your interviewing skills/personality/professionalism, with prior WE being a factor, though not generally a determining one. This is assuming around median/slightly below median grades-if you have straight Ps (or even a few LPs) without great interviewing skills and/or strong WE, V10 would be quite hard.

ph14, am I about right with my summary? I'm PI-bound, so I didn't pay a ton of attention to the posts about EIP.

[lastsamurai]

I can't imagine that straight Ps with no WE and average interviewing skills would send you to Skadden, but I can't speak specifically to it. It does seem to be generally believed on TLS that the top firms would have maybe slightly less stringent criteria for someone at YLS...maybe I'm wrong.

[BruceWayne]

If you get a LP at Harvard there's a good chance you will have trouble with a lot of the firms that are probably swimming around in your head now...

You can't get a LP at Stanford.

[ph14]

If you get a LP at Harvard there's a good chance you will have trouble with a lot of the firms that are probably swimming around in your head now...

You can't get a LP at Stanford.

LPs are really rare at HLS, entirely discretionary, and not something you really need to worry about. Definitely not something you should factor into your law school decision. SLS you can theoretically get a "restricted credit" grade. I do believe that is pretty rare though.

[BruceWayne]

If you get a LP at Harvard there's a good chance you will have trouble with a lot of the firms that are probably swimming around in your head now...

You can't get a LP at Stanford.

LPs are really rare at HLS, entirely discretionary, and not something you really need to worry about. Definitely not something you should factor into your law school decision. SLS you can theoretically get a "restricted credit" grade. I do believe that is pretty rare though.

People on these forums say this kind of thing all of the time because TLS attracts a certain type of person--but I know of people who have gotten LPs at Harvard and similar grades at other schools that are supposedly "rare". Frankly, a school's grading scheme is one of the absolute most important factors that you should look to when choosing between schools because it has a big impact on what/whether you get a job.

[ph14]

If you get a LP at Harvard there's a good chance you will have trouble with a lot of the firms that are probably swimming around in your head now...

You can't get a LP at Stanford.

LPs are really rare at HLS, entirely discretionary, and not something you really need to worry about. Definitely not something you should factor into your law school decision. SLS you can theoretically get a "restricted credit" grade. I do believe that is pretty rare though.

People on these forums say this kind of thing all of the time because TLS attracts a certain type of person--but I know of people who have gotten LPs at Harvard and similar grades at other schools that are supposedly "rare".

It happens. But it's certainly rare (not trying to make anyone feel bad if you got a LP).

[aboutmydaylight]

Isn't straight P's basically bottom of the class at HS anyway? I don't know why you'd assume a V10 firm with those grades.

[gottago]

Isn't straight P's basically bottom of the class at HS anyway? I don't know why you'd assume a V10 firm with those grades.

Maybe I misunderstood "unselective"

[thewaves]

I think it's hard to say what % get LPs at H vs restricted credit at S. Students at the respective schools both say they're rare or have never heard of anyone who has received one.

[WhiskeynCoke]

Thanks guys, I will mostly be making my choice on the other factors your mentioned, don't worry I was just curious.

What kind of aid are you getting? Where are you leaning?

0 since parents are loaded by financial aid standards (H said don't bother applying if they make over 180k combined). I'm leaning toward S at this point but still having a hard time letting H go. H and Cambridge would be more of an adventure since I'm from the west coast. Not a clerkship or bust person, actually think I want to end up in transactions for startups, so Silicon Valley makes the most sense, but I don't want to close off options in NYC.

There are a few things that I dislike about S like the first "quarter," which is really a semester. The line students used was "1L sucks at every school." So that's probably true of everywhere except Y. H seems to make no illusions that the experience is wonderful, but I went into the ASW expecting that. It sounds like both GSB and HBS make it difficult logistically to cross-register relative to the other schools at the respective universities.

Also I have no idea how I'll fare academically, so I'd like to have the "cushiest" experience as possible as far as law school goes.

If this is the case, its S x1000. S/B have a much easier time in the bay area. However, I'd like to point out that this seems to directly contradict your thread title / OP, which focuses on NY. So, yea....

[unc0mm0n1]

If you get a LP at Harvard there's a good chance you will have trouble with a lot of the firms that are probably swimming around in your head now...

You can't get a LP at Stanford.

LPs are really rare at HLS, entirely discretionary, and not something you really need to worry about. Definitely not something you should factor into your law school decision. SLS you can theoretically get a "restricted credit" grade. I do believe that is pretty rare though.

A friend of mine is K-JD, had 1 H and 1 LP and got the best firm in a secondary market in which she had no ties. She also got 2 NYC V20 firms. She didn't get Skadden or Cravath or anything but an LP isn't the kiss of death.

[WhiskeynCoke]

Wait, do you want SV or NY? The OP says NY, but at a later point you say you want to do tech in CA.

This matters because I would go to Stanford if I was most interested in doing start-up/tech/patent work in the bay area, and I would definitely go to Harvard if I wanted transactional practices in New York. We can theorize about the relative placement power of Stanford in New York, self-selection yadayada, but Harvard has an undeniable presence across all the top shops in NY. The exit options from these top firms will also be stacked with the Harvard alumni network more generally. Similarly, there are plenty of Harvard students heading to California at great firms, but you won't have the institutional and locality presence the Stanford students can rely on and develop (there's a lot of cool start-up activity in Boston/Cambridge too, I'm not dismissing that, but it's not the same as SV).

I think it comes down to this dichotomy since cost doesn't seem very relevant to you, and you haven't mentioned wanting to clerk and go into government.

Both great choices congratulations on your cycle

Don't underestimate the insularity of the bay area market. SF/SV are pretty hard to land unless you have REALLY strong ties, even coming from H. Also, you'll need better grades from H than from S if you want a bay area firm.

[manu6926]

...

[aboutmydaylight]

Wait, do you want SV or NY? The OP says NY, but at a later point you say you want to do tech in CA.

This matters because I would go to Stanford if I was most interested in doing start-up/tech/patent work in the bay area, and I would definitely go to Harvard if I wanted transactional practices in New York. We can theorize about the relative placement power of Stanford in New York, self-selection yadayada, but Harvard has an undeniable presence across all the top shops in NY. The exit options from these top firms will also be stacked with the Harvard alumni network more generally. Similarly, there are plenty of Harvard students heading to California at great firms, but you won't have the institutional and locality presence the Stanford students can rely on and develop (there's a lot of cool start-up activity in Boston/Cambridge too, I'm not dismissing that, but it's not the same as SV).

I think it comes down to this dichotomy since cost doesn't seem very relevant to you, and you haven't mentioned wanting to clerk and go into government.

Both great choices congratulations on your cycle

Don't underestimate the insularity of the bay area market. SF/SV are pretty hard to land unless you have REALLY strong ties, even coming from H. Also, you'll need better grades from H than from S if you want a bay area firm.

He's talking about CA in general, not Bay Area. HCC apparently have greater pull in LA and the market is less insular than norcal. Also, I've heard its easier to get Bay Area from H than Berkeley with or without ties, so I'm not sure if you're correct on how hard it would be to land bay area from H even at median.

[gottago]

edit

[drawstring]

I think (and hope) he was being sarcastic in that example.

[manu6926]

...

[unc0mm0n1]

Wait, do you want SV or NY? The OP says NY, but at a later point you say you want to do tech in CA.

This matters because I would go to Stanford if I was most interested in doing start-up/tech/patent work in the bay area, and I would definitely go to Harvard if I wanted transactional practices in New York. We can theorize about the relative placement power of Stanford in New York, self-selection yadayada, but Harvard has an undeniable presence across all the top shops in NY. The exit options from these top firms will also be stacked with the Harvard alumni network more generally. Similarly, there are plenty of Harvard students heading to California at great firms, but you won't have the institutional and locality presence the Stanford students can rely on and develop (there's a lot of cool start-up activity in Boston/Cambridge too, I'm not dismissing that, but it's not the same as SV).

I think it comes down to this dichotomy since cost doesn't seem very relevant to you, and you haven't mentioned wanting to clerk and go into government.

Both great choices congratulations on your cycle

Don't underestimate the insularity of the bay area market. SF/SV are pretty hard to land unless you have REALLY strong ties, even coming from H. Also, you'll need better grades from H than from S if you want a bay area firm.

He's talking about CA in general, not Bay Area. HCC apparently have greater pull in LA and the market is less insular than norcal. Also, I've heard its easier to get Bay Area from H than Berkeley with or without ties, so I'm not sure if you're correct on how hard it would be to land bay area from H even at median.

It's true, I had an offer from Palo Alto and I had never even been to SF, friends of mine also didn't have strong ties. I'm not sure where you're getting this, "you have to have ties to get the Bay Area." Is it as easy as NYC? Clearly not, but it's not like trying to get a truly insular market like Seattle for instance.