Top Law Schools

.

I think the consensus is that the schools are somewhat comparable for biglaw in general, but NYU>Penn for elite NYC firm (read: ~V10 placement). (NYU also allegedly has some self-selection towards PI that may not be as prevalent at Penn, which would also explain the NLJ250 gap)

Penn students may be more likely to end up in biglaw through some combination of placement or NYU PI bias, but it seems that NYU students who do go biglaw are more likely to end up in ~V10 than Penn students.

Anyone who knows better / has some info I'm missing, feel free to jump in...

All I know is that Penn places more students in big law than Penn usually does.

The argument, as I understand it, is that Penn does better in NLJ firms and NYU does better placing the students it does place in big law into arguably more prestigious firms. While I understand that some people obsess over the "prestige" of their firms, I think most people care more about just getting a job that pays market (as all market jobs are prestigious, regardless of what anyone says).

Aberzombie1892 wrote:All I know is that Penn places more students in big law than Penn usually does.

The argument, as I understand it, is that Penn does better in NLJ firms and NYU does better placing the students it does place in big law into arguably more prestigious firms. While I understand that some people obsess over the "prestige" of their firms, I think most people care more about just getting a job that pays market (as all market jobs are prestigious, regardless of what anyone says).

Typo?

I am a month away from applying to both schools, and here is what I gather. For overall biglaw+clerkship placement, Penn is most similar to Chicago: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=181415. Penn outperformed all of CCN in the c/o 2011 data. That said, both Chicago and NYU definitely place better in the elite firms.

TLS wisdom seems to echo what people are saying itt, Penn has had better NLJ 250 placement overall, but NYU seems to have a significant edge in V10 placement (getting a market paying job period would seem to me >>>>>> than V10 placement, but I'm going to Penn in the fall so take that with a grain of salt ).

You are correct in mentioning NYU's class size difference over Penn, and according to LST, only 38.3 percent of Penn students end up in New York, whereas 62.6 percent of NYU students end up in New York, so maybe there are a number of Penn kids who would rather stay in Pennsylvania or go to DC instead of NY (22.2 percent ended up in Pennsylvania, 7.3 in DC according to LST). Or maybe V10s really do just prefer NYU kids. Probably a little bit of both.

You can't make sense of the data if you continue to assume that it's just a matter of "Penn > NYU" or "NYU > Penn". It's really a multi-faceted phenomenon.

I think the V10 NYC firms consider NYU a core recruiting school, and hire tons of people from there. However, placement is not just about what happens to the top of the class, but also about what happens to the bottom of the class. NYU is much bigger than Penn and is completely NYC focused. Penn, on the other hand, is smaller and has a couple of substantial legal markets (Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Wilmington, maybe Baltimore) to fall back on. These markets normally recruit mostly from Temple, Villanova, Penn State, but will hire Penn grads with lower grades.

I actually think the "NYU is all about PI" argument is quite disingenuous. NYU wasn't all about PI in 2007 and 2008 when it was basically tied with Penn in big law placement: http://www.top-law-schools.com/archives ... =2&t=61206.

Personally, I would rather be top 1/3 at NYU than top 1/3 at Penn, but I'd rather be bottom 1/3 at Penn (with Philly ties) than bottom 1/3 at NYU (with NYC ties).

rayiner wrote:You can't make sense of the data if you continue to assume that it's just a matter of "Penn > NYU" or "NYU > Penn". It's really a multi-faceted phenomenon.

I think the V10 NYC firms consider NYU a core recruiting school, and hire tons of people from there. However, placement is not just about what happens to the top of the class, but also about what happens to the bottom of the class. NYU is much bigger than Penn and is completely NYC focused. Penn, on the other hand, is smaller and has a couple of substantial legal markets (Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Wilmington, maybe Baltimore) to fall back on. These markets normally recruit mostly from Temple, Villanova, Penn State, but will hire Penn grads with lower grades.

I actually think the "NYU is all about PI" argument is quite disingenuous. NYU wasn't all about PI in 2007 and 2008 when it was basically tied with Penn in big law placement: http://www.top-law-schools.com/archives ... =2&t=61206.

Personally, I would rather be top 1/3 at NYU than top 1/3 at Penn, but I'd rather be bottom 1/3 at Penn (with Philly ties) than bottom 1/3 at NYU (with NYC ties).

One of the best posts on TLS that perfectly sums up legal hiring in general.

People need to realize that what a school can do for the top of the class really isn't all that meaningful--it's what it can do for the bottom. Frankly, even a lot of schools that people bash on here can do a lot for people at the top of the class. For example top 20 percent at Emory, for as much crap as that school takes, is really a pretty good place to be. Honestly, it's a MUCH better place to be than bottom 1/3 at NYU even though many people on here will faint at that suggestion.

Further, the thing about NYC firms, even the one with big class sizes, is that while they don't care about ties and they hire in mass they have absurdly rigid GPA cutoffs. I don't care how big Simpson Thatcher's class size is they aren't going down to a 3.1 at NYU. Same with Skadden, Weil, Paul Weiss, and all the other big mega firms in NYC. Whereas the firms in the smaller markets where Penn has connections will consider a 3.1 Penn student with ties to that area. The same principle applies to other top schools in secondary markets. This is why I really don't like it when people jump at telling someone to go to "the highest school possible" even when it's in the top 14. Legal placement is more nuanced than that if you aren't talking about HYS.

I look forward to this thread becoming at least 5 pages long

tfleming09 wrote:I look forward to this thread becoming at least 5 pages long

so, CCP? CCNP? CC PN? CC PNND?

drbarry987 wrote:I saw a lot of threads that made it seem like CCN weren't a tier and that NYU was much closer to Penn for NYC big firm jobs. A lot of this I think was sparked by the Penn > NYU on that NLJ250 list. Some people were saying "CCP." But then I started looking at the 2012 summer associate data thread regarding this summer's raw placement at some of the very best corporate law firms in US, and now I'm a bit confused:

Skadden
NYU 10
Penn 1

Cravath
NYU 13
Penn 1

Davis Polk
NYU 26
Penn 2

According to LSN, NYU has a 1L class size of 476 and Penn has a 1L class size of 249 so we definitely need to account for that. Other difference could be self selection, but are Penn students really opting out of SAs at Cravath? Just kind of confused by the disparity between the NLJ chart and this 2012 SA raw data.

Judging by the NLJ charts isn't a great idea - there are innumerable that come into play in doing so. For a much better look at how firms view the individual schools, you need to look at how deep in each school's class particular firms tend to give offers.

rayiner wrote:You can't make sense of the data if you continue to assume that it's just a matter of "Penn > NYU" or "NYU > Penn". It's really a multi-faceted phenomenon.

I think the V10 NYC firms consider NYU a core recruiting school, and hire tons of people from there. However, placement is not just about what happens to the top of the class, but also about what happens to the bottom of the class. NYU is much bigger than Penn and is completely NYC focused. Penn, on the other hand, is smaller and has a couple of substantial legal markets (Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Wilmington, maybe Baltimore) to fall back on. These markets normally recruit mostly from Temple, Villanova, Penn State, but will hire Penn grads with lower grades.

I actually think the "NYU is all about PI" argument is quite disingenuous. NYU wasn't all about PI in 2007 and 2008 when it was basically tied with Penn in big law placement: http://www.top-law-schools.com/archives ... =2&t=61206.

Personally, I would rather be top 1/3 at NYU than top 1/3 at Penn, but I'd rather be bottom 1/3 at Penn (with Philly ties) than bottom 1/3 at NYU (with NYC ties).

what about bottom third at NYU with Chicago/smaller midwest market ties?

Doesn't NYU employ a ton of its grads? That may account for their recent increase in PI jobs, if their calculated that way by the school

rayiner wrote:You can't make sense of the data if you continue to assume that it's just a matter of "Penn > NYU" or "NYU > Penn". It's really a multi-faceted phenomenon.

I think the V10 NYC firms consider NYU a core recruiting school, and hire tons of people from there. However, placement is not just about what happens to the top of the class, but also about what happens to the bottom of the class. NYU is much bigger than Penn and is completely NYC focused. Penn, on the other hand, is smaller and has a couple of substantial legal markets (Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Wilmington, maybe Baltimore) to fall back on. These markets normally recruit mostly from Temple, Villanova, Penn State, but will hire Penn grads with lower grades.

I actually think the "NYU is all about PI" argument is quite disingenuous. NYU wasn't all about PI in 2007 and 2008 when it was basically tied with Penn in big law placement: http://www.top-law-schools.com/archives ... =2&t=61206.

Personally, I would rather be top 1/3 at NYU than top 1/3 at Penn, but I'd rather be bottom 1/3 at Penn (with Philly ties) than bottom 1/3 at NYU (with NYC ties).

Credited, but w/o Philly ties, bottom 1/3rd at Penn isn't really going to be that much better than NYU. Bottom 1/3rd at either is going to be tough and getting a job from there is going to rely a lot more on whatever else you bring to the table in terms of WE/interviewing skills/hustle than what school you go to. It's highly unlikely that the bottom 1/3rd people who strike out at NYU would have magically gotten a job just by going to Penn or the bottom 1/3rd people at Penn who snagged SA's wouldn't have gotten them at NYU. If you have Philly ties, Penn is probably a safer bet. If not, it's probably a wash and at least at NYU, you have a better shot at the top firms (which aren't just good because of prestige, but because many of them have the largest SA classes) if you manage to get above median grades.

Is it just Philly ties that give Penn the edge, or PA in general? I've got ties to Pittsburgh, and wouldn't mind working K&L Gates or ReedSmith, though NYC is definitely my top choice. Would Penn still have an edge here?

moonman157 wrote:Is it just Philly ties that give Penn the edge, or PA in general? I've got ties to Pittsburgh, and wouldn't mind working K&L Gates or ReedSmith, though NYC is definitely my top choice. Would Penn still have an edge here?

PA, DE in general. People understand that folks whose family is in Pittsburgh might want to work in the bigger legal market in Philly.

chasgoose wrote:Credited, but w/o Philly ties, bottom 1/3rd at Penn isn't really going to be that much better than NYU. Bottom 1/3rd at either is going to be tough and getting a job from there is going to rely a lot more on whatever else you bring to the table in terms of WE/interviewing skills/hustle than what school you go to. It's highly unlikely that the bottom 1/3rd people who strike out at NYU would have magically gotten a job just by going to Penn or the bottom 1/3rd people at Penn who snagged SA's wouldn't have gotten them at NYU. If you have Philly ties, Penn is probably a safer bet. If not, it's probably a wash and at least at NYU, you have a better shot at the top firms (which aren't just good because of prestige, but because many of them have the largest SA classes) if you manage to get above median grades.

I'm trying to understand what your point is here. Rayiner's point was never that bottom 1/3 at NYU or Penn is better than the bottom 1/3 at the other. In fact, that was his entire point. The whole idea of one school within the top 14 being better than the other is an oversimplification of legal placement. Bottom 1/3 at NYU, regardless of ties, IS more likely to strike out than bottom 1/3 at Penn with Philly ties because bottom 1/3 at NYU is below the cutoff for large NYC firms, and that person is not at a school that has connections with a smaller legal market. People have to understand that regardless of how big Weil etc. class is, they simply will NOT drop below a certain GPA level--period. If you don't have high grades you really are in a situation where you need to target firms in your home market. Going to a school that does not place in that market and that doesn't have a reputation that's so phenomenal that it overshadows that lack of a connection (i.e HYS) is a problem.

And as far as your point about a "better shot at the top firms because of the largest SA classes" if you manage to get above median grades---that's an entirely asinine point. ALL schools give you a great shot at those firms if you manage to get above median grades. I mean, whether a school can place its top grads into firm jobs is an almost useless way of comparing schools. If you strike out with above median grades at Penn or NYU the school has nothing to do with it. As Rayiner said, it's not what a school can do for the top of the class that matters, but what it can do for the bottom. What NYU can do for the bottom of its class really isn't any different than what Penn can barring ties to Philly/Wilmington--in which case Penn can do more.

rayiner wrote:I actually think the "NYU is all about PI" argument is quite disingenuous. NYU wasn't all about PI in 2007 and 2008 when it was basically tied with Penn in big law placement: http://www.top-law-schools.com/archives ... =2&t=61206.

Just looking for some clarification here. Are you saying the talk about NYU PI bias is disingenuous because it previously placed higher in biglaw (about the same as Penn in the years you mention) and didn't focus on the PI contingency of students to justify their placement power during that period? If that is the case, I don't think that the link you added does much to tell us about any presence or lack of PI bias at NYU since the argument would have been more along the lines of "NYU placed the same as Penn in NLJ firms these years, despite having a significant PI bias (would have placed more than Penn without the bias)". Can totally see how the NYU PI schtick is likely overblown / exaggerated (especially by NYU itself), but I don't see how this does much to show whether or not it's there at all / how significant it is if it is a real factor.

I don't entirely understand why people find it hard to believe that NYU could likely have a non-insignificant PI bias compared to schools not generally as well known for their PI support / student body. Just this cycle we had someone considering Penn Levy v NYU for PI (understandably, the reaction was "Lolwut? Go to Penn" but not everyone consults the TLS interwebz when making these decisions). It doesn't seem weird to me that NYU would likely snag more PI-dedicated folk than other T14 schools without the same PI rep.

Anyways, both awesome schools. I just don't understand why everyone is so quick to grab their guns whenever someone suggests that a school with a dedicated PI infrastructure and resources and reputation for a more PI-oriented student body probably grabs more PI-dedicated students than schools without those qualities or possessing those qualities to a lesser degree.

edited: link to aforementioned Levy v NYU for PI thread in case anyone cares: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=182515

indigomachine wrote:

rayiner wrote:I actually think the "NYU is all about PI" argument is quite disingenuous. NYU wasn't all about PI in 2007 and 2008 when it was basically tied with Penn in big law placement: http://www.top-law-schools.com/archives ... =2&t=61206.

Just looking for some clarification here. Are you saying the talk about NYU PI bias is disingenuous because it previously placed higher in biglaw (about the same as Penn in the years you mention) and didn't focus on the PI contingency of students to justify their placement power during that period? If that is the case, I don't think that the link you added does much to tell us about any presence or lack of PI bias at NYU since the argument would have been more along the lines of "NYU placed the same as Penn in NLJ firms these years, despite having a significant PI bias (would have placed more than Penn without the bias)". Can totally see how the NYU PI schtick is likely overblown / exaggerated (especially by NYU itself), but I don't see how this does much to show whether or not it's there at all / how significant it is if it is a real factor.

I don't entirely understand why people find it hard to believe that NYU could likely have a non-insignificant PI bias compared to schools not generally as well known for their PI support / student body. Just this cycle we had someone considering Penn Levy v NYU for PI (understandably, the reaction was "Lolwut? Go to Penn" but not everyone consults the TLS interwebz when making these decisions). It doesn't seem weird to me that NYU would likely snag more PI-dedicated folk than other T14 schools without the same PI rep.

Anyways, both awesome schools. I just don't understand why everyone is so quick to grab their guns whenever someone suggests that a school with a dedicated PI infrastructure and resources and reputation for a more PI-oriented student body probably grabs more PI-dedicated students than schools without those qualities or possessing those qualities to a lesser degree.

edited: link to aforementioned Levy v NYU for PI thread in case anyone cares: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=182515

The point is that the differential between Penn and NYU went from basically zero to 17%. Presumably, 17% more of the class didn't choose to go into PI from NYU's C/O 2011 class than NYU's C/O 2007/2008 classes.

In fairness, NYU's PI placement was pretty significant even for the class of 2008:

http://www.law.nyu.edu/careerservices/e ... /index.htm

Contrast that with Penn, which never really got in to the whole PI thing:

https://www.law.upenn.edu/careers/emplo ... istics.php

moonman157 wrote:Is it just Philly ties that give Penn the edge, or PA in general? I've got ties to Pittsburgh, and wouldn't mind working K&L Gates or ReedSmith, though NYC is definitely my top choice. Would Penn still have an edge here?

I mean, the point is really that you have a back-up market. Pittburgh, Philly and Wilmington are all going to find it plausible that you might really come to work there, and NYC doesn't care, so that's really all upside for you.

rayiner wrote:

indigomachine wrote:

rayiner wrote:I actually think the "NYU is all about PI" argument is quite disingenuous. NYU wasn't all about PI in 2007 and 2008 when it was basically tied with Penn in big law placement: http://www.top-law-schools.com/archives ... =2&t=61206.

Just looking for some clarification here. Are you saying the talk about NYU PI bias is disingenuous because it previously placed higher in biglaw (about the same as Penn in the years you mention) and didn't focus on the PI contingency of students to justify their placement power during that period? If that is the case, I don't think that the link you added does much to tell us about any presence or lack of PI bias at NYU since the argument would have been more along the lines of "NYU placed the same as Penn in NLJ firms these years, despite having a significant PI bias (would have placed more than Penn without the bias)". Can totally see how the NYU PI schtick is likely overblown / exaggerated (especially by NYU itself), but I don't see how this does much to show whether or not it's there at all / how significant it is if it is a real factor.

I don't entirely understand why people find it hard to believe that NYU could likely have a non-insignificant PI bias compared to schools not generally as well known for their PI support / student body. Just this cycle we had someone considering Penn Levy v NYU for PI (understandably, the reaction was "Lolwut? Go to Penn" but not everyone consults the TLS interwebz when making these decisions). It doesn't seem weird to me that NYU would likely snag more PI-dedicated folk than other T14 schools without the same PI rep.

Anyways, both awesome schools. I just don't understand why everyone is so quick to grab their guns whenever someone suggests that a school with a dedicated PI infrastructure and resources and reputation for a more PI-oriented student body probably grabs more PI-dedicated students than schools without those qualities or possessing those qualities to a lesser degree.

edited: link to aforementioned Levy v NYU for PI thread in case anyone cares: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=182515

The point is that the differential between Penn and NYU went from basically zero to 17%. Presumably, 17% more of the class didn't choose to go into PI from NYU's C/O 2011 class than NYU's C/O 2007/2008 classes.

Sure, but every law school has been hurting in private placement. In theory, if there was a significant group of PI people are NYU who could've otherwise gotten NLJ the gap could be significantly smaller than 17% (and NYU could have likely also outplaced Penn in the years you mentioned if that were the case).

I'm not trying to say that NYU NLJ placement power is presently greater than Penn's or that the PI bias claims aren't overblown, but NYU's PI focus/rep and strength is not really a new thing circa-ITE (see: Tiago's post for partial evidence of this). Given NYU's strength in this area, it should not be a huge surprise that least some PI bias likely exists and that it has a non-insignificant impact on NYU private placement.

IAFG wrote:

moonman157 wrote:Is it just Philly ties that give Penn the edge, or PA in general? I've got ties to Pittsburgh, and wouldn't mind working K&L Gates or ReedSmith, though NYC is definitely my top choice. Would Penn still have an edge here?

I mean, the point is really that you have a back-up market. Pittburgh, Philly and Wilmington are all going to find it plausible that you might really come to work there, and NYC doesn't care, so that's really all upside for you.

IAFG, would you say that someone who's backup market is not generally targeted from NYU is in a better/worse/or the same situation as someone who is NY or bust and how does this person compare to a Penn student with PA ties? Backup market being Chicago (backup, backup, backup being Indy).

Tiago Splitter wrote:In fairness, NYU's PI placement was pretty significant even for the class of 2008:

http://www.law.nyu.edu/careerservices/e ... /index.htm

Contrast that with Penn, which never really got in to the whole PI thing:

https://www.law.upenn.edu/careers/emplo ... istics.php

For class of 2008, 75% of NYU went into law firms, versus 76% of Penn.

rayiner wrote:

Tiago Splitter wrote:In fairness, NYU's PI placement was pretty significant even for the class of 2008:

http://www.law.nyu.edu/careerservices/e ... /index.htm

Contrast that with Penn, which never really got in to the whole PI thing:

https://www.law.upenn.edu/careers/emplo ... istics.php

For class of 2008, 75% of NYU went into law firms, versus 76% of Penn.

So then in 2008 the answer to the question of "who can better place people at the bottom of the class?" was NYU.

Actually the 75% figure NYU uses is based only on employed graduates, so nevermind.