Is it possible to get into corporate law without..... Forum

[Anonymous User]

I am a biglaw associate. I also had a close family member who was a biglaw hiring partner.

You do not need a business background. It certainly does not hurt to have one, but you shouldn't reorder your life or delay law school just to get one.

I'm not much of a gambling man, but I would wager that firms still screen at Penn.

Firms do have hard cutoffs even at CCN- even non-vault firms. Someone who is clearly bottom 10% is an autoding at most firms.

It amazes me how much law students think firms scrutinize every candidate. They interview hundreds of people, receive thousands of resumes, and screen almost wholly on law school grades/prestige.

They don't scrutinize every candidate, but they do scrutinize every serious candidate. At the firms I'm familiar with, hiring partners and hiring personal go through quite a bit of deliberation for candidates who make it to the callback level.

[Veyron]

Firms do have hard cutoffs even at CCN- even non-vault firms. Someone who is clearly bottom 10% is an autoding at most firms.

Grade selectivity =/= v range. Some firms are more grades focused than others. Bottom 10% is almost always an auto-ding to be sure but I've had biglaw hiring partners tell me point blank "we don't have grade cut-offs for Penn." So I know that its more of a sliding scale, at least at some firms. Others have definite cutoffs and there isn't any way around them.

[12AngryMen]

I heard that many of these firms still take into account your LSAT score when deliberating. Is that true?

[Veyron]

I heard that many of these firms still take into account your LSAT score when deliberating. Is that true?

Lol, no.

[D-ROCCA]

Douche.

I asked a simple question.

Y U mad bro? Cuz U gunna get styled on by poli sci majors who don't have your Business Administration Major with dual concentrations in finance and marketing classes?

[ResolutePear]

People hiring business professionals want results. Doesn't matter how much "knowledge" you have if you can't apply it to make some $$$.

It's the reason why people say that the MBA is usually a mid-career degree, either to change or advance a career. Although by the same token, MIT encourages the straight-into-MBA route. But that's a top BS anyways - it's like going to Kelloggs or Wharton.

Each to their own.

[rocon7383]

Douche.

I asked a simple question.

Y U mad bro? Cuz U gunna get styled on by poli sci majors who don't have your Business Administration Major with dual concentrations in finance and marketing classes?

insecure about your degree I see. That's cool.
--ImageRemoved--

[12AngryMen]

I heard that many of these firms still take into account your LSAT score when deliberating. Is that true?

Lol, no.

I got this information from a friend who works biglaw, said that they take into account "believe it or not" your LSAT score, grades, and prestige of university. It all counts. Can anyone confirm or deny this?

[Rule11]

I heard that many of these firms still take into account your LSAT score when deliberating. Is that true?

Lol, no.

I got this information from a friend who works biglaw, said that they take into account "believe it or not" your LSAT score, grades, and prestige of university. It all counts. Can anyone confirm or deny this?

How would a firm know your LSAT score? I suppose if you were a big enough tool to put it on your resume, they might "take that into account" as evidence of a horrid personality and reject you.

edit:

Rocon--no dividends, sorry. For what it's worth, I think you got a negative response because you sounded like you thought your major was particularly impressive. I'm sure you didn't mean to come across that way, but you did.

[Kabuo]

There is a firm that asks for your LSAT score, but I don't remember which. It was on ATL awhile ago, maybe Ropes?

[12AngryMen]

How would a firm know your LSAT score? I suppose if you were a big enough tool to put it on your resume, they might "take that into account" as evidence of a horrid personality and reject you.

edit:

Rocon--no dividends, sorry. For what it's worth, I think you got a negative response because you sounded like you thought your major was particularly impressive. I'm sure you didn't mean to come across that way, but you did.

Are you familiar with the interview process? Or are you naive enough to think that they simply gather all of their information from a piece of paper? Still looking for someone with actual experience to answer this for me.

[timbs4339]

How would a firm know your LSAT score? I suppose if you were a big enough tool to put it on your resume, they might "take that into account" as evidence of a horrid personality and reject you.

edit:

Rocon--no dividends, sorry. For what it's worth, I think you got a negative response because you sounded like you thought your major was particularly impressive. I'm sure you didn't mean to come across that way, but you did.

Are you familiar with the interview process? Or are you naive enough to think that they simply gather all of their information from a piece of paper? Still looking for someone with actual experience to answer this for me.

I've been on dozens of biglaw screening interviews and some callbacks and nobody has ever asked for my LSAT score. I have friends working all up and down the V100 and they haven't been asked either. The only firms that have asked have been small solos and in-house.

[timbs4339]

I am a biglaw associate. I also had a close family member who was a biglaw hiring partner.

You do not need a business background. It certainly does not hurt to have one, but you shouldn't reorder your life or delay law school just to get one.

I'm not much of a gambling man, but I would wager that firms still screen at Penn.

Firms do have hard cutoffs even at CCN- even non-vault firms. Someone who is clearly bottom 10% is an autoding at most firms.

It amazes me how much law students think firms scrutinize every candidate. They interview hundreds of people, receive thousands of resumes, and screen almost wholly on law school grades/prestige.

They don't scrutinize every candidate, but they do scrutinize every serious candidate. At the firms I'm familiar with, hiring partners and hiring personal go through quite a bit of deliberation for candidates who make it to the callback level.

Right, which is why I said screen. At schools like CCN they still have to sort through sometimes upwards of 200 resumes and transcripts at the initial interview, and callbacks are given starting only a day or two after OCI. My friends with the grades to get callbacks and finance experience did seem to get offers from firms that do primarily financial work, but not from firms considered the elite firms (i.e. out of their grade range).

[gwuorbust]

I love when 0Ls debate things they have no idea what they are talking about.

1. LSAT score will not matter for jobs.

2. You can get into BigLaw without any business knowledge.

3. a business background/degree can be helpful if you do it right. law firms aren't going to really give a shit what your undergrad degree is. but for non-law firms where most law students do not apply, a business background can be helpful. I have been applying to VC funds and I believe the ONLY reason I have been getting interviews is because I stress in my emails that I understand business. I know the financial ratios, I can read a balance sheet, income statement, etc., and I have founded a number of companies. Is this something non-business couldn't do? No. But it gives the people I am applying to reason to believe that I am some sort of special snowflake deserving an interview.

[Veyron]

I love when 0Ls debate things they have no idea what they are talking about.

1. LSAT score will not matter for jobs.

2. You can get into BigLaw without any business knowledge.

3. a business background/degree can be helpful if you do it right. law firms aren't going to really give a shit what your undergrad degree is. but for non-law firms where most law students do not apply, a business background can be helpful. I have been applying to VC funds and I believe the ONLY reason I have been getting interviews is because I stress in my emails that I understand business. I know the financial ratios, I can read a balance sheet, income statement, etc., and I have founded a number of companies. Is this something non-business couldn't do? No. But it gives the people I am applying to reason to believe that I am some sort of special snowflake deserving an interview.

This is credited in every particular.

[People's Eyebrow]

Sort of related to OP, if you could only take one law school course for corporate law--which is more practical 1) secured transactions or 2) securities regulations?

[timbs4339]

Sort of related to OP, if you could only take one law school course for corporate law--which is more practical 1) secured transactions or 2) securities regulations?

It really would depend on the professor and how far outside the casebook method they will go. No law school course where you read casebooks and appellate opinions is really practical in terms of what corporate associates do. If you wanted to be a securities litigator, securities regulation would probably be about as helpful as torts for a personal injury lawyer or crim law for a prosecutor.

[Fark-o-vision]

But at ASD they said we were taking the first step on our journey toward an exciting and fulfilling career as an attorney...

[Veyron]

Sort of related to OP, if you could only take one law school course for corporate law--which is more practical 1) secured transactions or 2) securities regulations?

It really would depend on the professor and how far outside the casebook method they will go. No law school course where you read casebooks and appellate opinions is really practical in terms of what corporate associates do. If you wanted to be a securities litigator, securities regulation would probably be about as helpful as torts for a personal injury lawyer or crim law for a prosecutor.

Crim law is a different story. That class teaches you statutory interpretation which is a critical procecutorial skill.

[RVP11]

Or are you naive enough to think that they simply gather all of their information from a piece of paper?

LOL you think firms are hiring private investigators or something? To research potential summer associates?!

[keg411]

Sort of related to OP, if you could only take one law school course for corporate law--which is more practical 1) secured transactions or 2) securities regulations?

I recently asked a corporate biglaw first year this, and the answer I got was Secured Transactions.

[vamedic03]

Sort of related to OP, if you could only take one law school course for corporate law--which is more practical 1) secured transactions or 2) securities regulations?

Is this assuming you've already taken Corporations (or Business Associations or whatever you school calls it)?

[vamedic03]

Sort of related to OP, if you could only take one law school course for corporate law--which is more practical 1) secured transactions or 2) securities regulations?

It really would depend on the professor and how far outside the casebook method they will go. No law school course where you read casebooks and appellate opinions is really practical in terms of what corporate associates do. If you wanted to be a securities litigator, securities regulation would probably be about as helpful as torts for a personal injury lawyer or crim law for a prosecutor.

Crim law is a different story. That class teaches you statutory interpretation which is a critical procecutorial skill.

Crim law really just barely scratches the surface of statutory interpretation.

[RVP11]

Sort of related to OP, if you could only take one law school course for corporate law--which is more practical 1) secured transactions or 2) securities regulations?

I would imagine if you're going to be doing a lot of commercial leasing and such (more common in secondary markets) then Secured Transactions will be more useful.

But for most corporate lawyers, especially in a market like NYC, Securities Regulation is probably more useful.

[pjo]

There is a firm that asks for your LSAT score, but I don't remember which. It was on ATL awhile ago, maybe Ropes?

It was K&L Gates. Here is the article: http://abovethelaw.com/2011/02/kl-gates ... sat-score/

IDK, it was for the Seattle office I believe, and I'm almost positive that's not something they usually ask for