Former V10 Summer Associate, Taking Qs Forum

[nosaj123]

How many SA's were there? whats the lowest school that was represented? (anything below T14?)

Not answering the first question, other than to say that the class was fairly large.

Not answering the second question, either. There were below-T14 law students in the class. Vast majority of summer associates were from CLS, NYU, or HLS.

Without giving specific schools, were there any SAs from Non-T14 schools that aren't feeders into the city (e.g. excluding Fordham in NYC)?

What I'm trying to understand is, does your V10 consider students at schools like Wash U, UM, Emory, William & Mary, etc.?

[Anonymous User]

Without giving specific schools, were there any SAs from Non-T14 schools that aren't feeders into the city (e.g. excluding Fordham in NYC)?

What I'm trying to understand is, does your V10 consider students at schools like Wash U, UM, Emory, William & Mary, etc.?

The V10 considers students from those schools, but like the students from "feeder schools," they have to have stellar credentials. We did have SAs from "non-feeder" schools

[Anonymous User]

Without giving specific schools, were there any SAs from Non-T14 schools that aren't feeders into the city (e.g. excluding Fordham in NYC)?

What I'm trying to understand is, does your V10 consider students at schools like Wash U, UM, Emory, William & Mary, etc.?

The V10 considers students from those schools, but like the students from "feeder schools," they have to have stellar credentials. We did have SAs from "non-feeder" schools

How does undergrad prestige play in hiring at big firms? I always see on these firms websites the partners usually went to top schools for undergrad and law school. If I went to a lesser known undergrad but top law school (HYS) would my chances be the same as someone who went to Ivy for both? Thanks

[Anonymous User]

It's difficult to measure the effect of "undergraduate prestige." For one, there's a significant degree of self-selection involved. You'll find that many top law students went to prestigious undergraduate schools. For another, attending a prestigious undergraduate school provides one with a networking advantage over students who attended non-prestigious universities. Many of one's "prestigious undergraduate school classmates" will go on to occupy very prestigious roles in other companies that could potentially be clients in the future.

I think it's a combination of these things that explains the disparity at the partnership level. Things are definitely beginning to change, though. I'm noticing that clients are demanding much more from firms than mere membership of a partner in the "old boys club." Whether this will significantly change things is unclear. For example, I can't fathom the links between Sullivan & Cromwell and Wall Street changing any time soon.

In terms of hiring, I think undergraduate degree can have an effect. Some evaluation forms might ask about it. On the non-quantifiable side, since there are more lawyers at top firms with top undergraduate pedigrees, it's more likely that the interviewer from a top university will go to the same school, thus facilitating the interview conversation. This would increase the chance of a callback as opposed to the interviewer who has nothing in common with the interviewee.

At the end of the day, I know people from rather unknown universities who are working at every elite law firm. It's definitely not a black mark or anything. Grades will be most determinative at the end of the day.

[Kohinoor]

Without giving specific schools, were there any SAs from Non-T14 schools that aren't feeders into the city (e.g. excluding Fordham in NYC)?

What I'm trying to understand is, does your V10 consider students at schools like Wash U, UM, Emory, William & Mary, etc.?

The V10 considers students from those schools, but like the students from "feeder schools," they have to have stellar credentials. We did have SAs from "non-feeder" schools

How does undergrad prestige play in hiring at big firms? I always see on these firms websites the partners usually went to top schools for undergrad and law school. If I went to a lesser known undergrad but top law school (HYS) would my chances be the same as someone who went to Ivy for both? Thanks

Just as an anecdote, I had several interviewers who had attended both my undergrad and law school. You probably lose to someone with that connection in a tie. It's a great talking point and I get the sense that people like to try to maintain/enlarge the community of people at the firm who share their alma mater.

[Anonymous User]

Just as an anecdote, I had several interviewers who had attended both my undergrad and law school. You probably lose to someone with that connection in a tie. It's a great talking point and I get the sense that people like to try to maintain/enlarge the community of people at the firm who share their alma mater.

OP here. This is absolutely correct. And for some alma maters, the common ground can be quite significant. Duke is an example. Strong community. Great camaraderie because of Duke basketball. Many talking points.

[TatteredDignity]

I know this thread is specific to V10, but in general, how relevant is UGPA in getting callbacks/offers? Will top grades and the ability to have a good convo with the interviewer overcome a poor undergrad record?

[Anonymous User]

I know this thread is specific to V10, but in general, how relevant is UGPA in getting callbacks/offers? Will top grades and the ability to have a good convo with the interviewer overcome a poor undergrad record?

My firm never saw my undergraduate transcript. I don't know how much having latin honors on the resume counts, but I don't think it's a big deal at all. You're fine. In the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't matter.

[vamedic03]

I know this thread is specific to V10, but in general, how relevant is UGPA in getting callbacks/offers? Will top grades and the ability to have a good convo with the interviewer overcome a poor undergrad record?

(1) Why anonymous?

(2) In all my screening interviews (except for Cravath) and callbacks, I didn't have a single person ask about my undergrad transcript or GPA

[TatteredDignity]

You're right, that was an abuse of the anonymous function. No particular reason.

Both of your responses are very reassuring. I have a terrible GPA, a great LSAT, and I was just hoping that come this fall, I'll somewhat be leaving that GPA behind me. Sounds as though I will to some extent (unless I get Cravath ).

Thanks!

[ClayDavis]

How do you feel about the fact that your V10 bonus is getting boned by several unprestigious V100s this bonus season? More specifically, how do you feel about the extra ~200-400 hours you will be working next year compared to other non-V10/non-NYC BIGLAW associates, only to get a shitty lockstep bonus?

I realize I sound like a dick, but I really want to know how that makes you feel. It used to be that the V10 would give the best bonuses - no more. Given that, as they say, you can't eat prestige, what will make the longer hours worth it for you? Exit options? Assuming you don't make partner, a safe assumption, what do you see as your first job after your V10?

[Anonymous User]

I can't answer this question other than to say that none of the bonus news worries me.

Regarding partnership and exit-options, I would like to stay as long as I can at my firm. I don't want to work at any other firm. I am open to in-house, but it has to be attractive enough a deal. Ideally, I'll be partner-track. Realistically, the dominant trend among partnership elections this year has been toward foreign offices. If you look solely in the HQ market of these V10s, you'll see that maybe 1 or 2 partners were elected (which makes Cravath's election of just one person not a big deal, since they only have two offices). I think, if I can help establish a practice for my firm in an emerging economy, my partnership prospects will be significantly better.

Ideally, though, I'd like to stick it out here in the US and see what I can do. I don't know what'll happen. I'm young and naive. But I'll work hard for the brass ring.

[homestyle28]

Were there unexpected upsides or down in your experience? If so, can you explain?

[vamedic03]

How do you feel about the fact that your V10 bonus is getting boned by several unprestigious V100s this bonus season? More specifically, how do you feel about the extra ~200-400 hours you will be working next year compared to other non-V10/non-NYC BIGLAW associates, only to get a shitty lockstep bonus?

I realize I sound like a dick, but I really want to know how that makes you feel. It used to be that the V10 would give the best bonuses - no more. Given that, as they say, you can't eat prestige, what will make the longer hours worth it for you? Exit options? Assuming you don't make partner, a safe assumption, what do you see as your first job after your V10?

Not OP... but, personally, I'd take the no bonus/minimal bonus of a DC V10 or low bonuses at a NYC V10 rather than massive layoffs at non-V10's.

[pasteurizedmilk]

You're right, that was an abuse of the anonymous function. No particular reason.

Both of your responses are very reassuring. I have a terrible GPA, a great LSAT, and I was just hoping that come this fall, I'll somewhat be leaving that GPA behind me. Sounds as though I will to some extent (unless I get Cravath ).

Thanks!

Ropes and Gray cares too. A lot.

[uvahooo]

I love how all 0ls are posting as if they understand grading in law school.

hahahaha..... (evil laugh) wait until law school then post back

made the same sort of mistake when I was a 0l.

[Anonymous User]

Were there unexpected upsides or down in your experience? If so, can you explain?

I had to take the evening to think about this.

Unexpected downside: Perhaps the one thing that made me really inefficient was just worrying. I rarely received criticism for my work, and I never knew where I stood with the powers that be. If I handed in an assignment to a partner, I rarely received feedback. If I did receive feedback, nothing was ever negative. I know that sounds like I should be patting myself on the back, but I really shouldn't. I was a summer, my work product is guaranteed not perfect, and I wasn't (and am not) even close to being the smartest guy in my summer class. At best, I'm a grinder (which is awfully surprising given how ADD I am).

And I hope this changes when I become a regular associate. I want to know when I screw up, so I know when to start looking for another job. But even aside from that, having good constructive feedback is useful just for honing my skills as a lawyer. I know I make mistakes. I want to know what they are and how to fix them.

Unexpected upside: A few of my close friends and relatives are partners at other big firms, and their single biggest advice was to go to a boutique. I went against the grain because I wanted a good firm name on my resume (at the very least) and to make it as a partner at a big firm (at the very most). I was beginning to regret my decision as the summer came closer, as I heard the nightmares of non-stop doc review.

But I was pleasantly surprised at how much responsibility I was given. And as a junior associate, I'm sure that while I will inevitably be doing doc review, it will be for the minority of my time, and that I am expected to "graduate" from that level by proving myself at other tasks. Really, if you're doing doc review at least 70% of the time and you're beyond your first year, it's probably a sign that the firm is pushing you out (and yes, I know of many stories where firms will hammer associates they want out by inundating them with menial tasks; my firm hasn't done it, as far as I know, but I know a particular V20 that engaged in this practice).

In sum: Completely happy with my decision. I think I'll only get more responsibility as a junior and later, as a mid-level, if I continue to do good work and build my reputation as that guy who is always available and ready, willing, and able to do work.

If there's one thing I want to emphasize the most, it's that you have to focus on building and maintaining a good reputation.

[homestyle28]

Were there unexpected upsides or down in your experience? If so, can you explain?

I had to take the evening to think about this.

Unexpected downside: Perhaps the one thing that made me really inefficient was just worrying. I rarely received criticism for my work, and I never knew where I stood with the powers that be. If I handed in an assignment to a partner, I rarely received feedback. If I did receive feedback, nothing was ever negative. I know that sounds like I should be patting myself on the back, but I really shouldn't. I was a summer, my work product is guaranteed not perfect, and I wasn't (and am not) even close to being the smartest guy in my summer class. At best, I'm a grinder (which is awfully surprising given how ADD I am).

And I hope this changes when I become a regular associate. I want to know when I screw up, so I know when to start looking for another job. But even aside from that, having good constructive feedback is useful just for honing my skills as a lawyer. I know I make mistakes. I want to know what they are and how to fix them.

Unexpected upside: A few of my close friends and relatives are partners at other big firms, and their single biggest advice was to go to a boutique. I went against the grain because I wanted a good firm name on my resume (at the very least) and to make it as a partner at a big firm (at the very most). I was beginning to regret my decision as the summer came closer, as I heard the nightmares of non-stop doc review.

But I was pleasantly surprised at how much responsibility I was given. And as a junior associate, I'm sure that while I will inevitably be doing doc review, it will be for the minority of my time, and that I am expected to "graduate" from that level by proving myself at other tasks. Really, if you're doing doc review at least 70% of the time and you're beyond your first year, it's probably a sign that the firm is pushing you out (and yes, I know of many stories where firms will hammer associates they want out by inundating them with menial tasks; my firm hasn't done it, as far as I know, but I know a particular V20 that engaged in this practice).

In sum: Completely happy with my decision. I think I'll only get more responsibility as a junior and later, as a mid-level, if I continue to do good work and build my reputation as that guy who is always available and ready, willing, and able to do work.

If there's one thing I want to emphasize the most, it's that you have to focus on building and maintaining a good reputation.

Thanks for the time and thoughtfulness here. Seriously.

[Blindmelon]

Unexpected downside:[/b] Perhaps the one thing that made me really inefficient was just worrying. I rarely received criticism for my work, and I never knew where I stood with the powers that be. If I handed in an assignment to a partner, I rarely received feedback. If I did receive feedback, nothing was ever negative. I know that sounds like I should be patting myself on the back, but I really shouldn't. I was a summer, my work product is guaranteed not perfect, and I wasn't (and am not) even close to being the smartest guy in my summer class. At best, I'm a grinder (which is awfully surprising given how ADD I am).

And I hope this changes when I become a regular associate. I want to know when I screw up, so I know when to start looking for another job. But even aside from that, having good constructive feedback is useful just for honing my skills as a lawyer. I know I make mistakes. I want to know what they are and how to fix them.

Unexpected upside: A few of my close friends and relatives are partners at other big firms, and their single biggest advice was to go to a boutique. I went against the grain because I wanted a good firm name on my resume (at the very least) and to make it as a partner at a big firm (at the very most). I was beginning to regret my decision as the summer came closer, as I heard the nightmares of non-stop doc review.

But I was pleasantly surprised at how much responsibility I was given. And as a junior associate, I'm sure that while I will inevitably be doing doc review, it will be for the minority of my time, and that I am expected to "graduate" from that level by proving myself at other tasks. Really, if you're doing doc review at least 70% of the time and you're beyond your first year, it's probably a sign that the firm is pushing you out (and yes, I know of many stories where firms will hammer associates they want out by inundating them with menial tasks; my firm hasn't done it, as far as I know, but I know a particular V20 that engaged in this practice).

In sum: Completely happy with my decision. I think I'll only get more responsibility as a junior and later, as a mid-level, if I continue to do good work and build my reputation as that guy who is always available and ready, willing, and able to do work.

If there's one thing I want to emphasize the most, it's that you have to focus on building and maintaining a good reputation.

Echo the thanks. This makes me feel a little better.
I chose a huge V20 (prestigious in the market, not much so outside) over a regionally-strong mid-size market-rate firm and have been really uneasy about the decision given fear over no responsibility/upward mobility - I ultimately chose the V20 because I liked the culture/atmosphere more. Anyway, long story short, its good to hear people say they've had good experiences working at the bigger firms.

[Anonymous User]

I think this is more of a firm specific thing, so I offer no guarantee that your firm operates the same way.

[Blindmelon]

I think this is more of a firm specific thing, so I offer no guarantee that your firm operates the same way.

Of course, but read ATL for more than 20 minutes and you'll think that every bigfirm is absolute hell. Its just refreshing to read positive experiences, rather than people complaining. I just had to listen to an old friend at Sidley explain to me how much he hated his life for like an hour. It was really awful.

[pasteurizedmilk]

I love how all 0ls are posting as if they understand grading in law school.

hahahaha..... (evil laugh) wait until law school then post back

made the same sort of mistake when I was a 0l.

Do you have any grades back?

[megaTTTron]

I think this is more of a firm specific thing, so I offer no guarantee that your firm operates the same way.

Of course, but read ATL for more than 20 minutes and you'll think that every bigfirm is absolute hell. Its just refreshing to read positive experiences, rather than people complaining. I just had to listen to an old friend at Sidley explain to me how much he hated his life for like an hour. It was really awful.

tcr. although, fwiw i think the unhappy ones are more vocal.

[run26.2]

Unexpected upside: A few of my close friends and relatives are partners at other big firms, and their single biggest advice was to go to a boutique. I went against the grain because I wanted a good firm name on my resume (at the very least) and to make it as a partner at a big firm (at the very most). I was beginning to regret my decision as the summer came closer, as I heard the nightmares of non-stop doc review.

Your whole post was full of good stuff.

Why were the friends and family recommending a boutique so highly?

[Anonymous User]

Why were the friends and family recommending a boutique so highly?

One relative, a partner at a V100, told me how his firm viewed junior associates: Just people who did grunt work and who had almost no chance at advancing at the firm. All of my friends and relatives just told me that boutiques provided better experience early on in one's career than a megafirm.

Even if I had listened to them, it's not like I'd have had a choice. I don't think my credentials were good enough for the boutiques everyone raves about. But I also don't truly believe that boutiques necessarily provide better experience. On average, they probably do. But so much is contingent on the nature of the case, the staffing, the way assignments are distributed, whether the firm is oversubscribed, etc. If the particular megafirm you join staffs cases leanly, then you have an excellent chance at acquiring the same sort of experience you would acquire at a boutique. If, on the other hand, the megafirm treats each case as having a massive army of lawyers in a massive hierarchy, with work going up and down the ladder, then odds are you will be doing more menial tasks as a junior associate.