Biglaw lawyer taking questions Forum

[Anonymous User]

2) There's schools specific that we shoot for, and there's a base level one that we just don't go under regardless of school. So for a top school, we'll take people all the way down to the unofficial cutoff, but for lower ranked schools the gpas/class ranks required will go up.

Does this mean your firm will not interview candidates from certain schools, regardless of grades/rank? Is this de rigueur for most Big Law firms? I'm #1 at a school ranked around 100 and I was told my grades would get me *some* bites from elite firms, even those that typically don't hire outside of the T30. I'm starting to think I have been grossly misinformed. . .

[winner21]

Hey thanks for coming on the boards and sharing your knowledge. I know you don't have a crystal ball or anything but I'll be graduating college in 2011 and I'll be a law graduate in 2014. By the time my OCI rolls around what do you think the market will look like by then? Do you think the salaries will have gone waaay down and overall be a blood bath for people like me? Is it worth even going to law school at this point. I would love to here your thoughts.

Also, if you give any insight on the 2016 presidential election that would be great.

And what school are you going to? Peoples College of Law! Hahahaha.

[D. H2Oman]

From your 2001 gateway PC to god's ears.

[pjo]

Dwaterman86 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Hey thanks for coming on the boards and sharing your knowledge. I know you don't have a crystal ball or anything but I'll be graduating college in 2011 and I'll be a law graduate in 2014. By the time my OCI rolls around what do you think the market will look like by then? Do you think the salaries will have gone waaay down and overall be a blood bath for people like me? Is it worth even going to law school at this point. I would love to here your thoughts.


Also, if you give any insight on the 2016 presidential election that would be great.


And what school are you going to? Peoples College of Law! Hahahaha.

chill out man, I ask lawyers this a lot at informational interviews. It not like they can say exactly how things will be that far into the future but they're well aware of trends and can advise of such especially within their own firm

[D. H2Oman]

Dwaterman86 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Hey thanks for coming on the boards and sharing your knowledge. I know you don't have a crystal ball or anything but I'll be graduating college in 2011 and I'll be a law graduate in 2014. By the time my OCI rolls around what do you think the market will look like by then? Do you think the salaries will have gone waaay down and overall be a blood bath for people like me? Is it worth even going to law school at this point. I would love to here your thoughts.


Also, if you give any insight on the 2016 presidential election that would be great.


And what school are you going to? Peoples College of Law! Hahahaha.

chill out man, I ask lawyers this a lot at informational interviews. It not like they can say exactly how things will be that far into the future but they're well aware of trends and can advise of such especially within their own firm

They have no idea what OCI is going to look like for the class of 2014.

[amped]

Dwaterman86 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Hey thanks for coming on the boards and sharing your knowledge. I know you don't have a crystal ball or anything but I'll be graduating college in 2011 and I'll be a law graduate in 2014. By the time my OCI rolls around what do you think the market will look like by then? Do you think the salaries will have gone waaay down and overall be a blood bath for people like me? Is it worth even going to law school at this point. I would love to here your thoughts.

Also, if you give any insight on the 2016 presidential election that would be great.

And what school are you going to? Peoples College of Law! Hahahaha.

chill out man, I ask lawyers this a lot at informational interviews. It not like they can say exactly how things will be that far into the future but they're well aware of trends and can advise of such especially within their own firm

They have no idea what OCI is going to look like for the class of 2014.

+1. Some firms still don't even really know how it will turn out this year for Class of 2011.

[Anonymous User]

do biglaw firms take candidates from schools like Yeshiva, American, George Mason seriously? Or are they looked down upon and basically have no chance?

[3rdYrLitigator]

Hey thanks for coming on the boards and sharing your knowledge. I know you don't have a crystal ball or anything but I'll be graduating college in 2011 and I'll be a law graduate in 2014. By the time my OCI rolls around what do you think the market will look like by then? Do you think the salaries will have gone waaay down and overall be a blood bath for people like me? Is it worth even going to law school at this point. I would love to here your thoughts.

It's way too far in the future to have any real idea of what things will look like. That said, I think Biglaw is going to be changed for a number of years. I think in general, the industry will be smaller and there will be more midsized/small firms instead, but I could be totally wrong.

1. Is there any chance for a mid-40s second career law school graduate to enter BigLaw?

2. Does a part-time law school study (with a full time job and therefore no summer law internship possibility) preclude a BigLaw career?

Thank you!

1. Yes, I know of some.

2. Yes, I know of some as well.

However, I don't know any who are both, but I'd think it's possible.

Does this mean your firm will not interview candidates from certain schools, regardless of grades/rank? Is this de rigueur for most Big Law firms? I'm #1 at a school ranked around 100 and I was told my grades would get me *some* bites from elite firms, even those that typically don't hire outside of the T30. I'm starting to think I have been grossly misinformed. . .

I think you're misreading my reply, it was in response to GPAs not school rankings. That said, right now it's probably pretty hard to get in the door when firms are pulling out of OCI at schools they generally go to. #1 and I'd be surprised if you don't get any bites, but it also depends on the market.

do biglaw firms take candidates from schools like Yeshiva, American, George Mason seriously? Or are they looked down upon and basically have no chance?

What's with the insecure Cardozo grads? This is the second Yeshiva question on this thread. There are biglaw associates from all of those schools.

[Sovereign]

3rd year, I would like to start by thanking you for taking time out of your busy schedule to answer our questions.

That being said, I have a question about something you alluded to earlier:

Depends on what you want. If you absolutely have to have biglaw right out of law schools, maybe you should reconsider, but if that's your goal for law schools, it probably isn't the right career move anyway. Just because you don't start out there doesn't mean you can't end up there as well

The general consensus on TLS is that if you don't make Biglaw out of college, it is a slim to none chance you will make it at all (granted some people take a year or two off to clerk for a judge before accepting an offer with a firm). Hence, I was confused by the above statement; if you could shed some light on the subject of lateraling into Biglaw without prior Biglaw experience (if such a thing even occurs), I am sure many people would appreciate it.

god your prose is annoying

[Anonymous User]

Are the big firms starting to recruit solely from the T-14s now? Which schools are they dropping out of OCI from and which schools are safe from having firms drop out of their OCI?

[Anonymous User]

do biglaw firms recruit LLMs? What's the best way to get biglaw through the LLM route?

[Anonymous User]

Do you have to work on major holidays? I realize this may be a silly question, but have you ever had to be in the office on Thanksgiving or Christmas?

[3rdYrLitigator]

Are the big firms starting to recruit solely from the T-14s now? Which schools are they dropping out of OCI from and which schools are safe from having firms drop out of their OCI?

I think most firms are still recruiting at strong regionals. My firm hasn't dropped out of any OCIs. The firms that pull out of OCI seem to mostly be pulling out of lower ranked regionals (with some exceptions of course).

do biglaw firms recruit LLMs? What's the best way to get biglaw through the LLM route?

Probably applying directly with the firm. I don't think there are enough LLMs from a given school every year to have a separate directed recruitment for them, but I really don't know much about it.

Do you have to work on major holidays? I realize this may be a silly question, but have you ever had to be in the office on Thanksgiving or Christmas?

Do "you" in general? Yes, you have to be available. I haven't personally, but it happens.

[Elms]

Just listening in... thanks for taking time to answer questions.

[3rdYrLitigator]

Just listening in... thanks for taking time to answer questions.

Well keep the questions coming.

[kurama20]

It seems that a lot of people think that being a URM gives you a big boost when it comes time to get hired; and that firms and companies are "clamoring" to hire URM candidates. Is this really true? The incredibly low number of URM partners at firms seems to point in the opposite direction (although people say that they are being "poached" for "excellent" in-house positions". I'm wondering if people are overreacting just because they see that their school has a diversity career fair. I just don't see firms clamoring to hire URM candidates at the bottom of their class.

[Anonymous User]

It seems that a lot of people think that being a URM gives you a big boost when it comes time to get hired; and that firms and companies are "clamoring" to hire URM candidates. Is this really true? The incredibly low number of URM partners at firms seems to point in the opposite direction (although people say that they are being "poached" for "excellent" in-house positions". I'm wondering if people are overreacting just because they see that their school has a diversity career fair. I just don't see firms clamoring to hire URM candidates at the bottom of their class.

In my experience firms are clamoring to hire URM candidates (I've seen URM candidates come through with significantly lower GPAs than our average hires), though I have a different theory on why you don't see URM partners. I think that it's a tough environment for URMs to stay around in, mostly because there's no network to support associates. It's hard to become partner without partner "champions" and because there are so few minorities in the partner ranks, there aren't that many partner role-model or mentors around. Personally, I think it's going to be a slow process, but just a matter of time before there are more URM partners. However, it's almost unquestioned as far as among associates at Biglaw firms that I've talked to that firms seem to be really trying hard to increase diversity and hire more URMs.

[kurama20]

It seems that a lot of people think that being a URM gives you a big boost when it comes time to get hired; and that firms and companies are "clamoring" to hire URM candidates. Is this really true? The incredibly low number of URM partners at firms seems to point in the opposite direction (although people say that they are being "poached" for "excellent" in-house positions". I'm wondering if people are overreacting just because they see that their school has a diversity career fair. I just don't see firms clamoring to hire URM candidates at the bottom of their class.

In my experience firms are clamoring to hire URM candidates (I've seen URM candidates come through with significantly lower GPAs than our average hires), though I have a different theory on why you don't see URM partners. I think that it's a tough environment for URMs to stay around in, mostly because there's no network to support associates. It's hard to become partner without partner "champions" and because there are so few minorities in the partner ranks, there aren't that many partner role-model or mentors around. Personally, I think it's going to be a slow process, but just a matter of time before there are more URM partners. However, it's almost unquestioned as far as among associates at Biglaw firms that I've talked to that firms seem to be really trying hard to increase diversity and hire more URMs.

OK well I can buy that. Basically they are clamoring to hire them initially because they need to boost their numbers. But when it comes to giving them the chance to become partner, and assisting them there is a serious glass ceiling. Well if that's the case I wonder if that means that for a URM going to say Chicago instead of Harvard or Michigan instead of Columbia will have less of an impact on their chances at the tough jobs than other candidates?

[3rdYrLitigator]

It seems that a lot of people think that being a URM gives you a big boost when it comes time to get hired; and that firms and companies are "clamoring" to hire URM candidates. Is this really true? The incredibly low number of URM partners at firms seems to point in the opposite direction (although people say that they are being "poached" for "excellent" in-house positions". I'm wondering if people are overreacting just because they see that their school has a diversity career fair. I just don't see firms clamoring to hire URM candidates at the bottom of their class.

In my experience firms are clamoring to hire URM candidates (I've seen URM candidates come through with significantly lower GPAs than our average hires), though I have a different theory on why you don't see URM partners. I think that it's a tough environment for URMs to stay around in, mostly because there's no network to support associates. It's hard to become partner without partner "champions" and because there are so few minorities in the partner ranks, there aren't that many partner role-model or mentors around. Personally, I think it's going to be a slow process, but just a matter of time before there are more URM partners. However, it's almost unquestioned as far as among associates at Biglaw firms that I've talked to that firms seem to be really trying hard to increase diversity and hire more URMs.

OK well I can buy that. Basically they are clamoring to hire them initially because they need to boost their numbers. But when it comes to giving them the chance to become partner, and assisting them there is a serious glass ceiling. Well if that's the case I wonder if that means that for a URM going to say Chicago instead of Harvard or Michigan instead of Columbia will have less of an impact on their chances at the tough jobs than other candidates?

Well, I think it's a two way street. I think URM associates may leave because they don't have that support, but the more that leave, the fewer URM partners there will be for future associates. I think there are definitely things the firms could do better, but I also think that it will be hard to develop the critical mass of URM partners if URMs keep leaving because of the lack of URM partners (that sentence is terribly worded, but I think you get the point).

Well, I'd say a URM coming out of any of those schools will be very highly in demand. But for clerkships/academia rank still matters.

[Anonymous User]

I think biglaw can be a great place to start your career even if you don't envision it being a long term plan. It can also be soul-crushing and it's very very difficult to figure out which firm will end up being a great experience, and which one will leave you a complete husk after two years.

What do you mean by soul-crushing? Do you have any particular firms in mind that would be less "soul-crushing"?

Thanks

[3rdYrLitigator]

I think biglaw can be a great place to start your career even if you don't envision it being a long term plan. It can also be soul-crushing and it's very very difficult to figure out which firm will end up being a great experience, and which one will leave you a complete husk after two years.

What do you mean by soul-crushing? Do you have any particular firms in mind that would be less "soul-crushing"?

Thanks

I mean that at times, the hours are brutal and the work can be insanely tedious. There are also partners out there who will take delight in making your life miserable for no other reason than to make your life miserable. I know some firms have reputations for being more brutal hours-wise or having a greater percentage of a-hole partners, but I'd rather not get into specific firms.

[amped]

I think biglaw can be a great place to start your career even if you don't envision it being a long term plan. It can also be soul-crushing and it's very very difficult to figure out which firm will end up being a great experience, and which one will leave you a complete husk after two years.

What do you mean by soul-crushing? Do you have any particular firms in mind that would be less "soul-crushing"?

Thanks

I mean that at times, the hours are brutal and the work can be insanely tedious. There are also partners out there who will take delight in making your life miserable for no other reason than to make your life miserable. I know some firms have reputations for being more brutal hours-wise or having a greater percentage of a-hole partners, but I'd rather not get into specific firms.

What? Why not? Please tell us about specific firms. That would be the most helpful info to come out of this thread. If you want, use the anonymous feature...we want to hear!

[pleasetryagain]

What? Why not? Please tell us about specific firms. That would be the most helpful info to come out of this thread. If you want, use the anonymous feature...we want to hear!

If someone on tls asked you to talk about which of your current profs are assholes would you do it?

[kurama20]

What? Why not? Please tell us about specific firms. That would be the most helpful info to come out of this thread. If you want, use the anonymous feature...we want to hear!

If someone on tls asked you to talk about which of your current profs are assholes would you do it?

Hell yes.

[amped]

What? Why not? Please tell us about specific firms. That would be the most helpful info to come out of this thread. If you want, use the anonymous feature...we want to hear!

If someone on tls asked you to talk about which of your current profs are assholes would you do it?

This is definitely not the same thing. If we were asking him about partners at his firm, that would be more analogous.

To answer the question: I would probably do it if it was to discuss which of all the profs at my school are jerks then yeah I probably would. I obviously wouldn't want to just name the profs I was taking for that semester.