Top Law Schools

1Ls: how scared are you?

Most of my target firms had low offer rates and cut their classes in 1/2 or 1/3.

At Mayer-Chicago, my landing pad this year

2008 2L SAs: 71
2009 2L SAs: 44 (Offers Made: 33)
2010 2L SAs: 11

Jeez. The judge I worked for last summer had 6 interns.

K&E Chicago is down to 32 this year
Jenner Chicago is down to 16
Sidley is down to 20
Winston & Strawn: 22

So, christ, total for the "Chicago 5": 101. That's a lot worse than I thought.

Add some of the other big V100 firms with offices in Chicago:

Skadden: 9 ( )
Latham: 9
Baker & McKenzie: 4
dla piper: 5
Jones Day: 8

Etc. etc.

Hey, C/O 2012 people: STOP BITCHING. You might have it bad, but it won't be the rapeage that the C/O 2011 got handed.

ToTransferOrNot wrote:
Hey, C/O 2012 people: STOP BITCHING. You might have it bad, but it won't be the rapeage that the C/O 2011 got handed.

Indeed. Light at the end of the tunnel for those in 2012.

Early reports are that a surprising number of firms have already signed up for OCI at an unnamed T10 school. Including nearly every firm that did not take a SA class last year.

Mayer got rawked.

The NY numbers are pretty bad too, with most of the former 100+SA firms taking on 30-40 people.

Yeah, just did some math. A 50% reduction for Vault 10 New York offices. Terrible.

From some of the major ATL firms, the numbers are interesting. Not as bad as I thought, but certainly not that great.

Offer Rates to Summer 2009 SA's: 117/172(almost 70%) - not bad
Incoming 2010 SA class at same firms: 103 (60% of last year)

Notably, some firms are taking on 3L summers. Bizarre.

Given my market preferences I only looked at Los Angeles. Some of the major firms:

Gibson (42) 2009 SAs, (27) 2010 SAs
Irell (33) 2009 SAs, (36!) 2010 SAs
Quinn (41) 2009 SAs, (26) 2010 SAs (Firm wide, no LA-only data available)
Munger (20) 2009 SAs, (15) 2010 SAs
Skadden (27) 2009 SAs, (07) 2010 SAs
Latham (37) 2009 SAs, (20) 2010 SAs
P. Hastings (27) 2009 SAs, (13) 2010 SAs
Jones Day (10) 2009 SAs, (6) 2010 SAs
Sidley Austin (19) 2009 SAs, (4) 2010 SAs
O'Melveny (25) 2009 SAs, (11) 2010 SAs

Totals: (281) 2009 SAs, (165) 2010 SAs

Does not seem to be as terrible as other posters described Chicago, but certainly not good news. Roughly 55% of the SA spots in LA this year as last.

1Ls, 2Ls, 3Ls: A moment of silence.

As an example of the fun, Skadden (all offices) took 241 in '08, 219 in '09, and... 71 in '10

May God have mercy on our souls.

skadden is an interesting case... i know for a fact they were bringing in new people for callbacks in november and making offers to them. tells me that they were too pessimistic and then couldnt get the numbers to fill their quotas. source from within tells me they were targeting 100 (firmwide).

Some firms clearly have done much better in managing their expectations, business, clients, profitability etc. These firms have done MUCH better with layoffs, hiring, offer rates etc.

anyone think the Vault rankings will see a massive overhaul?

blatant anti-skadden, latham et al. trolling. i realize.

ToTransferOrNot wrote: At Mayer-Chicago, my landing pad this year

2008 2L SAs: 71
2009 2L SAs: 44 (Offers Made: 33)
2010 2L SAs: 11

Jeez. The judge I worked for last summer had 6 interns.

K&E Chicago is down to 32 this year
Jenner Chicago is down to 16
Sidley is down to 20
Winston & Strawn: 22

So, christ, total for the "Chicago 5": 101. That's a lot worse than I thought.

Add some of the other big V100 firms with offices in Chicago:

Skadden: 9 ( )
Latham: 9
Baker & McKenzie: 4
DLA Piper: 5
Jones Day: 8

Etc. etc.

Hey, C/O 2012 people: STOP BITCHING. You might have it bad, but it won't be the rapeage that the C/O 2011 got handed.

I wonder what % change in total number 2L SA (for NALP firms) there were from 2007 OCI (i.e. 2008 2L SAs) to this year in Chicago. Seems like it had to be pretty large... Now if I wasn't so lazy I would considering looking this up for myself...

BradyToMoss wrote:Given my market preferences I only looked at Los Angeles. Some of the major firms:

Gibson (42) 2009 SAs, (27) 2010 SAs
Irell (33) 2009 SAs, (36!) 2010 SAs
Quinn (41) 2009 SAs, (26) 2010 SAs (Firm wide, no LA-only data available)
Munger (20) 2009 SAs, (15) 2010 SAs
Skadden (27) 2009 SAs, (07) 2010 SAs
Latham (37) 2009 SAs, (20) 2010 SAs
P. Hastings (27) 2009 SAs, (13) 2010 SAs
Jones Day (10) 2009 SAs, (6) 2010 SAs
Sidley Austin (19) 2009 SAs, (4) 2010 SAs
O'Melveny (25) 2009 SAs, (11) 2010 SAs

Totals: (281) 2009 SAs, (165) 2010 SAs

Does not seem to be as terrible as other posters described Chicago, but certainly not good news. Roughly 55% of the SA spots in LA this year as last.

What was the % drop from the 2008 SA class (that OCI'd in fall 2007) to this year?

Some firms clearly have done much better in managing their expectations, business, clients, profitability etc. These firms have done MUCH better with layoffs, hiring, offer rates etc.

anyone think the Vault rankings will see a massive overhaul?

blatant anti-skadden, latham et al. trolling. i realize.

Comparing 09 and 10 numbers, you can actually see how some firms didn't decrease their classes (that much):
Wachtell
Simpson
Cleary
Covington
W&C
Irell

If I were to make a list of the safest firms, coincidentally, those firms would be on it.

Firms with the sharpest decreases are also, unsurprisingly, starting their class of 2010 SAs in 2011.

krogers wrote:
Comparing 09 and 10 numbers, you can actually see how some firms didn't decrease their classes (that much):
Wachtell
Simpson
Cleary
Covington
W&C
Irell

If I were to make a list of the safest firms, coincidentally, those firms would be on it.

Firms with the sharpest decreases are also, unsurprisingly, starting their class of 2010 SAs in 2011.

Partners have been abandoning W&C so fast you'd think the firm was a burning oil tanker. That doesn't bode well for "safety."

You're thinking of the wrong W&C. why do people keep doing that here?

krogers wrote:

Some firms clearly have done much better in managing their expectations, business, clients, profitability etc. These firms have done MUCH better with layoffs, hiring, offer rates etc.

anyone think the Vault rankings will see a massive overhaul?

blatant anti-skadden, latham et al. trolling. i realize.

Comparing 09 and 10 numbers, you can actually see how some firms didn't decrease their classes (that much):
Wachtell
Simpson
Cleary
Covington
W&C
Irell

If I were to make a list of the safest firms, coincidentally, those firms would be on it.

Firms with the sharpest decreases are also, unsurprisingly, starting their class of 2010 SAs in 2011.

And Jones Day has clearly done well for itself. On kind of a different model. If I recall JD was blasting NALP for proposing a new system to potentially bail out the floundering f'd firms by pushing back OCI dates.

krogers wrote:You're thinking of the wrong W&C. why do people keep doing that here?

NYC bias?

Jones Day is doing EXTREMELY well. They're paying $13,333/week to their summer associates in NY!
--LinkRemoved--

Edit: No way to link to the page, but just look it up on nalp.

White & Case = a sinking ship?

NYC office: 113 SAs in 2008, 59 in 2009, 21 in 2010

krogers wrote:Jones Day is doing EXTREMELY well. They're paying $13,333/week to their summer associates in NY!
--LinkRemoved--

Edit: No way to link to the page, but just look it up on nalp.

That sure is a lot of money. Maybe they'll still consider 2nd half splits?

NYC to 693k?

Doesn't get any worse than Morgan Lewis

Location: '08 - '09 - '10

DC: 16 - 17 - 0

NYC: 10 - 23 - 0

PA: 15 - 23 - 0

We already knew it... just so stark.

At Mayer-Chicago, my landing pad this year

2008 2L SAs: 71
2009 2L SAs: 44 (Offers Made: 33)
2010 2L SAs: 11

if the HQ if a top firm in a major city is taking that kind of hit, id start making alternative plans just in case.

RVP11 wrote:

krogers wrote:You're thinking of the wrong W&C. why do people keep doing that here?

NYC bias?

Because one has about 200 lawyers and was founded in 1967, while the other has over 2000 lawyers and was founded in 1901. There's only one W&C, so if you mean Williams & Connolly you're going to have to say so.