Top Law Schools

Top 45% at a high T30/low T40. Realizing that my shot at a decent 2L summer job may be shot, is my legal career doomed? Wondering if I could graduate towards the top of my class (say 15%-25%) would I be able to land a decent job?

.

PKSebben wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Top 45% at a high T30/low T40. Realizing that my shot at a decent 2L summer job may be shot, is my legal career doomed? Wondering if I could graduate towards the top of my class (say 15%-25%) would I be able to land a decent job?

The type of jobs that care about GPA generally don't hire 3Ls / recent grads so while you should still shoot for great grades, not sure how much utility there is. Probably helpful at federal gigs, perhaps clerkships if you can really bust ass.

so smaller firms don't care at all about grades? if two Hastings students interviewed for the same job, one at top 20% and the other at top 75%, they aren't going to go for the higher gpa?

.

Agree with this a lot. I've talked to partners at small firms around where I'm at, and they basically all say they'd rather take someone half-decent from a local tier 4 than someone at a T25 school with a higher GPA. Maybe it made sense back before the recession since they weren't getting resumes from anyone but T4 students, but it seems kind of crazy to me now.

double post

I've heard the same thing. I know someone who was partner at a California firm (20-30 lawyers), and he did a lot of the interviews for the firm. He said that he mainly looked for someone who he could work with. The GPA was secondary to personality and work ethic.

edgarderby wrote:Agree with this a lot. I've talked to partners at small firms around where I'm at, and they basically all say they'd rather take someone half-decent from a local tier 4 than someone at a T25 school with a higher GPA. Maybe it made sense back before the recession since they weren't getting resumes from anyone but T4 students, but it seems kind of crazy to me now.

maybe some of them feel threatened as well?

so is that it then? non OCI people from T1 schools are just SOL ITE?

.

PKSebben wrote: this can't be news

it isn't, but typically people describe this process as kind of a ladder process...that since the biglaw rung isn't there for the elite grads, that they step down to the next rung that non OCI T1 people would have taken. That group then drops to the next rung, the one that T2-T4 people would have taken previously. And so on...

But the process as described in this thread sounds much differently.

T3 and T4 still get the same jobs they did before.

T1 non-OCI jumped a spot below them, due to T3 and T4 schools feeding into those non-OCI jobs.

edgarderby wrote:Agree with this a lot. I've talked to partners at small firms around where I'm at, and they basically all say they'd rather take someone half-decent from a local tier 4 than someone at a T25 school with a higher GPA. Maybe it made sense back before the recession since they weren't getting resumes from anyone but T4 students, but it seems kind of crazy to me now.

Yes. This is the truth. Our last two hires have been from the local T4 because they were a good "fit"... among other things. We had tons of resumes from better schools and applicants with better GPAs. We looked mostly at experience, interest in our practice areas, ties to the area, and overall fit with the firm. GPA and law school came after all that stuff. Most of our attorney staff is T2, though. Not because they are T2... it was based on the same factors. Applicants outside our region were at a disadvantage... plus honestly we have no idea where law schools outside our region are ranked. We could have someone look it up but... meh.

We were discussing this issue over lunch today; I brought it up based on some of the TLS threads. I think we decided that our next hire won't be from the local T4 because we want more diversity. We'll probably do something totally different next year. What that is, I don't know. But you never know, another T4 grad might knock our socks off. I have a feeling it will be someone from Drexel. Or maybe someone totally outside our region. We often do things differently just to be different, ha.

That said, we are way more applicant specific than grades or law school specific. WAY more. And our work is complex commercial litigation. (well most, we have comp defense too).

Plenty of non-biglaw jobs will still care about grades.

Journeybound wrote:I've heard the same thing. I know someone who was partner at a California firm (20-30 lawyers), and he did a lot of the interviews for the firm. He said that he mainly looked for someone who he could work with. The GPA was secondary to personality and work ethic.

How do you judge work ethic if you aren't using grades (I realize that grades are not a perfect indicator of work ethic)

Anonymous User wrote:decent job

Please define.

rando wrote:

Journeybound wrote:I've heard the same thing. I know someone who was partner at a California firm (20-30 lawyers), and he did a lot of the interviews for the firm. He said that he mainly looked for someone who he could work with. The GPA was secondary to personality and work ethic.

How do you judge work ethic if you aren't using grades (I realize that grades are not a perfect indicator of work ethic)

On a similar note, how bad does it look to say you worked your @ss off if you're only top half or even top 1/3?

While grades are not a great indicator of work ethic, they are a great indicator of intelligence + work ethic. Which is why I am afraid to tell employers I worked super duper hard and gave it my all, given my class rank.

RudeDudewithAttitude wrote:

rando wrote:

Journeybound wrote:I've heard the same thing. I know someone who was partner at a California firm (20-30 lawyers), and he did a lot of the interviews for the firm. He said that he mainly looked for someone who he could work with. The GPA was secondary to personality and work ethic.

How do you judge work ethic if you aren't using grades (I realize that grades are not a perfect indicator of work ethic)

On a similar note, how bad does it look to say you worked your @ss off if you're only top half or even top 1/3?

While grades are not a great indicator of work ethic, they are a great indicator of intelligence + work ethic. Which is why I am afraid to tell employers I worked super duper hard and gave it my all, given my class rank.

It probably won't come up. Everyone works hard in LS, everyone knows everyone works hard in LS. If you're on the defensive about grades in an interview, something has already gone wrong.

RudeDudewithAttitude wrote:

rando wrote:

Journeybound wrote:I've heard the same thing. I know someone who was partner at a California firm (20-30 lawyers), and he did a lot of the interviews for the firm. He said that he mainly looked for someone who he could work with. The GPA was secondary to personality and work ethic.

How do you judge work ethic if you aren't using grades (I realize that grades are not a perfect indicator of work ethic)

On a similar note, how bad does it look to say you worked your @ss off if you're only top half or even top 1/3?

While grades are not a great indicator of work ethic, they are a great indicator of intelligence + work ethic. Which is why I am afraid to tell employers I worked super duper hard and gave it my all, given my class rank.

I generally go with "I half-assed it but my natural intelligence carried me. If you hire me you'll get someone who will goof off for weeks and then finish the assignment by the skin of his teeth at the very last second. But, you know, I'll probably do a decent job."

disco_barred wrote:

RudeDudewithAttitude wrote:

rando wrote:

Journeybound wrote:I've heard the same thing. I know someone who was partner at a California firm (20-30 lawyers), and he did a lot of the interviews for the firm. He said that he mainly looked for someone who he could work with. The GPA was secondary to personality and work ethic.

How do you judge work ethic if you aren't using grades (I realize that grades are not a perfect indicator of work ethic)

On a similar note, how bad does it look to say you worked your @ss off if you're only top half or even top 1/3?

While grades are not a great indicator of work ethic, they are a great indicator of intelligence + work ethic. Which is why I am afraid to tell employers I worked super duper hard and gave it my all, given my class rank.

It probably won't come up. Everyone works hard in LS, everyone knows everyone works hard in LS. If you're on the defensive about grades in an interview, something has already gone wrong.

It is generally assumed that you busted your ass. And assuming that you are top half or top 1/3 you still beat out most of the people in your class, there is nothing to be on the defensive about for that. If you get the interview they are satisfied with your intelligence & work ethic, it shouldn't come up again.

ggocat wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:decent job

Please define.

$60-80k to start. just looking to make a comfortable living, pay off my loans and get an opportunity to prove myself a good lawyer. never was looking for BIGLAW out of the gate, or possibly ever.

Anonymous User wrote:

ggocat wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:decent job

Please define.

$60-80k to start. just looking to make a comfortable living, pay off my loans and get an opportunity to prove myself a good lawyer. never was looking for BIGLAW out of the gate, or possibly ever.

*dies*

There are very, very few 60-80K starting salary legal jobs, and almost all of them are at least as competitive to obtain with similar hours to biglaw.

disco_barred wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

ggocat wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:decent job

Please define.

$60-80k to start. just looking to make a comfortable living, pay off my loans and get an opportunity to prove myself a good lawyer. never was looking for BIGLAW out of the gate, or possibly ever.

*dies*

There are very, very few 60-80K starting salary legal jobs, and almost all of them are at least as competitive to obtain with similar hours to biglaw.

so what you're saying is i should have been a grade school teacher