
Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC

Last edited by Anonymous User on Fri Sep 10, 2010 3:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
Boaltie here, had an interviewer who couldn't stop trashing another school for the quality of its students. The fact is it happens, firms have schools they like better than others, happens all the time. At least this guy was honest about his preferences.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
Honesty is nice, but I'm sure he didn't tell them to their faces. So it's really not honesty at all -- it doesn't benefit me to hear it, and it generally just comes across as snarky and rude.Anonymous User wrote:Boaltie here, had an interviewer who couldn't stop trashing another school for the quality of its students. The fact is it happens, firms have schools they like better than others, happens all the time. At least this guy was honest about his preferences.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
--LinkRemoved-- ?
- bwv812
- Posts: 547
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:18 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
.
Last edited by bwv812 on Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- spanktheduck
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 4:23 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
Of course the school didn't do anything. Nothing the interviewer said was inappropriate. He may have been rude, although he may have been attempting to see how you would reaction. Unless the interviewer asks you something illegal, the school does not care. Also, outing him is a real dick move. He is a partner at a major law firm, you are a 2l.
Is it me or are there more posts this year from 2l's complaining about rude interviewers, even where the interviewer wasn't really that rude?
Is it me or are there more posts this year from 2l's complaining about rude interviewers, even where the interviewer wasn't really that rude?
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
The bold is relevant why? You mean to say that OP should refrain from calling someone out who said something stupid and rude because that someone has a successful career? What a tool you must be. Are you for real?spanktheduck wrote:Of course the school didn't do anything. Nothing the interviewer said was inappropriate. He may have been rude, although he may have been attempting to see how you would reaction. Unless the interviewer asks you something illegal, the school does not care. Also, outing him is a real dick move. He is a partner at a major law firm, you are a 2l.
Is it me or are there more posts this year from 2l's complaining about rude interviewers, even where the interviewer wasn't really that rude?
- spanktheduck
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 4:23 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
It's recognition that he has earned the right to talk that way to a law student, especially in an interview. OP, as a 2l, has not. It is reality. If you call out your boss, you will get fired. You might not like it, but that is the way it is. We all deal with it, bitching about it and running to the law school (who obviously was going to do nothing) is pathetic and makes you look like a child. We are in law school, it is time to suck it up.Anonymous User wrote:The bold is relevant why? You mean to say that OP should refrain from calling someone out who said something stupid and rude because that someone has a successful career? What a tool you must be. Are you for real?spanktheduck wrote:Of course the school didn't do anything. Nothing the interviewer said was inappropriate. He may have been rude, although he may have been attempting to see how you would reaction. Unless the interviewer asks you something illegal, the school does not care. Also, outing him is a real dick move. He is a partner at a major law firm, you are a 2l.
Is it me or are there more posts this year from 2l's complaining about rude interviewers, even where the interviewer wasn't really that rude?
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
Oh, so your position is that people can "earn" the right to say stupid things and not get called on it. Yeah, you are a tool.spanktheduck wrote:It's recognition that he has earned the right to talk that way to a law student, especially in an interview. OP, as a 2l, has not. It is reality. If you call out your boss, you will get fired. You might not like it, but that is the way it is. We all deal with it, bitching about it and running to the law school (who obviously was going to do nothing) is pathetic and makes you look like a child. We are in law school, it is time to suck it up.Anonymous User wrote:The bold is relevant why? You mean to say that OP should refrain from calling someone out who said something stupid and rude because that someone has a successful career? What a tool you must be. Are you for real?spanktheduck wrote:Of course the school didn't do anything. Nothing the interviewer said was inappropriate. He may have been rude, although he may have been attempting to see how you would reaction. Unless the interviewer asks you something illegal, the school does not care. Also, outing him is a real dick move. He is a partner at a major law firm, you are a 2l.
Is it me or are there more posts this year from 2l's complaining about rude interviewers, even where the interviewer wasn't really that rude?
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
He did interview there.bwv812 wrote:Who cares? It's highly, highly unlikely he's going to be interviewing at SLS or Boalt.
Outing the guy is just a dick move, too... and more dickish than whatever he said.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
Couldn't agree more!!!!!!!!!!Anonymous User wrote:The bold is relevant why? You mean to say that OP should refrain from calling someone out who said something stupid and rude because that someone has a successful career? What a tool you must be. Are you for real?spanktheduck wrote:Of course the school didn't do anything. Nothing the interviewer said was inappropriate. He may have been rude, although he may have been attempting to see how you would reaction. Unless the interviewer asks you something illegal, the school does not care. Also, outing him is a real dick move. He is a partner at a major law firm, you are a 2l.
Is it me or are there more posts this year from 2l's complaining about rude interviewers, even where the interviewer wasn't really that rude?
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
Nothing gives anybody the right to be an as*hole.spanktheduck wrote:It's recognition that he has earned the right to talk that way to a law student, especially in an interview. OP, as a 2l, has not. It is reality. If you call out your boss, you will get fired. You might not like it, but that is the way it is. We all deal with it, bitching about it and running to the law school (who obviously was going to do nothing) is pathetic and makes you look like a child. We are in law school, it is time to suck it up.Anonymous User wrote:The bold is relevant why? You mean to say that OP should refrain from calling someone out who said something stupid and rude because that someone has a successful career? What a tool you must be. Are you for real?spanktheduck wrote:Of course the school didn't do anything. Nothing the interviewer said was inappropriate. He may have been rude, although he may have been attempting to see how you would reaction. Unless the interviewer asks you something illegal, the school does not care. Also, outing him is a real dick move. He is a partner at a major law firm, you are a 2l.
Is it me or are there more posts this year from 2l's complaining about rude interviewers, even where the interviewer wasn't really that rude?
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
Unfortunately, all the as*holes disagree.Anonymous User wrote: Nothing gives anybody the right to be an as*hole.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
I believe Fried Frank (DC/NYC) didn't come to Boalt's OCIP. No wonder, what with the lousy partner(s) there hating on us hippies.
-
- Posts: 283
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:01 pm
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
I agree with a bunch of posters above who have pointed out that it doesn't really make a lick of difference who you are, partner, founder, whoever - you're not licensed to be a jerk to the janitor, your mother, or a law student interviewee.
- bwv812
- Posts: 547
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:18 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
.
Last edited by bwv812 on Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 283
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:01 pm
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
Okay, I concede its different - but my point is more at the guy who said he's "earned it" because he's a partner and you're a 2L. That's a pretty messed up attitude to take at the outset of entering the legal profession.bwv812 wrote: It may have been unprofessional for him to badmouth other schools, but he wasn't really being rude or a jerk or anything.
Partners, and any other experienced lawyers, for that matter - deserve respect based on seniority, but that logic doesn't work the other way, i.e. they don't "earn" the right to be a tool based on seniority. Just because something is the way it generally tends to be doesn't justify it being that way.
- spanktheduck
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 4:23 am
Re: Stanford & Berkeley: Fried Frank DC
Earned is the wrong word. I meant that he is a partner and can get away with saying what he wants (within reason). Complaining about it as a 2l just comes across as whining b/c there is nothing anyone can do about it and OP should understand that there is a pecking order and that as a 2l, he or she is at the bottem. The partner is at, or close to the top. It doesn't make it right, it just is reality and complaining about it doesn't do anything except reflect poorly on the OP. This is especially true when the partner doesn't even say anything that badly, as is indicated in the OP.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login