Texas OCI (and non-UT students bidding on TX firms) Forum

[Anonymous User]

Is it ok to bid both LL Houston and Dallas on a bid list? I'm bidding both pretty high so there is a chance I could get both interviews. I'm just nervous it's like shooting my own foot.

[Perseus_I]

Pretty much--and thanks for the Yetter tip, I don't know how I missed that. I'm basically trying to mail every lit office that pays market or better. Any others that I'm missing?

McKool Smith also meets your criteria (Austin/Lit/Market).

So with top 25% grades, how does this look for Dallas?

1. Fulbright (Dallas)
2. Akin Gump (Dallas)
3. Jones Day (Dallas)
4. Haynes & Boone (Dallas)
5. Locke Lord (Dallas)
6. Thompson Knight (Dallas)
7. K&L Gates (Dallas)
8. Andrews Kurth(Dallas)
9. Vinson & Elkins (Dallas)
10. Baker Botts (Dallas)

I put VE and BB at the bottom, because I thought I had more of a chance at getting jobs at places like JD and HB, so I wanted to make sure I was a lock for an interview by placing them high up on the list.

You are right in thinking you are probably out at VE/BB. Otherwise list looks like a fine top 10. But you need to be bidding far more than 10 firms (not clear from your post) because you are not a lock at any of these places.

+1, and if you're ok with houston, definitely bid there too since top 25% (and a decent interview) is likely to get at least one of the Big3

Thanks. My S/O and I want to be in dallas, but I'm using a few bids on back ups in houston. Would bracewell houston be a good safety, or do i need to go lower for a safety?

Winstead? I also get the impression that Locke Lord is more personality selective than grade selective (I'm clearly out), but I could be wrong.

[Perseus_I]

Pretty much--and thanks for the Yetter tip, I don't know how I missed that. I'm basically trying to mail every lit office that pays market or better. Any others that I'm missing?

McKool Smith also meets your criteria (Austin/Lit/Market).

So with top 25% grades, how does this look for Dallas?

1. Fulbright (Dallas)
2. Akin Gump (Dallas)
3. Jones Day (Dallas)
4. Haynes & Boone (Dallas)
5. Locke Lord (Dallas)
6. Thompson Knight (Dallas)
7. K&L Gates (Dallas)
8. Andrews Kurth(Dallas)
9. Vinson & Elkins (Dallas)
10. Baker Botts (Dallas)

I put VE and BB at the bottom, because I thought I had more of a chance at getting jobs at places like JD and HB, so I wanted to make sure I was a lock for an interview by placing them high up on the list.

You are right in thinking you are probably out at VE/BB. Otherwise list looks like a fine top 10. But you need to be bidding far more than 10 firms (not clear from your post) because you are not a lock at any of these places.

+1, and if you're ok with houston, definitely bid there too since top 25% (and a decent interview) is likely to get at least one of the Big3

Thanks. My S/O and I want to be in dallas, but I'm using a few bids on back ups in houston. Would bracewell houston be a good safety, or do i need to go lower for a safety?

Winstead? I also get the impression that Locke Lord is more personality selective than grade selective (I'm clearly out), but I could be wrong.

[Anonymous User]

Native Houstonian, top 10-20% at MVPB, and waiting on LR results. Planning on mass mailing some of the TX firms that won't be at OCI. Interested in Houston offices w/good litigation practices. I would also consider strong Austin firms, but I have no interest in Dallas at all. I do have some Austin ties and would prefer there over Houston if all else were equal. Am I missing any firms?

Andrews Kurth
Beck Redden
Bracewell Giuliani
Fulbright
Gibbs & Bruns
King Spalding
Mayer Brown
Susman Godfrey (I know it's unlikely as hell, but I figure no harm in trying--actually, same goes for all the boutiques)


Intentionally omitting Baker Botts, Vinson Elkins, Jones Day, Locke Lord, and Hayboo. TYIA!

Are you intentionally omitting some of the biggest Texas firms because they'll be at your OCI or are you doing it for some other reason? Also, you're missing firms, the most obvious being Yetter Coleman.

Pretty much--and thanks for the Yetter tip, I don't know how I missed that. I'm basically trying to mail every lit office that pays market or better. Any others that I'm missing?

I would also consider adding AZA (Ahmed Zavitsanos and Anaipakos). I have heard good things but dont know a lot about lit boutiques.

You might also look at Ware Jackson

[Anonymous User]

T30, 20%, TX native.

I have OCI interviews with Bracewell, LL, and Fulbright.

Any idea on my chances at these firms? Any tips for interviews? What offices should I say I prefer? Based on NALP, Houston's taking a bunch and Dallas is taking very few.

[Anonymous User]

probably have a decent shot at LL and Bracewell...Fulbright can be tough. Say that you are interested in the Houston office for Bracewell and Fulbright, but LL is based out of dallas so you might want to say you prefer the dallas office for them. Also depends where you are actually from. If not from either city, though, the above advice probably applies

[Anonymous User]

Can someone tell me what my chances are at Houston firms? I'm at Northwestern with grades between top 1/3 and median. My only ties are that my fiance is from Houston.

[Anonymous User]

Probably slim. Texas is very big on ties, and I'm not sure your tie will convince those Texas GOBs that you won't run back to Chicago/your home market. Texas firms are also big on split summers, so that could cause you problems depending on what else you line up. No harm in mailing, but I wouldn't waste bids if you have other options.

[AreJay711]

It might be the case that you have slim chances but from what I've been told by everyone I've talked to about it -- including a few partners and even a hiring partner -- what matters is being able to articulate a reason for wanting to be there. So your fiance might be your tie but you are going to want to say what else you like about the city and why you want to be their long term. If you hated the place you wouldn't want to be there so just tell what other reasons you have.

[Anonymous User]

Was nonresident at UT with competitive stats and got shut out of Houston/Dallas. Interviewers were constantly bringing up ties. They wanted blood relatives in the city, years spent living there, etc. Going to school in-state and saying I wanted to stay wasn't enough. YMMV.

[de5igual]

It might be the case that you have slim chances but from what I've been told by everyone I've talked to about it -- including a few partners and even a hiring partner -- what matters is being able to articulate a reason for wanting to be there. So your fiance might be your tie but you are going to want to say what else you like about the city and why you want to be their long term. If you hated the place you wouldn't want to be there so just tell what other reasons you have.

this. but it's easier said than done. houston (and really, the rest of texas) isn't really everyone's cup of tea, and people in texas know it. if you've never been to texas before, it's really damn hard to convince someone that you'd be ok working here long-term and not looking for an easy out after 2-3 years.

[Anonymous User]

Was nonresident at UT with competitive stats and got shut out of Houston/Dallas. Interviewers were constantly bringing up ties. They wanted blood relatives in the city, years spent living there, etc. Going to school in-state and saying I wanted to stay wasn't enough. YMMV.

+1...Non-residents generally underperform their class rank at texas firms. I luckily got a few offers in TX, but it was a pitiful amount compared to the number of callbacks received

[granger]

[Perseus_I]

Was nonresident at UT with competitive stats and got shut out of Houston/Dallas. Interviewers were constantly bringing up ties. They wanted blood relatives in the city, years spent living there, etc. Going to school in-state and saying I wanted to stay wasn't enough. YMMV.

+1...Non-residents generally underperform their class rank at texas firms. I luckily got a few offers in TX, but it was a pitiful amount compared to the number of callbacks received

Do Texas residents who are not from either Houston or Dallas have similar issues?

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Was nonresident at UT with competitive stats and got shut out of Houston/Dallas. Interviewers were constantly bringing up ties. They wanted blood relatives in the city, years spent living there, etc. Going to school in-state and saying I wanted to stay wasn't enough. YMMV.

+1...Non-residents generally underperform their class rank at texas firms. I luckily got a few offers in TX, but it was a pitiful amount compared to the number of callbacks received

Do Texas residents who are not from either Houston or Dallas have similar issues?

I did not. (Though I had relatively strong Dallas ties. Houston ties were fairly weak, but Houston cares a lot less about Houston-specific ties though.)

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone explain what's means by TX firms are big on splitting summers? Does that mean they prefer you to split a summer or prefer you to not split a summer? If they want you to split a summer, do you tell them you want to split a summer with another TX firm? Thanks.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Can anyone explain what's means by TX firms are big on splitting summers? Does that mean they prefer you to split a summer or prefer you to not split a summer? If they want you to split a summer, do you tell them you want to split a summer with another TX firm? Thanks.

From the firm's perspective, it's best that you don't split your summer since if you do that increases the chances that they give you an offer but you decide to go with the other firm. But firms won't hold it against you since split summers are still a part of legal hiring in Texas, though there seems to be a trend of going away from split summers. Most of the big firms now only do first half SA programs, so you will not have the ability to split if you get two offers from firms with first half SA programs--you'll have to choose. Some of the firms who offered second half SA programs last year were Andrews Kurth (all locations), Locke Lord (select locations), Weil Gotshal (select locations), and Gibson Dun (select locations). There were more, but that's just off the top of my head.

Thus, assuming firm SA programs are the same as last year--which you need to double check, if you get an offer from say V&E Houston (first half) and AK Houston (second half), then you can accept both and do six weeks at V&E and 6 weeks at AK (maybe even 7 at one of the places, depending on the dates of their SA programs). Not everyone splits, but it's nice to have the possibility of two options at the end of summer (and have two comparison points if you did not do a 1L SA).

[Anonymous User]

Most Texas firms expect you to split. The Big 3, however, now intentionally structure their summer programs to prevent split summering among themselves (e.g., you cannot summer at both BB & V&E because they both only offer first half programs). I don't know if you can spend the entire summer at these firms or not; from what I saw, almost everyone splits.

Texas firms will probably not look kindly on splitting with a non-Texas firm (casts doubts on your loyalty to the great state of Texas). And, of course, many large non-TX firms don't do split summers at all (e.g., Cravath), so your options are limited anyway.

I disagree that it is necessarily in the firm's best interests that you don't split. That certainly improves their yield, but it also means they're paying a class of SAs another $3000 per week for another 6 or 7 weeks. After a month, they know whether or not you're getting an offer (barring some boneheaded move like screaming at a partner). If they really didn't want people splitting, they would simply tell people they can't split. Instead, they intentionally structure less-than-full-summer programs on the assumption that someone else will be paying you for part of the summer. The Big-3 "choose one" block is a way of increasing yield because V&E isn't losing SAs to BB, etc. Of course, you can still rerecruit after 2L OCI, or after a clerkship.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

I disagree that it is necessarily in the firm's best interests that you don't split. That certainly improves their yield, but it also means they're paying a class of SAs another $3000 per week for another 6 or 7 weeks. After a month, they know whether or not you're getting an offer (barring some boneheaded move like screaming at a partner).

Good point.

If they really didn't want people splitting, they would simply tell people they can't split. Instead, they intentionally structure less-than-full-summer programs on the assumption that someone else will be paying you for part of the summer. The Big-3 "choose one" block is a way of increasing yield because V&E isn't losing SAs to BB, etc. Of course, you can still rerecruit after 2L OCI, or after a clerkship.

I'm not sure it would smart for any Texas firm to try and bully students into not splitting--unless all the top firms decided to do it together. For example: If V&E tried to do this then the top students at UT who had multiple choices in the big three and other firms might just say "screw that" and go to a firm that would let them split.

[Anonymous User]

I disagree that it is necessarily in the firm's best interests that you don't split. That certainly improves their yield, but it also means they're paying a class of SAs another $3000 per week for another 6 or 7 weeks. After a month, they know whether or not you're getting an offer (barring some boneheaded move like screaming at a partner).

Good point.

If they really didn't want people splitting, they would simply tell people they can't split. Instead, they intentionally structure less-than-full-summer programs on the assumption that someone else will be paying you for part of the summer. The Big-3 "choose one" block is a way of increasing yield because V&E isn't losing SAs to BB, etc. Of course, you can still rerecruit after 2L OCI, or after a clerkship.

I'm not sure it would smart for any Texas firm to try and bully students into not splitting--unless all the top firms decided to do it together. For example: If V&E tried to do this then the top students at UT who had multiple choices in the big three and other firms might just say "screw that" and go to a firm that would let them split.

Thank you for that information. So would it help at an interview to say if you were accepted to the firm's summer program, you wouldn't split and would stay with them? Or do you ask the interviewer whether the firm prefers that you split?

What's better for me in the long-run? Split or not to split?

[Cade McNown]

Was nonresident at UT with competitive stats and got shut out of Houston/Dallas. Interviewers were constantly bringing up ties. They wanted blood relatives in the city, years spent living there, etc. Going to school in-state and saying I wanted to stay wasn't enough. YMMV.

+1...Non-residents generally underperform their class rank at texas firms. I luckily got a few offers in TX, but it was a pitiful amount compared to the number of callbacks received

Mind if I ask stats for you two? Also: either of you TLR members / Moot Court dominators?

[Anonymous User]

I disagree that it is necessarily in the firm's best interests that you don't split. That certainly improves their yield, but it also means they're paying a class of SAs another $3000 per week for another 6 or 7 weeks. After a month, they know whether or not you're getting an offer (barring some boneheaded move like screaming at a partner).

Good point.

If they really didn't want people splitting, they would simply tell people they can't split. Instead, they intentionally structure less-than-full-summer programs on the assumption that someone else will be paying you for part of the summer. The Big-3 "choose one" block is a way of increasing yield because V&E isn't losing SAs to BB, etc. Of course, you can still rerecruit after 2L OCI, or after a clerkship.

I'm not sure it would smart for any Texas firm to try and bully students into not splitting--unless all the top firms decided to do it together. For example: If V&E tried to do this then the top students at UT who had multiple choices in the big three and other firms might just say "screw that" and go to a firm that would let them split.

Thank you for that information. So would it help at an interview to say if you were accepted to the firm's summer program, you wouldn't split and would stay with them? Or do you ask the interviewer whether the firm prefers that you split?

What's better for me in the long-run? Split or not to split?

If the recruiter doesn't tell you outright, ask what the firm's policy is re: splitting. Again, since many of these firms specifically run "first half" or "second half" SA programs, they aren't necessarily open to SAs staying all summer. Hence my initial words of caution for the NU poster who may not line up multiple TX firms.

[Anonymous User]

Was nonresident at UT with competitive stats and got shut out of Houston/Dallas. Interviewers were constantly bringing up ties. They wanted blood relatives in the city, years spent living there, etc. Going to school in-state and saying I wanted to stay wasn't enough. YMMV.

+1...Non-residents generally underperform their class rank at texas firms. I luckily got a few offers in TX, but it was a pitiful amount compared to the number of callbacks received

Mind if I ask stats for you two? Also: either of you TLR members / Moot Court dominators?

First anon, top 1/4 + TLR.

[Anonymous User]

Thank you for that information. So would it help at an interview to say if you were accepted to the firm's summer program, you wouldn't split and would stay with them? Or do you ask the interviewer whether the firm prefers that you split?

What's better for me in the long-run? Split or not to split?

I was with a Texas Big 3 firm this summer and I split, as did the vast majority of my firm's SAs.

I don't think committing to the full length of the program while still in the interview stage would help or hurt. The Big 3 firms generally get the applicants they want. They aren't going decide to extend an offer on the basis of whether you would stay for the full length of the their program. On some level, these firms expect you to split. If you have the credentials to get an offer from them they expect you'll get an offer from other firms. At the offer stage the firm told me I was free to work for a second-half firm with the parameters that I had to be with the first-half firm for the first six weeks of its program.

As to what's best for you in the long-run, I'm not sure there is a clear answer. I've never verified it, but I've heard numerous partners claim that 90% of students who split end up choosing their first-half firm. The main risk, as I see it, is that if you only have six weeks at a firm and you screw something up you might not have enough time to recover. The benefit is that you get a clean start with your second-half firm and you've hopefully learned from your experience at your first-half firm.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have a list of which firms split first or second half?