Top Law Schools

Pretty sure this is gonna be my final bid list. Would appreciate some feedback. All NYC unless otherwise noted. Ties where not NYC. Litigation focused. @ duke w/ a 3.51 (3.3 median) somewhere in the top 33-25% most likely. Secondary Journal. Pure lottery. Thanks for the help!

1. Cahill – 21 slots, 41 SA’s expected, v48
2. Proskauer – 21 slot, 28 SA’s expected, v39
3. Fried Frank -21 slots, 29 SA’s expected, v31
4. Kasowitz - 21 slots, 17 SA’s expected, v98
5. Milbank – 42 slots, 29 SA’s expected, v32
___________________________________________________
6. Shearman – 42 slots, 28 SA’s expected, v24
7. Dechert – 21 slots, 43 SA’s expected, v54
8. Linklaters – 42 spots (including 3 international offices), 30 SA’s expected, v29
9. Cadwalader – 84 slots (3 cities), 31 SA’s expected, v33
10. Holland & Knight (FL), 21 slots, 5 MIA, 2 Ft Lauderdale, v 62
__________________________________________________________
11. Latham – 20, 26 SA’s expected , v11
12. Paul Weiss - 21 spots
13. Weil – 63 slots, 62 SA’s expected
14. Skadden – 42 slots, 67 SA’s expected, v4
15. White & Case – 42 slots, 32 SA’s expected, v18
16. Ropes Gray – 84 spots (6 offices), 45 SA’s expected, v25
17. Jones Day – 63 spots (all offices) 20 SA’s expected, v19
18. Paul Hastings – 105 spots (many offices), 17 SA’s expected, v27
19. Cleary – 42 slots, , 115 SA’s expected, v 8
20. Simpson Thatcher – 63 slots (between NYC/LA), 83 SA’s expected, v6
________________________________________________________
21. Davis Polk – 63 spots (2 offices), 129 SA’s expected, v5
22. Alston & Bird - NY/DC/ATL (I think 63 spots for this and K&S)
23. King & Spalding - NY/DC/ATL
24. Vinson & Elkins – 42 spots (DC/NYC, TX)
25. McDermott – 42 spots, v56, 22 SA’s (2010)
26. hogan lovells (FL) – 21 spots, 3 SA’s expected, v51
27. Hunton & Williams (FL) - 42 spots (several cities) 3 SA's miami
28. Squire Sanders(FL) - 21 spots (multiple offices), 3 SA's expected
29. Morgan Lewis (FL) - 21 spots, 2 SA's expected
30. hill ward henderson (FL) - 21 spots, 4 SA's expected (95k starting salary)

How is paul weiss not up there...

Anonymous User wrote:How is paul weiss not up there...

Paul Weiss is a pretty big reach and I'm bidding relatively conservatively. I guess based on the lack of feedback and the many views the list must look pretty good... ?

Switch your 11-20 with your 1-10. You're better than you think.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:How is paul weiss not up there...

Paul Weiss is a pretty big reach and I'm bidding relatively conservatively. I guess based on the lack of feedback and the many views the list must look pretty good... ?

If Paul Weiss is a reach than STB, Cleary, and DPW are even bigger ones. Toss one and add Paul Weiss.

Fresh Prince wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:How is paul weiss not up there...

Paul Weiss is a pretty big reach and I'm bidding relatively conservatively. I guess based on the lack of feedback and the many views the list must look pretty good... ?

If Paul Weiss is a reach than STB, Cleary, and DPW are even bigger ones. Toss one and add Paul Weiss.

Just put in Paul Weiss instead of A&O. Better than A&O that low I guess, but they only have 21 slots so probably not gonna get an interview that low, but better shot than A&O w/ 21 slots.

Paul Weiss with their 21 slots will be gone very quickly ranked that low.

Fresh Prince wrote:Paul Weiss with their 21 slots will be gone very quickly ranked that low.

Yeah but since they're a pretty big reach I don't want to push down more attainable firms to make sure I have a shot at em.

Anonymous User wrote:

Fresh Prince wrote:Paul Weiss with their 21 slots will be gone very quickly ranked that low.

Yeah but since they're a pretty big reach I don't want to push down more attainable firms to make sure I have a shot at em.

Yet you ranked them lower than firms that are even bigger reaches and have at least twice the number of slots???

Also, FYI: Paul Weiss is a target.

McDermott's NY office has only had 4 SAs the past 3 years.

Anonymous User wrote:McDermott's NY office has only had 4 SAs the past 3 years.

Good call, don't know where I saw the number I had. Dropped them way down, inserted paul weiss higher. Thanks for the help.

Are you sure 3.51 places you that high? Do not professors try to maximize grades. Even keeping in mind that 3.3 should be median, if professors have maximized good grades, 3.51 COULD be out of 33%.

Anonymous User wrote:Are you sure 3.51 places you that high? Do not professors try to maximize grades. Even keeping in mind that 3.3 should be median, if professors have maximized good grades, 3.51 COULD be out of 33%.

Think real quick. To grade onto DLJ is generally low 3.8s (let's just say 3.83 for simplicity). So, top 5% is about 3.83.

In your hypo, let's say 3.55 is top 33% and the median is 3.32 (even a little above 3.3). That means that 17% of the class is in a .23 band (3.32 - 3.55) and 28% of the class is in a .28 band (3.55- 3.83). Grades are almost certainly packed around the median as it seems like most professors push things towards the median.

3.51 is probably not top quarter but it is definitely in the top third. Probably somewhere between top 25% and top 30%.

Looks pretty solid to me.

Looks good to me as well. Do you want FL at all. Outside of Holland & Knight its very possible that you don't get any of the FL interviews with them ranked that low (esp the firms whose spots are being used for multiple offices). Is that okay with you?

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Are you sure 3.51 places you that high? Do not professors try to maximize grades. Even keeping in mind that 3.3 should be median, if professors have maximized good grades, 3.51 COULD be out of 33%.

Think real quick. To grade onto DLJ is generally low 3.8s (let's just say 3.83 for simplicity). So, top 5% is about 3.83.

In your hypo, let's say 3.55 is top 33% and the median is 3.32 (even a little above 3.3). That means that 17% of the class is in a .23 band (3.32 - 3.55) and 28% of the class is in a .28 band (3.55- 3.83). Grades are almost certainly packed around the median as it seems like most professors push things towards the median.

3.51 is probably not top quarter but it is definitely in the top third. Probably somewhere between top 25% and top 30%.

This looks right, though where does the DLJ grade on number come from? As far as I knew, they don't release any of that information or how you got on.

3.3 is the median for a particular class. That does not mean it is the overall median. Law schools do this all the time with the LSAT, 164=25%, 172=50%, 173=75% for example.
In law school grading, it can easily be reversed with high grades continuing up (in the same way that the 168 continues towards the bottom) and low grades not continuing too far down, in the same way that the 75% does not go above much the 50%. Imagine that in a particular class, the 25% is an A, the 50% is a B+, and the 75% is a B. Somewhat like the reverse of usual LSAT distributions. Such a school would look like a B+ average median school, but the average student is more likely to get a random A- than a B...
The average student will not just have B+, but also a random grade outside of the B+, and that random grade is more likely to be in the A- range, rather than in the B range...

Classes at Duke might look:
5%: 4-4.3
29%: 3.7-4
15%: 3.4-3.6
Above 3.3= 49%.
36%: 3-3.3 (imagine this 36% concentrated around 3.3)
15%: 2.5-2.9 (imagine it concentrated around 2.9)

The median at each class is a 3.3... but every median student has a good chance of often getting above a 3.3 because 49% of the class does so in my hypothetical. This mean that once in twp classes the median student would hit that above 3.3. That raises the potential median gpa if we count all classes.

Disclaimer: I do not know this for sure, and professors might be tough and act in the exactly opposite ways from what I am assuming. These things are very difficult to tell and they are done on purpose in such a way. My overall point is that it is difficult to make assumptions with this system, and if professors all wanted to be nice to students, the overall median might go really high even though each class has a 3.3, and 3.51 would not be a top 1/3 certainty.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Are you sure 3.51 places you that high? Do not professors try to maximize grades. Even keeping in mind that 3.3 should be median, if professors have maximized good grades, 3.51 COULD be out of 33%.

Think real quick. To grade onto DLJ is generally low 3.8s (let's just say 3.83 for simplicity). So, top 5% is about 3.83.

In your hypo, let's say 3.55 is top 33% and the median is 3.32 (even a little above 3.3). That means that 17% of the class is in a .23 band (3.32 - 3.55) and 28% of the class is in a .28 band (3.55- 3.83). Grades are almost certainly packed around the median as it seems like most professors push things towards the median.

3.51 is probably not top quarter but it is definitely in the top third. Probably somewhere between top 25% and top 30%.

OP: I've actually heard that grade on was likely somewhere in the mid 3.7's last year (from a rising 3L on DLJ who likely graded on). As far as where I fall inside the 25-33% range I doubt it matters much since no one actually knows, and employers probably look at people in that range relatively similarly. I agree though that from what I've seen/heard I'd be below 25% but likely around 30% or just slightly above.

Thanks for the help (and the rankings debate).