Top Law Schools

I don't know how many Boalties we have lurking here, but why not start a thread to discuss EIW when our results come out today?

Seems like my list is solid. I got everyone in my 1-25 it seems. I haven't verified substantially, but it doesn't seem like I missed out on any of my big picks.

Anonymous User wrote:Seems like my list is solid. I got everyone in my 1-25 it seems. I haven't verified substantially, but it doesn't seem like I missed out on any of my big picks.

Same here. Is getting as many other interviews to fill the gaps the way to go now?

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Seems like my list is solid. I got everyone in my 1-25 it seems. I haven't verified substantially, but it doesn't seem like I missed out on any of my big picks.

Same here. Is getting as many other interviews to fill the gaps the way to go now?

I mean, your call. If it's a firm you have interest in, why not? But, I wouldn't sacrifice your sanity to have 30+ interviews just for the hell of it.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Seems like my list is solid. I got everyone in my 1-25 it seems. I haven't verified substantially, but it doesn't seem like I missed out on any of my big picks.

Same here. Is getting as many other interviews to fill the gaps the way to go now?

I mean, your call. If it's a firm you have interest in, why not? But, I wouldn't sacrifice your sanity to have 30+ interviews just for the hell of it.

My interest is in employment. Any good rule of thumb yields? Generally, how many interviews yield how many callbacks?

Just canceled a WilmerHale Palo Alto interview, so at least one spot is up for grabs tomorrow.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Seems like my list is solid. I got everyone in my 1-25 it seems. I haven't verified substantially, but it doesn't seem like I missed out on any of my big picks.

Same here. Is getting as many other interviews to fill the gaps the way to go now?

I'd be a little cautious about overbooking and fatiguing yourself. You can probably pull off a marathon day of 8 interviews, but your late ones that day will suffer (and it's likely te ones the next day will as well). Similarly, 6-7 interviews a day will probably leave you on fumes by day 4-5.

Anonymous User wrote:Seems like my list is solid. I got everyone in my 1-25 it seems. I haven't verified substantially, but it doesn't seem like I missed out on any of my big picks.

Wow, congrats. I missed a few in my top 25, but I'm happy with it for the most part. Hopefully I can pick those up at the hospitality suites, since I don't expect any of them to have open slots.

Re another poster, I don't have any desire to do more than maybe 25 interviews. 20 already sounds like hell.

Missed a bunch of DC, which I doubt will be opening up. Guess it's hospitality suites for me.

In the hopes that future Boalites use the search function, and because I couldn't find this information and consequently missed on a couple firms I really wanted:

-Orrick (SF) was gone by #8
-Lieff Cabraser gone by #16
-Paul Hastings (LA) gone by #17
-Altshuler Berzon gone by # 19
-Bingham (LA and SF) gone by # 20-21, respectively
-Sullivan Cromwell gone by #25
-Ropes & Gray gone by #27

Also, Irell (LA), Sidley (Chi), Latham (foreign offices), Jenner Block (Chi) somewhat surprisingly had open slots.

Feel free to add....

Anonymous User wrote:In the hopes that future Boalites use the search function, and because I couldn't find this information and consequently missed on a couple firms I really wanted:

-Orrick was gone by #8
-Lieff Cabraser gone by #16
-Paul Hastings (LA) gone by #17
-Altshuler Berzon gone by # 19
-Bingham (LA and SF) gone by # 20-21, respectively
-Sullivan Cromwell gone by #25
-Ropes & Gray gone by #27

Also, Irell (LA), Sidley (Chi), Latham (foreign offices), Jenner Block (Chi) somewhat surprisingly had open slots.

Feel free to add....

It might help to add what Orrick office. I got Orrick LA at a pretty low bid. The CDO only offers the previous year's data; so if you were early enough to visit the CDO website to get the 2010 data before they updated with 2011's, you could have looked at two data points instead of just one. Still two data points isn't ultimately that helpful.

My advice for future Boalties is this: assume a little over half your class is gunning for SF; about a quarter shoot shoot for LA. The rest aim for NY or DC. That's not groundbreaking information, but it helps ground your bidding. For example, you better put MoFo SF pretty high up if you want it, but you can afford to gamble a little with NY or DC firms.

I also got Orrick LA fairly low (22).
Bingham LA was gone by 18.

I was also surprised that slots were open for some of the bigger firms.

Anonymous User wrote:I also got Orrick LA fairly low (22).
Bingham LA was gone by 18.

I was also surprised that slots were open for some of the bigger firms.

Might be because people canceled their interviews. How about Wachtell being full.

(1) Is it just me or is b-line down? and (2) Does anyone else find it a bit odd that we can see who else is interviewing with a particular firm? I don't really see the merit in that.

It's definitely true that the SF firms are the most overbid, but I missed out on DC firms I bid in the low to mid teens.

Anonymous User wrote: -Lieff Cabraser gone by #16
-Altshuler Berzon gone by # 19

To add to the information pot, word on the street last year was that you had to bid Altshuler and Lieff in the top three to get an interview.

Good luck, everyone!

Tagging

Tangerine Gleam wrote:

Anonymous User wrote: -Lieff Cabraser gone by #16
-Altshuler Berzon gone by # 19

To add to the information pot, word on the street last year was that you had to bid Altshuler and Lieff in the top three to get an interview.

Good luck, everyone!

Damn, that's crazy. Though Altshuler did send out an email to collect transcripts for extra interviews, at least.

tag

I don't know much about Irell, but it looks like they didn't get a whole lot of bids, why is that? I expected them to fill up pretty quick.

Anonymous User wrote:I don't know much about Irell, but it looks like they didn't get a whole lot of bids, why is that? I expected them to fill up pretty quick.

This surprised me last year, too. For what it's worth, I don't think it's because people hate Irell or anything (although I know that some people have gone there and then lateraled elsewhere). My guess is that IP-minded folks might be generally more likely to want to practice in the Bay Area.

Also, I remember that the year before my class had EIW, the Irell interviewer was rude to a lot of interviewees, so maybe there is still some residual disinterest after everyone told stories about him/her being a jerk. Perhaps not the most fair way for applicants to evaluate a firm, but this person left an impression nonetheless.

All this aside, if you are interested in litigation in LA, I think Irell is worth interviewing with.

Anonymous User wrote:I don't know much about Irell, but it looks like they didn't get a whole lot of bids, why is that? I expected them to fill up pretty quick.

Irell is an IP focused firm that is also extremely grade conscious. People who fit that demographic typically want to stay in the Bay Area. People who don't typically don't waste their bids on Irell.

Staberinde wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I don't know much about Irell, but it looks like they didn't get a whole lot of bids, why is that? I expected them to fill up pretty quick.

Irell is an IP focused firm that is also extremely grade conscious. People who fit that demographic typically want to stay in the Bay Area. People who don't typically don't waste their bids on Irell.

But doesn't Irell do more than IP? The other grade-oriented places (altshuler and wachtell for two) filled up, whereas irell still has half of its schedule open.

irell definitely does more than IP, they have a really strong white collar practice and there's a lot of securities lit. i think more likely than not the open spots are due to the fact that they are well known for being extremely grade selective, and as stated, the number of people who can meet that cut off and want to be in la from boalt is pretty low.

Anonymous User wrote:(2) Does anyone else find it a bit odd that we can see who else is interviewing with a particular firm? I don't really see the merit in that.

I thought that was awkward last year, too, but it comes in handy if you need to swap times (names are clickable, sends an email).