Top Law Schools

List them.

Even if its "regional biglaw" and it pays 10-20% less than market

lol best of luck

Unless you mean "don't care about grades after you've obtained an SA with them" and then we could draw up a pretty big list.

Well i mean for lateraling. 2-5 years of experience.

sometimesIwonder wrote:Well i mean for lateraling. 2-5 years of experience.

Probably easier to create a list of firms that do care about grades, in that case.

zweitbester wrote:

sometimesIwonder wrote:Well i mean for lateraling. 2-5 years of experience.

Probably easier to create a list of firms that do care about grades, in that case.

yes, but can you list any big firms that don't care about grades for laterals lol.

sometimesIwonder wrote:

zweitbester wrote:

sometimesIwonder wrote:Well i mean for lateraling. 2-5 years of experience.

Probably easier to create a list of firms that do care about grades, in that case.

yes, but can you list any big firms that don't care about grades for laterals lol.

I'm guessing you didn't understand my post...

..."lol".

sometimesIwonder wrote:Well i mean for lateraling. 2-5 years of experience.

You really need to figure out a way of including relevant information in your original post instead of hoping people read your mind. It would be even better if you could figure out a way of combining your plethora of posts into a single coherent thread. Such as: I'm a 3d year labour & employment lawyer who is considering all of the following things, even if they seem contradictory: diversifying my practice; finding a specialty with better long term prospects; preserving my employment at my current firm and practice area; looking to move to a midsize firm in a secondary city; looking to lateral to another biglaw firm; wondering if grades are important for laterals.

You honestly come across as someone who has no idea what they're doing, is incapable of communicating effectively, is incapable of doing basic research, and has little respect for the time of others. If you really are thinking of lateraling and changing practice areas, I think it would honestly be a good idea to come up with a convincing reason for why you are interested in doing so, because based on your meanderings here I have a difficult time believing that you'll be able to effectively sell yourself to a new employer/practice group.

dead head wrote:

sometimesIwonder wrote:Well i mean for lateraling. 2-5 years of experience.

You really need to figure out a way of including relevant information in your original post instead of hoping people read your mind. It would be even better if you could figure out a way of combining your plethora of posts into a single coherent thread. Such as: I'm a 3d year labour & employment lawyer who is considering all of the following things, even if they seem contradictory: diversifying my practice; finding a specialty with better long term prospects; preserving my employment at my current firm and practice area; looking to move to a midsize firm in a secondary city; looking to lateral to another biglaw firm; wondering if grades are important for laterals.

You honestly come across as someone who has no idea what they're doing, is incapable of communicating effectively, is incapable of doing basic research, and has little respect for the time of others. If you really are thinking of lateraling and changing practice areas, I think it would honestly be a good idea to come up with a convincing reason for why you are interested in doing so, because based on your meanderings here I have a difficult time believing that you'll be able to effectively sell yourself to a new employer/practice group.

You're absolutely correct. I didn't think it through I suppose. With that said, now either answer the question posed here or get the f%#@ out of my thread. Your argument is such a piece of crap that if I ever encountered you as opposing counsel, you'd wish you chose that English PhD instead of law school. This is also a message for anyone else who wants to play mr. Witty, if you don't want answer the question posed in this thread, your irrelevant comments are not welcome. Loser.

Tag

sometimesIwonder wrote: You're absolutely correct. I didn't think it through I suppose. With that said, now either answer the question posed here or get the f%#@ out of my thread. Your argument is such a piece of crap that if I ever encountered you as opposing counsel, you'd wish you chose that English PhD instead of law school. This is also a message for anyone else who wants to play mr. Witty, if you don't want answer the question posed in this thread, your irrelevant comments are not welcome. Loser.

QFP

Also, bold words for someone who goes to a thread titled "firms that are hiring 3Ls" and posts the following:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=192744&start=324 wrote: people out of law school expect to get jobs still? I never understand why 3Ls get hired.

sometimesIwonder wrote:

dead head wrote:

sometimesIwonder wrote:Well i mean for lateraling. 2-5 years of experience.

You really need to figure out a way of including relevant information in your original post instead of hoping people read your mind. It would be even better if you could figure out a way of combining your plethora of posts into a single coherent thread. Such as: I'm a 3d year labour & employment lawyer who is considering all of the following things, even if they seem contradictory: diversifying my practice; finding a specialty with better long term prospects; preserving my employment at my current firm and practice area; looking to move to a midsize firm in a secondary city; looking to lateral to another biglaw firm; wondering if grades are important for laterals.

You honestly come across as someone who has no idea what they're doing, is incapable of communicating effectively, is incapable of doing basic research, and has little respect for the time of others. If you really are thinking of lateraling and changing practice areas, I think it would honestly be a good idea to come up with a convincing reason for why you are interested in doing so, because based on your meanderings here I have a difficult time believing that you'll be able to effectively sell yourself to a new employer/practice group.

You're absolutely correct. I didn't think it through I suppose. With that said, now either answer the question posed here or get the f%#@ out of my thread. Your argument is such a piece of crap that if I ever encountered you as opposing counsel, you'd wish you chose that English PhD instead of law school. This is also a message for anyone else who wants to play mr. Witty, if you don't want answer the question posed in this thread, your irrelevant comments are not welcome. Loser.

Wow. This is a lot. Somehow, narcissistically as ever, I feel better about myself, but worse about myself in this world, because this exists.

sometimesIwonder wrote:List them.

Even if its "regional biglaw" and it pays 10-20% less than market

i know a couple

dead head wrote:

sometimesIwonder wrote: You're absolutely correct. I didn't think it through I suppose. With that said, now either answer the question posed here or get the f%#@ out of my thread. Your argument is such a piece of crap that if I ever encountered you as opposing counsel, you'd wish you chose that English PhD instead of law school. This is also a message for anyone else who wants to play mr. Witty, if you don't want answer the question posed in this thread, your irrelevant comments are not welcome. Loser.

QFP

Also, bold words for someone who goes to a thread titled "firms that are hiring 3Ls" and posts the following:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=192744&start=324 wrote: people out of law school expect to get jobs still? I never understand why 3Ls get hired.

Nice job with the investigation. Aside from the fact that you found this sizzling piece on me, could you please share your investigative strategy and how you were able to identify the most incriminating and "bold" post of mine among my thousands of posts. While it may be "bold" for me to share my insensitive thoughts out-loud with my fellow unemployed, I think the fact that you're willing to disclose your idiocy in such a blatant manner on this site is much more bold, and perhaps endearing for such a f$&@ing retard. Loser.

sometimesIwonder wrote:Well i mean for lateraling. 2-5 years of experience.

Depends on how long it was since you graduated from law school?

sometimesIwonder wrote:

dead head wrote:

sometimesIwonder wrote:Well i mean for lateraling. 2-5 years of experience.

You really need to figure out a way of including relevant information in your original post instead of hoping people read your mind. It would be even better if you could figure out a way of combining your plethora of posts into a single coherent thread. Such as: I'm a 3d year labour & employment lawyer who is considering all of the following things, even if they seem contradictory: diversifying my practice; finding a specialty with better long term prospects; preserving my employment at my current firm and practice area; looking to move to a midsize firm in a secondary city; looking to lateral to another biglaw firm; wondering if grades are important for laterals.

You honestly come across as someone who has no idea what they're doing, is incapable of communicating effectively, is incapable of doing basic research, and has little respect for the time of others. If you really are thinking of lateraling and changing practice areas, I think it would honestly be a good idea to come up with a convincing reason for why you are interested in doing so, because based on your meanderings here I have a difficult time believing that you'll be able to effectively sell yourself to a new employer/practice group.

You're absolutely correct. I didn't think it through I suppose. With that said, now either answer the question posed here or get the f%#@ out of my thread. Your argument is such a piece of crap that if I ever encountered you as opposing counsel, you'd wish you chose that English PhD instead of law school. This is also a message for anyone else who wants to play mr. Witty, if you don't want answer the question posed in this thread, your irrelevant comments are not welcome. Loser.

Well now you've basically guaranteed that I won't answer your question.

sometimesIwonder wrote:

Nice job with the investigation. Aside from the fact that you found this sizzling piece on me, could you please share your investigative strategy and how you were able to identify the most incriminating and "bold" post of mine among my thousands of posts. While it may be "bold" for me to share my insensitive thoughts out-loud with my fellow unemployed, I think the fact that you're willing to disclose your idiocy in such a blatant manner on this site is much more bold, and perhaps endearing for such a f$&@ing retard. Loser.

Keep your story straight if you are going to troll. Or consider that the attitude you have displayed here led to your current job status and will likely prevent you from finding a new job.

sometimesIwonder wrote:Nice job with the investigation. Aside from the fact that you found this sizzling piece on me, could you please share your investigative strategy and how you were able to identify the most incriminating and "bold" post of mine among my thousands of posts. While it may be "bold" for me to share my insensitive thoughts out-loud with my fellow unemployed, I think the fact that you're willing to disclose your idiocy in such a blatant manner on this site is much more bold, and perhaps endearing for such a f$&@ing retard. Loser.

You have 37 posts and made the quoted post last night - I don't think finding it requires any great effort. Unless, of course, that was your point, in which case you need to work on your sarcasm/insults. Also, I'm not sure how they're your fellow unemployed if you're a 3rd year labor and employment associate?

In any case, dead head's initial assessment of your posting was absolutely correct. If you would like people actually to answer your questions you need to think of more productive ways to frame your questions and respond to others.