Top Law Schools

Going into my 3L year I was in the top third of my class at a school ranked between 55-65. However, I was going to law school in a city that I did not want to practice in. As a result, I spent a large portion of time during my 3L year making the 2.5 hour trip back to my hometown where I wanted to practice. I would go to lunch or meet with anyone who would talk to me. I was able to obtain a law clerk position at the firm that would eventually give me an offer who I currently work for. I also obtained a judicial internship. I worked both of these jobs during the fall and spring leading up to my graduation. This caused my third year grades to be less than stellar. I ended up graduating with a 3.09, in the bottom 50% of the class. The firm I currently work at is a 20 person firm, but I have always wanted to work somewhere larger. What is the best way to deal with my grades? Should I say something in my cover letter explaining the drop in my grades? Should I avoid putting a 3.09 gpa on my resume?

Work at the small firm for five years and your grades will matter less compared to your experience. Don't explain your grades, because your answer, however you phrase it, amounts to "I didn't try very hard and my grades slipped."

I don't know whether you should leave the grade off your resume - if you leave it off, your interviewer will know your grades sucked (and may assume they were worse than they really were), and if you put it on, they'll know the exact grades. I say put them on - they are what they are. They are yours now, so own them and move forward.

You should always put your gpa if it is above a 3.0. You might consider not putting your rank, however. Did you score above a 170 on the LSAT? If so, you might also put that on there.

sparty99 wrote:You should always put your gpa if it is above a 3.0. You might consider not putting your rank, however. Did you score above a 170 on the LSAT? If so, you might also put that on there.

Wait, what? Really?

Yeah, I would absolutely not put an LSAT score on a resume.

wert3813 wrote:

sparty99 wrote:You should always put your gpa if it is above a 3.0. You might consider not putting your rank, however. Did you score above a 170 on the LSAT? If so, you might also put that on there.

Wait, what? Really?

lol what?

Make sure to put your act/sat score below that one, then your PSAT if you really want to make an impression.

wert3813 wrote:

sparty99 wrote:You should always put your gpa if it is above a 3.0. You might consider not putting your rank, however. Did you score above a 170 on the LSAT? If so, you might also put that on there.

Wait, what? Really?

Some law firms and prestige-like firms ask for this (ibanks, top consulting firms). A high score exemplifies intelligence and strong analytical skills. If you are lacking in the class rank and possibly gpa, then a high LSAT score could mitigate those numbers. It shows that you are fairly intelligent and scored quite higher then your peers. Yes, one could wonder why you are not performing based on your high LSAT score, however oh well, a high LSAT score is one extra data point to judge you by if your law school grades are less than stellar.

You should also list any scholarships that you received.

sparty99 wrote:

wert3813 wrote:

sparty99 wrote:You should always put your gpa if it is above a 3.0. You might consider not putting your rank, however. Did you score above a 170 on the LSAT? If so, you might also put that on there.

Wait, what? Really?

Some law firms and prestige-like firms ask for this (ibanks, top consulting firms). A high score exemplifies intelligence and strong analytical skills. If you are lacking in the class rank and possibly gpa, then a high LSAT score could mitigate those numbers. It shows that you are fairly intelligent and scored quite higher then your peers. Yes, one could wonder why you are not performing based on your high LSAT score, however oh well, a high LSAT score is one extra data point to judge you by if your law school grades are less than stellar.

You should also list any scholarships that you received.

Don't list your LSAT unless they specifically ask for it. For most people, LSAT is only as useful as it predicts law school success and legal ability, and firms can look directly at your law school grades for that.

Do list any named scholarships you got. I would think about whether or not to list a scholarship if it was just a run of the mill merit scholarship without some sort of name attached to it. Though you could consider something like "Full tuition merit scholarship," or along those lines.

ph14 wrote:

sparty99 wrote:

wert3813 wrote:

sparty99 wrote:You should always put your gpa if it is above a 3.0. You might consider not putting your rank, however. Did you score above a 170 on the LSAT? If so, you might also put that on there.

Wait, what? Really?

Some law firms and prestige-like firms ask for this (ibanks, top consulting firms). A high score exemplifies intelligence and strong analytical skills. If you are lacking in the class rank and possibly gpa, then a high LSAT score could mitigate those numbers. It shows that you are fairly intelligent and scored quite higher then your peers. Yes, one could wonder why you are not performing based on your high LSAT score, however oh well, a high LSAT score is one extra data point to judge you by if your law school grades are less than stellar.

You should also list any scholarships that you received.

Don't list your LSAT unless they specifically ask for it. For most people, LSAT is only as useful as it predicts law school success and legal ability, and firms can look directly at your law school grades for that.

Do list any named scholarships you got. I would think about whether or not to list a scholarship if it was just a run of the mill merit scholarship without some sort of name attached to it. Though you could consider something like "Full tuition merit scholarship," or along those lines.

As I previously mentioned, if his gpa is a 3.0 and he had a high LSAT score, then he wouldn't have law school success. However, putting the high LSAT score, like a 170 above or probably a 175 even better, would look nice on the resume. And it would instantly singal that you have intellgence and you are smart. This can also be useful considering the school is not highly ranked.

sparty99 wrote:

ph14 wrote:

sparty99 wrote:

wert3813 wrote:
Wait, what? Really?

Some law firms and prestige-like firms ask for this (ibanks, top consulting firms). A high score exemplifies intelligence and strong analytical skills. If you are lacking in the class rank and possibly gpa, then a high LSAT score could mitigate those numbers. It shows that you are fairly intelligent and scored quite higher then your peers. Yes, one could wonder why you are not performing based on your high LSAT score, however oh well, a high LSAT score is one extra data point to judge you by if your law school grades are less than stellar.

You should also list any scholarships that you received.

Don't list your LSAT unless they specifically ask for it. For most people, LSAT is only as useful as it predicts law school success and legal ability, and firms can look directly at your law school grades for that.

Do list any named scholarships you got. I would think about whether or not to list a scholarship if it was just a run of the mill merit scholarship without some sort of name attached to it. Though you could consider something like "Full tuition merit scholarship," or along those lines.

As I previously mentioned, if his gpa is a 3.0 and he had a high LSAT score, then he wouldn't have law school success. However, putting the high LSAT score, like a 170 above or probably a 175 even better, would look nice on the resume. And it would instantly singal that you have intellgence and you are smart. This can also be useful considering the school is not highly ranked.

I'm only a 3L, but next year if someone sends me their resume with their LSAT score on it I would think that to be very odd. Can any associates/clerks speak to whether this is common or not? None of my friend's resumes that i've seen have had such a LSAT listing.

I've already seen it on people's resumes and have done recruiting. But as I mentioned, you only put it if it's high. Like really, 175 or above. And it's not necessary mostl ikely if you already have high grades. But if you wanted a V10 firm and you are a little out of their cut off, i wouldn't hesitate to put that 175 LSAT on my resume. Firms ask for it and ask in interviews, so clearly, they find some use in the number. Personally, i think it is irrelvant.

sparty99 wrote:I've already seen it on people's resumes and have done recruiting. But as I mentioned, you only put it if it's high. Like really, 175 or above. And it's not necessary mostl ikely if you already have high grades. But if you wanted a V10 firm and you are a little out of their cut off, i wouldn't hesitate to put that 175 LSAT on my resume. Firms ask for it and ask in interviews, so clearly, they find some use in the number. Personally, i think it is irrelvant.

I never had any firm except maybe 1 ask for my LSAT and even then i'm not sure if they asked for my LSAT and undergrad transcript or just my undergrad transcript. It just strikes me as odd, like the person who lists their high school accomplishments on their resume for OCI.

Not arguing with you, because you did acknowledge Todd point, but I'd someone had an lsat score way above their pets but a shitty gpa I would jump to the unfounded conclusion they were lazy, etc.

I just think the possibility that someone will be impressed by your high LSAT is outweighed by the risk that posting it looks douchey. I've never seen an LSAT on a resume. Admittedly I haven't done significant recruiting of any kind and it may be more appropriate in some industries (maybe elite consulting or the like really does want to see all your scores for everything). But in a legal setting I don't see it really helping. If the person was a great candidate in every other way I'd probably overlook it, but it would make a bad impression on me.

putting your LSAT on a resume looks douchey. period.

Putting your LSAT on a resume for a legal job if it is not asked for pretty much guarantees it hits the trash. After being pointed and laughed at.

Ignore your GPA. Rearrange your resume so that education is on te bottom and focus on experience. Grades and school are a sorting mechanism. If they have hard cut offs you are SOL. Your selling points should be what you have done since graduation. Specify and quantify.

So sparty doesn't tip the fact that he a URM on his resumes, but would have no hesitation in putting a 170+ LSAT score on it. I don't know why anyone should take his advice seriously.

I put my lsat score on my resume when applying to consulting jobs because they like that stuff. I can't comment on legal hiring bc I'm a 0L.

dead head wrote:So sparty doesn't tip the fact that he a URM on his resumes, but would have no hesitation in putting a 170+ LSAT score on it. I don't know why anyone should take his advice seriously.

I have a legal job despite being below median. Clearly I must be doing something right.

sparty99 wrote:

dead head wrote:So sparty doesn't tip the fact that he a URM on his resumes, but would have no hesitation in putting a 170+ LSAT score on it. I don't know why anyone should take his advice seriously.

I have a legal job despite being below median. Clearly I must be doing something right.

Logical Reasoning:
Question 1:

"I put my LSAT score on resume + I have a job. Therefore, I got the job because I put the LSAT on my resume."

Identify the weakness in this argument:
A. Speaker has confused correlation v. causation
B. Speaker could have gotten the job, despite putting the LSAT on his resume
C. Speaker is clearly a douche
D. All of the above

WhiskeynCoke wrote:

sparty99 wrote:

dead head wrote:So sparty doesn't tip the fact that he a URM on his resumes, but would have no hesitation in putting a 170+ LSAT score on it. I don't know why anyone should take his advice seriously.

I have a legal job despite being below median. Clearly I must be doing something right.

Logical Reasoning:
Question 1:

"I put my LSAT score on resume + I have a job. Therefore, I got the job because I put the LSAT on my resume."

Identify the weakness in this argument:
A. Speaker has confused correlation v. causation
B. Speaker could have gotten the job, despite putting the LSAT on his resume
C. Speaker is clearly a douche
D. All of the above

Oh, wait. Cause your poor reading skills failed to discover that I NEVER SAID I PUT MY LSAT SCORE ON MY RESUME. BUT NICE TRY THOUGH. You tried to be cute. But failed.

sparty99 wrote: I have a legal job despite being below median. Clearly I must be doing something right.

I'm glad you found something. And while you may have done something right, that doesn't mean your advice is solid.

Don't put your LSAT on there. If you do and also list a 3.09 GPA, that screams "underachiever".

While sparty is right that certain employers like seeing standardized test scores like the LSAT, legal employers are not in that group.

bk1 wrote:While sparty is right that certain employers like seeing standardized test scores like the LSAT, legal employers are not in that group.

You are wrong. I've seen firms specifically ask for it. Additionally, I've been asked in interviews. Also, I only said put this on if you scored very high. I know it might be hard for some of you straight-laced kids to think outside of the box when trying to get a job and putting your best foot forward. But shit. My record speaks for itself.

http://www.volokh.com/posts/1175045627.shtml

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... 0334268350