Top Law Schools

USC/UCLA/UT/Vandy student, ~top 1/3.

Have a few longshot chances left, but I'm assuming a strike out unless something extraordinary happens. Almost certainly due to poor interviewing and perhaps some bad strategic decisions about how to sell myself. I already mailed quite a bit, but I know I need to mass mail more now, yesterday, etc. I am and will continue to do so.

However, I need to figure out what to do in the likely scenario that I fully strike out. I still want Biglaw, in any practice area, I don't really care. Midlaw would be my next choice if possible, but I know there aren't a ton of these jobs. The caveat is that my search must be limited to NYC. I did not bid a ton of NYC firms because this was not a limitation before, but it is now. I'd prefer not to discuss that further and just assume only NYC for these purposes.

I am wondering if going all in on one practice area and specializing is the way to go, because it seems that hiring after OCI is much more based on need in certain areas rather than generally. I honestly will do whatever is necessary to get a job. If tax is my best shot, I'll do it. Same for bankruptcy, corporate, lit, whatever. I'm wondering which of these areas would be best for getting NYC Biglaw after OCI, or if perhaps I'm wrong about specializing altogether. I want to decide soon because I may need to change my schedule around based on a potential specialty.

TYIA.

Unless you have some sort of reset button, I'm afraid you're SOL. Start looking for government jobs and small firms.

Bronx Bum wrote:Unless you have some sort of reset button, I'm afraid you're SOL. Start looking for government jobs and small firms.

Best bet is go to small/mid-law firms in NYC and mass mail the fuck out of them. Why do you think you are a poor interviewer? Serious question but how tall are you? Maybe try to set up a few phone screeners if you do bad in in-person interviewing.

Morgan12Oak wrote:

Bronx Bum wrote:Unless you have some sort of reset button, I'm afraid you're SOL. Start looking for government jobs and small firms.

Best bet is go to small/mid-law firms in NYC and mass mail the fuck out of them. Why do you think you are a poor interviewer? Serious question but how tall are you? Maybe try to set up a few phone screeners if you do bad in in-person interviewing.

Just some secondhand feedback I have gotten from CSO. It's not necessarily that I'm horrible, it is just that how I came off did not jive that well with my resume and how I sold myself. I think I was just a bit below average at interviewing, but because I was probably borderline gradewise at most places anyway, it wasn't hard to ding me. I'm over 6' BTW.

Anonymous User wrote:

Morgan12Oak wrote:

Bronx Bum wrote:Unless you have some sort of reset button, I'm afraid you're SOL. Start looking for government jobs and small firms.

Best bet is go to small/mid-law firms in NYC and mass mail the fuck out of them. Why do you think you are a poor interviewer? Serious question but how tall are you? Maybe try to set up a few phone screeners if you do bad in in-person interviewing.

Just some secondhand feedback I have gotten from CSO. It's not necessarily that I'm horrible, it is just that how I came off did not jive that well with my resume and how I sold myself. I think I was just a bit below average at interviewing, but because I was probably borderline gradewise at most places anyway, it wasn't hard to ding me. I'm over 6' BTW.

If you're over 6' like 6'3-4, you should just spend a week in NYC and mass mail every other biglaw/midlaw firm in NYC you'd consider working for, tell them you'll be in town and you'd love to meet them in person. Seriously, this is probably the best way since a lot of places won't give you a look on grades alone, if you're already in the city you have a shot.

Plus assuming you're not lying about the height thing, you'll probably have a good in person presence which is a huge part of interviewing.

Morgan12Oak wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Morgan12Oak wrote:

Bronx Bum wrote:Unless you have some sort of reset button, I'm afraid you're SOL. Start looking for government jobs and small firms.

Best bet is go to small/mid-law firms in NYC and mass mail the fuck out of them. Why do you think you are a poor interviewer? Serious question but how tall are you? Maybe try to set up a few phone screeners if you do bad in in-person interviewing.

Just some secondhand feedback I have gotten from CSO. It's not necessarily that I'm horrible, it is just that how I came off did not jive that well with my resume and how I sold myself. I think I was just a bit below average at interviewing, but because I was probably borderline gradewise at most places anyway, it wasn't hard to ding me. I'm over 6' BTW.

If you're over 6' like 6'3-4, you should just spend a week in NYC and mass mail every other biglaw/midlaw firm in NYC you'd consider working for, tell them you'll be in town and you'd love to meet them in person. Seriously, this is probably the best way since a lot of places won't give you a look on grades alone, if you're already in the city you have a shot.

Plus assuming you're not lying about the height thing, you'll probably have a good in person presence which is a huge part of interviewing.

Not lying about the height, but I am moderately overweight at the moment, which can't have helped.

Morgan12Oak wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Morgan12Oak wrote:

Bronx Bum wrote:Unless you have some sort of reset button, I'm afraid you're SOL. Start looking for government jobs and small firms.

Best bet is go to small/mid-law firms in NYC and mass mail the fuck out of them. Why do you think you are a poor interviewer? Serious question but how tall are you? Maybe try to set up a few phone screeners if you do bad in in-person interviewing.

Just some secondhand feedback I have gotten from CSO. It's not necessarily that I'm horrible, it is just that how I came off did not jive that well with my resume and how I sold myself. I think I was just a bit below average at interviewing, but because I was probably borderline gradewise at most places anyway, it wasn't hard to ding me. I'm over 6' BTW.

If you're over 6' like 6'3-4, you should just spend a week in NYC and mass mail every other biglaw/midlaw firm in NYC you'd consider working for, tell them you'll be in town and you'd love to meet them in person. Seriously, this is probably the best way since a lot of places won't give you a look on grades alone, if you're already in the city you have a shot.

Plus assuming you're not lying about the height thing, you'll probably have a good in person presence which is a huge part of interviewing.

Ahh, so I now I figured out my problem. I'm a short dude (5'6''), no wonder why I've failed so far

Anonymous User wrote:USC/UCLA/UT/Vandy student, ~top 1/3.

Have a few longshot chances left, but I'm assuming a strike out unless something extraordinary happens. Almost certainly due to poor interviewing and perhaps some bad strategic decisions about how to sell myself. I already mailed quite a bit, but I know I need to mass mail more now, yesterday, etc. I am and will continue to do so.

However, I need to figure out what to do in the likely scenario that I fully strike out. I still want Biglaw, in any practice area, I don't really care. Midlaw would be my next choice if possible, but I know there aren't a ton of these jobs. The caveat is that my search must be limited to NYC. I did not bid a ton of NYC firms because this was not a limitation before, but it is now. I'd prefer not to discuss that further and just assume only NYC for these purposes.

I am wondering if going all in on one practice area and specializing is the way to go, because it seems that hiring after OCI is much more based on need in certain areas rather than generally. I honestly will do whatever is necessary to get a job. If tax is my best shot, I'll do it. Same for bankruptcy, corporate, lit, whatever. I'm wondering which of these areas would be best for getting NYC Biglaw after OCI, or if perhaps I'm wrong about specializing altogether. I want to decide soon because I may need to change my schedule around based on a potential specialty.

TYIA.

Take all of the tax classes your school offers and get a tax LLM at NYU?

Holly Golightly wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:USC/UCLA/UT/Vandy student, ~top 1/3.

Have a few longshot chances left, but I'm assuming a strike out unless something extraordinary happens. Almost certainly due to poor interviewing and perhaps some bad strategic decisions about how to sell myself. I already mailed quite a bit, but I know I need to mass mail more now, yesterday, etc. I am and will continue to do so.

However, I need to figure out what to do in the likely scenario that I fully strike out. I still want Biglaw, in any practice area, I don't really care. Midlaw would be my next choice if possible, but I know there aren't a ton of these jobs. The caveat is that my search must be limited to NYC. I did not bid a ton of NYC firms because this was not a limitation before, but it is now. I'd prefer not to discuss that further and just assume only NYC for these purposes.

I am wondering if going all in on one practice area and specializing is the way to go, because it seems that hiring after OCI is much more based on need in certain areas rather than generally. I honestly will do whatever is necessary to get a job. If tax is my best shot, I'll do it. Same for bankruptcy, corporate, lit, whatever. I'm wondering which of these areas would be best for getting NYC Biglaw after OCI, or if perhaps I'm wrong about specializing altogether. I want to decide soon because I may need to change my schedule around based on a potential specialty.

TYIA.

Take all of the tax classes your school offers and get a tax LLM at NYU?

I seriously thought about this, but I did some searching of old threads that didn't paint job prospects coming out as particularly rosy. I'd absolutely be willing to do this if I thought it'd give me a decent shot at a job afterwards.

Oh, you're over 6 feet tall? Never mind, you're golden. Just start including that in your cover letter, bro.

Sign up for your school's dual MBA program and see if you can't get in on next year's OCI. This should also help bring up your GPA if you feast on 2L classes. I've actually seen this tactic work a few times.

Wait what. He's over 6'? Dude you're boned. If you've had these struggles and over 6', what sort of advice are you looking for?

Don't really understand if the people in this thread who are joking/doubting the height thing are being serious or not. Being height is huge. When I interview people at my firm, its natural for height to be a huge consideration whether it be conscious or subconscious. Tall people have presence. All things equal, am I going to hire a 6'4 person or someone who is 5'7? Just being honest.

The 6'4 person has a lot more leeway in the interview coming in than the person 5'7. Not saying I won't recommend anyone sub 5'9, but they have to impress me a lot more since the 6'4 person already starts off in the "impressive" category.

Morgan12Oak wrote:Don't really understand if the people in this thread who are joking/doubting the height thing are being serious or not. Being height is huge. When I interview people at my firm, its natural for height to be a huge consideration whether it be conscious or subconscious. Tall people have presence. All things equal, am I going to hire a 6'4 person or someone who is 5'7? Just being honest.

The 6'4 person has a lot more leeway in the interview coming in than the person 5'7. Not saying I won't recommend anyone sub 5'9, but they have to impress me a lot more since the 6'4 person already starts off in the "impressive" category.

cant tell if trolling or not but now I am thrilled with my # of callbacks considering I am 5'7 on a good day. I also think it depends much more on personality, a short dude who comes off as a pussy is an auto ding where as a tall soft spoken guy might not be. But as long as you come off as self assured/assertive, i have had no problems and haven't really given it much thought until this thread.

Morgan12Oak wrote:Being height is huge.

180

Morgan12Oak wrote:Don't really understand if the people in this thread who are joking/doubting the height thing are being serious or not. Being height is huge. When I interview people at my firm, its natural for height to be a huge consideration whether it be conscious or subconscious. Tall people have presence. All things equal, am I going to hire a 6'4 person or someone who is 5'7? Just being honest.

The 6'4 person has a lot more leeway in the interview coming in than the person 5'7. Not saying I won't recommend anyone sub 5'9, but they have to impress me a lot more since the 6'4 person already starts off in the "impressive" category.

So do you not interview women or do you just prefer members of the WNBA or something? (OP, sorry this isn't helping you!)

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

Morgan12Oak wrote:Don't really understand if the people in this thread who are joking/doubting the height thing are being serious or not. Being height is huge. When I interview people at my firm, its natural for height to be a huge consideration whether it be conscious or subconscious. Tall people have presence. All things equal, am I going to hire a 6'4 person or someone who is 5'7? Just being honest.

The 6'4 person has a lot more leeway in the interview coming in than the person 5'7. Not saying I won't recommend anyone sub 5'9, but they have to impress me a lot more since the 6'4 person already starts off in the "impressive" category.

So do you not interview women or do you just prefer members of the WNBA or something? (OP, sorry this isn't helping you!)

don't really consider height when i interview women. my advice was meant for bros only; so n/a for women.

Morgan12Oak wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

Morgan12Oak wrote:Don't really understand if the people in this thread who are joking/doubting the height thing are being serious or not. Being height is huge. When I interview people at my firm, its natural for height to be a huge consideration whether it be conscious or subconscious. Tall people have presence. All things equal, am I going to hire a 6'4 person or someone who is 5'7? Just being honest.

The 6'4 person has a lot more leeway in the interview coming in than the person 5'7. Not saying I won't recommend anyone sub 5'9, but they have to impress me a lot more since the 6'4 person already starts off in the "impressive" category.

So do you not interview women or do you just prefer members of the WNBA or something? (OP, sorry this isn't helping you!)

don't really consider height when i interview women. my advice was meant for bros only; so n/a for women.

So could you maybe not talk about interviewing as if the only people you're interviewing are men?

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

Morgan12Oak wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

Morgan12Oak wrote:Don't really understand if the people in this thread who are joking/doubting the height thing are being serious or not. Being height is huge. When I interview people at my firm, its natural for height to be a huge consideration whether it be conscious or subconscious. Tall people have presence. All things equal, am I going to hire a 6'4 person or someone who is 5'7? Just being honest.

The 6'4 person has a lot more leeway in the interview coming in than the person 5'7. Not saying I won't recommend anyone sub 5'9, but they have to impress me a lot more since the 6'4 person already starts off in the "impressive" category.

So do you not interview women or do you just prefer members of the WNBA or something? (OP, sorry this isn't helping you!)

don't really consider height when i interview women. my advice was meant for bros only; so n/a for women.

So could you maybe not talk about interviewing as if the only people you're interviewing are men?

Will do, thanks.

sorry to get cranky at you.

OP, I hope something works out. My sense is that last year people got jobs (NYC/biglaw) way later than this, though I know the process sucks.

This is my first time closely following legal employment related threads and so far it has delivered. Close to Schulte-level trolling.

This Morgan clown is the same idiot peddling the Vault rankings as the best source for making a decision between firms and saying you should use it over perceived fit. So feel free to just ignore his advice as he's obviously not anything but a troll.

omfg people are taking this guy seriously

SLS_AMG is the same idiot perpetuating the idea that rankings somehow don't matter. Can we please stop this elaborate culture/fit flame?

I have to say I find the idea that height determines interview success much weirder than the idea that rankings produced by polling associates and heavily weighted toward NYC corp don't have any real significance, but could you all stick to addressing the OP's question? (We know the issue isn't height.)