Top Law Schools

Hi all --

I emailed a firm post-screener, letting them know that I'll be in the area for other CBs and would love to meet with them. The firm didn't reply positively or negatively; instead, i just received a "self-identify" request. It's been over a week since that request, and I'm still interested in them. Is it appropriate to follow-up to a follow-up? If so, how should I do it? Call / email the recruiter? Email my screening interviewer? Would appreciate any help!

PS -- the first time around, I emailed a follow-up to the recruiter.

Personally I think the first email was inappropriate, although others would disagree. A second followup post-screener almost certainly is.

ClubberLang wrote:Personally I think the first email was inappropriate, although others would disagree. A second followup post-screener almost certainly is.

A recruiter who's friends with our career services dean encouraged us all to send emails like the first one. If you're interviewing in a market that's far away (plane ride) from your school, why not? Also, this process moves pretty quickly, so why not?

Anonymous User wrote:

ClubberLang wrote:Personally I think the first email was inappropriate, although others would disagree. A second followup post-screener almost certainly is.

A recruiter who's friends with our career services dean encouraged us all to send emails like the first one. If you're interviewing in a market that's far away (plane ride) from your school, why not? Also, this process moves pretty quickly, so why not?

Hey, do what you want, my thought is just that they know you'll be in town and they know you want a callback already and anything further is kind of pestering. Most screeners result in rejection. It sounds like you've got other callbacks, I'd just move on and save my dignity.

ClubberLang wrote:Personally I think the first email was inappropriate, although others would disagree. A second followup post-screener almost certainly is.

I really wish law students were forced to identify themselves in this forum so their advice can be appropriately disregarded. A 3L really has no business stating what is almost certainly inappropriate.

TooOld4This wrote:

ClubberLang wrote:Personally I think the first email was inappropriate, although others would disagree. A second followup post-screener almost certainly is.

I really wish law students were forced to identify themselves in this forum so their advice can be appropriately disregarded. A 3L really has no business stating what is almost certainly inappropriate.

Wait so you agree with him?

TheThriller wrote:

TooOld4This wrote:

ClubberLang wrote:Personally I think the first email was inappropriate, although others would disagree. A second followup post-screener almost certainly is.

I really wish law students were forced to identify themselves in this forum so their advice can be appropriately disregarded. A 3L really has no business stating what is almost certainly inappropriate.

Wait so you agree with him?

No, I think he is a 3L who has no idea what he is talking about. Contacting a firm when you are goin to be in town is a common, and often appreciated move. Following up again, depending on how it is done, will have no effect, or could help. OP would have to really screw up his interaction with recruiting to move the dial from yes to no. He may get a no sooner by following up, but that would just be knowledge sooner rather than a different answer.

ClubberLang wrote:Personally I think the first email was inappropriate, although others would disagree. A second followup post-screener almost certainly is.

Why is the first one inappropriate? I landed 2 callbacks last week off that exact email telling them I am in the Area. It lets the firm save money and for many firms they simply don't have the resources to fly in/put up every person they want to callback

TooOld4This wrote:

TheThriller wrote:

TooOld4This wrote:

ClubberLang wrote:Personally I think the first email was inappropriate, although others would disagree. A second followup post-screener almost certainly is.

I really wish law students were forced to identify themselves in this forum so their advice can be appropriately disregarded. A 3L really has no business stating what is almost certainly inappropriate.

Wait so you agree with him?

No, I think he is a 3L who has no idea what he is talking about. Contacting a firm when you are goin to be in town is a common, and often appreciated move. Following up again, depending on how it is done, will have no effect, or could help. OP would have to really screw up his interaction with recruiting to move the dial from yes to no. He may get a no sooner by following up, but that would just be knowledge sooner rather than a different answer.

Valid point, no need to be a dick about it though. I just don't see how repeated follow up when he's already relayed the substance of his message is a good use of OP's resources. A long wait after a screener is usually (almost always?) a ding. I'd just accept it. Others may disagree and that's fine. Sorry for contributing.

ClubberLang wrote:

TooOld4This wrote:
No, I think he is a 3L who has no idea what he is talking about. Contacting a firm when you are goin to be in town is a common, and often appreciated move. Following up again, depending on how it is done, will have no effect, or could help. OP would have to really screw up his interaction with recruiting to move the dial from yes to no. He may get a no sooner by following up, but that would just be knowledge sooner rather than a different answer.

Valid point, no need to be a dick about it though. I just don't see how repeated follow up when he's already relayed the substance of his message is a good use of OP's resources. A long wait after a screener is usually (almost always?) a ding. I'd just accept it. Others may disagree and that's fine. Sorry for contributing.

Sorry for being a dick. It is really frustrating to come on here and see sweeping, emphatic edicts about what is and is or is not proper/correct/the way hiring is done. When these "decrees" come from students who have never actually been involved in the process, it is even more frustrating.

If you are a student, say so and couch answers that aren't anecdotes and experiences as speculation backed up with why you think that's the case. Hell, even practicing attorneys should refrain from universalizing their own perspective (and I have been probably guilty of this too).

TooOld4This wrote:

ClubberLang wrote:

TooOld4This wrote:
No, I think he is a 3L who has no idea what he is talking about. Contacting a firm when you are goin to be in town is a common, and often appreciated move. Following up again, depending on how it is done, will have no effect, or could help. OP would have to really screw up his interaction with recruiting to move the dial from yes to no. He may get a no sooner by following up, but that would just be knowledge sooner rather than a different answer.

Valid point, no need to be a dick about it though. I just don't see how repeated follow up when he's already relayed the substance of his message is a good use of OP's resources. A long wait after a screener is usually (almost always?) a ding. I'd just accept it. Others may disagree and that's fine. Sorry for contributing.

Sorry for being a dick. It is really frustrating to come on here and see sweeping, emphatic edicts about what is and is or is not proper/correct/the way hiring is done. When these "decrees" come from students who have never actually been involved in the process, it is even more frustrating.

If you are a student, say so and couch answers that aren't anecdotes and experiences as speculation backed up with why you think that's the case. Hell, even practicing attorneys should refrain from universalizing their own perspective (and I have been probably guilty of this too).

Dude don't Apologize. If you haven't heard back and it's most likely a ding anyways there is literally 0 downside to sending an email about how you'll be in the area and would love to meet with the firm. The person who posted that it is a bad idea is frankly giving bad advice. I can't imagine a scenario where a firm that Hasn't dinged you yet says "well we were going to call him back in the second wave until he emailed us about how we can see him for free/cheap instead of flying him in. Oh yeah also reiterated his interest in our firm."

Bad advice is bad advice