3L Don't Care, Know Nothing - All B's A Problem? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Have big law, not an amazing firm, but I like it. Just don't care. Will they care? Any reason to study? Down the road if I get canned, do employers look at 3L grades? If the answers are all no how does anyone try unless they're self concept is shaky enough to depend on grades? I've been learning entire classes in 3-4 hours, and doing reasonably well so have gotten cocky and need a panic moment. Please scare me.

[Jay2716]

I've seen lots of job ads for laterals that say something about law school grades. I've even seen some that have specific cutoffs listed. Grades don't matter as much as experience, and they won't matter for every job, but they absolutely can matter.

Disclaimer: still in law school

[Anonymous User]

About 25% of lateral jobs to which I've applied have required copies of my transcripts in the first submission. I graduated three years ago.

[XxSpyKEx]

Depends on how far you're out of law school. If you're 10-15 years out and have a portable book of business, no one will care about your grades. Not the least bit. On the other hand, if you're a few years out and looking to lateral, a lot of law firms and companies do ask for transcripts. Many job postings also say that they require "exceptional academics" or some bullshit like that. Overall, I don't think grades matter nearly as much as experience/the law firm you worked at, but it's not like no one cares after you get a couple years of experience.

[AreJay711]

Most of the lateral positions want what, a 3.4 minimum? Your GPA isn't going to fall by more than 0.1 so just check to see whether you can hold at a 3.4 with all B's. You should have saved you pass-fails for this moment.

[NonTradHealthLaw]

You know shit at this point in your life. If i saw your resume cross my desk after just a year of practice AND you phoned in 3L, I'd be leery. As others said, if you have a book and/or a couple years of solid performance then I'd congratulate you on 3LOLing it appropriately.

Know when your career starts and make deliberate decisions. I'm bored and this sucks is not deliberate.

[Anonymous User]

In lateral hiring, do employers just look at grades, or a combination of grades + school (as is the case for 2l hiring)? If you're median/slightly below at a school where those people generally do fine at OCI, will those grades become a problem when you're competing for lateral spots with people from lower tier schools who did better? (I.e. is a 3.3 from CCN better or worse than a 3.5 at a non-T14)?

Because if a 3.5 at a non-T14 is now more desirable, it seems that people at higher law schools actually have even more of an incentive to keep their grades up than they did before 2L hiring.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

Anecdotal but my 1L summer firm (big law, secondary market) they were hiring an associate and the partner told me one candidate, who I met, was not hired because her grades were so erratic (some low grades in courses that were relevant to litigation). The person they ultimately hired was summa cum laude from a T30 school.

[XxSpyKEx]

In lateral hiring, do employers just look at grades, or a combination of grades + school (as is the case for 2l hiring)? If you're median/slightly below at a school where those people generally do fine at OCI, will those grades become a problem when you're competing for lateral spots with people from lower tier schools who did better? (I.e. is a 3.3 from CCN better or worse than a 3.5 at a non-T14)?

Because if a 3.5 at a non-T14 is now more desirable, it seems that people at higher law schools actually have even more of an incentive to keep their grades up than they did before 2L hiring.

I don't think very many firms are quite this rigid when looking at laterals, where they are going to hire the 3.5 from a t14 over the 3.3 from CCN (and completely disregard everything else). I'm not a recruiter, so I don't have specific info, but I imagine the vast majority of firms look at the overall candidate, including the firm that they current work at, whether the type of work they have experience in matches what their needs, law school, grades, extracurriculars, "fit," etc. I think the biggest thing that will probably trump mostly everything else (with limits, of course) is if you have the exact experience that the firm has a need for. If you're looking for a 3rd to 5th year in a specific corporate practice group, it doesn't really make much sense to hire the guy who went to NYU and has 2 years of experience in general litigation over the t14 grad who has that exact experience they are looking for. The reason firms are willing to pay recruiters obnoxious fees for laterals is because it typically isn't super easy to find the exact lateral they need (unlike when you're a law school student who has no practice experience and are extremely fungible).

[Anonymous User]

OP here - my concern isn't that grades don't matter, but when they look for laterals, wouldn't they still prioritize first year grades? The incentive structure is very different b/w years 1 and 3 if your self-concept isn't at all based on grades. It doesn't mean I'm lazy, more that I've recognized how useless LS is for practice. I don't mean erratic like A, C, A, C. I mean like A, A, B+, B+ one year and B+, B+, B, B- a later year.

[Anonymous User]

Doesn't it depend on whether you're going to a V10, V20, or V50? If you start higher up do grades matter that much when you are trying to lateral?

[Anonymous User]

I guess my concern is similar. If you go to a school in the T6, even people in the bottom 1/3rd of the class could very plausibly get a job offer with good interviewing/smart bidding. On the other hand, if you go to a lower-ranked law school, the 2L selection process will, by and large, already have screened out most individuals with lower grades. So, aren't the people from top schools with 3.3 ish grades screwed in the lateral process, where they now have some of the lowest grades on the market? In that sense, shouldn't they be scrambling to raise their grades during 2L and 3L?

[Anonymous User]

OP here - my concern isn't that grades don't matter, but when they look for laterals, wouldn't they still prioritize first year grades? The incentive structure is very different b/w years 1 and 3 if your self-concept isn't at all based on grades. It doesn't mean I'm lazy, more that I've recognized how useless LS is for practice. I don't mean erratic like A, C, A, C. I mean like A, A, B+, B+ one year and B+, B+, B, B- a later year.

I've done the lateral job search and have not had any indication that people care more about 1L grades than other years.

The incentive structure is different for you because you went the biglaw route. Lots of attorneys didn't go that route, most likely including some attorneys involved in hiring at places to which you might apply as a lateral. If, like most lawyers, a hiring committee member applied for their first legal job after graduating from law school, their first thought upon seeing someone who did well 1L year and got progressively worse grades would not necessarily be "oh, of course she/he did, they lost their incentive to get good grades once they got a job offer after their 2L summer." It might be, "oh, they caught on to how to write a law school exam a bit quicker than their classmates and got good grades as a 1L, but by 3L their classmates had caught on and once they did, this person was pretty low on the curve." Or it might be entirely limited to, "oh, this person got X GPA," which GPA includes the 3L grades.

Part of me is just confused why you would risk it mattering in the future in order to save yourself from like 8-10 days of work.

[rpupkin]

Or it might be entirely limited to, "oh, this person got X GPA," which GPA includes the 3L grades.

I think that is what usually happens.

2L and 3L grades can matter for lateraling. They won't always matter, but they will for certain large firm, small firm, and government jobs.

I've never understood the TLS hivemind on this one. TLS is generally very risk-averse, especially when it comes to LSAT retakes and taking on debt. But when it comes to 2L and 3L grades, it's like: "No one cares as long as you don't fail! YOLO Bro!!"

[dixiecupdrinking]

Or it might be entirely limited to, "oh, this person got X GPA," which GPA includes the 3L grades.

I think that is what usually happens.

2L and 3L grades can matter for lateraling. They won't always matter, but they will for certain large firm, small firm, and government jobs.

I've never understood the TLS hivemind on this one. TLS is generally very risk-averse, especially when it comes to LSAT retakes and taking on debt. But when it comes to 2L and 3L grades, it's like: "No one cares as long as you don't fail! YOLO Bro!!"

It's because TLS is overwhelmingly law students and 0Ls who think that getting your first biglaw job is the be all end all.

[Anonymous User]

Or it might be entirely limited to, "oh, this person got X GPA," which GPA includes the 3L grades.

I think that is what usually happens.

2L and 3L grades can matter for lateraling. They won't always matter, but they will for certain large firm, small firm, and government jobs.

I've never understood the TLS hivemind on this one. TLS is generally very risk-averse, especially when it comes to LSAT retakes and taking on debt. But when it comes to 2L and 3L grades, it's like: "No one cares as long as you don't fail! YOLO Bro!!"

Yep. I'm the same anonymous as above, and was involved in hiring at my old firm. I wasn't involved in lateral hiring so I don't have insight into 3L grades mattering, but was involved in some 3L hiring and we absolutely rejected some people who had great 1L grades that got them an SA but lousy 2L grades. People care. At the very least it suggests shortsightedness, which isn't an attractive quality in a candidate.

[AreJay711]

OP here - my concern isn't that grades don't matter, but when they look for laterals, wouldn't they still prioritize first year grades?

Based on your experience at your firm, do you really think anyone's going to bother digging through an applicant's transcript and try to see how their grades changed? They might, but it's unlikely, especially since grades are not particularly well correlated to success at a big firm.

[Anonymous User]

Look bottom line you can either be the person who sacrifices everything as a machine in law school in order to continue to be the machine who sacrifices everything in practice, or you can realize that it's really not that serious until your job and take the time to be with friends, family, relaxation until you really need to put the effort in for your own benefit.

If you made it to the point where you have a full-time offer, that should really be your only concern and it does you no good to think 5 years down the road.

There's a reason people don't trust financial projections beyond 3 years because there is no way to have any idea what will happen by then at which point we can either be in a full blown depression, where your 3.7 won't save your ass, or NYC will be a ghost town and you'll be dead because ISIS manged to sneak in the dirty bomb.

In any event these kids really don't understand shit about shit and you should really just roll the punches. if you got the job congrats, don't f up.

ps:

And while I'm on the subject I feel like continuing my rant to say that this is a job (once you've gone biglaw corporate route you've lost all credibility to consider this a profession beyond malpractice liability), that's all it is, that's all it will ever be, and that's all anyone looking through the looking glass will see it as. No one cares, you're not hot shit, and any hot shit you think you are will be significantly beaten out of you in your first 12 months of this. Don't be Patrick Bateman saying, "I work for Pierce & Pierce, have you heard of it?" because they haven't. If you are, than you're the problem. But hopefully you're not and you remember that the guy who said such things was at one point a douche clown to you. Do not turn into him.

[dixiecupdrinking]

Look bottom line you can either be the person who sacrifices everything as a machine in law school in order to continue to be the machine who sacrifices everything in practice, or you can realize that it's really not that serious until your job and take the time to be with friends, family, relaxation until you really need to put the effort in for your own benefit.

If you made it to the point where you have a full-time offer, that should really be your only concern and it does you no good to think 5 years down the road.

There's a reason people don't trust financial projections beyond 3 years because there is no way to have any idea what will happen by then at which point we can either be in a full blown depression, where your 3.7 won't save your ass, or NYC will be a ghost town and you'll be dead because ISIS manged to sneak in the dirty bomb.

In any event these kids really don't understand shit about shit and you should really just roll the punches. if you got the job congrats, don't f up.

ps:

And while I'm on the subject I feel like continuing my rant to say that this is a job (once you've gone biglaw corporate route you've lost all credibility to consider this a profession beyond malpractice liability), that's all it is, that's all it will ever be, and that's all anyone looking through the looking glass will see it as. No one cares, you're not hot shit, and any hot shit you think you are will be significantly beaten out of you in your first 12 months of this. Don't be Patrick Bateman saying, "I work for Pierce & Pierce, have you heard of it?" because they haven't. If you are, than you're the problem. But hopefully you're not and you remember that the guy who said such things was at one point a douche clown to you. Do not turn into him.

Yeah ok but also take some pride in your work and don't blow off your 3L year just because you have a job.

If you have to be a "machine" to avoid getting straight B's (at a school that puts people in biglaw, where B's are basically bottom of the class), then, I dunno what to tell you.

There's a middle ground where you can not totally dick around while also seeing your friends and family.

[Wahoos]

ITT: Gunners rationalizing why they missed out on having fun 2L and 3L year

[desertlaw]

ITT: Gunners rationalizing why they missed out on having fun 2L and 3L year

Spot on.

[A. Nony Mouse]

There's a middle ground where you can not totally dick around while also seeing your friends and family.

Did people miss this? It's not either fun or decent grades.

[Big Shrimpin]

didnt read responses but GPA matters in lateral hiring for juniors

lots of the V20 also tend to be grade snobby

[rpupkin]

didnt read responses but GPA matters in lateral hiring for juniors

lots of the V20 also tend to be grade snobby

If you believe that, then you are a gunner who is rationalizing your lack of fun during your 2L and 3L years. Also, there are only two approaches to 2L/3L: (1) studying in a library 14 hours a day the entire semester, or (2) not studying at all until three days before your final. [/thread]

[Anonymous User]

This comes up every year, and everyone posts the same responses.

So I'll take my turn in the kabuki: in my firm, folks see transcripts when figuring out which juniors to try to pull into their practice group, and folks with bad grade drops get stuck in shittier practice groups and/or with shittier assignments. 2L/3L grades are also hugely important for lateral hiring until you are a very senior associate. I don't know what other firms do with any certainty but I can tell you recruiters have sworn to me that my 2L/3L grades will make lateraling a cakewalk if it ever came to that.

Think about it this way. High 3L grades suggest thst you are good at keeping focus during a boring, rather grueling, lengthy task, and will produce good work product even if it doesn't seem to matter much. What do you think firms look for in an associate?

That being said, if you have to study hard to blow away the curve during 3L year then you are doing it wrong. You're talking about classes where 20% of the students rarely show up . . .