Top Law Schools

Anonymous User wrote:

1) why wouldn't you apply anyway? What is it really costing you?
2) only you can answer this question.
3) you do realize SF is one of the most expensive cities in the country, in the state with arguably the most saturated legal market, right?

I think you should mass mail because 1) you're at a T2 (so you're never really safe), and 2) you're average at interviewing. I mean, it can't hurt.

OP here. I appreciate the response. I should clarify that at OCI, it is only local firms, and they only do OCI at my school.

I wouldn't apply because I feel like I have a better chance at getting a job through OCI and at this point, would prefer one of those jobs.

And as for SF being expensive and saturated, I do realize that, but with no debt and double the pay of my (not quite as high but still pretty high COL) home market, it seems like a financially sound choice. What I'm really asking is whether there are midlaw jr associate jobs that hire through SA programs.

ETA: I guess the quoted post was deleted, not sure why.

Anonymous User wrote:Thanks for the input.

You all are correct that I should mass mail and I will do so. I guess I am more interested in comparing the outcomes--80k/midlaw vs whatever is out there in SF (including whether such midlaw jobs are existent there). I know my chances at OCI. If I can nail 1/15 interviews, I'll have a job. Like many on this board, I am risk-averse. I worded the title in a misleading way--I am comparing two possible outcomes (one more likely than the other), not really asking if I should mass mail. I should have worded original post better.

So would you guys prefer SF biglaw or secondary market (think San Diego, Seattle, Miami) midlaw at 80k/year?

Kratos wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Thanks for the input.

You all are correct that I should mass mail and I will do so. I guess I am more interested in comparing the outcomes--80k/midlaw vs whatever is out there in SF (including whether such midlaw jobs are existent there). I know my chances at OCI. If I can nail 1/15 interviews, I'll have a job. Like many on this board, I am risk-averse. I worded the title in a misleading way--I am comparing two possible outcomes (one more likely than the other), not really asking if I should mass mail. I should have worded original post better.

So would you guys prefer SF biglaw or secondary market (think San Diego, Seattle, Miami) midlaw at 80k/year?

maybe worry about this if and when you get offers in both

Anonymous User wrote:OP again.

Alright, seems like you all think it's not worth thinking about options until they come to pass. That's fine. In my original post, I was among other things, trying to get a sense of whether I have a shot at an SF job. Still curious as to that. I know very little about the SF market in general. I don't think "preparing for interviews" and thinking about potential jobs is mutually exclusive. In fact, I think having an honest assessment of each job and knowledge about each job would actually help in interviews.

I have asked anon questions here before, and some posters are great and helpful. Others are quick to shit on anyone who may be in a different position than the average TLS-person. You all seem to think everyone is in a position where the reasonable thing to do is to take on huge debt, go to a T14/T6 school and then gun for big law, which you all seem to hate. I was lucky enough to go to a local T2 (where 75% of lawyers in my city attended, actual statistic, not a guess) without any debt. I also worked hard and did very well on my exams, ignoring the TLS studying cliches (I used no supplements, read every case closely, attended each lecture, and hand-wrote case briefs for each case). Biglaw is non-existent in my market. I was just trying to get a sense of what it is like so I can decide whether I want to spend time pursuing it (and yes, there is an opportunity cost). I am not guaranteed a job at OCI, but about 1/4 of the class will get jobs that way, and being in the top 3 should allow me a good shot at at least one offer, or else a state clerkship (which actually opens good doors in my city).

You guys seem to know a lot about biglaw. I was hoping for details pertinent to my situation. I know a partner at a large SF firm but was hoping for an associate's perspective. A lot of T2s (and T1s) do put even top students in a precarious position w/r/t jobs. But you guys should not be so quick to assume T2 = fucked and should pursue every option without regard to whether it would suit the person.

Anonymous User wrote:

I don't think you'll get a job in SF from a crap school in the middle of nowhere, but you should still apply. Is that better?

This was obviously supposed to insult me, but I am pretty happy and made choices that have paid off for me so far (taking no debt at a T2 over debt at a T14 where I'd likely be median). And it was more responsive/helpful than the previous comments, so I guess thank you.

Is my school crap? I don't think so. I've had excellent professors (way better than at the supposedly top tier undergrad I attended), like my classmates, have zero debt, and have pretty good prospects post-grad. For someone in the bottom half of my class, it may be a fair assessment.

No one is saying you're fucked, but just that you are not guaranteed and also you haven't given enough info to us. You said think Seattle, San Diego, or Miami. If you are at Miami with no connections to CA then you probably have close to no chance of getting SF big law. If you are at San Diego and from California with ties, you have a slightly better than 0% chance, but still not a great chance

Interesting, thank you. Does being originally from the bay area, and having half of my family there count as ties?

What else are you looking for here?

As in it seemed like you were looking for someone to tell you no.

Anonymous User wrote:You all seem to think everyone is in a position where the reasonable thing to do is to take on huge debt, go to a T14/T6 school and then gun for big law, which you all seem to hate.