LA BigLaw GPA Minimums
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2015 8:54 pm
Anyone know if GPA floors exist for LA Biglaw firms and if so, what they are?
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=250838
are you just making this up off the top of your head or nah? How could you possibly know what the cutoffs are for a UC Davis student vs. a Duke student?OutoftheWoods wrote:You could go all day analyzing each firm, but I think generally:
3.5+
Paul Hastings
Sidley
3.6+
Skadden
Gibson
Latham
STB
Sullivan & Cromwell
OMM
MTO
Arnold & Porter
There are prob a few im forgetting, but these are the most notable ones I think people look at.
If you're below 3.5, bid on everything else that makes sense to you. 3.4+ distinction is likely meaningless. no point below 3.3 bc well, you prob should just give up then (there are exceptions, of course).
Right. I would clarify at below T25, it does not matter what you're gpa is as long as you're in the top 10%. which tends to be the actual cutoff. 15% takes into account whatever the top 10% is (assuming you list that on your resume, being just below it by a bit)ManoftheHour wrote:It's ~15% for big law and 3% for fed clerk. You'd have some chance at at big law top quarter if you have WE or interview very well. Schools that range usually have lower GPAs so I would imagine the cutoffs are different. Example, at my school (ranked in the 30s), 3.1 is around median and 3.5 is ~ top 15%.
How do your numbers help OP? I don't understand what's going on in this thread. The obvious answer is "go talk to your CSO who gets paid $45-$100k/year to track the historical cut-offs for your school"ManoftheHour wrote:It's ~15% for big law and 3% for fed clerk. You'd have some chance at at big law top quarter if you have WE or interview very well. Schools that rank lower usually have lower GPAs to begin with so I would imagine the cutoffs are different (of course, it goes without saying that regardless, fewer of them will get big law than higher ranked schools). Example, at my school (ranked in the 30s), 3.1 is around median and 3.5 is ~ top 15%. 3.5 at WUSTL is like median/below median IIRC.
Yeah, this. GPA stats are utterly worthless unless they're for your school, and anything a firm puts forth as a "cutoff" is not to be trusted. Having seen the GULC and GW stats from OCI, there's a substantial difference in GPA requirements for most firms, which is probably based in part on school prestige but also differences in each school's curve.runinthefront wrote:How do your numbers help OP? I don't understand what's going on in this thread. The obvious answer is "go talk to your CSO who gets paid $45-$100k/year to track the historical cut-offs for your school"ManoftheHour wrote:It's ~15% for big law and 3% for fed clerk. You'd have some chance at at big law top quarter if you have WE or interview very well. Schools that rank lower usually have lower GPAs to begin with so I would imagine the cutoffs are different (of course, it goes without saying that regardless, fewer of them will get big law than higher ranked schools). Example, at my school (ranked in the 30s), 3.1 is around median and 3.5 is ~ top 15%. 3.5 at WUSTL is like median/below median IIRC.
This is a vast oversimplification that also omits a ton of firms.OutoftheWoods wrote:You could go all day analyzing each firm, but I think generally:
3.4+
Paul Hastings
3.5+
Sidley
3.6+
Skadden
Gibson
Latham
STB
Sullivan & Cromwell
OMM
MTO
Arnold & Porter
There are prob a few im forgetting, but these are the most notable ones I think people look at.
If you're below 3.5, bid on everything else that makes sense to you. 3.4+ distinction is likely meaningless. no point below 3.3 bc well, you prob should just give up then (there are exceptions, of course).
I was trying to prove your point. I'd rather have a 3.5 at my school than a 3.5 at non-T14 school in which a 3.5 is median. Because schools have different ranks for the same GPA, it's not all that useful to put a generalization on firm cutoffs based on GPA alone.runinthefront wrote:How do your numbers help OP? I don't understand what's going on in this thread. The obvious answer is "go talk to your CSO who gets paid $45-$100k/year to track the historical cut-offs for your school"ManoftheHour wrote:It's ~15% for big law and 3% for fed clerk. You'd have some chance at at big law top quarter if you have WE or interview very well. Schools that rank lower usually have lower GPAs to begin with so I would imagine the cutoffs are different (of course, it goes without saying that regardless, fewer of them will get big law than higher ranked schools). Example, at my school (ranked in the 30s), 3.1 is around median and 3.5 is ~ top 15%. 3.5 at WUSTL is like median/below median IIRC.
NYC2012 wrote:This sounds accurate for USC/UCLA at leastOutoftheWoods wrote:You could go all day analyzing each firm, but I think generally:
3.4+
Paul Hastings
3.5+
Sidley
3.6+
Skadden
Gibson
Latham
STB
Sullivan & Cromwell
OMM
MTO
Arnold & Porter
There are prob a few im forgetting, but these are the most notable ones I think people look at.
If you're below 3.5, bid on everything else that makes sense to you. 3.4+ distinction is likely meaningless. no point below 3.3 bc well, you prob should just give up then (there are exceptions, of course).
You go to UF. No la biglaw firm is gonna take a kid from across the country at a t50 school when they have more than enough kids in their backyard plus all the t13 kids.Anonymous User wrote:Does anyone know if I chance in big law with the following stats. First semester GPA: 3.23; Second semester GPA: 3.84; Cumulative: 3.56. I also I have a TA position starting in the fall. I go to the University of Florida and its currently ranked at 41. I know my first semester GPA was horrible but I'm planning to highlight the reasons for the jump in my cover letter.