Top Law Schools

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/biglaw-a ... youre-out/

Do we know which firm this is yet?

WSGR Palo Alto

Holy cow.

so if I got this right, they told applicants back in OCI that they typically give associates a second chance, they've historically given associates a second and sometimes third opportunity, and this year they've decided that some associates who failed can repeat while others cannot. that's extremely frustrating and definitely warrants some answers...

This is straight up savage

misterjames wrote:so if I got this right, they told applicants back in OCI that they typically give associates a second chance, they've historically given associates a second and sometimes third opportunity, and this year they've decided that some associates who failed can repeat while others cannot. that's extremely frustrating and definitely warrants some answers...

I think the reason why they're able to do that (not that it's not super fucked up) is the way their system works. For example, at my firm it's explicitly in the attorney handbook that we get a second chance, and after that at the firm's discretion. My understanding of WSGR is the second chance needs partner approval, which was obviously traditionally given. However this year they cheaped out and stuck their dick in that tradition, pointing to the policy requiring partner approval and saying, to some but not others, that there wasn't partner approval. Too bad so sad, don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

Not OP, but I will also offer that when I took second looks after receiving SA offers, WSGR was the only firm that said explicitly I'd have to pay my own way out there.

Idk if it's a sign of financial trouble or just being cheap, but not a good look.

savage. maybe it was just a cover for firing one associate that turned out to be garbage?

or do we know how many people got fired for this?

ArtistOfManliness wrote:savage. maybe it was just a cover for firing one associate that turned out to be garbage?

or do we know how many people got fired for this?

Shit, you'd have to be beyond garbage to get shitcanned a couple months in. Or crazy inappropriate. Maybe it's the dude who brought hookers to the Latham retreat.

Putting on my flame suit here, but I don't have a big problem with it, assuming they now hire to fill the position. That gives someone else a chance and makes this a wash. I think failing the bar is a big red flag and, while I know some decent attorneys who have failed the bar, I am not aware of any truly outstanding lawyers who failed.

smallfirmassociate wrote:Putting on my flame suit here, but I don't have a big problem with it, assuming they now hire to fill the position. That gives someone else a chance and makes this a wash. I think failing the bar is a big red flag and, while I know some decent attorneys who have failed the bar, I am not aware of any truly outstanding lawyers who failed.

I don't disagree with you about most of it. But if the firm told people this whole time that they always give a second chance and are still giving some, but not others a second chance that is really shitty. And yeah it is a wash if they do hire someone, but more likely than not this is an attempt to save money

trebekismyhero wrote:

smallfirmassociate wrote:Putting on my flame suit here, but I don't have a big problem with it, assuming they now hire to fill the position. That gives someone else a chance and makes this a wash. I think failing the bar is a big red flag and, while I know some decent attorneys who have failed the bar, I am not aware of any truly outstanding lawyers who failed.

I don't disagree with you about most of it. But if the firm told people this whole time that they always give a second chance and are still giving some, but not others a second chance that is really shitty. And yeah it is a wash if they do hire someone, but more likely than not this is an attempt to save money

Agreed. The practice itself isn't shitty - lots of employers don't give second chances. Going back on promises and treating people differently is shitty.

smallfirmassociate wrote:Putting on my flame suit here, but I don't have a big problem with it, assuming they now hire to fill the position. That gives someone else a chance and makes this a wash. I think failing the bar is a big red flag and, while I know some decent attorneys who have failed the bar, I am not aware of any truly outstanding lawyers who failed.

if you were told that your firm didn't care if you failed once, you might be more likely to study less/go to Europe/have fun and hope for the best the first time. and if you fail, study hard the second time. doesn't seem all that crazy of an idea to me... and definitely not one for which you should lose your job.

WSGR is going to lose a lot of HYS (well, mostly S) people for this. gotta wonder why it was so necessary

smallfirmassociate wrote:Putting on my flame suit here, but I don't have a big problem with it, assuming they now hire to fill the position. That gives someone else a chance and makes this a wash. I think failing the bar is a big red flag and, while I know some decent attorneys who have failed the bar, I am not aware of any truly outstanding lawyers who failed.

Pretty sure Kathleen Sullivan of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan failed the CA bar. Also, I'm sure plenty of "truly outstanding" attorneys have failed the bar, but simply don't disclose it or talk about it freely. Unless you are looking up ARDC info for all attorneys you meet, you wouldn't know when a person passed in x year or if they failed.

RaceJudicata wrote:

smallfirmassociate wrote:Putting on my flame suit here, but I don't have a big problem with it, assuming they now hire to fill the position. That gives someone else a chance and makes this a wash. I think failing the bar is a big red flag and, while I know some decent attorneys who have failed the bar, I am not aware of any truly outstanding lawyers who failed.

Pretty sure Kathleen Sullivan of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan failed the CA bar. Also, I'm sure plenty of "truly outstanding" attorneys have failed the bar, but simply don't disclose it or talk about it freely. Unless you are looking up ARDC info for all attorneys you meet, you wouldn't know when a person passed in x year or if they failed.

didn't she fail when she was mid-career (ie, mid destroying all opposing litigants) and already admitted to another bar?

ArtistOfManliness wrote:

RaceJudicata wrote:

smallfirmassociate wrote:Putting on my flame suit here, but I don't have a big problem with it, assuming they now hire to fill the position. That gives someone else a chance and makes this a wash. I think failing the bar is a big red flag and, while I know some decent attorneys who have failed the bar, I am not aware of any truly outstanding lawyers who failed.

Pretty sure Kathleen Sullivan of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan failed the CA bar. Also, I'm sure plenty of "truly outstanding" attorneys have failed the bar, but simply don't disclose it or talk about it freely. Unless you are looking up ARDC info for all attorneys you meet, you wouldn't know when a person passed in x year or if they failed.

didn't she fail when she was mid-career (ie, mid destroying all opposing litigants) and already admitted to another bar?

Yeah, I think she failed it right before becoming Dean of Stanford.

smallfirmassociate wrote:Putting on my flame suit here, but I don't have a big problem with it, assuming they now hire to fill the position. That gives someone else a chance and makes this a wash. I think failing the bar is a big red flag and, while I know some decent attorneys who have failed the bar, I am not aware of any truly outstanding lawyers who failed.

You must not know many lawyers.

WSGR junior associate here, I hadn't heard anything. Does whoever knows it was WSGR have more details? Like how they know and which groups the 1st years were in? Thanks!

smallfirmassociate wrote:Putting on my flame suit here, but I don't have a big problem with it, assuming they now hire to fill the position. That gives someone else a chance and makes this a wash. I think failing the bar is a big red flag and, while I know some decent attorneys who have failed the bar, I am not aware of any truly outstanding lawyers who failed.

Lol yea that ben cardozo guy is totes overrated

ArtistOfManliness wrote:savage. maybe it was just a cover for firing one associate that turned out to be garbage?

yeah it sounds like a pretext.

It's not just the bar. Someone didn't like the people who failed the bar, and bar passage/bad grades are the safest reasons for firing someone.

Nobody fails the bar because they thought they'd get a second chance. They might fail bec the rate of first time test takers from xyz failing is so low that no rational person will be afraid until late in the process and fear is the only incentive to study. Even if you can take it again, it's such a pain in the ass that your motivation won't change regardless of whether you get a second chance.

The caveat to this is those without a job are gonna sulk but people with a job are never likelier to fail - that's a complete misunderstanding of how motivation works. Motivation is goal oriented. Once you doubt something will lead to you achieving your goal, it's very hard to try. That's why the whole admission numbers : bar passage correlation is flawed. The ABA is ignoring one of the biggest, if not the biggest factors.