Top Law Schools

Junior associate on my firm's hiring committee here.

I've got two resumes of two close friends in front of me and I can only push one forward as my "recommendation" for an interview.

I want to push the one with the highest chance of actually getting the job/interview.

One is a median at MVBD. The other is top 1/3 at T20. Both are 2Ls. Neither are on LR. Both have moot court/secondary journal.

If you were a random mid-level/senior associate on my firm's hiring committee, who would you prefer to give an interview to?

Edit: this is NOT for my own home office. It's a satellite office of our secondary (home) market (all 3 of us went to HS together). FWIW, the T20 student is geographically closer to the home market but its still a couple hours flight time.

Which one would be the better fit?

This poll will probably be skewed because this site very likely has more median t14ers than top 1/3 t20ers.

Clemenceau wrote:This poll will probably be skewed because this site very likely has more median t14ers than top 1/3 t20ers.

True, but I also don't think there's a meaningful distinction in ability between someone at median and someone in top 1/3.

1. Does either have any work experience prior to law school?
2. Do they both want the same practice group? (In other words, is there a chance one wants a practice group the firm particularly needs and the other does not?)

Edited to add: I'd also probably look at course selection/grades in certain classes. For instance, if they want lit, I'd see if one had a much better legal writing grade than the other.

I'm not in either category but I think median at t14 is objectively better. Top 1/3 at t20 means you didn't get into a great law school, and you didn't do great in law school.

Hutz_and_Goodman wrote:I'm not in either category but I think median at t14 is objectively better. Top 1/3 at t20 means you didn't get into a great law school, and you didn't do great in law school.

Hutz_and_Goodman wrote:I'm not in either category but I think median at t14 is objectively better. Top 1/3 at t20 means you didn't get into a great law school, and you didn't do great in law school.

Or you took the full ride at Wash U like a gazillion other people.

I'd give it to the T20 guy because he probably has less of a chance of getting a job anywhere than your median t14 friend.

whats an updog wrote:I'd give it to the T20 guy because he probably has less of a chance of getting a job anywhere than your median t14 friend.

Agree.

RaceJudicata wrote:

whats an updog wrote:I'd give it to the T20 guy because he probably has less of a chance of getting a job anywhere than your median t14 friend.

Agree.

Yep

trebekismyhero wrote:

RaceJudicata wrote:

whats an updog wrote:I'd give it to the T20 guy because he probably has less of a chance of getting a job anywhere than your median t14 friend.

Agree.

Yep

same

Maybe a little edge for the t14et on paper but both solid so I'd recommend the one more fun to chill with

.

Firm likes to bill out T14 people more than T20. Might as well back the horse likely to win. Vote is telling here.

Bach-City wrote:

misterjames wrote:

trebekismyhero wrote:

RaceJudicata wrote:

whats an updog wrote:I'd give it to the T20 guy because he probably has less of a chance of getting a job anywhere than your median t14 friend.

Agree.

Yep

same

I'm with these guys. Regardless of which candidate is better, this will be more helpful to the T20 friend. Median at MVP will do fine

I also think it's telling that MVP median doesn't have a position lined up (op said they were 2Ls). MVP median had a full OCI to land something and didn't - firm will recognize this. T20 may also have struck out, but also had significantly fewer opportunities to land something during OCI

cron1834 wrote:Firm likes to bill out T14 people more than T20. Might as well back the horse likely to win. Vote is telling here.

lol are you trying to imply firms care about the law school of a hired junior associate when they bill clients? as if a client might google the junior doc reviewer to make sure they're t14 not t20 because heaven forbid they spend money on such a lawyer.

JenDarby wrote:

cron1834 wrote:Firm likes to bill out T14 people more than T20. Might as well back the horse likely to win. Vote is telling here.

lol are you trying to imply firms care about the law school of a hired junior associate when they bill clients? as if a client might google the junior doc reviewer to make sure they're t14 not t20 because heaven forbid they spend money on such a lawyer.

Exactly, that is ridiculous and stupid

DCfilterDC wrote:

Clemenceau wrote:This poll will probably be skewed because this site very likely has more median t14ers than top 1/3 t20ers.

True, but I also don't think there's a meaningful distinction in ability between someone at median and someone in top 1/3.

This. I'd argue there's little difference in the ability between these candidates. That said, I think clients would probably prefer school over a latin honor at a t20.

JenDarby wrote:

cron1834 wrote:Firm likes to bill out T14 people more than T20. Might as well back the horse likely to win. Vote is telling here.

lol are you trying to imply firms care about the law school of a hired junior associate when they bill clients? as if a client might google the junior doc reviewer to make sure they're t14 not t20 because heaven forbid they spend money on such a lawyer.

In some fields/locations clients will care, yes. It depends on what type of clients you work with and the degree to which the client is exposed to you as an associate.

I've even seen some clients pass over an attorney with 3+ years of solid experience because they didn't like where the attorney's degree came from. It's stupid, but it does happen.

elendinel wrote:

JenDarby wrote:

cron1834 wrote:Firm likes to bill out T14 people more than T20. Might as well back the horse likely to win. Vote is telling here.

lol are you trying to imply firms care about the law school of a hired junior associate when they bill clients? as if a client might google the junior doc reviewer to make sure they're t14 not t20 because heaven forbid they spend money on such a lawyer.

In some fields/locations clients will care, yes. It depends on what type of clients you work with and the degree to which the client is exposed to you as an associate.

I've even seen some clients pass over an attorney with 3+ years of solid experience because they didn't like where the attorney's degree came from. It's stupid, but it does happen.

Yes, of course it will happen to some extent, especially perhaps in more boutique or niche practice areas and firms. What else might happen is that a client is from CA and wants the UCLA or USC grad over the Duke grad. Or maybe they're from Texas and want the UT grad over the Northwestern grad.

I graduated in 2014 and still had to pull up the rankings to see where schools are in that range. This isn't the difference between Harvard and William and Mary. T14 to T20 can have arguments for or against either school based on personal preference. So no, I don't think that biglaw firm clients are generally going to prefer to pay for the t14 over t20 law students (esp considering t14 generally denotes the bottom half of that range).

Personally, I would back the one I feel would be more likely to do the actual job well, especially if my name was attached to the individual. If they were more or less equal in that capacity I would back the one more likely to interview well as I want my name attached to successful recommendations.

Assign one to heads, one to tails, and flip a coin a bunch of times to decide.

There has to be SOME other way to distinguish these two. There is no meaningful conclusion to draw from the information provided herein.

That said, if pressed on this under the incredible notion that they are exactly the same otherwise, I'd probably go with the T20 guy. A lot of qualified people attend lower-ranked schools for that sweet scholarship dough, and I'd rather have someone who excels among very smart people than someone who is average among people slightly smarter than very smart.

And lol at myself over "excels" being judged by law school grades. Truly, look at other factors here. Did either one ever work for a living? Writing samples? Personality?

AJordan wrote:Personally, I would back the one I feel would be more likely to do the actual job well, especially if my name was attached to the individual. If they were more or less equal in that capacity I would back the one more likely to interview well as I want my name attached to successful recommendations.

By the time this person has been at the firm long enough to see if they can "do the actual job well", OP will likely be long gone from the firm.