Top Law Schools

Delete Thread.

I would leave it off completely. You don’t want to draw attention to the fact that you weren’t at least top quarter.

With your stats and the fact that you’re at a v100 already, that should be what the firm judges. Don’t give them more ammunition to reject you.

Anonymous User wrote:I would leave it off completely. You don’t want to draw attention to the fact that you weren’t at least top quarter.

With your stats and the fact that you’re at a v100 already, that should be what the firm judges. Don’t give them more ammunition to reject you.

Post deleted.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I would leave it off completely. You don’t want to draw attention to the fact that you weren’t at least top quarter.

With your stats and the fact that you’re at a v100 already, that should be what the firm judges. Don’t give them more ammunition to reject you.

OP here. Thanks, for the reply. I'm concerned by removing class rank or my GPA it will signal I was below median.

Disagree with the previous poster. I'm in favor of leaving it on for the exact reason you mention: Leaving it off suggests you have something to hide. Ofc top quarter would've been better but top third is still good, and certainly I can't imagine anyone seeing top third and deciding to ding you for grades. To be direct, you went from a T20 to a V100 - firms wouldn't be picking up your resume if they wanted an Order of the Coif type.

Gut says to go with A, as your career services office recommends. I certainly wouldn't go with B, which has the effect of significantly understating your actual rank.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I would leave it off completely. You don’t want to draw attention to the fact that you weren’t at least top quarter.

With your stats and the fact that you’re at a v100 already, that should be what the firm judges. Don’t give them more ammunition to reject you.

OP here. Thanks, for the reply. I'm concerned by removing class rank or my GPA it will signal I was below median.

Quoted anon. I’ve lateraled twice. I’ve never included my gpa. I was near top third like you. Both firms asked for my transcript after my interview. I don’t think I would’ve done any better if I had included my gpa (honestly think I would’ve done worse).

V100 -> V50 -> V20 (if you’re curious).

Some places might care and assume you’re below median, but lateral hiring is difficult, so firms are more lenient.

I would put some explanation. Maybe even:

GPA 3.26 (Median 3.1).

I think the other ideas you suggested are ok too.

I thought all T20s curved to 3.33, so if I saw your resume listing a 3.26 I'd assume you were below median. So I think you need to include some info to dispel that assumption. (Maybe it's just a bad assumption on my part though.)

Pneumonia wrote:I would put some explanation. Maybe even:

GPA 3.26 (Median 3.1).

I think the other ideas you suggested are ok too.

I thought all T20s curved to 3.33, so if I saw your resume listing a 3.26 I'd assume you were below median. So I think you need to include some info to dispel that assumption. (Maybe it's just a bad assumption on my part though.)

I agree that there’s an (unfortunate) assumption that below a 3.3 is considered below median. There are a minority of law schools (idiotically) curve below that in the T20, which hinders recent grads who are having to apply for jobs.

Since you are a few years out, I would either omit GPA or signal that you were above median as above poster mentioned. Selection A of listing the percentile range is fine too. Make sure to mention any Dean’s List or CALI awards.

As previously posters mentioned, any interviews will focus on your experience and competence.

I would probably put:

GPA 3.25 (Top 35% = 3.18)


I think that most would assume your GPA is below median if you just leave it off, but you need to put more info to show that your GPA is actually pretty good because 3.25 would be bad at some schools. At WUSTL, for instance, it would be bottom 10% or so.

hoos89 wrote:I would probably put:

GPA 3.25 (Top 35% = 3.18)


I think that most would assume your GPA is below median if you just leave it off, but you need to put more info to show that your GPA is actually pretty good because 3.25 would be bad at some schools. At WUSTL, for instance, it would be bottom 10% or so.

Good point

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:I would probably put:

GPA 3.25 (Top 35% = 3.18)


I think that most would assume your GPA is below median if you just leave it off, but you need to put more info to show that your GPA is actually pretty good because 3.25 would be bad at some schools. At WUSTL, for instance, it would be bottom 10% or so.

What are your thoughts on leaving off GPA but listing an esoteric recognition given for an outstanding cumulative GPA? (no formal latin homors)
For example (this isn’t the actual name):
- Outstanding Academics Award (recognized for a high cumulative GPA)

I would find it weird if I saw a resume that noted high GPA but didn't list the GPA.

hoos89 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:I would probably put:

GPA 3.25 (Top 35% = 3.18)


I think that most would assume your GPA is below median if you just leave it off, but you need to put more info to show that your GPA is actually pretty good because 3.25 would be bad at some schools. At WUSTL, for instance, it would be bottom 10% or so.

What are your thoughts on leaving off GPA but listing an esoteric recognition given for an outstanding cumulative GPA? (no formal latin homors)
For example (this isn’t the actual name):
- Outstanding Academics Award (recognized for a high cumulative GPA)

Edit: Be accurate on what you list as your class rank.

List it as the following.

3.25 (Estimated Class Rank: Top 30% - 35%)
It looks less clunky than A and gives the same information and avoids the Top 1/3 dilemma.

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:I would probably put:

GPA 3.25 (Top 35% = 3.18)


I think that most would assume your GPA is below median if you just leave it off, but you need to put more info to show that your GPA is actually pretty good because 3.25 would be bad at some schools. At WUSTL, for instance, it would be bottom 10% or so.

What are your thoughts on leaving off GPA but listing an esoteric recognition given for an outstanding cumulative GPA? (no formal latin homors)
For example (this isn’t the actual name):
- Outstanding Academics Award (recognized for a high cumulative GPA)

Maybe just put top 30% and list that award. Those charts vary each year and no one really verifies class rank lin lateral hiring. They will verify your professional references and that you are leaving the firm on good terms

Do not lie about your credentials. Especially dumb in this instance given that you'd essentially be risking your career (low risk of getting caught notwithstanding) over something that's unlikely to make any real difference.

hoos89 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:I would probably put:

GPA 3.25 (Top 35% = 3.18)


I think that most would assume your GPA is below median if you just leave it off, but you need to put more info to show that your GPA is actually pretty good because 3.25 would be bad at some schools. At WUSTL, for instance, it would be bottom 10% or so.

What are your thoughts on leaving off GPA but listing an esoteric recognition given for an outstanding cumulative GPA? (no formal latin homors)
For example (this isn’t the actual name):
- Outstanding Academics Award (recognized for a high cumulative GPA)

Maybe just put top 30% and list that award. Those charts vary each year and no one really verifies class rank lin lateral hiring. They will verify your professional references and that you are leaving the firm on good terms

Why would you lie about your credentials in this instance? How much are you likely to gain by saying top 30% instead of top 35%? Yeah you're probably not going to get caught but why even go there over something that's unlikely to make a difference?

OP here. I completely agree and also know my school verifies frequently. It would only hurt.

Anonymous User wrote:List it as the following.

3.25 (Estimated Class Rank: Top 30% - 35%)
It looks less clunky than A and gives the same information and avoids the Top 1/3 dilemma.

An estimate isn’t the same as saying “top 35% = 3.(whatever).” Don’t estimate; you can only put info that your law school has given you.

nixy wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:List it as the following.

3.25 (Estimated Class Rank: Top 30% - 35%)
It looks less clunky than A and gives the same information and avoids the Top 1/3 dilemma.

An estimate isn’t the same as saying “top 35% = 3.(whatever).” Don’t estimate; you can only put info that your law school has given you.

Further, saying "estimate" suggests the percentile range is an unofficial/unreliable guess. Don't say "estimate." Just go with option A.

If the GPA is using the information the school provided follow the percentile class ranks, this is perfectly valid. Don’t state 20-25% if you don’t fall between those two. There are some schools that explicitly state don’t estimate class rank (e.g. NDLS). This isn’t the case here. This format is recommended since the school doesn’t provide an exact class rank (instead it’s a 5% increment) and there’s a substantial difference in a 3.24 and 3.16. If anything, removing the word “estimated” makes sense.

hoos89 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:I would probably put:

GPA 3.25 (Top 35% = 3.18)


I think that most would assume your GPA is below median if you just leave it off, but you need to put more info to show that your GPA is actually pretty good because 3.25 would be bad at some schools. At WUSTL, for instance, it would be bottom 10% or so.

What are your thoughts on leaving off GPA but listing an esoteric recognition given for an outstanding cumulative GPA? (no formal latin homors)
For example (this isn’t the actual name):
- Outstanding Academics Award (recognized for a high cumulative GPA)

I would find it weird if I saw a resume that noted high GPA but didn't list the GPA.

eh at Columbia, for example, the school expressly doesn't calculate a cumulative GPA (except for SCOTUS or something). but they give academic awards at the end of each year.

anyway, to echo others -- if you're going to put your GPA on the resume, include an explanation. a 3.2something would be bad at my school. however, I see nothing wrong with doing "Top 1/3": it's factually correct and you're not obligated the follow the school's esoteric resume policies 3 years out of law school. if someone calls the school, they'll get a response that you're in the 30-35% range and your GPA is much closer to the 30% than the 35%. so...yeah, top 1/3

A or B in the OP are fine. If the school says “don’t list top 1/3,” don’t list top 1/3 - for one thing, you never know when you’ll run into an alum who knows the esoteric resume policies and thinks violating them is bad. A firm is really not going to see any material difference between top 33.333333% and top 35% anyway - it’s like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:I would probably put:

GPA 3.25 (Top 35% = 3.18)


I think that most would assume your GPA is below median if you just leave it off, but you need to put more info to show that your GPA is actually pretty good because 3.25 would be bad at some schools. At WUSTL, for instance, it would be bottom 10% or so.

What are your thoughts on leaving off GPA but listing an esoteric recognition given for an outstanding cumulative GPA? (no formal latin homors)
For example (this isn’t the actual name):
- Outstanding Academics Award (recognized for a high cumulative GPA)

I would find it weird if I saw a resume that noted high GPA but didn't list the GPA.

eh at Columbia, for example, the school expressly doesn't calculate a cumulative GPA (except for SCOTUS or something). but they give academic awards at the end of each year.

anyway, to echo others -- if you're going to put your GPA on the resume, include an explanation. a 3.2something would be bad at my school. however, I see nothing wrong with doing "Top 1/3": it's factually correct and you're not obligated the follow the school's esoteric resume policies 3 years out of law school. if someone calls the school, they'll get a response that you're in the 30-35% range and your GPA is much closer to the 30% than the 35%. so...yeah, top 1/3

We actually don't have enough data to say that OP is in top 1/3 with certainty. Probably true, but not provable.

This is a tough one, I leave my GPA off, but have latin honors. I think the right answer is A

But more importantly, what T20 has such a low median GPA? That is a killer, I thought almost all T1 schools had between a 3.2 and 3.3 median 1L and then went higher 2L and 3L

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

hoos89 wrote:I would probably put:

GPA 3.25 (Top 35% = 3.18)


I think that most would assume your GPA is below median if you just leave it off, but you need to put more info to show that your GPA is actually pretty good because 3.25 would be bad at some schools. At WUSTL, for instance, it would be bottom 10% or so.

What are your thoughts on leaving off GPA but listing an esoteric recognition given for an outstanding cumulative GPA? (no formal latin homors)
For example (this isn’t the actual name):
- Outstanding Academics Award (recognized for a high cumulative GPA)

I would find it weird if I saw a resume that noted high GPA but didn't list the GPA.

eh at Columbia, for example, the school expressly doesn't calculate a cumulative GPA (except for SCOTUS or something). but they give academic awards at the end of each year.

anyway, to echo others -- if you're going to put your GPA on the resume, include an explanation. a 3.2something would be bad at my school. however, I see nothing wrong with doing "Top 1/3": it's factually correct and you're not obligated the follow the school's esoteric resume policies 3 years out of law school. if someone calls the school, they'll get a response that you're in the 30-35% range and your GPA is much closer to the 30% than the 35%. so...yeah, top 1/3

Present the best version on resume.

I'd omit the "(recognized for cumulative GPA of 3.40 or higher at graduation)" part, since you know it's actually untrue. It's unlikely anyone would actually care about a 0.04 difference in GPA (3.36 vs. 3.40), so very limited upside, while the potential downside is huge.

I'd recommend either omitting the parenthetical altogether or trimming it down to just say "recognized for cumulative GPA at graduation."

QContinuum wrote:I'd omit the "(recognized for cumulative GPA of 3.40 or higher at graduation)" part, since you know it's actually untrue. It's unlikely anyone would actually care about a 0.04 difference in GPA (3.36 vs. 3.40), so very limited upside, while the potential downside is huge.

I'd recommend either omitting the parenthetical altogether or trimming it down to just say "recognized for cumulative GPA at graduation."

Appreciate the reply. That's the description of the award on the school website. It is unfortunate because it is misleading.