Top Law Schools

I graduated t20 top 1/3. No LR. I'm at an amlaw 200 law firm in NYC/DC. I want to lateral eventually to my secondary home market. The 2 firms I'm looking at basically exclusively have a bunch of T10 median associates, also no LR. They also have a few associates fromthe local T50 andthose are exclusively top 10% or even summa, and LR.

trying to decide if I need to beef up my resume before trying to lateral or if I can just apply now (maybe apply for mid-career clerkships?)

If the firm only takes top 10% and LR from a top 50, I’m assuming it will probably only take a top quarter and journal from a top 30.

If you’re in a niche practice area, then they may dip down. But seeing as you mentioned a mid-level clerkship, I’m assuming you’re in lit, which makes the no journal even worse

2013 wrote:If the firm only takes top 10% and LR from a top 50, I’m assuming it will probably only take a top quarter and journal from a top 30.

If you’re in a niche practice area, then they may dip down. But seeing as you mentioned a mid-level clerkship, I’m assuming you’re in lit, which makes the no journal even worse

:/ thanks I was on a journal, just not LR. Anyways appreciate the response. Seems like it’s not worth an application st this point.

Anonymous User wrote:

2013 wrote:If the firm only takes top 10% and LR from a top 50, I’m assuming it will probably only take a top quarter and journal from a top 30.

If you’re in a niche practice area, then they may dip down. But seeing as you mentioned a mid-level clerkship, I’m assuming you’re in lit, which makes the no journal even worse

:/ thanks I was on a journal, just not LR. Anyways appreciate the response. Seems like it’s not worth an application st this point.

I mean, you have nothing to lose, so why not apply? The worst thing they can say is no thanks. I’m just saying that it’s not likely for you to get an offer, but doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try.

T10 median is very difficult to land. The median at Penn and Duke is 170, at UVA 169.

Top 10% at T20 would be comparable to median at T10.

2013 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

2013 wrote:If the firm only takes top 10% and LR from a top 50, I’m assuming it will probably only take a top quarter and journal from a top 30.

If you’re in a niche practice area, then they may dip down. But seeing as you mentioned a mid-level clerkship, I’m assuming you’re in lit, which makes the no journal even worse

:/ thanks I was on a journal, just not LR. Anyways appreciate the response. Seems like it’s not worth an application st this point.

I mean, you have nothing to lose, so why not apply? The worst thing they can say is no thanks. I’m just saying that it’s not likely for you to get an offer, but doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try.

Thanks, my concern though is that it’s fairly small market and I don’t want to burn my chance of getting in before I think I’m “ready.” Basically I’m worried about applying 2 years down the line and someone saying “didn’t we reject this guy already?” Lol

Wild Card wrote:T10 median is very difficult to land. The median at Penn and Duke is 170, at UVA 169.

Top 10% at T20 would be comparable to median at T10.

I actually got a 171 on my LSAT. I had a lower gpa though and I opted for the T20 for $$$ reasons and I applied late in the cycle.

Anonymous User wrote:I graduated t20 top 1/3. No LR. I'm at an amlaw 200 law firm in NYC/DC. I want to lateral eventually to my secondary home market. The 2 firms I'm looking at basically exclusively have a bunch of T10 median associates, also no LR. They also have a few associates fromthe local T50 andthose are exclusively top 10% or even summa, and LR.

trying to decide if I need to beef up my resume before trying to lateral or if I can just apply now (maybe apply for mid-career clerkships?)

IMO you don't have anything to lose by giving it a shot. Firms willing to dip down to non-LR T10 median don't sound super grade-sensitive... The fact that they take top 10% from the local T50 doesn't mean they won't be willing to dip below top 10% for a T20. To some extent the identity of your T20 may also matter. UT, for example, is going to place way better in TX than Minnesota; likewise, UCLA/USC will likely have some advantage over the other T20s in CA.

Anonymous User wrote:

2013 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

2013 wrote:If the firm only takes top 10% and LR from a top 50, I’m assuming it will probably only take a top quarter and journal from a top 30.

If you’re in a niche practice area, then they may dip down. But seeing as you mentioned a mid-level clerkship, I’m assuming you’re in lit, which makes the no journal even worse

:/ thanks I was on a journal, just not LR. Anyways appreciate the response. Seems like it’s not worth an application st this point.

I mean, you have nothing to lose, so why not apply? The worst thing they can say is no thanks. I’m just saying that it’s not likely for you to get an offer, but doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try.

Thanks, my concern though is that it’s fairly small market and I don’t want to burn my chance of getting in before I think I’m “ready.” Basically I’m worried about applying 2 years down the line and someone saying “didn’t we reject this guy already?” Lol

They probably won’t remember in two years. It may be better if that happens, though, since it shows that you’ve wanted to go back for some time.

Why don't you do some networking? I can't imagine an office willing to take a median T10 candidate is so selective that you are completely out of range. Secondary markets are ties/personality-sensitive so if enough people like you and can vouch for you, I doubt T20 top 1/3 would be enough to kill an application--especially if you're coming in as someone who is instantly billable (you haven't mentioned how senior you are) and don't have to be trained.

Wild Card wrote:T10 median is very difficult to land. The median at Penn and Duke is 170, at UVA 169.

Top 10% at T20 would be comparable to median at T10.

Obviously I have nothing empirical to support this contention, but my innate feeling is that this is wrong.

I'm top 1/3 at CCN. It just doesn't... feel like I'm nearly smart enough to be top 10% at a T20 at short of anything but a TTTT. It just feels wrong that I could step down a notch and can jump instantly to top 10%. Who knows? Maybe I could, but it doesn't feel like it.

Wild Card wrote:T10 median is very difficult to land. The median at Penn and Duke is 170, at UVA 169.

Top 10% at T20 would be comparable to median at T10.

What? Median at WUSTL is 168. That's a 1 point difference between UVA and WUSTL. But median UVA = top 10% WUSTL? lmfao

There's a reason top 10% T20 kids can consistently nail fed clerkships and V5 firms while median Penn kids are headed to Reed Smith, and it's not because they're equally prestigious.

Anonymous User wrote:I graduated t20 top 1/3. No LR. I'm at an amlaw 200 law firm in NYC/DC. I want to lateral eventually to my secondary home market. The 2 firms I'm looking at basically exclusively have a bunch of T10 median associates, also no LR. They also have a few associates fromthe local T50 andthose are exclusively top 10% or even summa, and LR.

trying to decide if I need to beef up my resume before trying to lateral or if I can just apply now (maybe apply for mid-career clerkships?)

So on one end of the spectrum you have 50th percentile of t10 (expressed as 50/10), and at the other end you have 10th percentile of t50 (expressed as 10/50). There is an inverse relationship between the class rank and school rank, with the middle of that spectrum (halfway between 10 and 50) being the 30th percentile of t30 (expressed as 30/30). If you graduated in the 33rd percentile (~top 1/3) of a t20 (expressed as 33/20), your credentials exceed the associates' (average) rank/school ratio, so your rank/school shouldn't be an obstacle IMO.

BeeTeeZ wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I graduated t20 top 1/3. No LR. I'm at an amlaw 200 law firm in NYC/DC. I want to lateral eventually to my secondary home market. The 2 firms I'm looking at basically exclusively have a bunch of T10 median associates, also no LR. They also have a few associates fromthe local T50 andthose are exclusively top 10% or even summa, and LR.

trying to decide if I need to beef up my resume before trying to lateral or if I can just apply now (maybe apply for mid-career clerkships?)

So on one end of the spectrum you have 50th percentile of t10 (expressed as 50/10), and at the other end you have 10th percentile of t50 (expressed as 10/50). There is an inverse relationship between the class rank and school rank, with the middle of that spectrum (halfway between 10 and 50) being the 30th percentile of t30 (expressed as 30/30). If you graduated in the 33rd percentile (~top 1/3) of a t20 (expressed as 33/20), your credentials exceed the associates' (average) rank/school ratio, so your rank/school shouldn't be an obstacle IMO.

Interesting thought but its not linear -- so grossly oversimplified. Median at T10 still has a brand name school (e.g., Penn, Columbia, Berkeley), and top 10% at t50 still have Coif from a strong (presumably) local school. Both are recognizable in the legal profession. The issue is that top 1/3 at t20 doesn't have either, no one knows whether top 1/3, unless cum laude or so, was actually top 1/3 or bottom 10%, and t20's school name is not impressive on its own.

As a side note, I'd rather take Coif+LR from T20 than top 1/3+no LR at T10. The former can get federal clerkship, the latter typically isn't competitive enough.

All that said, you should apply to lateral now, no need to wait.

Anonymous User wrote:

Wild Card wrote:T10 median is very difficult to land. The median at Penn and Duke is 170, at UVA 169.

Top 10% at T20 would be comparable to median at T10.

What? Median at WUSTL is 168. That's a 1 point difference between UVA and WUSTL. But median UVA = top 10% WUSTL? lmfao

There's a reason top 10% T20 kids can consistently nail fed clerkships and V5 firms while median Penn kids are headed to Reed Smith, and it's not because they're equally prestigious.

Can we drop the LSAT crap? OP is a graduate. You don't put your LSAT on your resume. These are not the droids/medians you're looking for.

Grades are largely meaningless except at the extremes.

In a buyer's market, why wouldn't a firm hire a Duke grad over a WUSTL grad?

You never know until you apply.

Jchance wrote:Interesting thought but its not linear -- so grossly oversimplified. Median at T10 still has a brand name school (e.g., Penn, Columbia, Berkeley), and top 10% at t50 still have Coif from a strong (presumably) local school. Both are recognizable in the legal profession. The issue is that top 1/3 at t20 doesn't have either, no one knows whether top 1/3, unless cum laude or so, was actually top 1/3 or bottom 10%, and t20's school name is not impressive on its own.

Agreed, with the minor quibble that T10 usually means schools ranked 7-10, not schools 1-10 or 4-10.

Jchance wrote:As a side note, I'd rather take Coif+LR from T20 than top 1/3+no LR at T10. The former can get federal clerkship, the latter typically isn't competitive enough.

Disagree that one needs top 1/3 AND Law Review to land a fed clerkship at a T10. Maybe for SDNY or a "direct" CoA clerkship, sure, but not a "generic" District Court clerkship.

Is anyone really impressed by an MVPB degree? I think it's better than T20, but OP should gain relevant experience and see where that takes him first -- that experience will be far more important than going to a T10 law school at the end of the day.

OP here, thanks all for the contributions.

Jchance wrote:

BeeTeeZ wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I graduated t20 top 1/3. No LR. I'm at an amlaw 200 law firm in NYC/DC. I want to lateral eventually to my secondary home market. The 2 firms I'm looking at basically exclusively have a bunch of T10 median associates, also no LR. They also have a few associates fromthe local T50 andthose are exclusively top 10% or even summa, and LR.

trying to decide if I need to beef up my resume before trying to lateral or if I can just apply now (maybe apply for mid-career clerkships?)

So on one end of the spectrum you have 50th percentile of t10 (expressed as 50/10), and at the other end you have 10th percentile of t50 (expressed as 10/50). There is an inverse relationship between the class rank and school rank, with the middle of that spectrum (halfway between 10 and 50) being the 30th percentile of t30 (expressed as 30/30). If you graduated in the 33rd percentile (~top 1/3) of a t20 (expressed as 33/20), your credentials exceed the associates' (average) rank/school ratio, so your rank/school shouldn't be an obstacle IMO.

Interesting thought but its not linear -- so grossly oversimplified. Median at T10 still has a brand name school (e.g., Penn, Columbia, Berkeley), and top 10% at t50 still have Coif from a strong (presumably) local school. Both are recognizable in the legal profession. The issue is that top 1/3 at t20 doesn't have either, no one knows whether top 1/3, unless cum laude or so, was actually top 1/3 or bottom 10%, and t20's school name is not impressive on its own.

As a side note, I'd rather take Coif+LR from T20 than top 1/3+no LR at T10. The former can get federal clerkship, the latter typically isn't competitive enough.

All that said, you should apply to lateral now, no need to wait.

Thanks, I do have "cum laude" on my resume/transcript.

Anonymous User wrote:Is anyone really impressed by an MVPB degree? I think it's better than T20, but OP should gain relevant experience and see where that takes him first -- that experience will be far more important than going to a T10 law school at the end of the day.

BrainsyK wrote:Why don't you do some networking? I can't imagine an office willing to take a median T10 candidate is so selective that you are completely out of range. Secondary markets are ties/personality-sensitive so if enough people like you and can vouch for you, I doubt T20 top 1/3 would be enough to kill an application--especially if you're coming in as someone who is instantly billable (you haven't mentioned how senior you are) and don't have to be trained.

Wild Card wrote:T10 median is very difficult to land. The median at Penn and Duke is 170, at UVA 169.

Top 10% at T20 would be comparable to median at T10.

Obviously I have nothing empirical to support this contention, but my innate feeling is that this is wrong.

I'm top 1/3 at CCN. It just doesn't... feel like I'm nearly smart enough to be top 10% at a T20 at short of anything but a TTTT. It just feels wrong that I could step down a notch and can jump instantly to top 10%. Who knows? Maybe I could, but it doesn't feel like it.

Thanks; networking is partly what I meant also by "waiting to beef up my resume," along with applying for clerkships.

Anonymous User wrote:Is anyone really impressed by an MVPB degree? I think it's better than T20, but OP should gain relevant experience and see where that takes him first -- that experience will be far more important than going to a T10 law school at the end of the day.

Thanks, my experience is pretty much on point. I 'm looking at those those two firms in particular bc they are the only ones I know of so far in my target market with the same strong/sizable practice group that I'm currently in.

Some of the answers here seem pretty crazy. I find it difficult to believe that Penn/Duke/Michigan median is so much better than graduating UT Austin or WUSTL cum laude.

FWIW: I was top 10% at GW and transferred to NYU, where I graduated around median.

I tried just as hard at NYU in 2L and 3L, but still found it much more difficult to receive top grades, probably because of the curve and intelligence of my classmates.
At GW, I found it almost easy to book a class. I don't think it would've been much more difficult 2L or 3L and I probably would have stayed in top 10%.

All this to say, in my mind, top 10% at GW equals median at NYU when you're talking about like, the actual law school "intelligence" of the person (not that they are more or less intelligent overall, but when it comes to doing well in law school. Other than doing well in law school I'm pretty dumb).

However, firms don't really consider this! My friends at GW who were also top 10% did not get the same offers in OCI that I did, even though I was now at NYU.

The takeaways should be: 1) apply because you have nothing to lose, and 2) firms will not equate these even if it would be accurate.

Anonymous User wrote:FWIW: I was top 10% at GW and transferred to NYU, where I graduated around median.

I tried just as hard at NYU in 2L and 3L, but still found it much more difficult to receive top grades, probably because of the curve and intelligence of my classmates.
At GW, I found it almost easy to book a class. I don't think it would've been much more difficult 2L or 3L and I probably would have stayed in top 10%.

All this to say, in my mind, top 10% at GW equals median at NYU when you're talking about like, the actual law school "intelligence" of the person (not that they are more or less intelligent overall, but when it comes to doing well in law school. Other than doing well in law school I'm pretty dumb).

However, firms don't really consider this! My friends at GW who were also top 10% did not get the same offers in OCI that I did, even though I was now at NYU.

The takeaways should be: 1) apply because you have nothing to lose, and 2) firms will not equate these even if it would be accurate.

I think this is one of those YMMV things. I also went to GW but I was only top 1/3 after 1L. I, myself, managed to transfer to Georgetown though. (I then did 3L at CCN as visiting student too) I also believe that I tried equally hard at Georgetown for 2L/3L and I ended up graduating coif (top 10%) at Georgetown.

How do you know the attorneys there were median students? Are their grades online, or are you just assuming that they are median since they aren't order of the coif or whatever?

JohnnieSockran wrote:How do you know the attorneys there were median students? Are their grades online, or are you just assuming that they are median since they aren't order of the coif or whatever?

Yeah, I jguess I don't know for sure or anything. Just basing this off no cum laude/honors/coif/LR.

BeeTeeZ wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I graduated t20 top 1/3. No LR. I'm at an amlaw 200 law firm in NYC/DC. I want to lateral eventually to my secondary home market. The 2 firms I'm looking at basically exclusively have a bunch of T10 median associates, also no LR. They also have a few associates fromthe local T50 andthose are exclusively top 10% or even summa, and LR.

trying to decide if I need to beef up my resume before trying to lateral or if I can just apply now (maybe apply for mid-career clerkships?)

So on one end of the spectrum you have 50th percentile of t10 (expressed as 50/10), and at the other end you have 10th percentile of t50 (expressed as 10/50). There is an inverse relationship between the class rank and school rank, with the middle of that spectrum (halfway between 10 and 50) being the 30th percentile of t30 (expressed as 30/30). If you graduated in the 33rd percentile (~top 1/3) of a t20 (expressed as 33/20), your credentials exceed the associates' (average) rank/school ratio, so your rank/school shouldn't be an obstacle IMO.

Not adding anything to the overall discussion but I liked this post a lot. Very different than the votes on just gut feeling. Not sure that it is accurate, but its a pretty valid point.

I think the reason school wins out in the poll is becasue it is tangible.

Outside of law review, cum laude, order of the coif, etc. there is no way to know if someone is a median student, bottom of the class, or close to top of the class. When I look at someone's law firm profile, school is the first thing I look at (in addition to the year of graduation to know what level they're at). For people that have been practicing, I don't particularly care what journal they were on or what latin honors go next to their name.

So, something like NYU or Penn is going to stand out to me over GWU, Order of the Coif. Some firms don't even list latin honors on the website, so I think for those reasons, schools are going to win out over grades once you're in practice. In 2L OCI, it's a different story.