Top Law Schools

Have a WLRK screener coming up. I've heard from some sources that these are the only legally substantive screeners. Is this true? Do I need to know "real" stuff about the law or is it just the normal why this firm, etc?

Thanks!

towel13661 wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:38 am

Have a WLRK screener coming up. I've heard from some sources that these are the only legally substantive screeners. Is this true? Do I need to know "real" stuff about the law or is it just the normal why this firm, etc?

Thanks!

The screeners aren't as intense as the callbacks. But yes, Wachtell has been known to ask substantive legal questions. E.g. "Here's a fact pattern. What arguments would you make against contract formation?"

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:59 am

The screeners aren't as intense as the callbacks. But yes, Wachtell has been known to ask substantive legal questions. E.g. "Here's a fact pattern. What arguments would you make against contract formation?"

Thanks. That's kind of annoying. Any other thoughts on the process?

towel13661 wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:02 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:59 am

The screeners aren't as intense as the callbacks. But yes, Wachtell has been known to ask substantive legal questions. E.g. "Here's a fact pattern. What arguments would you make against contract formation?"

Thanks. That's kind of annoying. Any other thoughts on the process?

Wachtell doesn't ask substantive legal questions. They aren't going to start quizzing you on Delaware corporate law. They may ask you how to reason through a fact pattern, but you aren't expected to know the law -- the goal is to figure out how you approach an issue you haven't seen before.

They'll also push you on legal issues you may have dealt with, e.g., if you tell your screener your Note topic, they'll probably ask about the legal issues you're writing about and probe about what gap you see in the law, etc. If you tell them about a legal problem you worked at a Judge's office, you'll be asked to explain the issue succinctly and discuss how you grappled with the issue - as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

Several years back I heard of a screener interviewer who would ask "what has been your favorite class in law school" and then based on your answer she would pick a case and ask you to explain it to (facts, holding, reasoning). Probably a litigator but I like to imagine it was an m&a partner who still pondered Eerie in her spare time.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

I had a screener last year with Wachtell (litigation), and the screener asked me a question about attorney-client privilege and whether it conflicted with our broad discovery system. I had no fucking clue what he was talking about, but I still managed to BS my way into a CB (sadly, no offer tho).

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:41 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

On the other hand, I drafted an MSJ for my internship but had enough other stuff on my resume that the issue/substantive discussion came up in only a fraction of my interviews. So, ymmv.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:41 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

The depth of discussion is more intense at Wachtell -- I have no reason to be facetious about it, I chose another firm over them. The best analogy I can make is to consulting interviews (I was an MBB consultant): McKinsey would constantly ask "And?" whenever you told them a story about how you overcame adversity or showed teamwork, as opposed to a Deloitte, which would be content with the base-level story. I found all of my Wachtell interviewers to be extremely probing of any story, legal concept, or even life decision I told them about, much more so than any other firm. It's not a hard interview by any means, but you're on your toes throughout it.

Back when I was doing OCI, Wachtell was my last screener of the day and I was just already exhausted from a million other screeners and also already had an offer in hand.

I actually enjoyed OCI -- meeting people, shooting the shit, etc.

Then this WLRK partner opens the screener with a fact pattern and asks me a question, and I stopped listening half way through not expecting I was going to like, be quizzed on it. I figured she was just yammering on about a recent case she was working on that I politely was going to listen about. So she caught me off guard I was just like "I'm sorry, I'm exhausted and actually didn't follow that." And she was all "Oh, uh..". And then there was an awkward silence and I was like "well, I don't really want us to waste one another's time" and left like 40 seconds into the screener.

I wonder if she remembers that. Probably. Or maybe it happens more often than I'd expect. Anyway, have disliked Wachtell ever since lol.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:54 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:41 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

The depth of discussion is more intense at Wachtell -- I have no reason to be facetious about it, I chose another firm over them. The best analogy I can make is to consulting interviews (I was an MBB consultant): McKinsey would constantly ask "And?" whenever you told them a story about how you overcame adversity or showed teamwork, as opposed to a Deloitte, which would be content with the base-level story. I found all of my Wachtell interviewers to be extremely probing of any story, legal concept, or even life decision I told them about, much more so than any other firm. It's not a hard interview by any means, but you're on your toes throughout it.

People who turn down Wachtell fascinate me. Could you elaborate as to why? They are known to be compensation leaders. Do you come from a very wealthy family, have no student loan debt, and compensation did not matter to you? Sorry to derail. It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:09 pm

It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

I am obviously not in this position but fwiw less than half of those extended WLRK offers at my school last year accepted.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

towel13661 wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:02 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 10:59 am

The screeners aren't as intense as the callbacks. But yes, Wachtell has been known to ask substantive legal questions. E.g. "Here's a fact pattern. What arguments would you make against contract formation?"

Thanks. That's kind of annoying. Any other thoughts on the process?

Wachtell doesn't ask substantive legal questions. They aren't going to start quizzing you on Delaware corporate law. They may ask you how to reason through a fact pattern, but you aren't expected to know the law -- the goal is to figure out how you approach an issue you haven't seen before.

They'll also push you on legal issues you may have dealt with, e.g., if you tell your screener your Note topic, they'll probably ask about the legal issues you're writing about and probe about what gap you see in the law, etc. If you tell them about a legal problem you worked at a Judge's office, you'll be asked to explain the issue succinctly and discuss how you grappled with the issue - as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This (bolded text) was exactly my experience at WLRK screener and CB. Other firms asked about my judicial internship in a cursory way but nothing close to the 5-10 minutes I spent discussing it at WLRK.

Separately, I mentioned I was interested in a specific area of law, and my WLRK interviewer and I ended up talking kind of philosophically about a hot-button issue in that field for another ~10 minutes. Not sure if that was the interviewer pushing me hard, or if that was me self-consciously steering the interview in a more rigorous direction because that’s how I thought a “Wachtell interview” should go.

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:54 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:41 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

The depth of discussion is more intense at Wachtell -- I have no reason to be facetious about it, I chose another firm over them. The best analogy I can make is to consulting interviews (I was an MBB consultant): McKinsey would constantly ask "And?" whenever you told them a story about how you overcame adversity or showed teamwork, as opposed to a Deloitte, which would be content with the base-level story. I found all of my Wachtell interviewers to be extremely probing of any story, legal concept, or even life decision I told them about, much more so than any other firm. It's not a hard interview by any means, but you're on your toes throughout it.

People who turn down Wachtell fascinate me. Could you elaborate as to why? They are known to be compensation leaders. Do you come from a very wealthy family, have no student loan debt, and compensation did not matter to you? Sorry to derail. It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

I didn’t apply to any NYC firms and even if I did probably would not have gotten an offer at Wachtell, but I would absolutely never work there. There is no amount of money (well, maybe there is, but it’s a lot more than Wachtell salary) that could get me to work those hours. I need my sleep.

Some of us, even those with student loan debt, value at least having time to sleep and eat more than we do a high amount of compensation.

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:54 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:41 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

The depth of discussion is more intense at Wachtell -- I have no reason to be facetious about it, I chose another firm over them. The best analogy I can make is to consulting interviews (I was an MBB consultant): McKinsey would constantly ask "And?" whenever you told them a story about how you overcame adversity or showed teamwork, as opposed to a Deloitte, which would be content with the base-level story. I found all of my Wachtell interviewers to be extremely probing of any story, legal concept, or even life decision I told them about, much more so than any other firm. It's not a hard interview by any means, but you're on your toes throughout it.

People who turn down Wachtell fascinate me. Could you elaborate as to why? They are known to be compensation leaders. Do you come from a very wealthy family, have no student loan debt, and compensation did not matter to you? Sorry to derail. It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

I don't come from a wealthy family, but I had full scholarships to law school and undergrad, I worked for a few years as a consultant, and my SO is a doctor: I'm not particularly driven by compensation.

That aside, I didn't dislike Wachtell, took their offer seriously, and wasn't scared of the workload -- I may end up billing something similar at the litigation boutique I will be going to post-clerkship.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:35 pm

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:54 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:41 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

The depth of discussion is more intense at Wachtell -- I have no reason to be facetious about it, I chose another firm over them. The best analogy I can make is to consulting interviews (I was an MBB consultant): McKinsey would constantly ask "And?" whenever you told them a story about how you overcame adversity or showed teamwork, as opposed to a Deloitte, which would be content with the base-level story. I found all of my Wachtell interviewers to be extremely probing of any story, legal concept, or even life decision I told them about, much more so than any other firm. It's not a hard interview by any means, but you're on your toes throughout it.

People who turn down Wachtell fascinate me. Could you elaborate as to why? They are known to be compensation leaders. Do you come from a very wealthy family, have no student loan debt, and compensation did not matter to you? Sorry to derail. It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

I don't come from a wealthy family, but I had full scholarships to law school and undergrad, I worked for a few years as a consultant, and my SO is a doctor: I'm not particularly driven by compensation.

That aside, I didn't dislike Wachtell, took their offer seriously, and wasn't scared of the workload -- I may end up billing something similar at the litigation boutique I will be going to post-clerkship.

Okay. This explains it. Nevertheless, very interesting.

Thank you for responding!

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:35 pm

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:54 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:41 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

The depth of discussion is more intense at Wachtell -- I have no reason to be facetious about it, I chose another firm over them. The best analogy I can make is to consulting interviews (I was an MBB consultant): McKinsey would constantly ask "And?" whenever you told them a story about how you overcame adversity or showed teamwork, as opposed to a Deloitte, which would be content with the base-level story. I found all of my Wachtell interviewers to be extremely probing of any story, legal concept, or even life decision I told them about, much more so than any other firm. It's not a hard interview by any means, but you're on your toes throughout it.

People who turn down Wachtell fascinate me. Could you elaborate as to why? They are known to be compensation leaders. Do you come from a very wealthy family, have no student loan debt, and compensation did not matter to you? Sorry to derail. It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

I don't come from a wealthy family, but I had full scholarships to law school and undergrad, I worked for a few years as a consultant, and my SO is a doctor: I'm not particularly driven by compensation.

That aside, I didn't dislike Wachtell, took their offer seriously, and wasn't scared of the workload -- I may end up billing something similar at the litigation boutique I will be going to post-clerkship.

Okay. This explains it. Nevertheless, very interesting.

Thank you for responding!

Nah, I think the real thing that explains it is the last bit -- they are going to a litigation boutique, post-clerkship.

The thing about Wachtell is they're hiring the best of the best. The best of the best have options that are on par with Wachtell. So while it makes no sense for even great candidates who are getting V5 offers to choose say S&C over Wachtell, those are not the type of candidates getting offers from Wachtell. It's more like if your choice is clerk for feeder judge or Wachtell, the decision to aim for SC clerkship over Wachtell makes way more sense. Or, if it's work IB at Evercore vs. m&a at wachtell, it's a much tougher decision.

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:09 pm

People who turn down Wachtell fascinate me. Could you elaborate as to why? They are known to be compensation leaders. Do you come from a very wealthy family, have no student loan debt, and compensation did not matter to you? Sorry to derail. It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

Not particularly uncommon at my T6. Not everyone wants Wachtell hours even with the compensation and even if they have debt. Also, some people pick comparable lit options.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:59 pm

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:09 pm

People who turn down Wachtell fascinate me. Could you elaborate as to why? They are known to be compensation leaders. Do you come from a very wealthy family, have no student loan debt, and compensation did not matter to you? Sorry to derail. It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

Not particularly uncommon at my T6. Not everyone wants Wachtell hours even with the compensation and even if they have debt. Also, some people pick comparable lit options.

ya saw the same - some ppl turned wachtell down for lit boutiques

There's a lot of mythologizing/outdated info about WLRK interviews imo.

For the most part, the interviews really aren't that intense. Throughout my screening process/CB I got a lot of 'tell me about a case where you disagreed with the holding,' and 'explain a legal concept,' and then for each there were follow-up questions and broader discussion. If you mention something off-hand, don't be surprised if you are asked to explain whatever it is in greater depth.

But there were no case studies and no requests to analyze novel fact patterns - all of the interview material came from my own resume/experiences/answers. (My understanding is that the case study was more common a while back, although perhaps there are a couple older partners that still like to ask it in interviews.)

TL;DR: Prep a case that you really enjoyed that you would feel comfortable explaining in depth, and make sure to have a punchy/interesting anecdote for each of your resume experiences that you are also prepared to discuss more broadly.

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:54 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:41 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

The depth of discussion is more intense at Wachtell -- I have no reason to be facetious about it, I chose another firm over them. The best analogy I can make is to consulting interviews (I was an MBB consultant): McKinsey would constantly ask "And?" whenever you told them a story about how you overcame adversity or showed teamwork, as opposed to a Deloitte, which would be content with the base-level story. I found all of my Wachtell interviewers to be extremely probing of any story, legal concept, or even life decision I told them about, much more so than any other firm. It's not a hard interview by any means, but you're on your toes throughout it.

People who turn down Wachtell fascinate me. Could you elaborate as to why? They are known to be compensation leaders. Do you come from a very wealthy family, have no student loan debt, and compensation did not matter to you? Sorry to derail. It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

This seems like a myopic (or maybe just youthful?) way of looking at it. People turn down more lucrative jobs for less lucrative jobs because there are things other than money that are important, even when you have lots of debt, do not come from a wealthy background, etc. Your late 20s and 30s are not years you can just get back down the road after you bank that WLRK check; they are just gone. Spending them at WLRK rather than a DPW or S&C might net you some more $$, at the margin, but that's not a no-brainer tradeoff when you recognize the value, and the finitude, of things like family, friendships, hobbies, non-career interests, becoming a real, well-rounded person, etc.

Plus it's not like the choice is between Wachtell and working at McDonalds. The choice is between a lot of money with a lot of hours, or even more money with more hours.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:50 pm

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:35 pm

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:54 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:41 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:07 am

as opposed to most firms where they gape in astonishment that you may have drafted a MOD.

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

The depth of discussion is more intense at Wachtell -- I have no reason to be facetious about it, I chose another firm over them. The best analogy I can make is to consulting interviews (I was an MBB consultant): McKinsey would constantly ask "And?" whenever you told them a story about how you overcame adversity or showed teamwork, as opposed to a Deloitte, which would be content with the base-level story. I found all of my Wachtell interviewers to be extremely probing of any story, legal concept, or even life decision I told them about, much more so than any other firm. It's not a hard interview by any means, but you're on your toes throughout it.

People who turn down Wachtell fascinate me. Could you elaborate as to why? They are known to be compensation leaders. Do you come from a very wealthy family, have no student loan debt, and compensation did not matter to you? Sorry to derail. It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

I don't come from a wealthy family, but I had full scholarships to law school and undergrad, I worked for a few years as a consultant, and my SO is a doctor: I'm not particularly driven by compensation.

That aside, I didn't dislike Wachtell, took their offer seriously, and wasn't scared of the workload -- I may end up billing something similar at the litigation boutique I will be going to post-clerkship.

Okay. This explains it. Nevertheless, very interesting.

Thank you for responding!

Nah, I think the real thing that explains it is the last bit -- they are going to a litigation boutique, post-clerkship.

The thing about Wachtell is they're hiring the best of the best. The best of the best have options that are on par with Wachtell. So while it makes no sense for even great candidates who are getting V5 offers to choose say S&C over Wachtell, those are not the type of candidates getting offers from Wachtell. It's more like if your choice is clerk for feeder judge or Wachtell, the decision to aim for SC clerkship over Wachtell makes way more sense. Or, if it's work IB at Evercore vs. m&a at wachtell, it's a much tougher decision.

Is there a discernible difference between the people who are getting offered at S&C, DPW, Skadden, etc (V3-5 basically) and those who are getting WLRK and CSM?

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 31, 2021 12:22 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:50 pm

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:35 pm

ChosenOneNow wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 1:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:54 am

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 30, 2021 11:41 am

This is absolutely not true. I had exactly the questions you describe about my note/internship at pretty much every screener and callback, complete with substantive discussion.

The depth of discussion is more intense at Wachtell -- I have no reason to be facetious about it, I chose another firm over them. The best analogy I can make is to consulting interviews (I was an MBB consultant): McKinsey would constantly ask "And?" whenever you told them a story about how you overcame adversity or showed teamwork, as opposed to a Deloitte, which would be content with the base-level story. I found all of my Wachtell interviewers to be extremely probing of any story, legal concept, or even life decision I told them about, much more so than any other firm. It's not a hard interview by any means, but you're on your toes throughout it.

People who turn down Wachtell fascinate me. Could you elaborate as to why? They are known to be compensation leaders. Do you come from a very wealthy family, have no student loan debt, and compensation did not matter to you? Sorry to derail. It is just uncommon to hear of someone turning down Wachtell.

I don't come from a wealthy family, but I had full scholarships to law school and undergrad, I worked for a few years as a consultant, and my SO is a doctor: I'm not particularly driven by compensation.

That aside, I didn't dislike Wachtell, took their offer seriously, and wasn't scared of the workload -- I may end up billing something similar at the litigation boutique I will be going to post-clerkship.

Okay. This explains it. Nevertheless, very interesting.

Thank you for responding!

Nah, I think the real thing that explains it is the last bit -- they are going to a litigation boutique, post-clerkship.

The thing about Wachtell is they're hiring the best of the best. The best of the best have options that are on par with Wachtell. So while it makes no sense for even great candidates who are getting V5 offers to choose say S&C over Wachtell, those are not the type of candidates getting offers from Wachtell. It's more like if your choice is clerk for feeder judge or Wachtell, the decision to aim for SC clerkship over Wachtell makes way more sense. Or, if it's work IB at Evercore vs. m&a at wachtell, it's a much tougher decision.

Is there a discernible difference between the people who are getting offered at S&C, DPW, Skadden, etc (V3-5 basically) and those who are getting WLRK and CSM?

Cravath's selectivity is much closer to the other three than WLRK. They regularly dip below the top third at my CCN for the right candidate. In fact, S&C has the highest GPA "cutoff" of the other 4 firms.

For M&A years ago. I didn’t get an offer but did get past screener.

I didn’t get the impression they set out to ask substantive questions but were just naturally curious and would follow up until I had nothing productive to say or they ran out of questions to ask.

I was asked about my ibanking internships and even did a quick walkthrough of how I would have built a DCF model. Then a lot of fit questions before they’d ask stuff like “favorite class?” And then launch into following up on that. The fit questions seemed designed to make sure I understood the hours they demanded.

It felt a bit like consulting case interviews where I had to think a few steps ahead to avoid laying traps for myself.