Summer Classes of 2022 Edition Forum

[Anonymous User]

I went to a well-regarded undergrad (HYP), and among the students interested in law there, going to a CCN law school was definitely considered a median/middle-of-the-road outcome.

Not sure if the data would actually bear that out; there used to be some table LSAC published that listed median LSAT scores by undergraduate affiliation. IIRC, that table tended to show that students from more selective undergrads had higher LSAT scores.

[Res Ipsa Loquitter]

Most HLS students could not have obtained admission to an Ivy undergrad. At the same time, most Harvard College students couldn’t swing a 173 or 174 if their lives depended on it, even if daddy hired an army of tutors. Apples and oranges.

I don't intend to get into this immature debate in this thread about undergrad prestige, law firm prestige and all that bull shit. But I just want to point out your error. Quite a huge chunk (probably around 1/3) of HLS students went to elite colleges (ivy and Stanford, MIT, etc) for undergrad. They were more represented than any other types of colleges (lac, private, state, overseas). Nobody honestly cares about the prestige of your undergrad once you are in law school because people realize that law school grades have nothing to do with where you went for undergrad.

I agree with you. But 2/3 is still “most”

Sure there are some HLS students who chose not to attend top undergrads to save money. But then again, some are narrowly defining top undergrad as HYPSM, which works against that.

I’m well aware of the type of people attending HLS and am aware that many went to elite undergrads and most went to very solid ones, e.g. even the state schools represented tend to be very strong schools like UCs, Texas, Florida, Michigan, etc

I’ll stand by my point prior post and don’t really think we disagree anyway

[Anonymous User]

If you guys want to talk about HLS, go ahead and create another thread.

[Anonymous User]

It would be fun to look at the huge SA classes.

[Res Ipsa Loquitter]

If you guys want to talk about HLS, go ahead and create another thread.

But why was this anon?

[Anonymous User]

As a senior associate at a V20, I honestly can't care less about where somebody went for undergrad. To most people including myself, the ones that went to elite undergrad but didn't go to a top law school or law school on full ride don't seem smart. In fact, to be honest, they just look liked they peaked in high school or went to that elite undergrad due to some donation by their parents. For example, those types of people that went to HYP -> TTT law school, or HYP -> shit law school grades, signal poor intelligence or work ethic.

[WhatIsLaw69]

So, uh, anyone got class lists or nah?

[Anonymous User]

A lot of these posts are really, really off base. They purport to reflect elite perspectives but clearly are written by folks who are anything but.

Most HLS students could not have obtained admission to an Ivy undergrad. At the same time, most Harvard College students couldn’t swing a 173 or 174 if their lives depended on it, even if daddy hired an army of tutors. Apples and oranges.

As for the kid saying he never heard of certain firms while he was a banking analyst — who cares? Law firms operate in a highly discreet manner. They don’t make front page news for crashing the economy or stealing from Stormy Daniels. It totally makes sense that 22 year old kids — yes, even our highly sophisticated 22 year old friends in financial services — would not have heard of most top biglaw firms.

As for what is elite or not elite, all we can say for sure is that most TLS posters are not. For the wealthiest Americans, Michigan is a top school. Why? Not totally clear, it’s just a network effect. I think Michigan sucks. But it has an important place in elite American culture. As does Penn — which is perhaps the undergrad of choice for America’s ultra rich.

Are we honestly comparing elite colleges to HLS now? We are talking about institutions with perennial admissions rates of 5-8% with 1000-1500 students across all majors vs a 15% admissions rate and 600 students in one program. You don't have near perfect numbers, amazing softs, good essay and genuine uniqueness you don't have a shot at the top undergrad. For HLS, a 173/3.9 gets a plumber in. You need to compete with future bankers, reseachers, doctors, engineers for undergrad admssison. For law, you need to defeat other neerdowells. It's not the same level of competition. Top undergrad opens doors for anyone to hedge fund, consulting, IB, FAANG, and a whole array of areas HLS is only able to offer less than 5% of their students for. I don't understand why this is even a debate. Yes you might have went to a top undergrad and also end up at HLS. Unfortunately, you fucked up.

[Anonymous User]

A lot of these posts are really, really off base. They purport to reflect elite perspectives but clearly are written by folks who are anything but.

Most HLS students could not have obtained admission to an Ivy undergrad. At the same time, most Harvard College students couldn’t swing a 173 or 174 if their lives depended on it, even if daddy hired an army of tutors. Apples and oranges.

As for the kid saying he never heard of certain firms while he was a banking analyst — who cares? Law firms operate in a highly discreet manner. They don’t make front page news for crashing the economy or stealing from Stormy Daniels. It totally makes sense that 22 year old kids — yes, even our highly sophisticated 22 year old friends in financial services — would not have heard of most top biglaw firms.

As for what is elite or not elite, all we can say for sure is that most TLS posters are not. For the wealthiest Americans, Michigan is a top school. Why? Not totally clear, it’s just a network effect. I think Michigan sucks. But it has an important place in elite American culture. As does Penn — which is perhaps the undergrad of choice for America’s ultra rich.

Are we honestly comparing elite colleges to HLS now? We are talking about institutions with perennial admissions rates of 5-8% with 1000-1500 students across all majors vs a 15% admissions rate and 600 students in one program. You don't have near perfect numbers, amazing softs, good essay and genuine uniqueness you don't have a shot at the top undergrad. For HLS, a 173/3.9 gets a plumber in. You need to compete with future bankers, reseachers, doctors, engineers for undergrad admssison. For law, you need to defeat other neerdowells. It's not the same level of competition. Top undergrad opens doors for anyone to hedge fund, consulting, IB, FAANG, and a whole array of areas HLS is only able to offer less than 5% of their students for. I don't understand why this is even a debate. Yes you might have went to a top undergrad and also end up at HLS. Unfortunately, you fucked up.

A) Good god, can we get off this topic

B) Even if all of this is true, for a top ug student HLS is still a good exit; frankly, I'd put it above FAANG, IB, and consulting. You know that it's true because people regularly leave these places TO GO TO HLS (I presume, going to one of Y/S where we have these people).

[Anonymous User]

Debevoise NY - 126 (excludes SEOs, does include other office stints)

Columbia (26)
NYU (16)
Harvard (10)
Georgetown (9)
Penn (8)
Michigan (6)
Yale/UVA (5)
Cornell/Fordham/New York Law (4)
Chicago/Cardozo/Seton Hall/Howard (3)
Duke/Northwestern/USC/Wash U/Tulane/Rutgers/St John’s (2)
Stanford/Brooklyn/Hofstra (1)

San Francisco (6), London (5), Paris (2)

Deb DC - 3

Georgetown/GW/George Mason (1)

[Anonymous User]

A lot of these posts are really, really off base. They purport to reflect elite perspectives but clearly are written by folks who are anything but.

Most HLS students could not have obtained admission to an Ivy undergrad. At the same time, most Harvard College students couldn’t swing a 173 or 174 if their lives depended on it, even if daddy hired an army of tutors. Apples and oranges.

As for the kid saying he never heard of certain firms while he was a banking analyst — who cares? Law firms operate in a highly discreet manner. They don’t make front page news for crashing the economy or stealing from Stormy Daniels. It totally makes sense that 22 year old kids — yes, even our highly sophisticated 22 year old friends in financial services — would not have heard of most top biglaw firms.

As for what is elite or not elite, all we can say for sure is that most TLS posters are not. For the wealthiest Americans, Michigan is a top school. Why? Not totally clear, it’s just a network effect. I think Michigan sucks. But it has an important place in elite American culture. As does Penn — which is perhaps the undergrad of choice for America’s ultra rich.

Are we honestly comparing elite colleges to HLS now? We are talking about institutions with perennial admissions rates of 5-8% with 1000-1500 students across all majors vs a 15% admissions rate and 600 students in one program. You don't have near perfect numbers, amazing softs, good essay and genuine uniqueness you don't have a shot at the top undergrad. For HLS, a 173/3.9 gets a plumber in. You need to compete with future bankers, reseachers, doctors, engineers for undergrad admssison. For law, you need to defeat other neerdowells. It's not the same level of competition. Top undergrad opens doors for anyone to hedge fund, consulting, IB, FAANG, and a whole array of areas HLS is only able to offer less than 5% of their students for. I don't understand why this is even a debate. Yes you might have went to a top undergrad and also end up at HLS. Unfortunately, you fucked up.

But why did YOU fail to get into HLS if it's so easy...?

[Res Ipsa Loquitter]

A lot of these posts are really, really off base. They purport to reflect elite perspectives but clearly are written by folks who are anything but.

Most HLS students could not have obtained admission to an Ivy undergrad. At the same time, most Harvard College students couldn’t swing a 173 or 174 if their lives depended on it, even if daddy hired an army of tutors. Apples and oranges.

As for the kid saying he never heard of certain firms while he was a banking analyst — who cares? Law firms operate in a highly discreet manner. They don’t make front page news for crashing the economy or stealing from Stormy Daniels. It totally makes sense that 22 year old kids — yes, even our highly sophisticated 22 year old friends in financial services — would not have heard of most top biglaw firms.

As for what is elite or not elite, all we can say for sure is that most TLS posters are not. For the wealthiest Americans, Michigan is a top school. Why? Not totally clear, it’s just a network effect. I think Michigan sucks. But it has an important place in elite American culture. As does Penn — which is perhaps the undergrad of choice for America’s ultra rich.

Are we honestly comparing elite colleges to HLS now? We are talking about institutions with perennial admissions rates of 5-8% with 1000-1500 students across all majors vs a 15% admissions rate and 600 students in one program. You don't have near perfect numbers, amazing softs, good essay and genuine uniqueness you don't have a shot at the top undergrad. For HLS, a 173/3.9 gets a plumber in. You need to compete with future bankers, reseachers, doctors, engineers for undergrad admssison. For law, you need to defeat other neerdowells. It's not the same level of competition. Top undergrad opens doors for anyone to hedge fund, consulting, IB, FAANG, and a whole array of areas HLS is only able to offer less than 5% of their students for. I don't understand why this is even a debate. Yes you might have went to a top undergrad and also end up at HLS. Unfortunately, you fucked up.

This post actually made me spit out my coffee. A lot of people actually want to be lawyers, rather than doctors or bankers. For anybody who wants to be a lawyer, HLS is a great option. Try doing something you enjoy instead of viewing everything as a zero-sum competition. You seem to live in a sick fantasy world where all the HYPSM undergraduates effortlessly become billionaires, who then dunk on their lowly HLS-educated lawyers for all eternity.

[Anonymous User]

I went to a well-regarded undergrad (HYP), and among the students interested in law there, going to a CCN law school was definitely considered a median/middle-of-the-road outcome.

Not sure if the data would actually bear that out; there used to be some table LSAC published that listed median LSAT scores by undergraduate affiliation. IIRC, that table tended to show that students from more selective undergrads had higher LSAT scores.

These are preserved on College Confidential, of all places, and the top schools have LSATs in the mid-160s. Going to a T6 law school isn't unusual by any means for Ivy (or Chicago, Stanford, etc.) undergrads but still isn't the norm. That said I had very few undergrad classmates who went to law schools below the ~T20, with the exception of a couple who went to their home-state flagship and planned to practice there.

https://talk.collegeconfidential.com/t/ ... /2091306/2

Also, the reason why elite law schools are harder to get into than elite undergrads isn't the acceptance rate, which is near-meaningless, but the applicant pool. The undergrad applicant pool at elite schools (a) doesn't include tons of students who just go to their local Big Ten school--it's very unusual to apply to private universities in most of the country, even if you're a top high school student--and (b) includes a huge proportion of students who get auto-rejected, who the schools intentionally seek out to lower their acceptance rates. That's why most Harvard students can't get into HLS despite HLS's higher acceptance rate.

[Anonymous User]

Debevoise NY - 126 (excludes SEOs, does include other office stints)

Columbia (26)
NYU (16)
Harvard (10)
Georgetown (9)
Penn (8)
Michigan (6)
Yale/UVA (5)
Cornell/Fordham/New York Law (4)
Chicago/Cardozo/Seton Hall/Howard (3)
Duke/Northwestern/USC/Wash U/Tulane/Rutgers/St John’s (2)
Stanford/Brooklyn/Hofstra (1)

San Francisco (6), London (5), Paris (2)

Deb DC - 3

Georgetown/GW/George Mason (1)

Thanks for posting and getting us back on track

Interesting how different the class composition for Deb is versus Cleary, when I generally think of them as peer firms (albeit with different practice area strengths).

Deb has many fewer Harvard SAs than Cleary (despite being a larger class). On the other hand, Deb has more of Penn, GULC, and Michigan in particular. Deb also seems markedly less allergic to the local schools (Fordham, Cardozo, and so on).

[Anonymous User]

A lot of these posts are really, really off base. They purport to reflect elite perspectives but clearly are written by folks who are anything but.

Most HLS students could not have obtained admission to an Ivy undergrad. At the same time, most Harvard College students couldn’t swing a 173 or 174 if their lives depended on it, even if daddy hired an army of tutors. Apples and oranges.

As for the kid saying he never heard of certain firms while he was a banking analyst — who cares? Law firms operate in a highly discreet manner. They don’t make front page news for crashing the economy or stealing from Stormy Daniels. It totally makes sense that 22 year old kids — yes, even our highly sophisticated 22 year old friends in financial services — would not have heard of most top biglaw firms.

As for what is elite or not elite, all we can say for sure is that most TLS posters are not. For the wealthiest Americans, Michigan is a top school. Why? Not totally clear, it’s just a network effect. I think Michigan sucks. But it has an important place in elite American culture. As does Penn — which is perhaps the undergrad of choice for America’s ultra rich.

Are we honestly comparing elite colleges to HLS now? We are talking about institutions with perennial admissions rates of 5-8% with 1000-1500 students across all majors vs a 15% admissions rate and 600 students in one program. You don't have near perfect numbers, amazing softs, good essay and genuine uniqueness you don't have a shot at the top undergrad. For HLS, a 173/3.9 gets a plumber in. You need to compete with future bankers, reseachers, doctors, engineers for undergrad admssison. For law, you need to defeat other neerdowells. It's not the same level of competition. Top undergrad opens doors for anyone to hedge fund, consulting, IB, FAANG, and a whole array of areas HLS is only able to offer less than 5% of their students for. I don't understand why this is even a debate. Yes you might have went to a top undergrad and also end up at HLS. Unfortunately, you fucked up.

But why did YOU fail to get into HLS if it's so easy...?

Exactly this. First, comparing law schools to colleges is absurd and pointless. In any event, all his claims are wrong.

If HLS is so easy to get into, why didn't you get in? The last time I checked, HLS's acceptance rate is 6.9%. Even assuming 15%, 15% doesn't show the full picture of the competition as the pools are different. Most kids from all over the US and other countries that are doing well in their high schools take their shot at Harvard College regardless of how remote the actual chances are. Having grown up abroad, I know that for a fact. For HLS, for the most part, only those with GPA and LSAT within a reasonable range tend to apply. If HLS is such an overrated, poor outcome as you make it out to be, why do so many Harvard College students try so hard to get into one of Harvard, Yale, or Stanford for law school? I know this for a fact as I took language courses with undergrads at Harvard. If hedge fund, consulting, IB, FAANG are better options than biglaw, why do, in fact, at least a majority of HLS students with job experience post college come from one of those fields?

[Anonymous User]

Debevoise NY - 126 (excludes SEOs, does include other office stints)

Columbia (26)
NYU (16)
Harvard (10)
Georgetown (9)
Penn (8)
Michigan (6)
Yale/UVA (5)
Cornell/Fordham/New York Law (4)
Chicago/Cardozo/Seton Hall/Howard (3)
Duke/Northwestern/USC/Wash U/Tulane/Rutgers/St John’s (2)
Stanford/Brooklyn/Hofstra (1)

San Francisco (6), London (5), Paris (2)

Deb DC - 3

Georgetown/GW/George Mason (1)

Thanks for posting and getting us back on track

Interesting how different the class composition for Deb is versus Cleary, when I generally think of them as peer firms (albeit with different practice area strengths).

Deb has many fewer Harvard SAs than Cleary (despite being a larger class). On the other hand, Deb has more of Penn, GULC, and Michigan in particular. Deb also seems markedly less allergic to the local schools (Fordham, Cardozo, and so on).

I think Deb has a "better" spread, honestly. Something about Cleary hyper-targeting Columbia and HLS, while obviously demonstrating its appeal to elite law students, seems a bit off.

[Anonymous User]

As a senior associate at a V20, I honestly can't care less about where somebody went for undergrad. To most people including myself, the ones that went to elite undergrad but didn't go to a top law school or law school on full ride don't seem smart. In fact, to be honest, they just look liked they peaked in high school or went to that elite undergrad due to some donation by their parents. For example, those types of people that went to HYP -> TTT law school, or HYP -> shit law school grades, signal poor intelligence or work ethic.

100% agree with this.

[Anonymous User]

I think Deb has a "better" spread, honestly. Something about Cleary hyper-targeting Columbia and HLS, while obviously demonstrating its appeal to elite law students, seems a bit off.

Any reason why Berkeley so heavily represented at Cleary?

[Sackboy]

As a senior associate at a V20, I honestly can't care less about where somebody went for undergrad. To most people including myself, the ones that went to elite undergrad but didn't go to a top law school or law school on full ride don't seem smart. In fact, to be honest, they just look liked they peaked in high school or went to that elite undergrad due to some donation by their parents. For example, those types of people that went to HYP -> TTT law school, or HYP -> shit law school grades, signal poor intelligence or work ethic.

100% agree with this.

Meh, a lot of those folks seem to have just fucked around in college, because they often go HYP --> TTT but then graduate in the top 3% or something.

[Anonymous User]

As a senior associate at a V20, I honestly can't care less about where somebody went for undergrad. To most people including myself, the ones that went to elite undergrad but didn't go to a top law school or law school on full ride don't seem smart. In fact, to be honest, they just look liked they peaked in high school or went to that elite undergrad due to some donation by their parents. For example, those types of people that went to HYP -> TTT law school, or HYP -> shit law school grades, signal poor intelligence or work ethic.

100% agree with this.

Meh, a lot of those folks seem to have just fucked around in college, because they often go HYP --> TTT but then graduate in the top 3% or something.

“Often” is certainly a stretch here.

[Sackboy]

As a senior associate at a V20, I honestly can't care less about where somebody went for undergrad. To most people including myself, the ones that went to elite undergrad but didn't go to a top law school or law school on full ride don't seem smart. In fact, to be honest, they just look liked they peaked in high school or went to that elite undergrad due to some donation by their parents. For example, those types of people that went to HYP -> TTT law school, or HYP -> shit law school grades, signal poor intelligence or work ethic.

100% agree with this.

Meh, a lot of those folks seem to have just fucked around in college, because they often go HYP --> TTT but then graduate in the top 3% or something.

“Often” is certainly a stretch here.

I see it all the time, and it's also the only way TTT grads are making it into biglaw, so I'll live with my "stretch."

[Anonymous User]

As a senior associate at a V20, I honestly can't care less about where somebody went for undergrad. To most people including myself, the ones that went to elite undergrad but didn't go to a top law school or law school on full ride don't seem smart. In fact, to be honest, they just look liked they peaked in high school or went to that elite undergrad due to some donation by their parents. For example, those types of people that went to HYP -> TTT law school, or HYP -> shit law school grades, signal poor intelligence or work ethic.

100% agree with this.

Meh, a lot of those folks seem to have just fucked around in college, because they often go HYP --> TTT but then graduate in the top 3% or something.

maybe because the TTT people tend to be not as bright?

[Anonymous User]

If you know someone in biglaw who went to a TTT, practically by definition they were top 3%.

[BrowsingTLS]

If you know someone in biglaw who went to a TTT, practically by definition they were top 3%.

I think the post above you was implying that people who go to TTTs are generally less bright than those who go to HYP etc., so that makes it easier for someone from HYP to go to a TTT, have less bright competition, and graduate at the top of class and get biglaw. I don't agree. I'm just explaining what I think the point must be.

[Anonymous User]

As a senior associate at a V20, I honestly can't care less about where somebody went for undergrad. To most people including myself, the ones that went to elite undergrad but didn't go to a top law school or law school on full ride don't seem smart. In fact, to be honest, they just look liked they peaked in high school or went to that elite undergrad due to some donation by their parents. For example, those types of people that went to HYP -> TTT law school, or HYP -> shit law school grades, signal poor intelligence or work ethic.

100% agree with this.

Meh, a lot of those folks seem to have just fucked around in college, because they often go HYP --> TTT but then graduate in the top 3% or something.

“Often” is certainly a stretch here.

I see it all the time, and it's also the only way TTT grads are making it into biglaw, so I'll live with my "stretch."

Didn’t realize you were only referring to those who make it into biglaw. Makes more sense now.