JD Vs. BSF. Forum

[Anonymous User]

Alas! Another "help me decide." This time with the two most disliked firms on TLS. These are my only options. Dumping on both firms won't help me because I will end up at one.

TLDR; are there ANY benefits that BSF (withholding office for anon) has over JD at this point?

JD has less opportunity for associates to develop skills at an early and crucial stage compared to v10's and boutiques. BSF still appears to have more opportunity even with all the partner/client departures, at least compared to JD. Is this a bad reading?

$ - Blackbox stinks. It seems like BSF still will pay out big bonuses. True?

Exit options - a significant consideration for me. If BSF closes after my first year (or before I start), can I lateral to another big law firm? Is BSF still attractive to Judges for clerkships and DOJ like it used to be?

The obvious reason to choose JD is the financial health and stability of the firm with long-term career prospects should I decide to stay.

I know people may be hesitant to acknowledge, but are there any benefits that BSF has over JD NY at this point, or is it really that broken of a firm? Any other things I should take into consideration?

[Anonymous User]

Alas! Another "help me decide." This time with the two most disliked firms on TLS. These are my only options. Dumping on both firms won't help me because I will end up at one.

TLDR; are there ANY benefits that BSF (withholding office for anon) has over JD NY at this point?


Going into OCI, I thought I would land at least one v10/15 (great grades from t6), alas, that was not the case, and this is what I ended up with. Here's the thing I had high hopes for myself and felt capable of being a great litigator. I am still somewhat set on trying, even with my poor OCI experience.

JD NY has a couple of big problems. The standouts for me are that JD has less opportunity for associates to develop skills at an early and crucial stage compared to v10's and boutiques. BSF still appears to have more opportunity even with all the partner/client departures, at least compared to JD. Is this a bad reading?

$ - Blackbox stinks, and I know I will feel like S*** getting paid less. It seems like BSF still will pay out big bonuses. True?

Exit options - a significant consideration for me. If BSF closes after my first year (or before I start), can I lateral to another big law firm? Is BSF still attractive to Judges for clerkships and DOJ like it used to be? JD NY seems to have only mediocre exit options for lit associates and doesn't place in Gov.

The obvious reason to choose JD is the financial health and stability of the firm with long-term career prospects should I decide to stay.

I know people may be hesitant to acknowledge, but are there any benefits that BSF has over JD NY at this point, or is it really that broken of a firm? Any other things I should take into consideration?

Part of my hesitancy for JD NY is its mediocre reputation, all my friends with similar grades got v10 lit in DC/NY, and I'll be a bit self-conscious about taking JD.

Pick either and start mailing clerkship apps ASAP. If you're applying now, the judges DGAF where you are going to summer. Clerk right out of LS and then get hired into a V10. /Thread.

[Anonymous User]

Alas! Another "help me decide." This time with the two most disliked firms on TLS. These are my only options. Dumping on both firms won't help me because I will end up at one.

TLDR; are there ANY benefits that BSF (withholding office for anon) has over JD NY at this point?


Going into OCI, I thought I would land at least one v10/15 (great grades from t6), alas, that was not the case, and this is what I ended up with. Here's the thing I had high hopes for myself and felt capable of being a great litigator. I am still somewhat set on trying, even with my poor OCI experience.

JD NY has a couple of big problems. The standouts for me are that JD has less opportunity for associates to develop skills at an early and crucial stage compared to v10's and boutiques. BSF still appears to have more opportunity even with all the partner/client departures, at least compared to JD. Is this a bad reading?

$ - Blackbox stinks, and I know I will feel like S*** getting paid less. It seems like BSF still will pay out big bonuses. True?

Exit options - a significant consideration for me. If BSF closes after my first year (or before I start), can I lateral to another big law firm? Is BSF still attractive to Judges for clerkships and DOJ like it used to be? JD NY seems to have only mediocre exit options for lit associates and doesn't place in Gov.

The obvious reason to choose JD is the financial health and stability of the firm with long-term career prospects should I decide to stay.

I know people may be hesitant to acknowledge, but are there any benefits that BSF has over JD NY at this point, or is it really that broken of a firm? Any other things I should take into consideration?

Part of my hesitancy for JD NY is its mediocre reputation, all my friends with similar grades got v10 lit in DC/NY, and I'll be a bit self-conscious about taking JD.

Pick either and start mailing clerkship apps ASAP. If you're applying now, the judges DGAF where you are going to summer. Clerk right out of LS and then get hired into a V10. /Thread.

Do you think this stands for random D. court clerkships?

[Anonymous User]

Pick either and start mailing clerkship apps ASAP. If you're applying now, the judges DGAF where you are going to summer. Clerk right out of LS and then get hired into a V10. /Thread.

Do you think this stands for random D. court clerkships?

Random D. Court? No. But OP has "great grades from t6," which will get any reasonably resourceful rising 2L hard looks for COAs clerkships.

[Anonymous User]

Alas! Another "help me decide." This time with the two most disliked firms on TLS. These are my only options. Dumping on both firms won't help me because I will end up at one.

TLDR; are there ANY benefits that BSF (withholding office for anon) has over JD NY at this point?

JD NY has a couple of big problems. The standouts for me are that JD has less opportunity for associates to develop skills at an early and crucial stage compared to v10's and boutiques. BSF still appears to have more opportunity even with all the partner/client departures, at least compared to JD. Is this a bad reading?

$ - Blackbox stinks, and I know I will feel like S*** getting paid less. It seems like BSF still will pay out big bonuses. True?

Exit options - a significant consideration for me. If BSF closes after my first year (or before I start), can I lateral to another big law firm? Is BSF still attractive to Judges for clerkships and DOJ like it used to be? JD NY seems to have only mediocre exit options for lit associates and doesn't place in Gov.

The obvious reason to choose JD is the financial health and stability of the firm with long-term career prospects should I decide to stay.

I know people may be hesitant to acknowledge, but are there any benefits that BSF has over JD NY at this point, or is it really that broken of a firm? Any other things I should take into consideration?

Part of my hesitancy for JD NY is its mediocre reputation, all my friends with similar grades got v10 lit in DC/NY, and I'll be a bit self-conscious about taking JD.

Honestly a tough choice. Can'g go wrong with either. BSF is still elite and you sound inclined to choose it. If your risk tolerance is ok with it go for it.

[Wild Card]

bsf definitely is a flaming trashheap these days, rats scurrying from a sinking ship and all that, but jones day ny simply is not a selective biglaw firm. they take people in the 3.0 to 3.1 range at nyu, at the very least.

meanwhile, bsf still manages to pull in top of the class litigation koolaid drinkers

[Anonymous User]

Alas! Another "help me decide." This time with the two most disliked firms on TLS. These are my only options. Dumping on both firms won't help me because I will end up at one.

TLDR; are there ANY benefits that BSF (withholding office for anon) has over JD NY at this point?

JD NY has a couple of big problems. The standouts for me are that JD has less opportunity for associates to develop skills at an early and crucial stage compared to v10's and boutiques. BSF still appears to have more opportunity even with all the partner/client departures, at least compared to JD. Is this a bad reading?

$ - Blackbox stinks, and I know I will feel like S*** getting paid less. It seems like BSF still will pay out big bonuses. True?

Exit options - a significant consideration for me. If BSF closes after my first year (or before I start), can I lateral to another big law firm? Is BSF still attractive to Judges for clerkships and DOJ like it used to be? JD NY seems to have only mediocre exit options for lit associates and doesn't place in Gov.

The obvious reason to choose JD is the financial health and stability of the firm with long-term career prospects should I decide to stay.

I know people may be hesitant to acknowledge, but are there any benefits that BSF has over JD NY at this point, or is it really that broken of a firm? Any other things I should take into consideration?

Part of my hesitancy for JD NY is its mediocre reputation, all my friends with similar grades got v10 lit in DC/NY, and I'll be a bit self-conscious about taking JD.

I'd go JD NY. It's not very selective compared to its "peer" firms, but it is still a stable biglaw firm with top notch clients. You will most likely get paid slightly under market, but I've heard billables are lower at JD and partnership is actually possible there if you want to gun for it. BSF is in complete disarray. It really is a gamble going there right now.

But as others noted, you should try to get a clerkship and get a job with another firm if you aren't happy with these options. Most judges won't care at all about which firm you summered at. I got a COA clerkship and I summered in a secondary market at a firm that is less prestigious than JD.

But you really should have more offers if you have great grades from a T6 and participated in OCI, so you may want to self-reflect on what went wrong there and try to fix it.

[Anonymous User]

bsf definitely is a flaming trashheap these days, rats scurrying from a sinking ship and all that, but jones day ny simply is not a selective biglaw firm. they take people in the 3.0 to 3.1 range at nyu, at the very least.

meanwhile, bsf still manages to pull in top of the class litigation koolaid drinkers

To be fair, if this is truly who JD NYC fills their class with, OP may stand out and get some unique opportunities (for a summer). That could work to OP's advantage as a king of the nerds sort of deal. Not that high grades guarantees success in this scenario, but it at least gives OP a leg up coming in as the top dog. INA is a tough nut to crack, but OP might have a better shot.

[Anonymous User]

Couple things to note in response to OP:

1 - BSF will pay more than JD's black-box comp IF you can get staffed on the (increasingly few) cases at BSF where there's enough work to allow you to bill a lot AND the firm profits enough at year-end to allocate some of that towards your bonus. Both are gambles: in terms of getting staffed with the (increasingly few) BSF rainmakers to put you on the busy cases/allow you to bill a lot AND in terms of the firm's profitability (which will fluctuate year in and year out much more so than a stable firm like JD).

2 - Yes, arguably you'll get more opportunity to do senior-associate work as a junior at BSF. It's not as regimented or hierarchical. But that cuts both ways. It means you'll also have to do paralegal work, filings, retrieving Jonathan Schiller's mail from his house for him at the office, etc. The stuff you can push to paras or assistants at large firms is stuff you're stuck doing yourself at BSF.

[Wild Card]

To be fair, if this is truly who JD NYC fills their class with, OP may stand out and get some unique opportunities (for a summer). That could work to OP's advantage as a king of the nerds sort of deal. Not that high grades guarantees success in this scenario, but it at least gives OP a leg up coming in as the top dog. INA is a tough nut to crack, but OP might have a better shot.

And it's in Brookfield Place mall, so you can take long sunny walks by the waterfront every day, oyster happy hour every day ....

[Anonymous User]

Couple things to note in response to OP:

1 - BSF will pay more than JD's black-box comp IF you can get staffed on the (increasingly few) cases at BSF where there's enough work to allow you to bill a lot AND the firm profits enough at year-end to allocate some of that towards your bonus. Both are gambles: in terms of getting staffed with the (increasingly few) BSF rainmakers to put you on the busy cases/allow you to bill a lot AND in terms of the firm's profitability (which will fluctuate year in and year out much more so than a stable firm like JD).

2 - Yes, arguably you'll get more opportunity to do senior-associate work as a junior at BSF. It's not as regimented or hierarchical. But that cuts both ways. It means you'll also have to do paralegal work, filings, retrieving Jonathan Schiller's mail from his house for him at the office, etc. The stuff you can push to paras or assistants at large firms is stuff you're stuck doing yourself at BSF.

OP here. Thanks for this. Also, regarding 1, don't call me silly but does the fact that there was the recent big BlueCross settlement make any difference whatsoever to the firm's financial health? (at least from an outsider's guess)
Second, curious to know if there is a solid chance the firm regains its footing in the next couple of years in terms of client base, etc. There seems to be a bunch of younger star partners at the big offices that want to make it happen (or else why wouldn't they have bounced). Either way just trying to make the right decisions here.

[Anonymous User]

bsf definitely is a flaming trashheap these days, rats scurrying from a sinking ship and all that, but jones day ny simply is not a selective biglaw firm. they take people in the 3.0 to 3.1 range at nyu, at the very least.

meanwhile, bsf still manages to pull in top of the class litigation koolaid drinkers

Not at my T6. They hired probably the most reviled dude in the class.

[Anonymous User]

Couple things to note in response to OP:

1 - BSF will pay more than JD's black-box comp IF you can get staffed on the (increasingly few) cases at BSF where there's enough work to allow you to bill a lot AND the firm profits enough at year-end to allocate some of that towards your bonus. Both are gambles: in terms of getting staffed with the (increasingly few) BSF rainmakers to put you on the busy cases/allow you to bill a lot AND in terms of the firm's profitability (which will fluctuate year in and year out much more so than a stable firm like JD).

2 - Yes, arguably you'll get more opportunity to do senior-associate work as a junior at BSF. It's not as regimented or hierarchical. But that cuts both ways. It means you'll also have to do paralegal work, filings, retrieving Jonathan Schiller's mail from his house for him at the office, etc. The stuff you can push to paras or assistants at large firms is stuff you're stuck doing yourself at BSF.

OP here. Thanks for this. Also, regarding 1, don't call me silly but does the fact that there was the recent big BlueCross settlement make any difference whatsoever to the firm's financial health? (at least from an outsider's guess)
Second, curious to know if there is a solid chance the firm regains its footing in the next couple of years in terms of client base, etc. There seems to be a bunch of younger star partners at the big offices that want to make it happen (or else why wouldn't they have bounced). Either way just trying to make the right decisions here.

1- The Blue Cross settlement is a very rare achievement. Have you read the reports about it? It took decades in the making, was enough of a rarity to achieve the press coverage that you see, will have to be used to recoup a lot of investment already put into it (so that some of the $$$ will need to be used to replenish institutional resources already spent), and doesn't happen that often. But sure, it's possible they'll pull off another like it, I guess.

2- Yeah there's a chance the firm will recover/regain its footing. But it's not likely. It's not an easy thing to become a powerhouse litigation boutique once, let alone a second time given this level of damage BSF has been through. And I'm not sure the younger "stars" are what will make that happen. You can't just talent or hustle your way to success the way David Boies originally did -- he's a truly generational talent that also got lucky early on. His success isn't something you can just put your mind to and duplicate. And at least some of these younger stars are stars because they, well, pleased Boies enough for him to elevate them into management-level position. That's not the type of skill you need to resuscitate a business, it's the skill that gets you promoted internally when you can please your bosses.

As for who would have bounced, some just can't bounce because there's no market (or no good market) for them. A very senior associate or a junior partner with no independently-robust client-level connections isn't always desirable on the lateral market, so some of these folks are locked into BSF for better or for worse, functioning as service partners for a steadily depleting stable of actual business-generating partners. The firm's trying to fix that by doing more plaintiff-side contingency work, but that has its own risks (and, sure, rewards).

If you're excited about a fresh start with lots of public-facing PR-driven legal work (see for reference their plaintiff-side work for women post-Dobbs, or for Epstein victims), maybe then it's a good fit. Otherwise, I'd stay away.

[Anonymous User]

bsf definitely is a flaming trashheap these days, rats scurrying from a sinking ship and all that, but jones day ny simply is not a selective biglaw firm. they take people in the 3.0 to 3.1 range at nyu, at the very least.

meanwhile, bsf still manages to pull in top of the class litigation koolaid drinkers

Not at my T6. They hired probably the most reviled dude in the class.

I mean, he may be reviled, but he still may be top of the class or near it

[Anonymous User]

Couple things to note in response to OP:

1 - BSF will pay more than JD's black-box comp IF you can get staffed on the (increasingly few) cases at BSF where there's enough work to allow you to bill a lot AND the firm profits enough at year-end to allocate some of that towards your bonus. Both are gambles: in terms of getting staffed with the (increasingly few) BSF rainmakers to put you on the busy cases/allow you to bill a lot AND in terms of the firm's profitability (which will fluctuate year in and year out much more so than a stable firm like JD).

2 - Yes, arguably you'll get more opportunity to do senior-associate work as a junior at BSF. It's not as regimented or hierarchical. But that cuts both ways. It means you'll also have to do paralegal work, filings, retrieving Jonathan Schiller's mail from his house for him at the office, etc. The stuff you can push to paras or assistants at large firms is stuff you're stuck doing yourself at BSF.

OP here. Thanks for this. Also, regarding 1, don't call me silly but does the fact that there was the recent big BlueCross settlement make any difference whatsoever to the firm's financial health? (at least from an outsider's guess)
Second, curious to know if there is a solid chance the firm regains its footing in the next couple of years in terms of client base, etc. There seems to be a bunch of younger star partners at the big offices that want to make it happen (or else why wouldn't they have bounced). Either way just trying to make the right decisions here.

1- The Blue Cross settlement is a very rare achievement. Have you read the reports about it? It took decades in the making, was enough of a rarity to achieve the press coverage that you see, will have to be used to recoup a lot of investment already put into it (so that some of the $$$ will need to be used to replenish institutional resources already spent), and doesn't happen that often. But sure, it's possible they'll pull off another like it, I guess.

2- Yeah there's a chance the firm will recover/regain its footing. But it's not likely. It's not an easy thing to become a powerhouse litigation boutique once, let alone a second time given this level of damage BSF has been through. And I'm not sure the younger "stars" are what will make that happen. You can't just talent or hustle your way to success the way David Boies originally did -- he's a truly generational talent that also got lucky early on. His success isn't something you can just put your mind to and duplicate. And at least some of these younger stars are stars because they, well, pleased Boies enough for him to elevate them into management-level position. That's not the type of skill you need to resuscitate a business, it's the skill that gets you promoted internally when you can please your bosses.

As for who would have bounced, some just can't bounce because there's no market (or no good market) for them. A very senior associate or a junior partner with no independently-robust client-level connections isn't always desirable on the lateral market, so some of these folks are locked into BSF for better or for worse, functioning as service partners for a steadily depleting stable of actual business-generating partners. The firm's trying to fix that by doing more plaintiff-side contingency work, but that has its own risks (and, sure, rewards).

If you're excited about a fresh start with lots of public-facing PR-driven legal work (see for reference their plaintiff-side work for women post-Dobbs, or for Epstein victims), maybe then it's a good fit. Otherwise, I'd stay away.

OP. All very helpful info. With all this being said, I am curious what you would do or advise someone to do in my situation.

[Anonymous User]

Former JD associate here who has been both co-counsel and opposing counsel to BSF.

Go to Jones Day.

First, on compensation, there will be very little difference in your first year. You will likely enter at 225,000 base and then get a raise to $235,000 or $240,000 in July of your first year. This comes out to either $2,500 or $5,000 less than market. And that assumes you'd be making hours elsewhere in your first year which isn't a given.

Second, on skills development, Jones Day (especially as a first-year associate) is choose-your-own-adventure. You can find the cases that are interesting to you and hustle to get staffed on them. It is not true that "JD has less opportunity for associates to develop skills at an early and crucial stage compared to v10's." This is a firm-specific analysis. I did more varied work than friends at Latham, Kirkland, or Gibson. I did less varied work than friends at Quinn, some lit boutiques, and some busy V50s. Though those friends had miserable first years.

Third, on stability, we are entering an economic slowdown and no one is certain whether BSF will even exist in five to ten years. When partners leave with clients, it lowers the overall profit pool for the other partners, which incentives them to leave. And so on. On the other hand, Jones Day is extremely stable financially. It has blue-chip clients like McDonalds, Walmart, and J&J, which will continue to use the firm for its legal needs through any recession.

Fourth, on BSF, it seems like its trying to turn itself into a plaintiffs shop. This could fuck you if you tried to lateral and were directly adverse to potential new firm's clients. Moreover, internal culture can get toxic when people rely on suing others to make money and are singularly focused on a potential future settlement.

Last, Jones Day's reputation and exit opportunities are nowhere near as "mediocre" as your 1L friends perceive it to be. Certainly Jones Day's hiring standards have dropped over the past two or three years (which I've taken from fairly snide comments by summer associates at my current boutique -- please don't be that guy, OP, it's rude). But the firm as a whole takes on matters in line with what you'd find at most V20s or whatever. When you're lateraling, most hiring partners won't know or care that Jones Day hires well below median at NYU, but they probably will have worked with Jones Day as co-counsel on something or another.

To be clear, I don't love Jones Day. I left because of frustrations with black-box comp and the GOP representations. But its nowhere near as bad as people on this site hold it out to be. And its certainly nowhere near as bad as Boies--a teetering plaintiffs shop with a toxic culture.

[Anonymous User]

Former JD associate here who has been both co-counsel and opposing counsel to BSF.

Go to Jones Day.

First, on compensation, there will be very little difference in your first year. You will likely enter at 225,000 base and then get a raise to $235,000 or $240,000 in July of your first year. This comes out to either $2,500 or $5,000 less than market. And that assumes you'd be making hours elsewhere in your first year which isn't a given.

Second, on skills development, Jones Day (especially as a first-year associate) is choose-your-own-adventure. You can find the cases that are interesting to you and hustle to get staffed on them. It is not true that "JD has less opportunity for associates to develop skills at an early and crucial stage compared to v10's." This is a firm-specific analysis. I did more varied work than friends at Latham, Kirkland, or Gibson. I did less varied work than friends at Quinn, some lit boutiques, and some busy V50s. Though those friends had miserable first years.

Third, on stability, we are entering an economic slowdown and no one is certain whether BSF will even exist in five to ten years. When partners leave with clients, it lowers the overall profit pool for the other partners, which incentives them to leave. And so on. On the other hand, Jones Day is extremely stable financially. It has blue-chip clients like McDonalds, Walmart, and J&J, which will continue to use the firm for its legal needs through any recession.

Fourth, on BSF, it seems like its trying to turn itself into a plaintiffs shop. This could fuck you if you tried to lateral and were directly adverse to potential new firm's clients. Moreover, internal culture can get toxic when people rely on suing others to make money and are singularly focused on a potential future settlement.

Last, Jones Day's reputation and exit opportunities are nowhere near as "mediocre" as your 1L friends perceive it to be. Certainly Jones Day's hiring standards have dropped over the past two or three years (which I've taken from fairly snide comments by summer associates at my current boutique -- please don't be that guy, OP, it's rude). But the firm as a whole takes on matters in line with what you'd find at most V20s or whatever. When you're lateraling, most hiring partners won't know or care that Jones Day hires well below median at NYU, but they probably will have worked with Jones Day as co-counsel on something or another.

To be clear, I don't love Jones Day. I left because of frustrations with black-box comp and the GOP representations. But its nowhere near as bad as people on this site hold it out to be. And its certainly nowhere near as bad as Boies--a teetering plaintiffs shop with a toxic culture.

OP. This is very helpful. JD does seem like an excellent place, and everyone I met there was nice etc. Regarding "please don't be that guy," I certainly am not. On one hand, it seems the law is in large part about prestige, and I am chasing it. On the other, I am from an underprivileged background, and I know most of this (v10 v v30) is meaningless in the broader scheme of things.

It seems that you were in the DC office do you think all the above, specifically with development and exit options, applies to NY?

[Anonymous User]

OP. This is very helpful. JD does seem like an excellent place, and everyone I met there was nice etc. Regarding "please don't be that guy," I certainly am not. On one hand, it seems the law is in large part about prestige, and I am chasing it. On the other, I am from an underprivileged background, and I know most of this (v10 v v30) is meaningless in the broader scheme of things.

It seems that you were in the DC office do you think all the above, specifically with development and exit options, applies to NY?

So I actually wasn't in DC or NY, I was in another major market office (think LA, SF, Chicago, Houston). But the work I did wasn't specific to my office. Instead, I primarily worked on cases with attorneys in DC/NY/some of the international offices. I cannot imagine that the opportunities would have differed were I in NY, but don't want to say outright.

As for prestige, it does matter but only to an extent. For example, HLS is more prestigious than GULC, and the result is that its likely easier for an HLS student to get an offer from something like a Paul Weiss than it is for a GULC student. But that doesn't mean that GULC students don't get offers from Paul Weiss, or even that its particularly difficult for GULC students to do so. It just means that its easier from HLS. By the same metric, Paul Weiss is more prestigious than Jones Day. The result is that its probably easier to become an Assistant US Attorney from Paul Weiss. But that doesn't mean that its impossible (or even uncommon) from Jones Day. This calculus shifts as you widen the prestige gap i.e. HLS vs. UMD Law, Paul Weiss vs. Cozen O'Connor.

[Anonymous User]

OP. This is very helpful. JD does seem like an excellent place, and everyone I met there was nice etc. Regarding "please don't be that guy," I certainly am not. On one hand, it seems the law is in large part about prestige, and I am chasing it. On the other, I am from an underprivileged background, and I know most of this (v10 v v30) is meaningless in the broader scheme of things.

It seems that you were in the DC office do you think all the above, specifically with development and exit options, applies to NY?

So I actually wasn't in DC or NY, I was in another major market office (think LA, SF, Chicago, Houston). But the work I did wasn't specific to my office. Instead, I primarily worked on cases with attorneys in DC/NY/some of the international offices. I cannot imagine that the opportunities would have differed were I in NY, but don't want to say outright.

As for prestige, it does matter but only to an extent. For example, HLS is more prestigious than GULC, and the result is that its likely easier for an HLS student to get an offer from something like a Paul Weiss than it is for a GULC student. But that doesn't mean that GULC students don't get offers from Paul Weiss, or even that its particularly difficult for GULC students to do so. It just means that its easier from HLS. By the same metric, Paul Weiss is more prestigious than Jones Day. The result is that its probably easier to become an Assistant US Attorney from Paul Weiss. But that doesn't mean that its impossible (or even uncommon) from Jones Day. This calculus shifts as you widen the prestige gap i.e. HLS vs. UMD Law, Paul Weiss vs. Cozen O'Connor.

New poster chiming in. I'd say that JD NY has wider internal variation than most other firms. On the one hand, it hires NYU students with 3.0-3.1 GPAs (which peer firms may not). On the other hand, it has 6 or 7 SCOTUS clerks (which other peer firms do not). Best believe they are not all getting paid the same. JD really is a choose-your-own-adventure place. Working there is neither a badge of honor (like working at Wachtell), nor a badge of shame (like working at certain disreputable v100s). You will be judged by the experience you gain and the people you meet.

[Anonymous User]

bsf definitely is a flaming trashheap these days, rats scurrying from a sinking ship and all that, but jones day ny simply is not a selective biglaw firm. they take people in the 3.0 to 3.1 range at nyu, at the very least.

meanwhile, bsf still manages to pull in top of the class litigation koolaid drinkers

Not at my T6. They hired probably the most reviled dude in the class.

I mean, he may be reviled, but he still may be top of the class or near it

Apart from being insufferable, he's not (the fact I know is one of the many reasons he's insufferable). There are few people around here which I think are straight-up unhireable, and he's one of 'em.

Of course, that individual is anecdotal. But they sure as hell aren't "pulling in top of the class litigation koolaid drinkers" anymore, at least not here.

[Anonymous User]

OP. This is very helpful. JD does seem like an excellent place, and everyone I met there was nice etc. Regarding "please don't be that guy," I certainly am not. On one hand, it seems the law is in large part about prestige, and I am chasing it. On the other, I am from an underprivileged background, and I know most of this (v10 v v30) is meaningless in the broader scheme of things.

It seems that you were in the DC office do you think all the above, specifically with development and exit options, applies to NY?

So I actually wasn't in DC or NY, I was in another major market office (think LA, SF, Chicago, Houston). But the work I did wasn't specific to my office. Instead, I primarily worked on cases with attorneys in DC/NY/some of the international offices. I cannot imagine that the opportunities would have differed were I in NY, but don't want to say outright.

As for prestige, it does matter but only to an extent. For example, HLS is more prestigious than GULC, and the result is that its likely easier for an HLS student to get an offer from something like a Paul Weiss than it is for a GULC student. But that doesn't mean that GULC students don't get offers from Paul Weiss, or even that its particularly difficult for GULC students to do so. It just means that its easier from HLS. By the same metric, Paul Weiss is more prestigious than Jones Day. The result is that its probably easier to become an Assistant US Attorney from Paul Weiss. But that doesn't mean that its impossible (or even uncommon) from Jones Day. This calculus shifts as you widen the prestige gap i.e. HLS vs. UMD Law, Paul Weiss vs. Cozen O'Connor.

New poster chiming in. I'd say that JD NY has wider internal variation than most other firms. On the one hand, it hires NYU students with 3.0-3.1 GPAs (which peer firms may not). On the other hand, it has 6 or 7 SCOTUS clerks (which other peer firms do not). Best believe they are not all getting paid the same. JD really is a choose-your-own-adventure place. Working there is neither a badge of honor (like working at Wachtell), nor a badge of shame (like working at certain disreputable v100s). You will be judged by the experience you gain and the people you meet.

Some above median people from my T14 went to JD NY. It's a mix of medianish T14 students and honors students from T20-40 schools

[Anonymous User]

As a former Jones Day associate (6 years in a major market office) I’d pick JD. Very stable firm and there are a lot of good things about it including chances of partnership. I also left largely because the representations I had do not match my politics. People are fleeing Boies and the point about creating conflicts issues if you try to lateral is a good one. If Boies actually collapses it may not be easy to find a job immediately in the wake of that news. If you go to JD and want to leave after a couple years it will be easy to do so. I had a good time there by big law standards and would recommend it even though I ultimately left.

[Anonymous User]

The other thing to keep in mind about BSF is, lots of associates have left over the past 2-3 years and when they (we) interviewed at other firms when lateralling, the interviewer was very understanding about why we're leaving BSF and the circumstances. People had joined when it was a great firm; it then collapsed through no fault of any associates, and so makes sense associates are leaving in droves.

But if you try to leave BSF after having joined in these past few years, it's gonna seem like an awkward convo: why in the world would you have joined BSF *after* all this drama? Did you have no other options? It'll look bad to start with, in terms of your either your ability to get other offers or your professional judgment, and maybe you can explain it, but you're starting from a position of weakness. To me that compounds with the other poster's point about how it may be difficult to lateral from BSF if you join now.

[Anonymous User]

It seems like the best strategy here is really neither. You should take the summer associate, apply to clerk, and then reapply to firms with your clerkship. My take is that BSF is probably better to have on your resume--you can say you really wanted to litigate and the firm seemed to have good opportunities (still), but you discovered after the summer that it is not for you. Jones Day is not at all in the same league as the V10, so, say, DPW might wonder why you didn't summer somewhere better unless you snag a really good clerkship (SDNY, COA, etc.). Any district court clerkship is good to have on your resume. Coastal ones are better but you can easily spin a good story out of clerking in Oklahoma ("I really clicked with the judge's style, I wanted to see what the docket was like outside of the big cities, blah blah").

[Anonymous User]

Maybe check out the most recent NYT article re Jones Day...