Chicago 2L Takings ?s Forum

[iwantawhiteiphone4]

I'm going to be very honest with you on a couple fronts. First, I don't really know any of the transfers in other classes, because I mostly just know my own class. I imagine the transition is made a little easier by the fact that most of your classes will have a mix of 2L's and 3L's. So it's not like you'll stick out like a sore thumb. I personally won't be standoffish, and I can't see people in my class being that way either. But you obviously know that people here already have their established "groups," in some sense. So I think getting involved in student org's, etc. is your best bet for getting to know people and mixing in a little.

Second, and this is far more touchy, the economy makes the transfer phenomenon a little awkward, and you should just be ready to face that head on. No reason for you to apologize for your situation, but neither should you think you're going to come in here and "take over". I think I read in a recent e-mail from our (outgoing) dean of students that Chicago is bringing in 25 people this year. Frankly, that number surprises me, especially when there are a good number of people in our class who are going to have trouble finding jobs. So you should just be sensitive to the fact that the situation "out there" (as much as it sucks) creates a little bit of anxiety in here. Just try to keep a sense of humor (and humility) about it and "lay low" when it comes to certain things. If you display any kind of "entitlement" at all, it will not be well-received.

I completely agree with the first point. I don't know a ton of (rising) 3Ls, so I will assume any transfer is simply a 3L.

I mildly disagree with the second point. I don't think the sense of entitlement is strong enough that students will blame transfers for taking jobs. Everyone knew OCI wasn't spectacular last year. If/when students below median don't get jobs, I think most will realize it's their own fault. Obviously, transfers who think they are the cat's pajamas (my favorite Epstein-ism) and constantly talk about how badass they were at their old schools will be rejected, but current student who brag--or even talk--about grades are already shunned (in my experience).

Back to agreeing with you: your 70%-in-law-firms number looks right. I had double-counted a few students. A more telling number would be the percent of students wanting firm work who actually found firm jobs. A few law review kids are working for judges and public interest organizations. I presume they could've had firm jobs. I would guess the percent of people wanting to work at firms who found firm jobs is higher: maybe 80%?

[miamiman]

Chill out. Seriously. Those places don't take on many summers at all. And it's rare for us to have more than one or two go to any of them even in good years.

Eh, *sigh*, this is my normal state. I suppose that makes me "fit" for law.

EDIT: I should say the only reason I'm able to freak out at all is because of your truly blessed work above.

so... THANK YOU again for that.

just relax and focus on getting good grades when you get here - analyzing hiring trends is for people in the decision-making phase - you're in the "do well at the school you decided on" phase

fair. gotta keep the eye on the prize though.

[doyleoil]

I completely agree with the first point. I don't know a ton of (rising) 3Ls, so I will assume any transfer is simply a 3L.

I mildly disagree with the second point. I don't think the sense of entitlement is strong enough that students will blame transfers for taking jobs. Everyone knew OCI wasn't spectacular last year. If/when students below median don't get jobs, I think most will realize it's their own fault. Obviously, transfers who think they are the cat's pajamas (my favorite Epstein-ism) and constantly talk about how badass they were at their old schools will be rejected, but current student who brag--or even talk--about grades are already shunned (in my experience).

Back to agreeing with you: your 70%-in-law-firms number looks right. I had double-counted a few students. A more telling number would be the percent of students wanting firm work who actually found firm jobs. A few law review kids are working for judges and public interest organizations. I presume they could've had firm jobs. I would guess the percent of people wanting to work at firms who found firm jobs is higher: maybe 80%?

Yeah probably right about the below-median people. Good call. And I think you're also right about the law review contingent.

[iwantawhiteiphone4]

Maybe the judge placement shows that some people write on from the bottom 25%?

Doyle (or anyone): do you know a lot about the Chicago market? Which firms are the most prestigious/selective? I know of the big firms--K&E, SA, MB--but I know next to nothing about the small firms (other than Bartlit Beck). Are there some small firms that attract the law review-types?

[doyleoil]

Grippo & Elden and Eimer Stahl are supposed to be very good. But they're also really small so getting an offer would be kinda random. Bartlit is probably the most selective (as far as I know) but I don't think they hire 2L's. I think last year there was someone from law review at Barack Ferrazzano. Last year we also had a 1L, public-interest type at Loevy & Loevy (it's a smaller plaintiff-side civil rights firm).

I don't know enough to say if there's anything else out there. It doesn't seem like Chicago has any Munger/W&C-type places, though (medium-sized, ultra-selective litigation firms).

[miamiman]

Grippo & Elden and Eimer Stahl are supposed to be very good. But they're also really small so getting an offer would be kinda random. Bartlit is probably the most selective (as far as I know) but I don't think they hire 2L's. I think last year there was someone from law review at Barack Ferrazzano. Last year we also had a 1L, public-interest type at Loevy & Loevy (it's a smaller plaintiff-side civil rights firm).

I don't know enough to say if there's anything else out there. It doesn't seem like Chicago has any Munger/W&C-type places, though (medium-sized, ultra-selective litigation firms).

Asking not answering: aren't the midsize firms I listed above (Goldbergs, Barracks, etc.) roughly equal in competitiveness to a Mayer or Winston? Or am I miserably off?

[doyleoil]

Grippo & Elden and Eimer Stahl are supposed to be very good. But they're also really small so getting an offer would be kinda random. Bartlit is probably the most selective (as far as I know) but I don't think they hire 2L's. I think last year there was someone from law review at Barack Ferrazzano. Last year we also had a 1L, public-interest type at Loevy & Loevy (it's a smaller plaintiff-side civil rights firm).

I don't know enough to say if there's anything else out there. It doesn't seem like Chicago has any Munger/W&C-type places, though (medium-sized, ultra-selective litigation firms).

Asking not answering: aren't the midsize firms I listed above (Goldbergs, Barracks, etc.) roughly equal in competitiveness to a Mayer or Winston? Or am I miserably off?

It's just tough to say. I mean, it's probably easier for a U of C kid to land an offer at Mayer or Winston or Jenner than those places, because they take so few people every year. "Prestige"-wise, I don't really know how the smaller places rate (other than Bartlit). Maybe the names won't carry you as far as a lateral outside the Midwest as, say, a Mayer? But the work might be just as interesting (and you might get more early responsibility).

[miamiman]

Grippo & Elden and Eimer Stahl are supposed to be very good. But they're also really small so getting an offer would be kinda random. Bartlit is probably the most selective (as far as I know) but I don't think they hire 2L's. I think last year there was someone from law review at Barack Ferrazzano. Last year we also had a 1L, public-interest type at Loevy & Loevy (it's a smaller plaintiff-side civil rights firm).

I don't know enough to say if there's anything else out there. It doesn't seem like Chicago has any Munger/W&C-type places, though (medium-sized, ultra-selective litigation firms).

Asking not answering: aren't the midsize firms I listed above (Goldbergs, Barracks, etc.) roughly equal in competitiveness to a Mayer or Winston? Or am I miserably off?

It's just tough to say. I mean, it's probably easier for a U of C kid to land an offer at Mayer or Winston or Jenner than those places, because they take so few people every year. "Prestige"-wise, I don't really know how the smaller places rate (other than Bartlit). Maybe the names won't carry you as far as a lateral outside the Midwest as, say, a Mayer? But the work might be just as interesting (and you might get more early responsibility).

In a lot of respects, smaller "shops" like those strike me as more attractive since you're given more responsibility / better assignments / (more respect?) earlier in your associateship. I might be reaching on the third ITE. The obvious drawback, though, is that while your QOL might be better at first, it still will be much easier to make partner having worked outright at a brand like Mayer.

[dresden doll]

One of my closest friends at UChi is a transfer. I can't speak for everyone, of course, but I can say that I, personally, have zero intention of being stand-offish towards people who are only doing what I personally would do in their place.

[bizen boat]

One of my closest friends at UChi is a transfer. I can't speak for everyone, of course, but I can say that I, personally, have zero intention of being stand-offish towards people who are only doing what I personally would do in their place.

Thanks for that. I was a little surprised to read doyle's warning to transfers to be humble and not too uppity. In my experience, it's the transfer students who tread lightly and a few "native" students with the superiority complex because, after all, they were good enough to get in the first time around (and let's be honest, that argument does not entirely lack merit--just mostly). I neither want nor expect a campfire kumbaya moment in which we all join hands, but I am heartened to read such an honest statement as dresden's.

[doyleoil]

One of my closest friends at UChi is a transfer. I can't speak for everyone, of course, but I can say that I, personally, have zero intention of being stand-offish towards people who are only doing what I personally would do in their place.

Thanks for that. I was a little surprised to read doyle's warning to transfers to be humble and not too uppity. In my experience, it's the transfer students who tread lightly and a few "native" students with the superiority complex because, after all, they were good enough to get in the first time around (and let's be honest, that argument does not entirely lack merit--just mostly). I neither want nor expect a campfire kumbaya moment in which we all join hands, but I am heartened to read such an honest statement as dresden's.

yeah my asshole tendencies are hard to suppress - my bad

[and, as i said earlier about the professors, it's about the ideas, not where you came from....so if you've got great ideas, bring 'em to the table - this place is a great sounding board]

[dresden doll]

One of my closest friends at UChi is a transfer. I can't speak for everyone, of course, but I can say that I, personally, have zero intention of being stand-offish towards people who are only doing what I personally would do in their place.

Thanks for that. I was a little surprised to read doyle's warning to transfers to be humble and not too uppity. In my experience, it's the transfer students who tread lightly and a few "native" students with the superiority complex because, after all, they were good enough to get in the first time around (and let's be honest, that argument does not entirely lack merit--just mostly). I neither want nor expect a campfire kumbaya moment in which we all join hands, but I am heartened to read such an honest statement as dresden's.

As I see it, transfer students are where they are because Admissions felt they earned it. If anyone has issues in the matter, they should take it up with Admissions, not students themselves.

As for being good enough to get in, I don't really even think that those who get in because of a good LSAT/GPA combo can really be said to have earned their spot in a manner superior to those who get in after rocking their 1L year at another school. In my experience, law school is tougher to master than LSAT/UG.

At any rate, I do not believe that anyone - and that includes doyle, too - will be stand-offish and mean to transfer students. I certainly won't be.

[doyleoil]

I do not believe that anyone - and that includes doyle, too - will be stand-offish and mean to transfer students.

this - we're a pretty well-adjusted crew - well, except when i'm on the golf course - but other than that, i mostly act my age

[dresden doll]

I do not believe that anyone - and that includes doyle, too - will be stand-offish and mean to transfer students.

this - we're a pretty well-adjusted crew - well, except when i'm on the golf course - but other than that, i mostly act my age

TBF, the adjustment tends to go out the window when some of us play table soccer (or however the heck would you call it) in the Green Lounge.

[bizen boat]

TBF, the adjustment tends to go out the window when some of us play table soccer (or however the heck would you call it) in the Green Lounge.

If table soccer is the same thing as foosball, then I'm going to like U of C even more than I thought.

[dresden doll]

TBF, the adjustment tends to go out the window when some of us play table soccer (or however the heck would you call it) in the Green Lounge.

If table soccer is the same thing as foosball, then I'm going to like U of C even more than I thought.

God help you if you defeat me! I don't take that well.

[rsg87]

Sorry to keep badgering the 2L's but just another question. What do most people do for lunch on campus? Are there places to eat, it seems like the restaurants in Hyde Park are little far from the Law School (I could be wrong though, not good with directions).

[lilybbloom]

most people bring lunch or buy something at the cafe inside the law school, which sells sandwiches, soups and some other stuff. the selection isn't great and it stops selling food pretty early, though, like around 2 i think.

there is an undergrad dorm/dining hall right behind the law school, so some people go there. it's $9 for all you can eat.

there is also a pretty good convenience store with some fresh food from local restaurants about a block from the law school also.

most days of the week there will be a lunchtime talk, so if you're willing to attend the talk and sit through the entire lunch period, you can get free lunch that way (although if there's only 1 or 2 talks going on that particular day, you have to rush out of class to get a place in line or the food might run out). there are only a few places that cater the lunches- so it'll always be thai, indian, potbellys/jimmy johns, mediterranean, or pizza. you will get tired of those options pretty quickly!

the closest restaurants are like a 15 minute walk so most people use the options i just mentioned.

[Mr. T6]

This thread still exists?

Allow me to provide some unsolicited advice:

1. Rule statements can be as long as several paragraphs. Don't assume that all of the letters in IRAC are created equally.

2. Formality of prose is important in the legal profession. "Our client will likely lose on part two of the assault test" is not a sufficiently legal way of saying that he never saw it coming. Rather, you should write, "Our client is unlikely to prevail on the second element of the two-element assault test." When in doubt, err on the side of formality.

3. Organization is important on exams. Do so as if you are writing a brief. For instance:

Jack does not have a viable assault claim, because he will not be able to demonstrate that the second element of the two-element test was met

a) Jack will prevail on the first element of assault

(Rule)

Analysis

b) Jack will not prevail on the second element of assault

(Rule)

Analysis

4. Almost all law is straightforward. Waking up every morning should be a pleasure, knowing full well that you can readily handle any common law or statutory framework that the world throws at you. Our professors are not more intelligent than you; they are merely not showing you how to think like a lawyer, which involves a clean, concise understanding of legal frameworks as applied to any set of facts. Rather, our professors are skipping all of the information that you need in order to perform a legal analysis, in favor of all of the policy analysis behind the law that you don't need to perform such an analysis.

5. Justified is your friend (not the Timberlake album). Crooked margins are ugly margins are unprofessional margins. Look at a SCOTUS or 7th CoA opinion. Notice those nice, sharp margins?

[UnTouChablE]

This thread still exists?

Allow me to provide some unsolicited advice:

1. Rule statements can be as long as several paragraphs. Don't assume that all of the letters in IRAC are created equally.

2. Formality of prose is important in the legal profession. "Our client will likely lose on part two of the assault test" is not a sufficiently legal way of saying that he never saw it coming. Rather, you should write, "Our client is unlikely to prevail on the second element of the two-element assault test." When in doubt, err on the side of formality.

3. Organization is important on exams. Do so as if you are writing a brief. For instance:

Jack does not have a viable assault claim, because he will not be able to demonstrate that the second element of the two-element test was met

a) Jack will prevail on the first element of assault

(Rule)

Analysis

b) Jack will not prevail on the second element of assault

(Rule)

Analysis

4. Almost all law is straightforward. Waking up every morning should be a pleasure, knowing full well that you can readily handle any common law or statutory framework that the world throws at you. Our professors are not more intelligent than you; they are merely not showing you how to think like a lawyer, which involves a clean, concise understanding of legal frameworks as applied to any set of facts. Rather, our professors are skipping all of the information that you need in order to perform a legal analysis, in favor of all of the policy analysis behind the law that you don't need to perform such an analysis.

5. Justified is your friend (not the Timberlake album). Crooked margins are ugly margins are unprofessional margins. Look at a SCOTUS or 7th CoA opinion. Notice those nice, sharp margins?

So funny. More, Please more tips!!

[Dany]

5. Justified is your friend (not the Timberlake album). Crooked margins are ugly margins are unprofessional margins. Look at a SCOTUS or 7th CoA opinion. Notice those nice, sharp margins?

Love this!

[TaipeiMort]

I just discovered this thread. I have a quick question if anyone would be willing to answer. I have a small disability that makes it difficult for me to write with my hands. Would this mess anything up for me in regard to exams?

[pehaigllleises]

I only had one half of one exam (out of eight) that required writing by hand. It was Property with Helmholz, and it was his first year doing such an exam--he might go back to the usual format for next year, he might not, and you might not have him anyway. So long as you can type, you're fine. My impression from the dean of students office is that they take very seriously the ideal that you should be no worse off for anything out of your control. You can talk to them at the beginning of the year or just wait to see if it ever even comes up.

[SuichiKurama]

Grippo & Elden and Eimer Stahl are supposed to be very good. But they're also really small so getting an offer would be kinda random. Bartlit is probably the most selective (as far as I know) but I don't think they hire 2L's. I think last year there was someone from law review at Barack Ferrazzano. Last year we also had a 1L, public-interest type at Loevy & Loevy (it's a smaller plaintiff-side civil rights firm).

I don't know enough to say if there's anything else out there. It doesn't seem like Chicago has any Munger/W&C-type places, though (medium-sized, ultra-selective litigation firms).

Not that this is that important but Chicago definitely does have a Munger/W&C type firm---in a way it's even more of that vein in terms of their business model than those two firms. I don't know if I've ever seen a firm more selective than Bartlitt Beck--the profiles of their attorneys are amazing.


http://www.bartlit-beck.com/
http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTA ... hbxlogin=1
--LinkRemoved--

[doyleoil]

Grippo & Elden and Eimer Stahl are supposed to be very good. But they're also really small so getting an offer would be kinda random. Bartlit is probably the most selective (as far as I know) but I don't think they hire 2L's. I think last year there was someone from law review at Barack Ferrazzano. Last year we also had a 1L, public-interest type at Loevy & Loevy (it's a smaller plaintiff-side civil rights firm).

I don't know enough to say if there's anything else out there. It doesn't seem like Chicago has any Munger/W&C-type places, though (medium-sized, ultra-selective litigation firms).

Not that this is that important but Chicago definitely does have a Munger/W&C type firm---in a way it's even more of that vein in terms of their business model than those two firms. I don't know if I've ever seen a firm more selective than Bartlitt Beck--the profiles of their attorneys are amazing.


http://www.bartlit-beck.com/
http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTA ... hbxlogin=1
--LinkRemoved--

I'm fairly sure I mentioned Bartlit in my post, but the relevant point is that Munger and W&C are bigger, and hence take more people every year, than Bartlit. I don't even know if Bartlit hires 2L's anymore (my recollection from perusing their website is that they only look at you post-clerkship, but I could be wrong). Thus, Bartlit is almost certainly more selective in its entry-level hiring than Munger and W&C, which is probably what you were getting at. I definitely agree that it's a fantastic firm. It's just not AS within reach (or realistic, as far as OCI strategy goes) for a 2L as the other two.