Don't you think you should also put parentheticals with the firm nicknames? e.g., "We'll get you and mangle you?"

Is Weil really as much of a sweatshop as everyone says?

What are the differences between Simpson and Cleary? They seem very similar to me (except Cleary is downtown, yuck).

I believe the over under on "LLLLLAAAATHHHHAAAAMMM" is 45 minutes.

That and L2L complaining that the prestige scores are higher than his hourly wage as a fluffer....

The idea that Weil is a sweatshop is a remnant of how the firm was 6 or 7 years ago. In the past few years, the firm has made a concerted effort to change the firm culture and has done a really good job. I am given a lot of latitude to work the way I prefer as long as the work gets done. If I want to take a vacation, the other people in my group cover for me. For those who do not believe me, ask your classmates who are now here or call up an alum and ask. I know the feeling is not the same for some of my friends at other firms on this list.

I think that the sweatshop thing is really associated with the practice of corporate law rather than any particular firm per se.

How difficult is it to get a job at Latham? Anyone know if they have GPA cutoffs or what GPA you need from Georgetown? It seems like the criteria a lot of the firms list for OCI isn't very accurate - Thanks

Does it really fucking matter what firm you work at? Not really.

Really, WHO CARES.

You will care from August to Thanksgiving your 2L year. Thereafter, you and everyone else will promptly stop giving a shit.

What makes this thread less useful than the earlier one is that Latham and Covington are not NY firms.

It might be better to have threads devoted to peer firms in specific cities.

Sphincter is First First First!!!

June 28, 2007

The American Lawyer Names Debevoise & Plimpton as Leader of Its “A-List” for Fourth Consecutive Year

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The American Lawyer magazine published its 2007 “A-List” ranking today, naming Debevoise & Plimpton of New York City as the leader of the nation’s law firm elite for the fourth consecutive year.

Weil, Gotshal & Manges advanced to second place from its eleventh position last year.

One firm, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, joined The A-List for the first time, while six other firms regained a position on this year’s list.

Drawn from four different ALM rankings of the nation’s largest firms, the 20-member A-List looks beyond simple business results to identify firms that set the standard for their peers in areas including economic performance, pro bono work and diversity.

Complete rankings for The A-List are featured in the July issue of the magazine and are available on the Web at www.americanlawyer.com.

The six firms returning to The A-List this year are: Arnold & Porter (number 17); Cravath, Swaine & Moore (number 18); Howrey (number 19-tie); Munger, Tolles & Olson (number 3); Robins Kaplan (number 19-tie) and Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett (number 13).

Only seven firms have been named to The A-List in each of the five years of its existence: Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton; Davis Polk & Wardwell; Debevoise & Plimpton; Latham & Watkins; Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler; Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison; and Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr.

The A-List firms will be honored at The American Lawyer’s 4th Annual Awards dinner, to be held October 24th at Cipriani in New York City.

The A-List is created through a composite ranking of four objective firm dimensions, based on data collected for various surveys throughout the year:

* Revenue Per Lawyer, as a measure of the success of a firm’s practice and an approximation of client quality and satisfaction

* Associate Satisfaction, as a measure of each firm’s training and development commitment

* Diversity, as a measure of each firm’s track record in hiring and retaining minority lawyers

* Pro Bono, as a measure of each firm’s fulfillment of its professional requirement to contribute high-quality, free legal services to indigent clients and community service and non-profit organizations.

A weighted ranking of firms is created from these factors for all Am Law 200 firms. The top 20 firms comprise The A-List.

How about a thread comparing litigation boutiques? (Kellogg Huber, Susman Godfrey, Keker Van Nest, Bartlit Beck, Beck Redden, Zuckerman Spaeder, Robbins Russell, Yetter Warden, Eimer Stahl, etc.)

It seems much harder to get information about these firms.

Please go to another firm to get your $. Your billing rates on the litigation side are much lower than ours on the transactional side. We'd save money for the bonus pool if we could jettison you.

10:01--

I don't know about Latham's grade requirements in particular, but many of the posted grade requirements at Georgetown OCI were utter nonsense when I interviewed. My favorite: my Hale & Dorr interviewer remarked on what staggeringly high grades she'd seen during a day of screening interviews. It turned out she didn't know that someone had listed the firm as requiring an A average. (They didn't.)

Most firms don't have hard cutoffs, and the willingness to dig deep varies a bit from year to year, but if Latham is like its peer firms, I'd say you've got a good shot anywhere in the top 10-15%, some reasonable shot in the top 1/3, and a rather iffier shot below that. But that's just a guess--I didn't interview there.

The above only applies if you are a non-minority. Sorry, or congratulations, depending on your view, but that's how it works.

And for OCI, as for most everything, Asians = non-minorities.

For all but the truly truly elite firms, grade-cutoffs are largely a myth firms like to propagate to pretend they only hire the top 15% from the top schools. But of course plenty of idiots at the bottom of the class at Penn get great jobs.

Anon you are HILARIOUS - you will not believe how many of my non-minority friends (including yours truly) have cracked Big Law and how desperately we have been wooed. Turns out when the i-banks are full of minorities, they want to see some minorities in the law firms they hire...

I'm at Cleary. I work too much. I don't like the faux-liberal bolgna. I've been on the receiving end of these "we feel so bad about how much we are tooling you to death" b.s. lines from partners for a good year and a half now. Need to exit, but I don't even know wtf I'm really doing.

Where's seward and kissel in the vault 100 list?

Any idea what kind of grades at HLS would be needed for Latham in Chicago?

12:15 : Um, B/B+

9:56

I spoke to someone at Weil back in May (he just finished his 9th month there), and he couldn't wait to get out. He had lost 20 lbs (he was skinny to begin with), had to start taking blood pressure medication, and was overall a wreck. In his own words "I'm gonna finish out the year so I can get a bonus, and then I'm out".

If anything, this pretty much means that you can't discuss firms without mentioning practice groups. Since your experience seems to be a polar opposite of his (or perhaps you just got lucky and got assigned to a nice partner).

GULC's career office said you need an A average to get a job at Hale and Dorr? Hahahahaha. I don't know who's dumber, the person who said it or the law students who believed it.

If you're still referring to *Wilmer Hale* as *Hale and Dorr* you are truly fucked at OCI.

his name was GULC Alum.... he already did OCI and most likely when it was still Hale and Dorr

no problem with that

12:03 - Seward and Kissel isn't even on the V100 list. They're too small as a firm to generate enough revenue to make it onto that list, and may not even make it into V200. BUT, it's a really nice place from what I hear...

The vast majority of associates at these Vault top 20 firms will be shambling nervous wrecks of their former selves after three years.

They will either be too fat, or too skinny from stress, out of shape, and desperately unhappy.

The point? If you go to one of these hellholes, SAVE EVERY PENNY. AND PLAN YOUR ESCAPE.

there is no vault 200

Right, thanks, I meant AmLaw 200...

Covington NY had a Brooklyn summer this year...count them out of the V20 come 2008.

10:22- Are billing rates really that much lower in litigation than in transactions? Even IP and securities litigation?

2:39 is right - and more importantly don't call Wilmer Hale just Wilmer if you get a legacy Hale and Dorr interviewer, the chowderheads get really antsy about that.

10:22 - It depends on the group and sometimes even the client.

BigLaw is what you make of it. Yes, your first year is hell, but that's generally because you are a useless moron. It generally gets better as you get more experienced and can actually contribute to a project. Once you can appreciate the business side of it, it can actually be fun.

For NYC BigLaw associates, having 3+ years at a big NYC firm (not the local branch of Latham) is a badge of honor that you will carry for the rest of your career. It will give you instant credibility.

Yes, plan your escape. A few points that should be made:

(1) The training at top 5 firms is incomparable. You will simply be working with better, and more dedicated, lawyers than if if you merely go to a top 100 firm. If you become one of these dedicated lawyers, it will set the foundation for your skill set and work ethic that will be with you your entire career.

(2) The "write your ticket" idea is simply a myth, propogated by lazy media. Maybe it was that way in the 30s but it isn't that way now.

You can write your ticket in the sense that you can lateral downward pretty easily, but that's about it. In-house legal departments simply don't need 3rd year m&a associates, wherever they're from.

(3) There are practices within the top 100 that are less extreme than the most "big time" practices in the city, and still involve very interesting work. If you develop your skill set at a top 5 place and then go to one of these practices, you can have a pretty good life, including a pretty good professional life.

But the best advice is in 8:25 AM -- have an exit strategy, or at least always be aware of the legal world outside the building you're working in, so you have your s--t more together when you talk to headhunters and then go on interviews. It will save you a lot of pain and insecurity and confusion as you're slaving away for your 3 or 4 years or whatever.

Seward & Kissell is only a nice place to work if you're not in the hedge fund group, which, by the way, is the firm's only real draw (aside from maritime law). It advertises itself as a friendly, lifestyle firm, when in fact associates work quite hard there. What's worse is that the assigning responsibilities are given to third- and fourth-year associates, because with respect to hedge fund work associates at those levels can ostensibly "run" deals. This, of course, leads to horrible mismanagement and whatever else that results from a situation where a junior associate can push work down to even more junior associates. On top of this, the firm doesn't even pay market bonuses -- only if you hit 2300 hours! Complete shit-show.

What sort of exit strategies would you suggest for a V10 NYC litigation associate, class of 2003 who's never actually been to court?

As for Seward & Kissell. the associates are still pissed that they're not listed on the website (which looks like it was designed in the 90s). The partners are too cheap to actually update the site. Also, no summer associate lunches at S&K.

Yes, everyone knows that Latham is a CA firm, but the NY office is hardly a "branch" or "satellite" office. The NY office has more attorneys (over 300) than other Latham office and will continue to grow. Although the LA and NY offices are sort of dual power centers, it is no secret that the NY office drives the firm.

covington dc is a great place to work. 8:44, don't know anything specific about the NY office but hiring from different schools makes the classes a hell of a lot more interesting than just filling from HYS.

Latham has a well deserved reputation as a sweat shop. After several years, every associate in my practice group would agree and most of my close friends here plan to leave. FYI - the ones that don't plan to leave have a lot of debt.

Any insights into Cov (DC)? Does working at Cleary in DC mean always being eclipsed (and beat down) by NY?

Couldn't you say that every V-20 firm is a sweatshop? Depending on practice group, particular assignments and supervisors, there is a very good chance that one will work hellish hours at any one of these firms. If you're looking for lifestyle, by and large V-20 is not where you want to be.

What sort of exit strategies would you suggest for a V[6] NYC litigation associate, class of 200[4] who's never actually been to court [except pro bono]?

Ralph - I'd agree in most cases, but certainly not all.

I've done a lot of co-counsel work with Weil's NYC litigation group and they are fairly wretched people that I wouldn't want to ever be around. Ever. By comparison, I've worked with a lot of other big NYC shops (including my own), and Weil sticks out as being the worst in terms of personalities. I will say that most of Weil's partners seem pretty sharp.

For what it's worth, I have a friend who recently left Weil's corporate group. He said corporate is known to be much friendlier than litigation (probably true at a lot of firms--less Type A's).

I've also been struck by the lackluster pedigree line of Weil's litigation associates. This seems to be the place if you went to Fordham, Cardozo, or other less-than-glamorous schools.... but maybe that's just my experience.

I work at Covington NY and can say that it is a pretty good place as Biglaw goes, particularly in NY - and I know of what I speak, having lateral-ed from a Vault top 5 NY firm (as have many of my colleagues here). Really nice new offices don't hurt either. It's not utopia, but it is a good deal as law firms go.

9:07 -- why haven't you been to court? I don't know what your firm is like, but at White & Case, the pro bono program is the chance to actually learn to lawyer by doing. I'm a year junior to you, and I've handled several small civil litigations from start to finish, including mediation, discovery, motion practice (including oral arguments), and settlement. I'm currently in the process of scheduling several depositions, for which I will be the examining attorney (one of them will be of opposing counsel). And I've got an appeal pending in the 1st dep't., for which I just assigned a first year to take the first cut at drafting the brief. On all of this, I've been the senior lawyer working on the cases (although I've had as much help as I've needed from seniors).

The best exit strategy is to learn how to practice law, around your duties as a revenue-generating legal research and doc review monkey.

Covington DC is a pretty good place to work. Partners tend to be respectful of weekend and personal time and are generally good people and great lawyers. The work is interesting, and, besides those inevitable busy periods, not crushing in the least.

How interested is Latham in clerks who didn't summer with them?

Apparently not interested enough to offer a market bonus. Pow!

Thanks c&B assoc. - that's helpful. Out of curiosity, were you corp, litigation...?

Although I am now a government lawyer, I worked in litigation at Simpson Thacher for three years. I enjoyed my time there. I worked reasonable hours, by Biglaw NYC standards (an average day was probably 9 to 7 or 7:30); I worked with friendly (for the most part), capable partners; and I was generally treated well. The firm's culture encourages respect and politeness.

If I were to return to Biglaw NYC, I would again consider Simpson. I would also consider Davis Polk, Debevoise, and Cleary, but probably nowhere else.

I asked you a question.

"What sort of exit strategies would you suggest for a V[6] NYC litigation associate, class of 200[4] who's never actually been to court [except pro bono]? "

Back when I was graduating law school in the late 1990's, Weil was known as one of the worst sweatshops around. A few years later, a very well known partner who was known to be just awful left to go to another firm, and ever since then, the firm has gotten better in terms of its treatment of associates. Now, in fact, it is known as one of the nicer big firms for associates.

Can anyone provide a comparison of the DC branches of each of these firms?

In response to "Does working at Cleary in DC mean always being eclipsed (and beat down) by NY?"

Answer: No. Much of the work is different at Cleary DC than Cleary NY. Basically the entire antitrust practice is located in DC. The DC litigation practice focuses around antitrust too.

8:44 - Covington NY's summer class was more than 80% Harvard-Yale-NYU. The Brooklyn summer was likely a superstar.

The comment about minority hiring is so bogus. If you are implying, as it sounds you are, that minorities can get jobs willy-nilly in Big Law with lower GPAs, that's a pure matter of your own conjecture. It's so NOT true. Yes, firms say they want minorities, but they don't *really*, so in order to "get in," you have to act like a non-threatening white-washed version. Basically, if you are willing to deny who you are and feel comfortable around a bunch of white people that aren't comfortable around you, then sure, the doors are wide open, but if you at all seem like you will disrupt the core anglo male dominance at firms, you haven't a shot in hell.

Also, it's just not true that Asian doesn't count for firms (for law school admissions, maybe), but Asian does count, as does "openly gay" and "middle eastern" and "disabled" and anything else that they list on the NALP form...if you can get more of those (like, be, a latina disabled lesbian, then that's even better...as long as you are really white culturally).

Finally, I'll point out that the true, TRUE advantage, over being a minority, is just being white and fluent in the langauge of frats/sorors, sports, etc.

Why all this emphasis on going to court as a necessary skill for litigation associates? As I understand it *nobody* really goes to court all that much in these big firms. Sure, you can do pro bono and enrich your life, but doing domestic violence or asylum cases or whatever don't seem like they'd really lead to a great lateral position to another firm in your 3rd-4th-5th year.

Pro bono court practice would only seem to be really important (in terms of skill building) if your exit strategy is to totally switch gears and do legal aid or hang out your own shingle or something like that.

I guess that participating in some big flashy pro bono case would also look good on your resume for its own sake, but the bigger and flashier the pro bono case, the less likely a jr. associate is going to get to do substantive work on it! Just like everything else at a big firm.

10:18 - you are correct, he is #1 in his class at Brooklyn Law.

9:34 - lackluster pedigree line? get over yourself. i'd rather work with down to earth cardozo grads than shallow, arrogant megalomaniacs like yourself.

Some of you are so ridiculous. I've met tons of dumb associates from "top" law schools namely HLS, UVA, GULC, and NYU. Get over yourselves. So what if there is a student from Brooklyn law working at Covington? He obviously deserves to be there. The individuals who sit around and worry about which "Tier 2 and below" law students are going to top firms are losers. They probably work a lot harder than you and are probably smarter too.

I worked at Weil this summer. I learned a load, and I met some pretty phenomenal people. Of course, I wasn't in the NY office, so I could have a very different perspective than anyone who worked in NY.

I highly recommend checking out Weil's non-NY offices. The non-NY offices do no "local" work; the attorneys work with the NY office on all matters, so even though you're not in NY, you're getting interesting work. The people from the regional offices seem to be generally laid back, and they seem to stick around for a few years.

10:21--"in order to "get in," you have to act like a non-threatening white-washed version"

Just like everybody else does. You aren't special--we all have to play the same game. Maybe it's harder for you, but too bad--you want in the game, show you can play.

Besides, what constitutes "acting" black (or chicano or whatever) in a professional business setting? What do you want to do that you feel you can't? Talk about your passion for ________? What's fits in that blank? And don't give us some nonsense about not fitting in--most of us white-folk don't either, which is part (if generally unspoken) of the general complaint about big firm life.

I am still waiting for an answer to my question. I am getting the feeling that the answer is: (1) gov't work, (2) recruiter, (3) write a legal tabloid blog, or (4) live off of your parents/spouse. This is very depressing.

"What sort of exit strategies would you suggest for a V[6] NYC litigation associate, class of 200[4] who's never actually been to court [except pro bono]? "

10:36: But I'd rather work with a down to earth top ten grad than your down to earth Cardozo grad....

Agree with 10:39---I've had nothing but incredibly positive experiences with Weil's Boston office (partners and associates).

I was a summer at weil NY and clerked there during the year. Had a terrific experience in both positions and especially as a clerk found the partners appreciative and responsive to good work. some partners did not realize i was a clerk and still treated me with respect - which was shocking, given my expectations of big law.

only complaint - i have a beard and, in response to finding out I'm a clerk (and in front of 5 associates and another partner), a partner disdainfully said to me, "oh, that must be why you have that sh*t on your face". nice. real nice.

Covington is the best DC firm, hands down. Widely recognized as having the smartest associates.

9:34 poster. is suppose you count yourself among those "down to earth" top ten grads? if unchecked arrogance is your standard for "down to earth", then yes, i have no choice but to concede to your highness's argument.

10:37 - The big deal is that Cov NY, in the past, has only taken summers from HYCN, with a few random T14 outliers thrown in the mix here and there. They are trying to expand their NY office and have thus broadened their recruiting efforts, ergo the Brooklyn summer is significant as it is indicative of this effort.

10:57. Thank you (sincerely) for the explanation. I just get annoyed by the elitists who post comments questioning the merits of students who aren't Tier 1 grads, but work amongst their ranks.

10:57. Thank you (sincerely) for the explanation. I just get annoyed by the elitists who post comments questioning the merits of students who aren't Tier 1 grads, but work among their ranks.

9:07--Part of the problem is not enough informaiton. Do you want to remain a litigator and remain in NYC? And you don't want to go to another firm? If the answers are yes, yes, yes, then you are, as you surmised, pretty well screwed, but not so much because you haven't been to court. Exit options for junior litigators are usually (1) another firm or (2) gov't work.

Now, if you don't want to be a litigator anymore, you may have lost your window with the credit market meltdown. A year ago, you could have probably found someplace to take you in as a corpie, but that's not happening in this market.

Covington NY made offers to a couple of BLS students last year, too. Top BLS students generally hold offers from several V10 firms. It's cheap for the firms to recruit there, and it makes the firm look less fusty by letting in a few people from non-T1 schools.

"What sort of exit strategies would you suggest for a V[6] NYC litigation associate, class of 200[4] who's never actually been to court [except pro bono]? "

I suggest you write a ridiculous, invective I QUIT email, forward it to everyone in the firm, and then bungee jump out of the managing partner's window in a chicken suit.

I look forward to the ATL post, with amateur video.

10:55 et al.: If I had to list the most tedious parts of working in BIGLAW, having to hear bullshit comments regarding my "pedigree" whilst grinning and bearing it would rank near the top. The vast majority of people I work with went to tippity-top law schools. The vast majority of them are lovely people. The vast majority of them believe that, had they had the misfortune of five fewer points on their LSAT and ended up at Brooklyn/Cardozo/UConn/etc., they would've ended up at the top of the class. I believe that to be utter bullshit. Sure, some of them would have, but not all of them. These places are very, very competitive - the curve is brutal and the people at the top of the class are really smart and, more important in law school, really frigging tenacious.

It's one thing to get into law school, it's another thing entirely to kick ass once you're there.

10:54 Covington associate: I assume you mean among big-firm, full-service D.C. offices (Wilmer, A&P, Hogan, D.C. offices of NY firms), right? I don't think Covington associates are generally regarded as smarter than those at Jenner, Kellogg, W&C, or other smaller, elite shops.

Anyone find it interesting that kirkland dropped a place from 10 to 11 this year in vault's ranking?

Any reason why covington deserves to be 10, and not kirkland? Vaults system of ranking is a bit random anyway. But thought id put it out there to here some good comments...(and ofcourse the usual BS comments)

11:15 - don't hate the player, hate the game.

11:15 - I think you are entirely correct, but I'm always curious, what do you think it takes to rise to the top at Cardozo, Brooklyn, etc. How is it different from other places? When I look at how I did in my friendly non-competitive law school but still ended up with a great job, I shudder at what would have happened to me at Brooklyn, I probably would have been destroyed...

Anybody know which firms will hire summer "pre-clerks" (i.e., recent grads who are about to clerk) who did not previously summer at that firm? (Or who did, but that's more common.)

Not just NY--Chicago, DC, and other big markets too. Lat, perhaps pre-clerkship gigs would be a worthy thread? Thanks.

As for 9:07 Revised - do more pro bono work. That's the only way to get courtroom experience as a junior litigator in a large firm.

Amen, 11:15.

To the elitest posters, just be thankful that you did slightly better than me on the LSAT because, had you ended up at my Tier 2 school, I would have crushed you.

11:19 - Kirkland had been in the 11 spot for several years before moving to 10 last year. Is there any particular reason they score a few hundreds of a point lower this year? Uhhhhh, no.

11:25, Latham had a few pre-clerks in their summer class of 2004.

11:29: The difference between LSAT scores at top schools and those at T2s is more than slight. It is a broad gap that, on average, separates the dumbs from the smarts.

11:33: Perhaps you're right as to the averages, but the point is if someone makes it from a Tier 2 to BigLaw, it means they have the chops. So, to look at the person's law school and infer some kind of lack of ability/intelligence is nonsense.

11:37: I agree and so do law firms, as they tend to hire the top 5-10% from T2s in/near their market.

i say let the elitists cling to their pedgree as a validation of their worth. if that is what you need to do to prove that you are smarter and better at what you do than myself, then good on you.

on the other hand, i will use my previous professional background, and my superior work product (according to my reviews) to prove how much more valuable i am than you. i went to my school on scholarship, and i have virtually no debt.

even more important, i have chewed and spit out ivy leaguers in undergrad, moot court, and in the professional world.. and i will continue to do so.

so if you'll excuse me.. i gotta get back to work.

Pre-clerks: try Debevoise.

11:25 - I knew a pre-clerk in DC with offers from Kirkland and Wilmer. He went to Wilmer, where there were half a dozen or so pre-clerks. None of them wound up returning to the firm, fyi, but I'm sure they enjoyed the $30-40K that Wilmer gave them.

Anyone know anything about Latham's San Diego office? Including how often their hire 3Ls who didn't summer for them?

11:33 - I have nothing against T3 students, but I'd never leave my wallet lying around if one happened to be nearby.

These threads should really focus more on what matters, which is associate compensation. And more specifically, what are the bonus ranges at these places and how do they determine bonuses (discretionary or by formula based on hours).

"Prestige" scores are such BS, and won't matter at all when you start working. There are differences in the experience you get among different firms, but it will not correllate to a Vault ranking. And anyone who thinks you get the "best" training/experience at a Vault top 5 firm has just bought into their propaganda.

I have taught for extended periods of time (not just as a visiting professor) in five law schools (all by choice), in over thirty years of law teaching. They have included a top 3 school, a top forty school, and three others in between. I have graded exams, papers, externships, moot court argumenst, mock trials, and clinical practice work of hundreds of students in each of these schools and it is clear from these experiences that there are large differences in the quality of the work done by students at the various levels of schools. What counts as A level work at the worst school I've taught at would be B- to B work at the best school. The differences are stark, measureable, and obvious to anyone, no matter her/his assumptions or expectations going in. This is not to say that good lawyers cannot come from lower ranked schools because obviously they do, or that everyone in a top school does high quality work because it is equally obvious that that is not true, but to argue that the quality of the work done by law students is roughly the same no matter the school is to deny reality. There are many who do not want to believe this, of course, in all levels of schools and for a wide variety of reasons, but the world is what it is whether it fits one's ideological presuppositions or not. More power to the Brooklyn student at Covington. I hope he/she is the occasional superstar missed by the credentially system in this country. Wouldn't be a Russian immigrant by any chance? That's the most common scenario.

12:25 = blatant ivy league student trolling. why would a law professor stop to comment on this topic?

that was bullshit.

12:25 - Subtle Ukraine troll.

I know people from the Brooklyn Law School who are as smart if not smarter as the HLS folks. I would hire No. 1 out of the Brooklyn Law School over 20-40th percentile at HLS in a heartbeat. More power to Covington, the BLS No. 1 person probably had offers to go to 3 or 4 of the V5 firms.

to 12-36 - if that person is an immigrant from the FSU, s/he probably left when it was still the USSR, and Ukraine/Russia was the same.

I doubt a law professor would use a non-word like "credentially."

What's the general consensus on Cleary and their selection outside of T14 schools? I am at a top 30 law school, top of my class, law review...if (and that's a big if) I get an offer there, will I generally be looked down upon by T14 students?

hey anybody else have responses to 11:25's posting re: pre-clerkship positions?

Pre-clerk questions. Just call the firm. They love to hire your types. Don't hesitant. Get some Ks in your pocket before you start doing your clerkships.

Re: 9:14's post on Simpson vs. Cleary: they're very different--I mean, different among top NY firms where ppl work very hard. Basically, Simpson is "nice" (in negative terms: passive-aggressive and not upfront, as has been mentioned), and similar to but a little less stuffy than Davis Polk, and Cleary is "quirky" (negative: nobody wants to be there b/c they all feel like they gave up their chance to do a PhD to be there; hence the post above about partners apologizing for assigning boring work), and more corporate-heavy than Debevoise. This is based on a number of people I know who each work or have worked for one or more of the above firms (myself included).

Fundamentally, these firms are all very well regarded and you will work hard at all of them (and probably not feel much appreciated). They're more humane than the V3 (and probably Skadden), however.

This pedigree thing is all crap. I work in BigLaw, and we have people here who went to lower schools who are kicking the butts of people who went to HLS/YLS. I went to a top 20 LS, and get more responsibility and better work than plenty of people from higher schools than me. And, sure, some people from HLS/YLS do better work than me.

It gets you in the door a little easier, sure, but once you're in, it's your work product, not the certificate you've framed on your wall, that matters.

"What sort of exit strategies would you suggest for a V10 NYC litigation associate, class of 2003 who's never actually been to court?"--9:07

I suggest a bottle of Maker's, some pills (pref. downers), an old car, a hose, and a rag, ala the guy in The Client

Alternatively, a quiet house, a noose and a porno mag suited to your (weird) tastes, ala the guy at WSG&R.

T1 schools v. T2 schools. T1 gets 80% bright people and 20% who got there for random reasons (extremely easy undergrad major/luck on the LSAT/parents were alumni etc....). T2 has about 20-30% of people who are easily bright enough to get into the T1 schools, but didn't for a variety of reasons (including family issues, messing up first year in undergrad, messing up on the LSAT, etc...).

This means that some people at T2 schools, are more than aptly qualified to work at Biglaw, some are brighter than people out of T1 schools. Nonetheless, if you average it out, the average person in a T1 school, is brighter than an average person in a T2 school.

Covington DC is fantastic. Seriously. Great people (who happen to be absolutely brilliant in addition to personable), very good atmosphere, and top-notch work.

That was by far the worst analysis I have ever read. You should actually go get an undergraduate degree. Be careful not to mess up your first year, otherwise you may not get into Cooley.

from hearing how these firms treat people:

i would work at any one of these 5 except weil over S&C.

i would work at stb over cravath.

I summered at Covington DC a couple summers ago. It seems to be a really humane place to be an associate. They do a good job watching out for associate development, hours seem pretty humane, and everyone there was universally nice. They seemed very responsive to requests of their attorneys -- e.g., building a child care facility across the street, having a good part-time policy. Unlike some places that seem more sink-or-swim, they do their best at Covington to make sure that people have equal opportunities (after some focus group a few years back, they moved to more of an assignment system vs free market), and it seemed true that someone who made a mistake would be guided and helped as far as possible, rather than just ignored or shown the door (or placed on doc review for the remainder of his/her life at the firm). That said, it was still a bit too stuffy for me, though that might be a DC vs West Coast thing since I am a California native.

WEIL IS AMAZING....i loved every minute of the summer. A special thanks to Penny Reid, Andrew Colao, and Rod Miller.

12:25 -

I transferred from a tier 2 to a top 5 law school. I did not get a perfect 4.0 at my tier two (although close). Thus, there were people who did better than me in a few classes.

Since going to the top 5 school, my gpa has remained virtually the same. And I have not taken easy classes so the curve is similar to my tier 2 school.

As someone who is (a) not flame like 12:25 and (b) actually has been to both schools, I can say there absolutely is a difference between the student bodies. The top 5 students are either extremely smart or brilliant. However, the difference between random top 5 students and random top 5% students at teir 2 schools is not great.

Further, of the others from the teir 2 who transferred to various t14 schools, all have been median to virtually 4.0.

12:25 is obviously flame, but is also totally inaccurate.

To 01:00 AM -

What kind of toolbag posts (a) at 1 in the morning on a Saturday night about (b) how AMAZING his summer experience was, and (c) personally "shouts out" people who are paid to make him think they like him? Wow, this guy'll be perfect in BigLaw.

It seems that Cleary, like more firms, will hire from just about any law school. However, it certainly goes lower in the classes at top-ranked schools. I don't think that anyone looks down on lawyers "outside of T14 schools." My summer class was mostly Yale, Harvard, Columbia, and NYU, but it is just a woman from Cardozo who's now clerking for SCOTUS. The proof is in the pudding.

10:05, I am at a tier 2 school and would like to transfer, any insight on what the prospects and process are like?

1:34 -

True that the shout out is a little odd... but I work at Weil and the person did name 3 particularly friendly partners.

And I'll give the shout out to Weil too: I don't know if I'll continue on there forever (or even through the end of the year), but I'll give them credit for responding to associates' concerns. Certainly in the couple of years I've been there, things have continually - slowly - but continually, changed for the better. I wouldn't get that confused with them actually caring too much about associates - but what big organization cares too much about its employees?

Oh, and for all the BS about people's schools - I went to a Tier-1 school and was near the top of my class / law review / etc.... BUT one of the things I really appreciate about Weil is how it goes into the lower-tiered schools to find some really great talent. Some of the brightest people I work with (and some of the most influential and important partners in the firm) went to "bad" law schools. I think this fact speaks really highly of the place - although there are certainly plenty of tier-1 students roaming around in the halls, if that concerns you...