Date: June 13th, 2005 6:58 PM Author: Honey-headed location rigpig
You're obviously really fucking stupid. Have you heard of Vault, big guy? I didn't know 174 had to be in law school to know that Cravath is a good firm. I also didn't know that you have to be in law school to take an interest in firms/law school. Shut up next time, thanks.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:20 AM Author: vigorous depressive party of the first part
You'll work hard, but it'll make you a better lawyer in whatever specialty you wind up in. I bet you have a pretty good idea what you want to focus on, and that it's something that lends itself to a biglaw practice more than most of your classmates.
And don't worry--if it turns out to not be a great fit, you'd have obscene options if you reinterviewed.
Also, paging GTO? He suggests that poor representation of Yale and Stanford at firms like Cravath implied poorer placement in NYC than Harvard. And, in Stanford's case, Northwestern as well.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:04 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle frum station
"Also, paging GTO? He suggests that poor representation of Yale and Stanford at firms like Cravath implied poorer placement in NYC than Harvard. And, in Stanford's case, Northwestern as well."
I wasn't pointing to poor placement at Cravath, I was pointing to poor placement at *all* Vault/AmLaw firms in the aggregate. The quality modifier in the rankings didn't have much of an impact at all, except at the extreme margins (ie. statistical ties) the quality/depth rankings ended up being the same as the depth rankings.
In other words, tons of Yalies turning down Cravath for Cleary makes absolutely no difference... A self selection problem only exists if tons of Yalies are turning down Cravath for Jacoby & Meyers or the Personal Injury Hotline.
And fyi, the poorer placement isn't due to their reputations -- the regression analysis on the national employment data makes it *very* clear what's going on here.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:12 AM Author: vigorous depressive party of the first part
Okay, I apologize for being down on the study before I've seen it (and I am looking forward to reading it). But what is your conclusion, if it's not reputational?
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:31 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle frum station
Going to leave that as a surprise for now. However, think about some of the things that differentiate the HYSCCN schools and you'll probably come up with at least one of the variables.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:32 AM Author: vigorous depressive party of the first part
The only obvious thing is geography. But I'm skeptical that it's that big a deal, in terms of options (though not in terms of outcomes). Okay, well I'll wait anxiously.
EDIT: I could also see alumni network. There might be a little more to that.
Date: February 25th, 2005 11:27 AM Author: Concupiscible field
Seems to me that one thing that differentiates the HYSCCN crowd is that they have academic and clerking options not available to the the 7-200 crowd below them. Is that a reason why Yalies are turning down top firms?
Date: February 25th, 2005 12:51 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle frum station
That's sectoral preferences and it's accounted for. Keep in mind that the overwhelming majority of clerks -- even Yale clerks -- go into private practice after their clerkship.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:12 AM Author: offensive arousing indian lodge boistinker
GTO--I just glanced at your paper. The bluebooking sucks and will be an obvious hinderance to getting any sort of placement (Epstein and Tribe can get away with bad bluebooking; law students can't). Clean that shit up. Or if you don't know how to, pay someone to do it.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:29 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle frum station
I didn't bluebook it yet, the current cites are just placeholders for when I do bluebook it. I'm looking for comments on the substance, not the stylstic form (unless you think sections of text should be converted to footnotes, or new sections added, or something like that). Sorry if I wasn't explicit about this in the email.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:33 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle frum station
Thanks, I really appreciate it. Plan is to get comments, make all the necessary revisions to the substance, then go and do all the bluebooking then. Considering how many citations I've added/removed/altered, I figure spending hours perfectly bluebooking a draft is a waste, better to just do it all at once on the final version.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:35 AM Author: offensive arousing indian lodge boistinker
You can post it here when you've bluebooked it. But before you send it to the journals, I'd seriously have someone check your work (since you're a 1L who probably will make some mistakes).
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:39 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle frum station
Yeah I definitely will, thanks.
I just hope a journal would find the topic interesting... My big obstacle is that lower ranked schools might not be too interested in this, but without an offer from one of them it'll be extremely hard to be seriously considered by the high ranked schools, who would likely be very interested in this. Ugh.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:41 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle frum station
I think there are only one or two secondary journals dealing with education. There are a few labor and employment law journals, but I don't think they'd handle something like this since they seem to just focus on the NLRA and that kind of shit (though I guess if they take email submissions it can't hurt to send it in anyway, since the cost would be $0).
The other education journals either require exclusive publication rights (South Carolina) or are peer reviewed and do not allow submissions to other journals (Journal of Legal Education at GULC).
So far I'm more than double over their word limit. I guess if I gutted the rankings themselves and just focused on what influences employment placement, I might be able to get it to work. Then again, I probably should just not bother since it's probably too much of a tangent for them. Ugh.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:29 AM Author: offensive arousing indian lodge boistinker
Transfers everywhere don't get "introduced" to the class. So you don't talk to any of the 2L/3L folk in class with you besides the transfers? Do you talk to the 3L transfers? What are you going to tell me next--that there are separate transfer classes.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:01 AM Author: offensive arousing indian lodge boistinker
Look at my moniker and email -- am I someone who has always wanted to be around Bruce and Akhil? Staying at the top is a valid concern, but you'd always be on the review. I assume you can't make YLJ?
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:34 AM Author: offensive arousing indian lodge boistinker
Maybe this is a problem unique to YLS transfers. What you've experienced as a transfer is clearly not the case at a lot of other top schools. Do you think YLS students are asshole snobs and scorn transfers, or something?
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:40 AM Author: offensive arousing indian lodge boistinker
Ok, I'm probably blowing your statement out of proportion, then. I guess your experience is as such because YLS is so small. If you go to a huge school like HLS/CLS/NYU you will still not know a ton of people.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:07 AM Author: vigorous depressive party of the first part
I transfered undergrad and it took a long time before I felt like I was part of the class. I'd say the transfers here at Stanford would feel similarly to mwallens.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:13 AM Author: vigorous depressive party of the first part
I think we should take more transfers. A lot more, actually. Transfers are a real loyal bunch. You feel like you've gotten to the promised land and become a really loyal alum. Or at least that was my undergrad experience.
Date: February 25th, 2005 2:03 PM Author: Maize tripping national security agency
When I had my Cravath callback, one of my interviews was with an alum of my school, which also historically has had trouble recruiting there. We talked a bit about it and I think agreed that part of the reason was that Cravath had more of a sweatshop reputation than other comparable NYC firms...a reputation this person felt was undeserved, because, according to them, they work no more hours than DPW etc...
The person also mentioned that if you wanted a US attorney job, Cravath was not the feeder, but other firms were, so don't come to Cravath if that is your grand plan.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:47 PM Author: Crimson comical locus
You're definitely not crazy for going to Cravath. I'm also a YLS 2L, and I've noticed that people here make choices about firms that are quite strange and faddish. Wilmer is this year's big winner; in addition to its NYC crew, it also has another 8 or so YLS folks in DC. It's honestly pretty bizarre that people here prefer Cleary, Debevoise, and Paul Weiss over Cravath and S&C (in NYC); and Wilmer, O'Melveny, and Jenner over W&C, Covington, and Mayer (in DC). The only explanations for the madness are 3Ls' stories about working at their firms, and firms' efforts to raise their YLS profile. Wilmer and OMM, for example, are really really visible--Dellinger gave a talk here in the fall, and Wilmer organized a YLS reception during the ACS convention last summer.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:19 AM Author: self-absorbed clown partner
Well, thank God. The more smart kids, like Yalies, that stay the hell out of my way the better. I hope they all pursue appellate glory arguing about whether men can buttpeck each other and whether I can wipe my arse with the flag.
Cravath money is pretty good and the exit options are supposed to be amazing, assuming you dont make partner.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:27 AM Author: self-absorbed clown partner
Well I didnt say making partner was easy, obviously.
I always hear the Cravath name on a resume opens a ton of doors in many areas. In-house legal work, other law firms, starting your own law firm, going to consulting or banking or other business things, etc. etc. etc.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:28 AM Author: irradiated chestnut fat ankles
arguments like "cravath provides great exit options" usually sound like arguments of the form "Harvard Law School provides great exit options-- you can transfer down to any school so easily!"
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:34 AM Author: self-absorbed clown partner
so what? the reality is that not many people will be making partner at cravath. but "transferring down" from there will probably still give a better result than if one had gone to another firm.
and for the people who go into banking/business, maybe they'll make even more than if they'd made partner @ cravath.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:37 AM Author: irradiated chestnut fat ankles
i just think that talkign generally about whether "exit options" from a given biglaw firm exceed the exit optiosn from another biglaw firm is generally stupid. e.g. the vast majority or cravath litigators would be more or less useless to a corporations in house department.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:42 AM Author: self-absorbed clown partner
what's stupid about it? most people at any top biglaw firm will not make partner, for one reason or another. so, it makes good sense to focus on what kind of options each biglaw firm will open up later on.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:43 AM Author: irradiated chestnut fat ankles
oh, i'm just saying it's so specific to your practice area/client contacts taht generalizations as between *firms* is dumb.
e.g. Thacher Proffitt will provide much better exit options into e.g. the securitization divisions of the top i-banks than will wachtell, since wachtell just doesn't do much of that.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:47 AM Author: self-absorbed clown partner
yeah that's very true, the whole practice groups thing. but cravath is supposedly pretty strong in almost all their groups, if not the very highest firm.
how about credit markets, especially junk bond trading. any idea if any law firms get involved with the legal end of that? that's been kinda catching my interest lately.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:49 AM Author: irradiated chestnut fat ankles
Latham & Watkins immediately comes to mind with respect to that.
Find out which firms act as counsel to the banks that issue thsoe securities.
Drexel Burnham Lambert was tops in that, but then they split-- mostly to DLJ-LA, and a few to UBS-LA. DLJ LA became CSFB LA. I think Latham does most of their work.
Therefore, if you want to be a big dick doing junk bond issuances, much better to go to the Latham than e.g. Wachtell. I don't think Cravath does too much of this, but i'm not sure-- i know they do tons of M&A.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:52 AM Author: self-absorbed clown partner
oh yeah drexel burnham lambert, michael milken and all that. his odd-looking face is on my desk top at the moment!
latham, that's actually the first biglaw firm i ever heard of. they have a chicago office too, i wonder if that office gets involved in low grade bond issues and stuff.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:49 PM Author: Contagious fortuitous meteor public bath
The vast majority of Drexel's work was done by Irell and Manella--not Latham. Milken's little brother was an associate there before he split to join Milken and then establish his own hedge fun. He maintained close ties to Irell after leaving.
Date: February 25th, 2005 3:56 AM Author: self-absorbed clown partner
i have no idea what my chances will be at either one, since i'm not in law school yet. considering how hard they're supposed to be though, yeah, not too many people have good shots.
Date: February 25th, 2005 4:06 AM Author: irradiated chestnut fat ankles
"i have no idea what my chances will be at either one, since i'm not in law school yet."
The fact taht you are not in law school bars you from opining on your chances at getting a job at one of these firms, yet the fact that you are not in law school does not bar you from acting as an expert on various other aspects of legal careers??
Date: February 25th, 2005 10:27 AM Author: Bisexual shivering base
Yeah, I know who you're talking about. Wasn't too sad to see him go, in all honesty.
But I know the OP, if he is who he says he is, and I'm surprised he'd post in such a way. Prove it: post the initials of one of the people you were supposed to live with this year before you bailed for New Haven.
Date: February 25th, 2005 10:31 AM Author: Razzmatazz church building brethren
Hey mwallens, your story reminds of what happened with Columbia and Cravath in the mid-90's. A bunch of the Columbia law review staff working at Cravath one summer had a horrible experience, spread the word about their dissatisfaction, and in the following year Cravath was not able to recruit anyone from Columbia. Obviously, Cravath has repaired its reputation with Columbia since then, but something similar might be happening with Yale. Peer assessments have a strong influence on people's decisionmaking.
Date: February 25th, 2005 10:32 AM Author: Aquamarine infuriating office puppy
people are dodging sweatshops like Cravath until they start ponying up the dough. Who wants to work 10 more hours a week for the same salary as SF, LA, Chicago, or DC?
Date: February 25th, 2005 10:34 AM Author: internet-worthy fragrant travel guidebook dysfunction
It seems very possible, if not likely, that people accepting 2L offers from NYC biglaw will be seeing higher base salaries from at least some NYC firms in the next year or two.
Date: February 25th, 2005 1:17 PM Author: Flushed national crotch
Hey MW,
I'm going to be a 1L at YLS this fall. I'm not really interested in academia or clerking at all, and it seems like that isn't your path either. That said, do you find it a bit suffocating over there, and are you able to have your needs/interests met?
Date: February 25th, 2005 6:21 PM Author: cobalt center selfie
Hey, MWallens, same is true at Chicago.... even though the "yield" was higher than one, Cravath had to go pretty deep into the class to get people. No L.Rev'ers at CSM from the U of C.