2010 OCIP Callbacks
[CLARIFICATION: The purpose of this thread is not to display the frequency of callbacks/duration of the callback period for a given employer. THUS, please do not re-post callbacks that are already included in the main post!! Thank you kindly :) ]
This is the 2010 callback thread. If you are unsure about what that might mean, look here, here, or even here. Then take a break and look here for some comedic relief.
Still unsure what the thread is all about? Here is a short explanation: some people think it's helpful to learn whether firms are calling back as soon as possible. This thread is designed to satiate that obsessive desire by publicly disseminating that information as quickly as possible. To make it work, everybody has to play -- if you get a callback, post that information anonymously into the comments. Please format it like this:
[Firm Name], [Firm City], [+/-]
+ means you got a callback.
- means you did not get a callback.
Here is a longer explanation:
(a) When you get a callback or a ding (ding = a rejection), look to see if that information has been included in the main post. If not, post it into the comments using the following format: Firm Name, City, + or - to indicate offer or ding respectively. If it's already in the main post but you post it again to comments anyway, I'll cry for humanity a little bit and then delete the comment.
(b) I will move your information into the main body of the thread. After adding the information, I will delete comments that state only an offer or a ding. I will also delete comments that I find counterproductive to a supportive, positive OCI process for everyone. That may bother some people, but tough cookies!! That said, I'll keep any comment posted under your full, real name.
(c) I will keep comments that offer something substantive, ask or answer a question, or make me laugh (a relatively low standard.)
As Patrick noted last year, and as Armen wisely opined five years ago: if this thread makes you feel anxious or uncomfortable, just skip it. You'll miss very little of substance, and you'll spare yourself a few weeks of stress. In any case, you will learn nothing here about your callbacks that wasn't going to come to you by phone or mail, anyway. Lastly, while I can't claim to know all of the class of 2012 (that is our class year, right?), I think it's pretty safe to say we are all fabulously brilliant future Avengers of the Law in addition to being really, really good people -- so take it one day at a time, stay kind to your friends, and you're gonna KILL IT!!
Drumroll, please...
Alameda County DA's Office +
Allen Matkins, SF+
Alson & Bird, DC+
Arnold & Porter, DC-, SF+
Baker Botts, DC+, Houston+
Baker McKenzie, SF+, SV+
Bingham, SF+
Boies Schiller, Oak+/-, NY+/-
Bracewell & Giuliani*, NY +
Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, Den +/-
Bryan Cave, LA+/-, SF+
Cahill Gordon*, NY+
Cleary, Gottlieab, Steen & Hamilton, NY+/-
Covington & Burling, DC-, SD+/-, SF+, SV+
Cooley, SF+, SV+
Cox Castle, LA+
Cravath, Swaine and Moore, NY+/-
Crowell & Moring, DC+/-, LA+, SF+/-, OC-
Curtis Mallet-Prevost, NY+
Davis Polk, SV+/-, NY+
Davis Wright Tremaine, Sea+
Debevoise & Plimpton, NY +
Dechert, Phil+, SV+
Dewey & LeBouf, NY+
Faegre & Benson*, Minn+
Fenwick & West, SV+
Finnegan Reston+
Fish & Richardson, SD+, SV+
Foley Lardner, SF+
Fox Rothschild, LA-
Fried Frank*, NY +
Freshfields, NY+
Gibson Dunn, LA+/-, NY+/-, OC+, SF-
Goodwin Procter, Bos+, LA+, SF+, SV+
Greenberg Taurig, SV+/-
Gunderson Dettmer Stough Villeneuve Franklin & Hachigian, SV+
Hanson Bridgett, SF+
Haynes and Boone, Dal+, SV+
Hogan Lovells, DC+, NY+
Holland & Knight, SF+/-
Hooper Lundy, LA+, SF+
Howard Rice, SF+/-
Howrey, SF+
Irell and Manella, LA+, OC+
Ivins Phillips, DC+
Jeffer Mangels, LA +/-
Jenner and Block, Chi+, LA+
Jones Day, DC+, LA+/-, SD+/-, SF+/-, SV+/-
K&L Gates, SV+
Katten Muchin Rosenman*, LA+
Keker & Van Nest*, SF+/-
King & Spalding, SV+
Kirkland & Ellis, LA-, SF+/-, SV+/-
Knobbe Martens, DC+, OC +, SV-
Kramer Levin, NY+/-
Latham & Watkins, DC-, LA+/-, NY+, OC-, SD+, SF+/-, SV+/-
Loeb & Loeb, LA+/-
Mayer Brown, SV-
McDermott, LA-, SV-
Morgan Lewis, LA+, SF+/-, SV+/-
Morrison & Foerster, LA+/-, SD+/-, SF +/-, SV-
Munger Tolles, LA+/-
Nixon Peabody, SF+
O'Melveney & Myers, DC+/-, LA+/-, OC+/-, SF+/-, SV+
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LA+, Sac+/-, SF+/-, SV+/-
Paul Hastings, LA+/-, NY+, OC-, SD-, SF+/-, SV+
Paul Weiss, NY+
Pepper Hamilton*, NJ +
Perkins Coie, Sea+/-, SV+/-
Pillsbury, LA-, SF+
Quinn Emmanuel, LA+, SF+, SV+
Reed Smith, SF+
Ropes & Gray, Bos+, NY+, SF+/-
Sedgwick, SF+
Shartsis Friese, SF+
Shearman, SF+
Sheppard Mullin, LA+/-, OC+, SF+/-
Sidley Austin, Chi+, DC+/-, LA+/-, SF+/-, SV+/-
Simpson Thatcher, LA+/-, NY+/-, SV+/-
Skadden, NY+/-, SF-, SV+/-
Steptoe, DC+
Stradling Yocca, OC-
Sullivan & Cromwell, LA+/-, NY+/-
Thompson & Knight, Dal+
Townsend, SF-, SV-
Vinson Elkins, DC+, Houston +
Wachtell, NY+
Weil, Gotshal & Manges, NY+/-, SV+
White & Case, LA+, SV+
WilmerHale, Bos-, Chi-, DC+/-, LA+/-, NY+/-, SV+/-
Wilson Sonsini, SD+, SV +/-
Winston & Strawn, DC+, LA-, SF+/-
*Non-OCIP / Pre-OCIP callbacks.
This is the 2010 callback thread. If you are unsure about what that might mean, look here, here, or even here. Then take a break and look here for some comedic relief.
Still unsure what the thread is all about? Here is a short explanation: some people think it's helpful to learn whether firms are calling back as soon as possible. This thread is designed to satiate that obsessive desire by publicly disseminating that information as quickly as possible. To make it work, everybody has to play -- if you get a callback, post that information anonymously into the comments. Please format it like this:
[Firm Name], [Firm City], [+/-]
+ means you got a callback.
- means you did not get a callback.
Here is a longer explanation:
(a) When you get a callback or a ding (ding = a rejection), look to see if that information has been included in the main post. If not, post it into the comments using the following format: Firm Name, City, + or - to indicate offer or ding respectively. If it's already in the main post but you post it again to comments anyway, I'll cry for humanity a little bit and then delete the comment.
(b) I will move your information into the main body of the thread. After adding the information, I will delete comments that state only an offer or a ding. I will also delete comments that I find counterproductive to a supportive, positive OCI process for everyone. That may bother some people, but tough cookies!! That said, I'll keep any comment posted under your full, real name.
(c) I will keep comments that offer something substantive, ask or answer a question, or make me laugh (a relatively low standard.)
As Patrick noted last year, and as Armen wisely opined five years ago: if this thread makes you feel anxious or uncomfortable, just skip it. You'll miss very little of substance, and you'll spare yourself a few weeks of stress. In any case, you will learn nothing here about your callbacks that wasn't going to come to you by phone or mail, anyway. Lastly, while I can't claim to know all of the class of 2012 (that is our class year, right?), I think it's pretty safe to say we are all fabulously brilliant future Avengers of the Law in addition to being really, really good people -- so take it one day at a time, stay kind to your friends, and you're gonna KILL IT!!
Drumroll, please...
Alameda County DA's Office +
Allen Matkins, SF+
Alson & Bird, DC+
Arnold & Porter, DC-, SF+
Baker Botts, DC+, Houston+
Baker McKenzie, SF+, SV+
Bingham, SF+
Boies Schiller, Oak+/-, NY+/-
Bracewell & Giuliani*, NY +
Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, Den +/-
Bryan Cave, LA+/-, SF+
Cahill Gordon*, NY+
Cleary, Gottlieab, Steen & Hamilton, NY+/-
Covington & Burling, DC-, SD+/-, SF+, SV+
Cooley, SF+, SV+
Cox Castle, LA+
Cravath, Swaine and Moore, NY+/-
Crowell & Moring, DC+/-, LA+, SF+/-, OC-
Curtis Mallet-Prevost, NY+
Davis Polk, SV+/-, NY+
Davis Wright Tremaine, Sea+
Debevoise & Plimpton, NY +
Dechert, Phil+, SV+
Dewey & LeBouf, NY+
Faegre & Benson*, Minn+
Fenwick & West, SV+
Finnegan Reston+
Fish & Richardson, SD+, SV+
Foley Lardner, SF+
Fox Rothschild, LA-
Fried Frank*, NY +
Freshfields, NY+
Gibson Dunn, LA+/-, NY+/-, OC+, SF-
Goodwin Procter, Bos+, LA+, SF+, SV+
Greenberg Taurig, SV+/-
Gunderson Dettmer Stough Villeneuve Franklin & Hachigian, SV+
Hanson Bridgett, SF+
Haynes and Boone, Dal+, SV+
Hogan Lovells, DC+, NY+
Holland & Knight, SF+/-
Hooper Lundy, LA+, SF+
Howard Rice, SF+/-
Howrey, SF+
Irell and Manella, LA+, OC+
Ivins Phillips, DC+
Jeffer Mangels, LA +/-
Jenner and Block, Chi+, LA+
Jones Day, DC+, LA+/-, SD+/-, SF+/-, SV+/-
K&L Gates, SV+
Katten Muchin Rosenman*, LA+
Keker & Van Nest*, SF+/-
King & Spalding, SV+
Kirkland & Ellis, LA-, SF+/-, SV+/-
Knobbe Martens, DC+, OC +, SV-
Kramer Levin, NY+/-
Latham & Watkins, DC-, LA+/-, NY+, OC-, SD+, SF+/-, SV+/-
Loeb & Loeb, LA+/-
Mayer Brown, SV-
McDermott, LA-, SV-
Morgan Lewis, LA+, SF+/-, SV+/-
Morrison & Foerster, LA+/-, SD+/-, SF +/-, SV-
Munger Tolles, LA+/-
Nixon Peabody, SF+
O'Melveney & Myers, DC+/-, LA+/-, OC+/-, SF+/-, SV+
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LA+, Sac+/-, SF+/-, SV+/-
Paul Hastings, LA+/-, NY+, OC-, SD-, SF+/-, SV+
Paul Weiss, NY+
Pepper Hamilton*, NJ +
Perkins Coie, Sea+/-, SV+/-
Pillsbury, LA-, SF+
Quinn Emmanuel, LA+, SF+, SV+
Reed Smith, SF+
Ropes & Gray, Bos+, NY+, SF+/-
Sedgwick, SF+
Shartsis Friese, SF+
Shearman, SF+
Sheppard Mullin, LA+/-, OC+, SF+/-
Sidley Austin, Chi+, DC+/-, LA+/-, SF+/-, SV+/-
Simpson Thatcher, LA+/-, NY+/-, SV+/-
Skadden, NY+/-, SF-, SV+/-
Steptoe, DC+
Stradling Yocca, OC-
Sullivan & Cromwell, LA+/-, NY+/-
Thompson & Knight, Dal+
Townsend, SF-, SV-
Vinson Elkins, DC+, Houston +
Wachtell, NY+
Weil, Gotshal & Manges, NY+/-, SV+
White & Case, LA+, SV+
WilmerHale, Bos-, Chi-, DC+/-, LA+/-, NY+/-, SV+/-
Wilson Sonsini, SD+, SV +/-
Winston & Strawn, DC+, LA-, SF+/-
*Non-OCIP / Pre-OCIP callbacks.
posted by L'Alex at 1:22 PM
193 Comments:
Wolfram and Hart, Los Angeles, +
ugh... i googled it.
4:42 wins the world.
Could we report non-OCIP or pre-OCIP callbacks?
5:54 - sure! Just let me know when a callback is non-OCIP or pre-OCIP and I'll designate it with an asterisk in the main post.
Wait, people already have callbacks? In one day?
@7:57 - Don't worry. Some firms make callback offers on the spot, and some take two weeks or more. A majority take at least a few days. So don't start stressing if you don't hear back this week.
This legend of cities may be helpful to you guys as you post your info:
California
SF = San Francisco
SV = Silicon Valley Area
LA = Los Angeles
CC/SM = Century City/Santa Monica and the westside.
OC = Orange County (Irvine, Newport Beach, etc.)
SD = San Diego Area
WC = Walnut Creek
Oak = Oakland
Non-California
These are self explanatory:
NY
Bos
DC
Phi
Atl
Fla
Dal
Den
To add to Armen's list, apparently "LAA" means Anaheim for some reason.
Also, who calls it SV? I always thought it was just PA.
Caley, LAA is a baseball term referring to the team formerly known as the California Angels but currently the Los Angeles Angels of the nearby suburb of Anaheim.* Since Anaheim is in Orange County, the OC moniker works just fine.
SV captures all of the South Bay / Peninsula area, whereas Palo Alto does not include Menlo Park, San Jose, etc.
You want to discuss the merits of using +/-?
* Bonus points to whoever names the reference without Googling:
Sue: You don't know what it's like Mikey! I grew up here!
Trent: Anaheim!
Swingers. I'll be donating my bonus points to the 2Ls.
Is it worth differentiating between 2L and 3L callbacks in this economy?
This is L'Alex's thread, so she's the ultimate boss, but in my humble opinion I don't think it's wise to make such a distinction. If recruiting this season is anything like last season, there are simply too few 3L slots to be had. And even fewer call backs. So by broadcasting something as a 3L offer, you're essentially giving yourself away.
As the "ultimate boss" around here, I tend to agree with Armen. Also, it's hard enough for people to give me the info requested in the main post, let alone designate whether it's a 2L or 3L callback. On that note...
5:40PM - what city for Winston & Strawn?
Is it just me or are there others (2L) doing OCIP who have not kept up with the classes at all? I have literally done no reading. Those who went through this in the past, is this normal?
12:16, I don't get how anyone does OCIP AND keeps up with class. This is at the least, a physically draining process. Even when I *try* to crack open a book, I can't focus. Same goes for class. Hell, I still haven't even bought the book for some of my classes.
It bothers me that Boalt doesn't start OCIP *before* classes start like many other "top-10" schools. Well, c'est la (Boalt) vie? Good luck, everyone.
12:16, I didn't do any reading for the first few weeks, either. People who interview on the east coast (I'm told) do a bit on the flights back and forth, but other than that, yeah - few people are cracking the books.
So, don't worry. Everyone is in the same boat.
12:26 - Another 3L seconding the above but adding one comment. If you're on call and haven't read or don't plan to show up, email your professor. I have done this on many occasions for various reasons and never once had it backfire. On the other hand, I know people who've kept quiet in the hopes that the professor wouldn't call on them. Sometimes this works. Other times it backfires and you look like an ass.
You're assumed to be grown ups, ie in the nest position to determine your priorities and availability. If you live up to that assumption, you'll be fine.
9:55 here. Clearly, 12:26=12:16 and nest=best. And writing before coffee=bad idea.
I read during OCIP for the two classes I thought would be the most difficult to keep up with, but I'm pretty sure Patrick got better grades than I did.
Imagine being a transfer (before this year) and going through OCIP and the CLR write-on simultaneously. That was fun.
During my stint in the hell known as OCI, I remember most professors being very aware of the fact that your career is on the line during these very intense weeks, thus they grudging accept the fact that keeping up with class will tend to take a back seat.
Think of it this way: would you rather suffer the slight embarassment of answering "Not prepared" or walk into a 20 minute interview so completely unprepared you forget the name of the firm (this happened to me with Shartsis Friese; needless to say, I did not get a call back).
Good luck everyone!
12:16,
"Normal" is putting it mildly.
4:02 Nice Work! Wish I could walk out the door with a callback like you did with Jones Day (who I'm pretty sure are interviewing until 5:00).
Do firms contact people about callbacks all at once or over a couple of days?
10:16, I got a callback from a firm 2 days after it was posted here. Lesson for everyone: they don't all come out at the same time, the fact that it's posted on N+B and you didn't get it does not equate to a ding.
Also, do they ever just fail to contact you? I thought they generally email to let you know you're a ding.
Sometimes they send a ding in the mail and it takes a week to get to you, so the ding doesn't always come via email.
Can anyone weigh in on the value of law firm rankings? I am leaning towards firms that are lower on the Vault list because of quality of life/firm culture. Am I hurting myself as far as exit options and post big law life? I really like the firms I've met with on the lower end of the Vault list, but everyone seems to be hung up on top firms. Am I making a mistake?
Unless you're getting superior work experience at a lower ranked firm, exit options could suffer. However, often at smaller firms you get superior experience with inferior networking.
But also, Vault rankings are fairly B.S., since they are based on the opinions of graduating law students rather than legal professionals.
3:15 here. So would exit options from a V60-80 firm be significantly worse than exit options from say, a V30-40? I've never wanted to work at the top 10, and I interviewed at a top 20 and just hated the culture and the people. But now I'm panicking that this whole prestige thing is actually important....
No substantial difference by rank, only by firm.
It just depends on the firm, location, and what skills you grab.
I am at a mid-size firm/boutique/whatever you call not big law but still doing large cases for large corporations. We routinely hire laterals from big firms who are trying to do the exit you are talking about.
They get hired if they look like they can handle cases on their own, are smart, and could learn quickly. This means we have hired people from Skadden, Reed Smith, Latham, and insurance defense firms. While a top 20 firm like skadden would be a plus, and biglaw in general is a plus, after about rank 20 the Vault rank doesn't mean anything for us.
In short, my admittedly limited experience is that you have (A) top 20 vault (though no one actually uses those rankings, they just tend to correlate); (B) the next 80 firms on the list; and (C) other work experience that would give you complex civil lit work. A is somewhat better than B, is somewhat better than C. Then you have the other 98% of lawyers in America. Either A/B/C is a great way to start a career.
And C should make everyone realize that you do not need biglaw to have a career.
09 Alum here.
In my limited experience at a CA big firm, I have never heard the Vault rankings mentioned, except at Boalt. Our marketing department does, however, keep us updated on our Am Law 100 ranking and Chambers and Partners practice group ratings.
Also, having filled out my first "associate satisfaction" survey for the Vault Ranking, I have even less respect for Vault. Vault can probably let you know if somewhere is not a good place to work, but I wouldn't use it to make a call between several good places to start your career.
Just like I'd tell you not to let US News tell you where to go to law school, but I'd recommend using it to weed schools out if you have no independent knowledge of recommendations.
Thanks, 09 alum. My problem is that I can see myself sticking around for only two or three years at the V10 firms, and I can see myself wanting to make a career out of the lower vault firms b/c I honestly like the culture. I want to go to a firm, plant my roots, and hopefully not have to leave.
The earlier discussion about dings being sent in the mail just reminded me of this.
Does anyone else remember getting a "ding" or rejection letter from Farella Braun + Martel even without getting a 20-minute interview with them? That was sure nice of them.
They apparently sent such letters to anyone who bid on them, regardless of whether that person got an interview. So great getting extra rejection letters.
I have a question for the alumni on here. Does talking with other firms about working for them down the line (after getting multiple offers or after accepting an offer from a different firm) impact your chances of getting an offer at the end of 2L summer? Or is it just considered networking, since the legal market is awful?
Huh?
I think 3:22 is trying to say: He got gobs of offers and wants to lead along the ones he didn't accept, and wants to know if that is okay in the eyes of the firm he did agree to work at.
Also 3:22 is a dick to talk about his "problems" of what to do with multiple offers while many people are stressing about getting just one callback.
Hmm, as an alumn, here's my quick take:
If you've accepted an offer, then you contact the other firms that have also extended an offer to you, thank them for their time, wish them well / hope your paths cross, that kind of a thing. This profession is VERY SMALL. Just like law school, people gossip and you do earn a reputation. Not really in your interest to start that reputation this early as someone who talks out of both sides of his mouth. Makes no sense to me.
And it shouldn't make sense to any Boaltie. There's a reason the school takes your word (as opposed to a deposit) when it comes time to matriculate. The same attitude that your word is worth its weight in gold continues post-law school. So, if you have told a firm that you will accept their offer, that also implies you're no longer entertaining other offers.
Finally, yeah that's a dick thing to do. Your classmates are also looking for a job. Politely decline your open offers (as described above), so that firms can look to other applicants on their list to fill in slots.
3:22 here. This wasn't some attempt to be a dick - I don't have any offers. I was asking a hypothetical question about two different scenarios to try to learn etiquette for networking and what is overstepping bounds. Sorry this came across the wrong way. I'm just looking for some advice on how to network without looking bad. I guess it didn't come out that way.
3:22, I imagine you will get conflicting advice about this, but here are my two cents.
What you really want is a job. Once you get a summer gig, your best chance of stability is to put your head down, focus on your work and on your networking within the firm that gave you an offer, and rely on yourself to land an offer. Poking around at other firms may or may not land you an opportunity elsewhere, but it seems at least as likely to shoot you in the foot. If a lawyer at Firm B goes out for drinks with her buddies at Firm A, and your name comes up, it will almost certainly kill your chances at both firms. Why run that risk when one firm as already invited you for the summer?
To me, this is a little like asking if it is okay to hit on your girlfriend’s friends just in case it doesn’t work out between you two. Networking? Maybe so. Wise? Definitely not.
Here's the thing. Your best "networking"* is with your friends in law school. You will end up in different firms, different non-profits, different government agencies. I honestly cannot count any more the number of times I've had an instance of someone approaching me about firm so and so and me redirecting them to a classmate at the firm, and vice versa (where friends at Firm X reach out to me to ask about a job candidate they think I may be familiar with). That kind of "networking" is invaluable from my limited perspective.
So in a nutshell, I don't see any valuable "networking" that you can pull off at this stage in your career. But if you invest in your friendships now, and continue to keep in touch with them at regular intervals, then in no time at all you will have a very valuable Rolodex.
* I really cringe at this term because it carries such a sycophantic connotation. Either you're in touch with someone who you think is worthy of keeping in touch with or you're not. It's not that hard.
3:22 again. Thanks, guys. I am terrible at networking and the cdo keeps pushing it. I appreciate the advice, and I am sure others on here do as well.
I don't know if this helps it seem easier, but networking is a highbrow way to say "making friends." If you can make friends, you can network. It really is that simple.
Starting to lose my mind trying to juggle classes and the OCIP madness. Phase I is done, 11 interviews + 1 non-OCIP interview, no cb's yet, hoping to get at least one. Too exhausted for Phase II but 10 more interviews to plod through.
Good luck to all.
7:06, I. feel. you.
I HATE OCIP SO MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You're quite right L'Alex. And, yes, what you say is indeed sappy. But it also helps to vent the frustration and realize that others are on the same boat. It is one thing to chant "just stay positive" and quite another to actually stay positive. Perhaps some of us just want confirmation that we're not the only ones unable to keep being positive all the time? Thanks for your positive thoughts, though. And more power to you!
People getting NOs... are you getting letters? emails? what does it mean to have just not heard either way from places?
my wilmer NY was email. But it didn't come till several days after the NY + was reported here.
I got a rejection call from Orrick SF...
How about those bong-shaped lamps in the hotel rooms? What the hell is that about?
I think they are shaped like bongs on purpose... but ya I've def caught myself staring at them lol.
Terrible 2 part question: To whoever got a Kirkland callback, did you meet their grade minimum, and if so, by how much did you exceed it?
i am not the one that noted a Kirkland callback though I also got one. I did not meet their grade requirement.
This thread has a treasure trove of comments, a lot of them about bong lamps.
While researching firms last night I came across a disturbing benefit listed on one firm's recruiting webpage . . . "organized dieting club."
Wondering if I should ask my interviewer if she has taken advantage of that resource...
I had a question for those who did the Perkins Coie interview for their Seattle office...if you've heard back from them (I guess for not getting an interview), did you guys hear by e-mail or phone or other?
@ 8:53 it was an e-mail.
Also, Jones Day, SD, +
Setting up callbacks in the student lounge at Durant STILL makes you a douche, in case you forgot, even if you're from a "little school down south, you might have heard of it, Stanford."
12:09, if you're referring to what and who I think you're referring to, well-played sir, and I tip my hat to you.
As do I, 12:09. EXCEPTIONALLY well-played and well-deserved.
15 interviews so far, 1 ding, 0 callbacks, 14 silences. mediocre grades. average interviews. killself.
Is the general consensus that you've been dinged if you haven't heard from a firm that others have heard from? There are several firms on this list that have called back and dinged people and I've heard nothing at this point. Is silence good news?
Yeah, can someone explain if silence means anything?
Callbacks come in waves. If you have not received a ding, then it is still possible you will receive a late wave callback. Do not despair (yet).
I received a call back two days after everyone else received a call back. I don't know what happened there, but it worked out.
Can we not post this information? Who the f*ck cares? Patience is a virtue, or something? And besides, shouldn't be using our time sharing hilarious interview stories? As is the great spirt of boalties' adorable nerdiness?
21 interviews so far, 2 cbs, 5 dings. A lot of silenece here as well. Also, several dings are from far less desirable firms that cbs. I find it (and OCIP generally) utterly bizarre.
Two callbacks is great. I know plenty of people with none.
20 interviews, 25 callbacks, 0 dings, hoooooooooohaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
11:02,
I have no clue what you mean by "less desirable." You really need to get out of that law school ranking mode. Yeah there are those rankings from Vault and AmLaw, but let's be real, those rankings don't make any firm more or less "desirable."
I should hope that you are looking at firms based on your legal interests and on their expertise and the practice areas they focus on. If you are looking at firms based on prestige only, then you are gonna be miserable in BigLaw.
@ 9:45
I get your gripe, as a lot of people do this, but I meant less desirable for a very specific practice area. Some of the best firms for it are not super high-ranked in Vault or whatever (and some are). I am only interviewing for a single thing within an already specialized area, so my preferences are bound to be different than a lot of people, but still, it seems really random.
I am a bit divorced from this whole process, having gone through it two years ago, but I would put a lot of thought into going for one of the smaller firms. I had the choice between two smaller firms and one big one, and chose the latter. By far the worst decision I have made.
Could someone weigh in on this or point to the link where it has been discussed. Q: does our late cb wk put us at a disadvantage? should we try to schedule cbs before that even if it means missing class?
There's a fundamentally incorrect premise in that question. Call back week is not too late. Recruiting is too early. But that's a can of worms that NALP has opened and ineptly trying to cure.
To follow-up on Armen's comment:
I'm a 1st year associate, and I just was discussing this problem with a partner who's a Boalt alum.
If you get a callback, if at all possible, DO NOT WAIT. If the callback is in California, set it up asap. Offers are handed out on a rolling basis, and we've been seeing people from other CA schools for the last two weeks. And it's not like the firm is waiting until OCIP at other schools is complete to start making offers.
Act quickly.
2:50 PM, thanks for your feedback. It seems, however, firms in one location (e.g., NY) generally prefer you only fly there once and knock out all the cbs in that location so that the firms can all share in your expenses. It seems difficult to schedule ASAP when round 2 is not even over until the 8th and there. In that respect, cb week is the most logical sensible. How did you handle the situation?
@ 2:47 and 2:50
I think it depends on the firm. I've directly asked the recruiting coordinators at the firms I have callbacks with whether they are handing out offers on a rolling basis or whether they are waiting 'til a given date. All the firms I've talked to are waiting until the end of September to start making offers. Granted, I'm interviewing in D.C. as opposed to California. So it's probably best to check yourself with each firm.
Firm recruiters have been asking me what other firms I have callbacks with. Can they do that?
3:15, in a word, "Yes."
When they asked me this type of question I provided vague answers as much as possible. “Oh, the usual suspects. Say, the lobby here is lovely, can you see the bridge from here?”
Or whatever.
Point being that although they want to know they will not be so rude as to circle back to it if you steer the conversation away. And there is nothing better than a direct but unrelated question to steer a conversation into safer territory.
One more thing. Don’t lie about where you have callbacks. Most of the recruiters know each other and are personal friends. You don’t want to get caught when they gossip with each other behind the scenes.
2:50 again.
NY is one thing, I think. But if you get a callback in California, even if it's LA or Orange County, then by all means, schedule it ASAP. Miss a day of class, do it on a Friday, whatever.
...or you can just tell them the firms you have callbacks at. It isn't going to affect your chances.
I have a question: is discussing callbacks akin to discussing grades? Is it rude?
Dewey, Chetem, & Howe, Chicago, +
4:12 Talking about callbacks is rude, and it is worse than talking about grades...when you are in public. If you are in the student lounge in the hotel, or in Zeb, or in the library, and you are talking loudly on your phone or to other people about how many callbacks you have, then you should know that EVERYONE HATES YOU. EVERYONE.
That said, this page is an OCIP page, and it is really the only source of information on anything OCIP related--callback or otherwise--because God knows the CDO isn't any help. So be patient with those stressing to the blogosphere about their callbacks. At least they aren't doing it outloud. in public. like an a**hole.
You know who you are.
Jesus people grow up, if you don't want to hear it....don't listen in to other people's conversations.
@7:52
Willful ignorance is not a skill I picked up at Boalt; it is difficult to not listen to someone talking loudly on the phone next to you in the student lounge.
Wax? Bose Quiet Comfort® Headphones? Is that the only solution? Maybe individuals being considerate would be easier.
@8:17 nice product placement.
And I agree. Even if people are over-reacting, at least try to have some class. I know we are all law students, but it won't kill us to at least try to behave tactfully. probably.
So is tomorrow the big day for call-backs? A big wave before the Labor Day weekend? Let's sure hope so. Good luck, everyone.
@9:03
I got a wave a responses tonight, six total, some with good news, some with bad, so hopefully some of the slower firms will have most of their responses out by the weekend?
Good luck everyone!
@7:52
Are you a transfer student, also?
Listen guys, it's great to have you here, and I've met some of you and have nothing but nice things to say about most of you. But I have to say, the two of you setting up shop to schedule your callbacks in the student center: I'm sure you worked your ass off in your former law schools, and it was probably really competitive, so maybe that's what you're used to...but that's not how we roll at Boalt. We mostly try to keep the standard law school douchyness at a minimum. Please proceed accordingly. Thank you.
Hey, I apologize. I thought that no one was around, and we were trying to keep our voices down as low as we could. In fact, I think that we were almost whispering. Anyways, that was the first time that I've talked to anyone here about Callbacks. And now I feel really, really bad about it. I'm sorry and it won't happen again. Didn't mean to be a douche.
You must have really low self-esteem if it hurts your feelings to other people's success.
Alright now, let's not beat a dead horse. This has nothing to do with insecurity or self-esteem or being a douche - it has to do with recognizing that (for the most part) we are all friends competing for the same thing. If you had a friend who was sad because she couldn't afford a car, would you go on and on in front of her about how great your car is? Or how many extra cars you have? No, it just isn't collegial.
Now please, let's move on.
2Ls,
Talk to the 3Ls more. Really. We want to help, but it's difficult to know which 2Ls have callbacks at the firms we summered at.
If you have a callback at firm X and you know a 3L who worked at firm X, go and talk to them.
If you have a friend who has a callback at firm X and you know a 3L who worked there, make an introduction.
CLR and other journals have lists of where their members worked. Look at these lists.
If even a single Boalt 2L does a callback at my firm without talking to me first, then someone has failed. It could be me, it could be the 2L, or it could be one of their friends.
Finally, if a 3L offers to discuss a firm with you, make sure you do it. Not only will you get some good inside information, but firms sometimes informally ask their summers for feedback on candidates. It would be much better if I could say "oh yeah, she is great, she did X thing, she is easy to talk to, she is really interested in Y area of law..." rather than "oh, i don't really know anything about her"
We want to help. Help us help you.
-- A 3L
@9:55 Well said, L'Alex
Solidarity, Boalties!
11:07 is right. Many of us get solicited by our firms for feedback and for our opinions of 2Ls that are interviewing. We want to talk to you. We want more Boalties at our firms. Seek us out!
-Another 3L
Transfer student here. I have not disclosed my call backs and I only schedule them from HOME. On multiple occasions, I have had Boalties trash talk the transfers from my school and talk about how we are all d-bags. Totally unprovoked!!
Maybe it only takes one transfer to ruin it for the rest, but guess what - it only takes one boaltie to ruin it for the rest, too.
Don't hate the player, hate the game.
@3:22 PM
It does not take only one Boaltie to ruin it. We already ignore the douche bags. Remember, you're joining us. Like when you join any organization, you will be more highly scrutinized than the people who are already members of the club!
@ 4:26 I'm cool with being scrutinized. But the broad generalization that all transfers from x school are d-bags is not scrutiny.
@4:34:
sounds a lot like strict scrutiny to me!
it is like the 2L class isn't even the 2L class anymore. with so many transfers and LLM's it feels more like we are at a new law school.
@ 4:37: you saying I have a funamental right to be here?? I'm digging it!
3:22 Here. I just want to clarify, that I really enjoy being here at Boalt and that the overwhelming majority of you guys have been totally rad. Thanks!
Good job on Wachtell whoever got a CB; remember to talk to the people at Boalt who were paralegals there!
There were also a few Wachtell CBs last year. You might want to seek out those 3Ls to get a sense of what the interview is like.
Wow, what pettiness. The continuing 2Ls with their standards for transfer students and animosity toward LLMs -- very disappointing. Even if OCI has you stressed.
Transfers and LLMs are a great part of this school.
Law students are hysterical. Look at yourselves!
People can be jerks. And people can be nice. Some of those people are transfers and some are not.
I personally witnesses 2 transfers being completely rude to someone the first week of school. But I also met a few 2L transfers and last years transfers and they're awesome. It seems this years transfers are more competitive and less willing to assimilate into Boalt. But that doesn't mean ALL of them are like that. Some are rather pleasant.
The only thing I have to say about transfers is that I wish Boalt had done a better job introducing me to them. It was like this strange group of people suddenly appeared, and that they tended to interact only among themselves.
Sullivan and Cromwell, LA -
@ 9/3; 4:41
you mean it's almost like the 2L class isn't like that 1/3 of the 2L class you saw every day last year? I'm still meeting people I thought were transfers that simply were in another supermod.
Oh. And to the schmuck who differentiated between transfers and Boalties: get over yourself. The transfers ARE Boalties (and as far as the ones I've met) are pretty nice.
I agree with @ 6:46PM. I write separately to point out the grammatical error in the last sentence.
I'll join 8:49 and 10:01. Did I miss the meet-the-transfer mixer this summer? The one's I've met are awesome.
SCOTUS DC-
as a transfer myself, i am really embarrassed when transfers discuss their callbacks in the lounge room at hotel durant where it's almost impossible not to hear. i think it shows a lack of maturity/sensitivity.
Sounds like we have a lot of bitter Bettys at Boalt.
yeah, it's OCIP and all, but can we get some new posts? OCIP isn't the only thing going on at boalt
Yes it is.
I spoke to previous transfers before making the decision to do so myself. I was expecting a little animosity, so this does not surprise me.
The funny thing to me is that Boalt, like every law school, thinks they are so different (aka "not douchey"). Guess what? There is an equal percentage of douches at Boalt and my old law school, and I'm guessing at any big law firm.
This is just a douchey profession.
You guys are douches.
Maybe I am too.
Douche.
Doooooooosssssshhhhhhh
I, too, have experienced (and was expected to participate in) some transfer bashing. I was in a journal office working away, when someone came in and started talking about how awful the transfers were and how they were "taking all our jobs at OCIP." I was mortified that other journal members would hear this person talking to me and think I shared his sentiments. I kept saying how I was sorry he felt that way, but that all the transfers I've met have been awesome people.
And about them "taking our jobs":
1) most transfers were at the top of their class at other schools. They were already competing for the same jobs as us. Top of the class at Hastings would have been fair game for any number of firms.
2) some transfers came from other top law schools and just wanted to be back in CA for whatever reason. They were also already competing for the same jobs as us. A Michigan or UVA or Columbia kid who wants to work in CA would be just as competitive as a Boaltie at their respective OCIPS.
Ugh is OCIP over yet?
This process is bringing out the ugly in many of us--continuing students included. It's just easier to blame it on the new folk.
This transfer talk is getting way overblown. From what I gather, only a handful of the 40+ of you have pissed off a small minority of the 250+ of us. Seriously most of us enjoy having you here and want to get to know you. Lots of us are just stressed out about our job sitch (or prospective lack thereof). Please don't let these comments from a few students discourage you from getting to know the rest of us or getting involved.
...can someone post something embarrassing and/or funny now? Bong lamp comments? How about a John Yoo quip? Has the 1L class-cest begun? Anything but this dragged on transfer talk
My sincere condolences to whoever was rejected by WilmerHale's Chicago office. You may find some consolation, however, in the fact that the firm doesn't even have a Chicago office!
So you're not the only one who won't be working there this summer...
Perhaps they meant Beijing, China?
Gee golly transfers, glad your OCIP is going so well, but please stop fucking talking about how your callbacks went IN CLASS.
You know its getting rough when someone busts a "gee golly" out.
It's not just transfers. I just had to listen to someone schedule his callback as he paced up and down the Student Center halls. Get it together people!
I like the Dewey, Cheetam and Howe reference -- two thumbs up.
Is there any way to approve comments with a rule to limit them to only callbacks? I'm serious, I wouldn't post otherwise. It's really not fun to read through people complaining. Especially if it's about a specific incident, why not walk up and say something like: "I couldn't help but overhear your conversation about callbacks. I really don't mean to be rude, but would you mind muting it for those of us who are having less luck with OCIP?"
We go to a top law school and have amazing life opportunities, regardless of how many callbacks we get. OCIP is justifiably dominating many of our thoughts and anxieties, but -- in case you aren't already -- take a step back, eat a big ol' cookie, and remember that your talent and eventual law degree are going to allow you do whatever you want to do in life, regardless of where you work next summer.
Is there any way we can get BHSA to require transfers to wear yellow snowflakes on their coats for their first semester here so we can identify them easier?
Just a question – if I’m at school all day for interviews/classes/meetings and really need to schedule a callback with my computer in front of me to see my calendar where do you suggest I go? There are people everywhere. Yes, some people could be more sensitive but the truth is this stuff has to get done and there aren’t exactly great options for locations to do this while on campus.
5:00,
The terrace. Or Strada. Or one of the many benches around the law school where you can pick up wifi and schedule your callback without (maybe inadvertently) making everyone hate you.
OK, the antidote to petty conflicts arising out of OCIP is the same as any competitive environment: kangaroo court. The process is simple.
1. Establish ground rules (e.g., no scheduling call-backs inside the law school);
2. Take time/place/manner complaints on an honor system;
3a. 1 of 10 magistrates solicits response from accused, and, if respondent admits offense, magistrate assesses punishment, but magistrate may also do a MSJ-style proceeding based on complaint and response and then assess punishment;
3b. If respondent denies and raises a genuine issue as to a material fact, evidence is taken from witnesses (as identified by each party) individually via email (straight-up civil law style) by 1 of 4 Kangaroo Justices; final decision rendered after inquisition
4. Respondent may appeal to the 3 other Kangaroo Justices not on case, but review is discretionary.
Punishments? Alcoholic beverages for the immediate victims of the douchey behavior. Now, I know that this may shock some of your sensibilities, but I think we should keep the Ice Penalty on the table for the most severe cases (*Disclaimer: I am not advocating for or against this severe form of punishment*): getting Iced by a sixer of Smirnoff over the course of an evening.
If someone doesn't drink alcohol, then it should be some sort of beverage/snack.
Sometimes you just need something this silly to break down the ridiculousness of how stressed out we all are. Trust me, if we're f***ed at Boalt, the boat's coming down with us! Also, time may heal all wounds, but time passes faster when your drunk.
Any takers?
Maybe for next year's 2Ls, they could set it up where everyone who agrees to be under the jurisdiction of the Kangaroo Court pitches in $20, the Court in turn becomes a student org with a sham purpose (Boalties for The Common Law), gets funded, and throws a rager at the end of OCIP for all members in good standing...
Zero OCIP callback-er here. I have nothing against people who schedule their callback within my earshot. Unless, of course, the dude/dudette is obviously showing off or something. But the obviousness has to be, well, ridiculously obvious - not touchy-feely "oh my god look at that guy scheduling callback in the student lounge" obvious but pacing-around-with-a-loud-voice-talking-about-how-next-week-doesn't-work-because-he/she-already-has-three-scheduled obvious (and in that case it's not the fact that s/he is scheduling a callback but the fact that s/he is a potentially successful corporate lawyer that gets to me).
On a related note, who else with zero callbacks so far? Let's form a solidarity group and go get drunk this Friday or Saturday (or, heck, during a weekday because who the fuck cares at this point, right? Right? Bueller? Anyone?)
The Down Low Saturday night for a post-OCIP blowout for everybody. No excuses, play like a champion. Rule 76.
Suggestions for a cheap place to pre-game it?
Transfer here. Not to beat a dead horse, but allow me to speak my peace ---
get.over.it.
You know when you were getting accepted to lots of awesome law schools and were excited and wanted to talk to all your friends about it and you were scheduling visits to all the various campuses? Well I was that person across the room, with a crappy LSAT score, just hoping somewhere would let me in.
And someone did let me in. And I worked my ass off and got great grades in a system that (shockingly) has a harder curve than Boalt. And then I worked my ass off some more to finally, on my third try, get in here.
So if I use the 5 spare minutes I have to make a phone call, and you happen to be in earshot of that call? I'm sorry if it offends you, but please, get over it. I'm not trying to upset you, I'm just trying to get er done.
I guarantee your curve wasn't harder that Boalt's because you weren't competing against people at Boalt. Unless you transferred from another T10. But if it justifies you bellowing out callbacks around your classmates, think whatever you please.
Come on, guys - I know OCIP isn't all rainbows and kittens, but do we have to be terrible to one another?!?! We should be disgusted by some of the comments posted in this thread and by how we are reacting to each other.
The reality is that some people have callbacks and some people don't. This is part of life. Not everything will go your way. It's much better to learn this lesson EARLIER rather than later. Hell, I'd love to have been born an heiress, but I don't begrudge Paris Hilton her millions. We're all adults. We need to start acting like it.
As a 3L who had a miserable OCIP experience last year and has since become very jaded about the process, anything I have to say has to be taken with a grain of salt. That said, it is a little disappointing to read the animosity here.
Given the economy (yes, I went there), I don't think people should be ostracized for scheduling callbacks within the law school. This is a stressful time, and there is certainly the concern that things need to get done quickly. Regardless of whether law firms truly believe that a response a split-second after a callback offer is indicative of anything, I cannot be certain. But given how random the process is, and how any misstep can result in a rejection, I don't think it should necessarily be a bad thing that people are trying to act quickly. And if part of 'acting quickly' is to schedule within the law school, then so be it.
I know it's difficult to hear other people having success, especially if you haven't heard back from any prospects (despite oftentimes thinking you had a great interview), but as difficult as it is, the better thing is not to resent the person's success. I'm not saying you have to go up and say 'congrats' (unless you're a friend), but there is also no need to give the person a dirty look or complain about it here, or blame the 'transfer' bogeyman.
I bring this up because in the end, transfer or douche or space alien from Planet 52, in the end we're all part of the same community and we should support each other. There are limits to this support, but if some people are successful and you are not, that is an unfortunate part of life. It's difficult for us type-A personality people, especially those of us who may have never experienced failure, but the real failure would be to turn into a person you're usually not by blaming people who probably have no more control over this entire process than you do. Especially since in the end, you're going to have to go to school with these people for another two years, and it's really not going to be a very fun two years if you resent everyone who might have had more success in a process that is horrifically arbitrary.
The exception to this, of course, is if they are being a total arse about it and doing it to brag. Or simply are bragging. But honestly, I don't think scheduling a callback in the law school or talking to your friends about it should be considered bad form for the most part. It sucks to hear for the rest of us, but the sooner you just accept it and move on, the more you will be appreciate your peers and what they bring to this community.
Has anyone received CB's after 20 minutes of absolutely irrelevant chit-chat? Or is this just a way for interviewers to pass the time after they were already underwhelmed by your resume?
I, for one, am in favor of limiting further non-callback reporting discussion in this thread to people willing to post with a handle. I think making people stand by what they say in this sort of a situation would resolve any animosity rather quickly by making everyone people, rather than ContinuingBoalt-anon v. IncomingTransfer-anon. It is easy to generalize about "you people" when "you people" post as an anonymous blob. And that goes for both sides.
Yeah, we need to get rid of the anon feature. It seems like a different side of people come out when they are hiding behind the internet.
Alright kiddies, hate to break up the personality beauty pageant going on here, but this conversation now officially sucks - hence, the European in me takes great pleasure in announcing that any further comments on this thread regarding the transfers/callbacks issue WILL be censored, deleted, "disappeared", kaput if you post anonymously. Goodnight Boalties, one and all.
continuing 2L here. In general, I want to apologize to the transfers for the lack of class demonstrated in these comments. To stoop to the low level established, here are my thoughts:
@5:32- that was a lot of typing to not be funny at all
@ 5:50- if you tried to get into Boalt a fourth time, I bet you would get a ding.
@ 6:05- you are an idiot. Please post what classes you take in the future so I can ride your curve.
@8:47- you're a jerk.
Everyone should be nicer to each other. No amount of zing in a nuts and boalts post will make up for your lack of cleverness in your 1L final exams.
The European in me is more than happy to apply inconsistent standards to this thread. The last comment may stand as a comprehensive reminder of the retardedness that has ensued here. All future anon comments on the transfers/callbacks issue will be deleted, though... I mean it!
can we have some alums and 3L's give advice on how to make the most of your callback?
is it a terrible idea to do 2 callbacks in one day?
also, what is the average offer rate from callbacks? do firms have a number they intend to cut?
People will disagree with me on how to make the most of your callback, and that's okay. There is no right answer here, but here is my advice.
Be friendly and warm. Firms are interviewing for "colleague" as much as for "summer associate." Actually, more.
Show up early, but not ridiculously so. Ten to fifteen minutes is fine. Twenty or more is awkward.
Wear clean clothes.
Be positive about everything that comes your way, no matter who you are talking with. This definitely includes your interactions with other interviewees you may encounter on your way in or out.
Brace yourself for the possibly that you will encounter in the elevator a person from another firm with whom you interviewed. This has happened to me a couple of times, and having the possibility on your radar makes the awkwardness factor go down.
When you first enter a firm the receptionist will probably offer you a glass of water or a cup of coffee. I say be gracious and accept. It makes you look, and feel, comfortable. And it gives the attending receptionist a chance to interact with you.
Try to remember at least one personal thing about the people who interviewed you in Hotel Durant. You will probably see them again at the firm, and you should bring it up. Nothing says "colleague" like the guy or gal who remembers you.
Look people in the eye when you shake their hand.
If your interviewer is all jazzed to talk, let them. Just make sure you chime in every now and then. I doubt this is true of all people, but it is certainly true of lawyers that they usually love to hear themselves talk.
If, on the other hand, your interviewer is tired or disengaged, step up and carry the conversation. Try not to be remembered as the person with all the awkward silences.
Smile.
Above all, just be nice. There may be conventional wisdom to the contrary, but I feel like once you get to a callback you are well on your way to closing the deal. You qualify for the job, and people at the firm have affirmatively said that you seem hirable. Show them they are right; be the energetic, fun, exciting person you were when you came to law school. As opposed to, say, the vindictive, unhappy souls who have been commenting above.
Good luck, everyone!
Shute Mihaly +
Sheppard Mullin SF+
King & Spalding SV+
and a bunch of dings that are already posted (keeping douchebaggery to a minimum).
Oh, and to the transfers: my apologies for all the negativity above. Turns out OCIP doesn't bring out the best in people. That said, I'm happy you're all here. Welcome to Boalt!
I would NOT recommend two callbacks in one day unless you are going to be in that city for only one day and there is absolutely no other choice.
My morning callbacks last year lasted from around 9 til around 1 or 2, depending on how many people I was interviewing with and how long the lunch part lasted. In one, the lunch lasted a long time because it was going really well.
Some of my afternoon callbacks started with a lunch so I would have been unable to do two in one day if both of them had the lunch part. Others just had multiple interviews that began around 1 or 2 so trying to do two in one day really isn't a good idea.
Callbacks consist of multiple 30 minute interviews so it is a half day process at the very least.
The last thing you want is to be late to a second callback because the first one lasted longer than you had anticipated.
The long comment above was to 9:52.
To 9:53, I wouldn't do two callbacks in a day. Can you imagine doing ten Hotel Durant interviews in a day? That's what two callbacks would be like. Ugh.
As to the number firms plan to cut, well, it is a glass half full thing. Think of it this way: every firm has a definite number of people it plans to *hire.*
What do people think about thank-you notes for callbacks? Handwritten notes, typed letters, emails sent the next day?
You will probably get a list of your interviewers the day before the callback. If you're the type of person who can do it, memorizing some information about each of them can be useful. Do not stress out about this and do not try to show off your knowledge (that's a good way to make someone hate you). But I remember finding it really helpful to know something about the person interviewing me -- if nothing else, it made me less nervous.
More generally, my advice is to learn as much as possible about the firm but not to make any specific effort to show off what you know. If you can convince them that you are highly competent but not at all obnoxious, they will want to hire you.
Thank you notes are unnecessary and inadvisable -- at least at my firm and in my opinion. Two reasons: 1) My evaluations are done within minutes of your leaving my office. 2) They are an opportunity to screw up in terms of tone -- since they serve no real purpose, I would avoid them. Also, if you feel you must send thank you notes, send emails. Under no circumstances send handwritten notes. In a modern professional environment, it would just be weird.
at one point during my callbacks someone asked me a question that basically just demanded i discuss a case i read in 1L, any case. (i don't remember quite what the question was, but it was something very open-ended.) pretty quickly i came up with something, but for about five seconds i thought i was gonna have a Sarah Palin moment. not a fun moment for me.
if you, like me, tend to forget everything -- even case NAMES -- within a week after the end of finals, it might be worth taking a perfunctory glance at your 1L outlines before callbacks. nobody's gonna test you on them, but it's good to seem like someone who has, in fact, been through a year of law school.
I'm going to veto that last comment. Absolutely do NOT read your 1L outlines before callbacks. The likelihood of you being quizzed on something is miniscule, and if you're not the type of person that memorizes stuff like that, you're not going to know it on the job and you're not going to want to work at that place anyway.
Have we really resorted to censoring valid comments about poor behavior by Boalt students?
Concur with IBZ above and with Disco Stu. But with a caveat: a thank you email or note can make you stand out in the minds of the attorneys you interviewed with, which in turn will make it easier to pick things up when you return as a summer or an associate. Informal mentoring relationships, working relationships, etc. tend to form much more organically, so this may be a way to jump start that process.
James,
What was censored?
As far as I know, the only deleted comment was a personal attack on all of those who did not get into Boalt the first time around due to LSAT scores. You're not missing much.
do not schedule 2 callbacks for the same day. you will be exhausted from the first. in this market, you want to be as prepared as you can for a callback and you just can't if you have two in one day.
the most common mistake i see in callbacks is that people don't take the opportunity to tell me something about themselves that's not on their resume when i've asked a question that could call for that info. for example, if i ask about teamwork & conflict (which i usually do b/c we all work on teams in litigations), run with it. don't say, oh yeah, i worked on team and was really successful as you can see from thus 'n' such thing on my resume.
the best advice i got while at boalt was to have story about how my background experience would make me a better lawyer. once you have a story like that, there will be multiple opportunities to use it in interviews/callbacks.
good luck all. i hope i interview some of you soon.
I was a 2L with no call-backs from OCIP last year. It sucked. DO NOT DESPAIR.
Apply for everything relevant you can find on b-line. Start sending resumes to other areas in the country you have ties to.
I finally got a summer offer in late October. And I received an offer to return after the bar two weeks ago.
I know how horrible it feels to not get a single callback. But I still have a job. It will be ok as long as you keep working hard at getting a job.
Good luck.
I call shenanigans on the Alameda DA callback. They called you back while they were in the middle of day 2 of OCIP interviews? You must have really knocked their socks off.
Alum here with a couple thoughts after doing some callback interviews recently:
1) Make eye contact. Sounds obvious, but you would be surprised how difficult it is to listen closely to someone who is staring in a different direction.
2) Have a response ready for the question, Why this firm? It doesn't need to be great or even original, but at least appear as though you have given it a bit of thought beforehand. Knowing a strength of the firm is likely sufficient.
3) On thank you notes, I agree they are unnecessary as I always do my reviews right after the interview. If you do write them, I suggest an informal and short email that references a specific part of the conversation. A form letter that I know you are sending to every interviewer out of perceived obligation isn't really helpful.
4) Remember that the best interviews are conversations, not question and answer sessions. Once you've given a direct answer, feel free to use the question as a stepping stone to other topics or to then pose your own questions. (By the time the interviewer asks if you have any questions, hopefully you've already asked about a half dozen.) Remember that most attorneys probably skimmed your resume about 5 minutes before the interview started, or may even be looking at it for the first time sitting there with you--don't be shy about guiding the conversation toward topics you want to discuss, or about pointing out parts of your resume other than law school that you enjoy discussing. As a general matter, if I have to resort to the standard interview questions prepared by the firm, it means things could be going better. One thing I always enjoy is when an interviewee can thread together seemingly disparate aspects of a resume to show how their experience has helped prepare them for a law job. This also gives you a chance to show that you're an interesting person beyond the classroom.
Of course, some interviewers do have a long list of prepared questions and hypos that they want you to answer---if you end up in that interview, just answer the questions directly. But that interview is the exception, not the norm.
This is a bit disjointed, but I hope helpful. The main point, I think, is that enthusiasm, more than anything else, wins over an interviewer. So talk about things you are genuinely enthusiastic about and you'll do great.
Another alum: there is actually such a thing as being too on-point in your callback. I was lamenting with a fellow reviewer the other day that I spent 2 hours with someone and never really got to know them as a person. I know the applicant's resume and the applicant is clearly qualified, but neither my fellow reviewer nor I would ever want to have a beer with the applicant - and ultimately that will weigh heavily on the applicant's chances to get an offer. Show your personality = high marks in your reviews. Remember that you wouldn't be getting a callback if you didn't already meet the qualifications for the position - the callback is about the intangibles (which is why you get run by so many people).
10:34 - what is this story about the PBJ and PH I keep hearing about?
Separately, glad the snark is out of the thread now and we can all go back to behaving like civil adults.
Good luck, Boalties!
At least one Paul Hastings interviewer asked everyone he interviewed to describe to him how to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich as if he were a 10 year old that was not familiar with the process.
And this isn't on the wall of awkward because...?
To the person who heard Arnold & Porter DC-....how did you hear? Phone call, email or letter?
Is it ever OK to contact a firm if it has been over two weeks and no one has heard back yet?
12:43, I'm not trying to be disparaging, but what do you think is the common sense thing to do in that situation?
Has anyone heard from Gibson Dunn SF?
Presumably, if they had, they would have posted it if they read this blog.
I have. It's not pretty: six dead, fourteen wounded, and thirty remain unaccounted for.
Armen re 12:43. Thanks for your condescending response. Obviously I don't know the 'common sense' thing to do or I wouldn't have asked.
1. I distinctly disavowed any intent to disparage you. Replacing disparaging with condescending is, unpersuasive, to say the least.
2. As a summer associate, junior associate, mid-level, senior associate, partner, G-14 government lawyer, newbie at a non-profit, whatever, you will run into countless instances requiring you to use your own judgment with imperfect (again, to say the least) guidance. In a lot of those situations, you will have nothing more than your instincts and common sense to guide you. It's hard at first, but eventually, you get the hang of it.
3. As a result of the two points above, you cannot construe my rhetorical question as anything other than an attempt to move you away from the mindset of asking questions at every turn and receiving instant answers (this is sort of the AutoAdmitization of legal education) and closer toward the reality you have chosen as your future path. Sure, I can tell you what to do in your situation. But that wouldn't be really helping you, would it? I guarantee you, if you take a few seconds to think about it, and write down what you think you should do, it will probably be the right answer.
Did Cooley SF email or call you about your callback?
@4:50 - phone call
Thanks for the lulz, nerds!
As a Boalt alum who is now interviewing candidates, let me remind you folks: the people interviewing you sat in your shoes once too.
Please stop bullshitting us. We see through it. We talk about it with each other. We know when you're feeding us scripts, and we can tell when you're not being genuine.
I can't speak for the partners, who may have different criteria, but I'm mostly looking for somebody who it wouldn't suck to be stuck at trial with. Somebody smart, hard working, and who has some shred of social skills.
If you insult us by giving us bullshit lines about why you want to work for our firm, we will know better.
Best of luck!
@12:38-- email.
(Covington DC-) How did you hear?
@ 2:58pm - Skadden NY ding was via mail or email?
@1:06 skadden ding was by mail
Alum here - please, please do not send thank you notes if you can't write something specific to your conversation with the particular interviewer. (And even better, don't bother at all.) I received a two-sentence thank you email today (not from a Boaltie) that thanked me for my time and said the recruit had enjoyed learning about my firm. That was it. It was also the only thank you note I've received so far, and it definitely stands out--and not in a good way. Further, I'd submitted my review about that candidate days ago, so if the note was meant to help, it was too late anyway.
I feel bad for the recruit--I'm sure the CDO at that school advised doing it and it was just executed poorly. But Boalties, you are better than this.
Also, it may bear repeating because I'm still running into it: have down-cold, non-lame answers for the questions (1) why my firm and (2) why this city. It does not matter in the slightest if you say the exact same thing to each person--we aren't going to be comparing notes and it will be better to have one good answer than try for six or more unique ones.
Good luck all of you!
has anyone heard from luce forward? no?
Do any other alums (or 3Ls) have advice about whether or not to send thank you notes/emails after callbacks? Do people agree with 9/13 @ 8:27? Or do people still expect/appreciate a quick thank you. I am inclined not to send them because I think they are superficial, even when you can reference specific parts of each given conversation, and if I was the one doing the interviewing, I would not expect them from recruits. I just don't want to commit of faux pas...
I wish OCIP hadn't made me a neurotic crazy person about really stupid stuff like this.
I received an e-mail from A&P-DC asking me to fill out an Equal Employment Opportunity Applicant Self Identification Form.
I can understand receiving this before the screening interview, but to receive this 2 weeks later?
To the other person who received a SullCrom LA offer, would you mind emailing me your name/contact info? I think it would be far more economical to get a 2br and split it than to carry the cost of a 1br in West LA. Also, we should go out and grab some coffee/lunch sometime.
balzac1426@hotmail.com
If I have yet to get a CB from Weil, that is a rejection, right? Debating whether to go to the reception tomorrow or not.
Post a Comment
<< Home