But I Want My Grades NOW! NOW NOW NOW!

It is June, and as such all of you anonymous commentors now may have a place in which to complain about grades (or the lack thereof). As a benchmark, the deadline for exams to be scored is June 7th, and the deadline for final grades to be submitted is June 15th. Of course, it is common for professors not to comply with these deadlines, so take those dates with a grain of salt. I hope everyone is having an excellent summer thus far, and that preoccupation with grades is not preventing anyone from enjoying not needing to be preoccupied with school!

Whine and You Shall Receive

Just responding to a request for a forum for 1Ls to complain about being graded for WOA this year. We all need to whine sometimes, particularly during finals, so let me indulge you.

I sympathize with you guys. As one commenter pointed out, having a P in WOA wouldn't exactly be ideal for those with an interest in litigating (though I don't think it's fatal). It is a nice opportunity for strong writers, who might not do well in first-year required courses, to set themselves apart. I also agree with McWho that the complaint about the curve could apply equally to doctrinal classes.

I will go ahead and strongly disagree with the person who said the only feedback you're getting is your letter grade and some "checkmarks." That's patently untrue. From TA feedback to instructor draft feedback to oral argument feedback to final brief feedback, everyone involved in WOA worked pretty hard to make sure you knew where you stood and how you could improve.

Have at it.

Please, Sir, May I View the Course Evalutations?

Some of you may have noticed that the rules have changed for course evaluations. If you don't do all of your evaluations, you no longer get to see any of the evaluations for any classes. Apparently the carrot of $50 Amazon gift cards wasn't working well enough and the administration had to get out the stick.

Now, usually this is the sort of thing that I don't even realize has occurred because I don't read emails from the administration unless they're from M*nd*, but so many of my peers have complained that I felt like it was at least worth discussing.

I understand, powers that be, that you want as much data available as possible. That makes sense, this information is helpful to us, we use it to choose classes and professors and I guess it helps make professors better teachers. I understand that you want us all to evaluate everyone. But, there are often reasons why people don't evaluate: maybe they forget to, maybe they don't care, maybe they feel like they'd be offensive to the prof if they were forced to. I cannot imagine that forcing individuals to fill out those forms is going to improve the quality of the teaching evaluations. Instead, you'll get lackluster or random responses from individuals who don't want to take the time, but feel forced to write something.

Also, let's be honest, it's a shitty way to treat a bunch of people who pay $42,000+ a year to take those classes. It's not a positive way to treat your students (and come on, let's be honest, we're paying customers and that's how the school, at the end of the day, views us).

On Asking Professors to Move Up Exam Dates

So, you're in a class where the last few weeks of class are canceled. You've had your outline prepared since week five and boy oh boy, wouldn't it be great if you could just take the exam a few weeks early? Gee, it would be swell, wouldn't it. Why don't I just raise my hand and ask my professor to move the date up?

If this is you, please don't do it.

Moving up an exam, a few weeks before said exam would take place, is not fair to your classmates. Every class should have a syllabus. The syllabus should be distributed at the beginning of the semester and it should set the expectations for when exams will take place. If the syllabus does not list any exam times, it has to be assumed, 10 weeks into the semester, that the exam will take place at the scheduled time, not a few weeks ahead of time.

Setting aside the fact that it isn't fair to anyone who has scheduled (or not scheduled, as the case may be) their studying to coincide with the exam taking place on the actual scheduled exam date, you look like a huge fucking gunner.

A Modest Proposal

Seriously, people, stop flipping out about the seating charts. You don't need to fill it out ahead of time. You don't need to have intra-mod email chains (tres, I'm looking at you) debating what the appropriate etiquette is because I'll make it very, very simple:

Go to class, sit in a seat. Fill in the chart once you sit in the seat. I understand that HHs only go to those in the first three rows in the middle, but you still look like a huge chomo filling that shit in early.

Love,
James

Stop Chewing So Damn Loud in the Library or Proper Library Etiquette

Since I know you all have come to look to me for advice on how to behave in public (hint: it involves consistent heavy drinking) Peter and I wanted to give everyone a helpful guide of what not to do in the library:

1. Don't cut your toenails. You know who you are.


2. Don't wear perfume or cologne. This is a library not a fucking Abercrombie. If we can smell you and you're not making out with one of us then you're wearing too much fragrance.


3. While we're on odors, take a shower. Again, if we can smell you and we're not making out there is a definite issue.


4. Don't laugh. This is finals. We realize none of us are actually studying in our carrels, but don't break the illusion. (Also, Gunners, adverse possession isn't fucking funny).


5. Don't chew with your mouth open. Don't grunt, don't snort, don't snuffle. We're right fucking next to you, dude. So every time you smack your lips while chewing that gum, grunt when you readjust your pants or groan when the combination of coffee and cheetos you've been eating for the last four days makes your stomach hurt, we can hear it. And it's gross. And we're studying. And did we mention it's gross?


6. Don't come here if you're sick. Oh, poor you, you're sick. Get the fuck out of our library. You disgust us, you're distracting us, and if you get us sick we're going to knife you. (But not in the library because only a huge asshole would come to the library sick).


7. Turn your cellphone to silent. Silent doesn't mean vibrate. AND DON'T FUCKING ANSWER IT.


8. Stop unbuttoning your pants, loosening your belt or doing anything else that would remind us of my grandpa in an Italian restaurant. This isn't your fucking bedroom. You want to take off your clothes? Go home, or at least to the Student Center.


9. See that thing about a half inch above your mouth? Breath through it. If it's clogged up, blow it. If it whistles, blow it. Blow ≠ sniffle incessantly. Honestly, you're probably sick so gtfo of the library.


10. Just plain shut up. Stop talking. Right now. Whispering is talking. Yes, we can hear you. No, you don't understand proximate cause. Now shut up.

Peter helped me put this list together, but if you see him tell him (in American Sign Language, see rule #10) to zip up his fucking pants.

First!

Someone was kind enough to email this (pdf) to me early this morning (before it broke at ATL) but laziness must have gotten to me first because only now am I getting around to posting it. The short version of the story is that Harvard is the latest "top law school" to adopt the Berkeley grading system.

Oh, wait, it's not the Berkeley grading system, because the Harvard cutoffs are different:

Honors = 37%
Pass = 55%
Low Pass = 8%
Fail = 0%

See? Thirty-seven percent? Fifty-five percent? Totally, totally different.

Let's be sure to get two things straight. First, Haaaavard remains willing to tag and brand the bottom of the class. LP = bottom 8% ??? Ouch. Second, the school has explicitly reserved the possibility of failing students . . . but apparently does not plan on it: the passing grade percentages add up to 100.

Am I the only who thinks that as the big schools trend toward warm & fuzzy grading systems like ours, we ought to get some firsties credit? We may be dirty hippies out on the west coast, but come on! A little credit here!

"Go to Your Corner!"

This is the kind of thing one might joke about, but no one actually does: When ordinary discipline failed to get 15 year old Trenton General to improve his grades, his

. . . parents were about to take the cell phone away — again — recently when they offered their son a choice. “His cell-phone for two weeks or a corner for two hours,” Don [his father] said. “He chose the corner.”

“The corner” was not a quiet spot in his room, but rather a very public intersection in the middle of town. There Trenton held a hand-lettered sign that listed his grades — an E in English and math, a C in science and an A in phys ed. At the bottom of the list the sign said, “My future = shaky!”

First of all, "an E in English and math"? What the hell is an "E"? Sounds like the grades at Boalt.

Second, I honestly don't know what to think about this. Sounds like it worked here, but what if your child is struggling because he or she lacks confidence or self-esteem? "The corner" seems like it would destroy the child in that case. On the other hand, it's pretty powerful medicine, isn't it? Some law schools publicize name and rank, which I suppose has a similar effect. But I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to go through that. For the second time this week, thank God I'm at Boalt.

Lessons 1Ls Either Should Have Learned or Should Be Prepared For…

First of all, congratulations to all 1L’s on finishing the first 1/6 of your legal education.  To all those 3Ls who are one semester away from it being over, my condolences ahead of time.

Here I will impart to 1Ls (and really slow 2Ls and 3Ls) a few things about law school that you will likely learn on your own someday, but will help you much more if you can grasp early on.  For some people, these ideas never sink in.  These people are determined to define life as a struggle.  I cannot reach these people.

First, the classroom.  By now you have probably experienced the much ballyhooed “Socratic method”.  Look, it is complete bullsh*t.  It need not cause anyone an ounce of anxiety. The sharp ones out there have already figured this out: if you get cold-called in class and proceed to make an absolute ass of yourself, there are ZERO consequences for your grade.  Sure, maybe you feel embarrassed or disappointed in yourself, but these stem from your own vanity and conceit and have nothing to do with your grade (do away with those and you will be forever better off, but that is another story).  Behold, the beauty of anonymous grading!  Your grades in almost every class in law school will be 100% the result of a the mixture of your final exam plus randomness (see below).  So enjoy the opportunity to make crap up on the fly when you are cold-called and generally unprepared.  This will much better prepare you for real practice, when you will frequently have to act way more prepared than you actually are, than will investing way too much time preparing for class by boning up on useless case law.

Second, reading.  If you are really hung up about doing the casebook reading, you are wasting your time. If you don’t know this yet, you will once your grades come out (see below).  For certain classes maybe it is helpful…but for the most part, you can read a case brief, get the gist, and then go enjoy some free time.  There is nothing wrong with reading assigned case law, if you can, but don’t fall into the trap of thinking it is necessary and making yourself crazy in order to do 100% of it.

Third, grading.  You will find out your first semester grades sometime before you graduate.  Maybe even before March.  Your grades are, for the most part, random.  Professors will read your exams with varying degrees of attention.  For the smaller classes, sure, they will scrutinize more, and good work is likely to get rewarded.  But for the huge 1L classes, here is what will happen.

The professor will read your exam and quickly recognize it as one of three types.  The first type is the really well written, reasoned, top-notch law exam.  That exam will be considered for an HH, depending on how many others fall into this group. 

The second type is the really poor exam, missing important issues; lacking facility with legal reasoning; and poorly organized.  However, this is not a “sub-P”; rather, as long as there is SOME evidence of the student having attended class, this student will get a P. 

Then there is the third group of papers falling in the middle.  Not superb, not brilliant, but quality.  These will be all so similar, that the professor will give them a very cursory reading and have little ability to rank the exams against each other.  Most of the papers will be P’s, but some will creep into the H range depending on the size of the first category. 

So, the professor will either (a) throw the papers down the stairs and rank them according to how they fall; (b) have his/her 3 year old decide how to rank the papers; or (c) ask Zoltar how to rank each paper.  (Option (c) is unlikely, because of the required investment in quarters).

I know some of you will find this incredible.  Others of you are going to write exams that fall into the first category.  But for the rest of us, the results will demonstrate my point here.  You will either believe it, or you will resist it and keep overworking and stressing about your grades as if they really correlated to your stress level and work ethic.  But if you can take this lesson to heart now, don’t find it despairing.  Do not be disappointed; be uplifted, for it is a blessing.  You do not need to worry about your grades, because you are mostly going to be in the random category anyway, so find fun and productive and edifying ways to spend your time in law school.  Get involved in a clinic.  Get into yoga.  Make moonshine in your bathtub.  Organize the 2nd Annual Unofficial Boalt Hall Paintballing Extravaganza (for those who were at it last year, you know it was freakin’ amazing, and you’re welcome; carry the torch, and I promise to show up).  Try and get laid for once.  Do something interesting for once. 

The randomness of grading, and thus the insanity of really investing much hope in good grades, also allows you all to focus on the classes that really matter.  Anyone who has taken the bar exam and/or worked in the field can tell you most of your classes are largely irrelevant to either the bar exam or working as a lawyer.  Of course the 1L classes are on the bar exam, but you will be re-learning these subjects in whole for the bar exam, and especially for criminal law and property, they will be very different beasts.  Your success on the bar exam will have almost no correlation with how hard you worked on those subjects as a 1L.  To the contrary, your success at a job will be related to how well you can write.  So you probably don’t want to blow off LRW or WOA.  Yeah, they are undervalued, unit-wise.  But your other grades are random, and those classes don’t matter for sh*t, so you might as well give a little more attention to LRW and WOA. 

(In my opinion, beyond 1L year, the most bar-helpful classes are evidence, civil procedure II (you be a fool if you don’t take it), and criminal procedure.  A bonus is that these subjects are not especially difficult.)

Two important points are worth mentioning here.  First, if you want to clerk, my comments about grades not mattering do not really apply to you.  Grades definitely matter for that.

Second, some of you might be wondering whether grades matter more today because of the economic clusterf*ck in which we are mired.  I think there is some merit to this, but it should not be overstated.  Firms are hiring fewer people right now, and will naturally gravitate towards students with better grades.  That said, there are counterbalancing factors here.  First, law firms may have a better idea of how they are faring by next August, when they will start looking at your transcripts.  Hopefully things will look better by then.  Second, whether you care about your grades or not, your grades are most likely random…this is in beautiful harmony with the utter chaos of the universe in general.  Learn to love it.  If you do, besides being more attractive to nihilists, the energy you can divert to other interesting activities (both school-related and otherwise) will also make you seem more interesting to law firms.

DZ, OUT!

Breaking News: Rest of Nation Follows Berkeley's Lead, For Once

Who knew that ginkgo biloba was the only thing holding Boalt back?

No sooner are the stinky trees gone, do we learn that both Harvard and Stanford Law Schools have decided to defer to Berkeley--at least as far as grading systems go. According to Above the Law, Harvard is abandoning its eight point (!) grading system in place of an Honors/Pass system. And Stanford, which took the same step several months ago, is replacing graduation honors (e.g., graduating "with distinction") with course-specific "book awards" that sounds suspiciously like AmJurs and Prossers.

Five thoughts come to mind:

1. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I don't mind Harvard and Stanford copying our system. But they should at least acknowledge it--not use this "some other law schools" crap.

2. Okay, so maybe they're actually copying Yale. But Yale prizes, though legion, aren't given for every course. Also, Stanford's "1 out of every 15" award is essentially a HH score with a 7% cutoff. The only difference is that it's indicated in the "honors" section of a transcript (where it's more noticeable).

3. I'm curious to know which grading system came first: ours or Yale's. I suspect the latter--but only because Berkeley's first stab at grade reform (in 1967) was Top (10%), Middle (80%), and Bottom (10%). Incidentally, I can't think of a worse system than that, although I'm sure enterprising readers have the requisite imagination.

4. Is our system better than these new versions? Due to the HH grade, we now have more grade differentiation than YLS, HLS, and SLS. And that's not even counting all of the AmJurs/Prossers awarded each semester. After all, it's only really the number of HHs you get (rather than H/P distinctions) that makes a difference in our super-secret class rank calculations.

5. SLS is abandoning individual Coif membership. For Boalt alumni, this award is pretty much the only way to indicate particularly good grades on your resume without looking like an ass. Up until now, Yale was the only law school to have fewer graduation awards than Boalt (that is, it had neither Coif nor in-house awards). Is this a good or bad development? Personally, I don't have a problem with graduation awards--why not give some kind of public recognition to people who earn reasonably good grades? If anything, I would say that the 10% cutoff (for Coif) seems a bit high to me. If class sizes were equal, then about 50 students per year at Columbia get awards that they would not have gotten at Berkeley.

(Note: Okay, I know the last two points have been done on Nuts & Boalts before. But all the people who posted on those are now doing doc review.)

Stanford Adopts Retroactive Grading Policy [Above the Law]
Not to be Left Behind, Harvard Changes Grading System Too [Above the Law]

2008 Clerkship Post-game

Comments in a thread below ask for a place to further discuss clerkship opportunities at Boalt. One of those comments, from someone who obviously knows what they are talking about, contains a thoughtful series of observations and suggestions. I am quoting that comment in full, as it provides as good a place to begin as any.

-------------------

As an alum who failed to secure a clerkship until after I graduated, I agree that Boalt's clerkship "support" is quite lacking.

First, Boalt professors rarely volunteer to contact judges on students' behalf. This puts students in the very awkward position of having to broach the subject. Clerkship hiring is based largely on personal connections. It's increasingly rare for students to secure an interview without knowing someone who knows the judge.

Second, many (if not most) Boalt professors seem willing to go to bat only for very highly ranked students. I worked very hard as a GSI for a professor, only to have them reach out to their judicial connections for a higher ranked student who did not serve as their GSI. I have heard similar stories from my classmates. As a result, the very highly ranked students (top 10% and above) tend to do extremely well while the marginal candidates (top 25-15%) tend not to. A student outside the top 10% will rarely get looked at by a judge without someone reaching out to the judge on their behalf.

Professors should get pushier about helping students secure clerkship interviews. A few years ago I attended a conference which had dozens of federal judges in attendance. I watched Yale faculty members introduce students to judges at the cocktail reception. Our esteemed faculty clerkship coordinator, who was also in attendance at this conference, did not even make an effort to say "hello" to the Boalt student attendees.

Third, Boalt does not have a very good alum network. The Career Office should do a better job of fostering alum networking. ES in the CDO has done a very good job of hooking current students up with Boalt alums. I have made a personal commitment to try to help Boalt students in any way I can, and hope others will do the same. An application has a much better chance of getting pulled from the pile if it mentions a former clerk's name in the cover letter.

Fourth, the school should study and re-evaluate its policy of ranking students for clerkship purposes. The new OSCAR system makes it too easy for judges to filter applications by class rank. Schools that do not rank their students are non-filterable.

-------------------

*I have posted into the comments a compendium of the commentary thus far from the other thread. Efficiency, and all. One place, you know?

Boumediene

I have to run to court this morning so I can't say anything. Rather I'm opening this up for discussions. Habeas for Gitmo detainees. At long last, the King may not make his subjects disappear.

Washington and Lee Cuts Class for its 3L's

A commentator in an earlier post asks: what's wrong with the current structure of legal education?

The Dean at Washington and Lee, supported by a unanimous faculty, answer that question thusly: "For some time, members of the legal profession, practitioners, judges and scholars alike, have urged law schools to place greater emphasis on professionalism and learning in context."

His solution? Replace the entire third year curriculum with "experiential" learning, including actual interactions with clients. It's being implemented as we speak.

Here are his words, a National Law Journal article, and a WSJ Law Blog post.

3L status remains far, far over the horizon for this chap. But, which should I value more: the opportunity finally play lawyer, or the opportunity to finally take Wine Law?

Brain Enhancement is Wrong, Right?

A commentator in another thread recently mentioned drug abuse for intellectual inhancement. The NY Times ran a story about the ethical implications of this phenomenon today, and it is worth a read.

The piece asks some interesting questions. Is there a meaningful distinction between substance abuse in athletics and academics (because unlike athletes, intellectuals' successes drive social progress)? Is there an ethical distinction between a scenario in which an employee chooses to use, say, Adderall, and a scenario that person is asked to use Adderall by their employer? Will we someday put asterisks after Nobel Prize winners' names?

One comment in particular caught me off guard. A graduate student interviewed for the article said, "You can usually tell who’s using [stimulants] because they can be angry, testy, hyperfocused, they don’t want to be bothered."

Ummm . . . right.

Who has been spiking my coffee?

WOA Woes

Five papers due - about 5 hours each.
Twenty three cases to read - about 225 pages.
Class twice a week - about 17 hours.
Relevance to the "real world" - extremely high.
Moot Court requirement - fulfilled.
Grade - Pass/Fail.

Credits - one.

Shouldn't WOA be worth more than this?

20% of Hastings Students Get A's, 80% "Unhappy With Grading System"

A commentator below argues bar stats suggest Boalties are soft. Yet meanwhile, a recent survey suggests our friends across the bay wish they could be more like us!*

Okay, that was a bit overstated.

But the survey does reveal that Hastings students wish their grading system was more like ours: about 80% of UC Hastings believe their 20/60/20 grading curve puts them at a disadvantage on the job market against Boalt and UCLA grads.

According to the Hastings 3L who authored the survey, "Those are the schools that our students see themselves as competing with, and they want to appear on paper as close to these students as possible." Orrick's West Coast hiring partner disagrees: " . . . before going on campus to interview, we remind the on-campus interviewers what the specific grading system at that school is so we're comparing apples and apples," he said. "We don't use the Stanford grading criteria to evaluate a Hastings student or vice versa," he added."

It was a second argument for a grading system change that struck me. Buried halfway down the page, the Academic Dean at Hastings remarks: "The curve should be relaxed because it's the right thing to do and because the students become stressed about grades."

Is it the "right thing to do"? And will it relax students about their grades? Are there any Hastings transfer students here who are in a position to answer that question?



*For the record -- I'll bet at least 80% of Boalties have at least a bit of Hastings-envy, too. I know *I* would rather live in the city . . .

Better to know (when for the hell of it)?

Dean O has announced that class rankings (for the Class of 2009) are available per request. From her email:

Please remember that disclosure of your class rank is permitted
exclusively for applications for judicial clerkships for after
graduation. You may also disclose it if you are applying for a law
teaching job. Any other use of the ranking information is a violation
of the Academic Honor Code.

Boalt has been known to lag in the number of students who pursue a career in either of the two above exceptions. Yet, even Dean O "expect[s] to be innundated with requests" from students seeking their class rank. This indicates to me that there's a high number of requests from students that just want to know for the hell of it.

So I ask: is it better to know?

Grades Post-1L at Berkeley Law

Today, David Lat over at Above the Law hit the gold mine of "comment cluster F*#ks" (his term, not mine) when he opened a thread entitled "Do Law School Grades Matter?"

I'm not one for throwing gasoline on the fire, especially given the fact I've seen what appear to be record numbers of you in the library studying diligently for finals. However, due to the number of people who mentioned the ATL thread to me today, I figured there'll likely be a number of you who may want to talk in an open thread about how our post-1L grades relate to our future success when we're "Berkeley School of Law" alums.

Obviously topics for conversation may range from the elitist perspective of "heh, we go to Berkeley" to how our unorthodox grading system may be our future savior (or demise).

Again, if you're not a fan of the topic, feel free to skip the discussion. For the rest of you, unload any anecdotes or reactions you may have, and we'll see if the topic generates a similar response here on N&B.

2007 OCIP Callbacks

Sorry all, I've been busy moving. Alright, leave callback offers and rejections here. I will delete the comments that just list the call back info. Be sure to check out the format from the OCIP threads from prior years on the sidebar. Just in case you're too lazy: Firm Name, Office, + or -.

A few notes. I am not participating in my firm's recruitment process this year in any way (at least I'm not aware that I am) so that's why I am doing this. And I'm too much of an egomaniac to give admin access to someone else (for now). Also, I personally hate doing this, but some find it useful. If you don't, please do not read it. If you freak out easily, don't read it.

Lastly, if you are comfortable with e-mailing me (I promise not to reveal your id in any way, shape, or form) please do so at armenaut-at-gmail. This will make things infinitely easier for me in the next few weeks as I juggle unpacking, starting work, and fantasy football/baseball overlap.

Good luck.

Update: Ok, I'm moving it up, but I'm a bit busy so I may not update the listing today.

***

Akin Gump, DC +, LA +, NY -, SF +/-, SV +
Alameda DA +
Allen Matkins, LA +, OC +, SF +/-
Arnold & Porter, DC +, LA -
Baker Botts, DC +
Baker McKenzie, DC -, SD -, SF +, SV +
Beyer Weaver, Oak+
Bingham, W.LA +, SF +, SV +, WC +
Boies Schiller, DC +, NY +
Bryan Cave, W.LA +, OC +
Chadbourne, NY +
Chapman Cutler, SF -
Cleary, DC +/-, NY +/-
Cooley, SD -, SF+/-, SV +/-
Covington & Burling, DC +/-, SF +/-
Cox Castle, LA +
Crowell & Moring, DC +
Cravath, NY +
Curtis, NY +
Davis Polk, NY +/-, SV +/-
Davis Wright, LA -, SF -
DCPD, +
Debevoise, NY +/-
Dechert, Bos +, DC +/-, NB +, NY +, SF +/-, SV +
Dewey, LA +, SV +
Dickinson Peatman Fogarty, Napa +
DLA Piper, Chi +/-, LA +, NY +, SD +/-, SF +/-, SV +/-
Dow Lohnes, DC -
Drinker Biddle, SF -
Faegre & Benson, MN +
Farella, SF +/-
Fenwick, SV +
Fish & Richardson, Bos +, NY -, SD +/-, SV +
Foley Lardner, LA +, SF +
Folger, SF -
Freshfields, Lon +/-, NY +
Fried Frank, DC +/-, NY +/-
Fulbright, LA +/-, NY +
Gibson Dunn, DC -, LA +, NY +, OC +/-, SF +/-, SV +/-
Gibson Robb & Lindh +
Goodwin Proctor, Bos +, DC -, LA +, NY +, SF -, SV +
Gordon Rees, DC -
Greenburg Traurig, DC -, LA +/-, NY -, SV +/-
Greene Rodovsky, SF +
Gunderson, SV +/-
Hanson Bridgett +/-
Heller, LA +, NY +/-, SD +, SF +/-, SV +
Hogan & Hartson, DC +/-, LA +, NY +
Holland & Knight, DC -, LA +, SF -
Holme Roberts & Owen, SF +/-
Howard Rice, SF +/-
Hughes Hubbard, NY +/-, LA +
Hunton and Williams, DC -, NY +
Irell, LA +/-, NB +/-
Jeffer Mangels, LA +
Jenner & Block, Chi +/-
Jones Day, DC +/-, LA +, NY +, SF +/-, SV +
Kaye Scholer, LA +
Keker, SF -
Kenyons, SV +
King & Spalding, NY +
Kirkland, DC +/-, LA +/-, NY -, SF +/-
Kirkpatrick Lockhart, LA -
Kramer Levin, NY +
Latham, Chi -, DC +, HK -, LA +, NY +/-, SD +, SF +/-, SV +/-
LeBoeuf, DC +, NY +, SF +
Lewis Feinberg Lee +
Lief Cabreser, -
Loebs, LA -
Luce Forward, SD +/-
Manatt, LA -, NY +, SV -
Mayer Brown, Chi +, DC +, LA +, SV +
McDermott, Chi +, DC +, LA +/-, OC +
Milbank Tweed, LA +/-, NY +
Mitchell Silberberg, LA -
Morgan Lewis, DC +, LA +/-, SF +/-, SV +/-
MoFo, LA +, NY +, OC +, SD +/-, SF +/-, SV +/-, Tok +
Munger, LA -
Nichols Castor, SF +
Nixon, SF +/-, NY +
Norton Rose, Lon +
Office of Leg. Counsel, DC -
O'Melveny, CC +/-, DC +, LA +, NY +/-, OC +, SF +, SV +
Orrick, LA +/-, NY +, SF +/-, Sea -, SV +/-
Patterson, NY +/-
Paul Hastings, Chi +, DC +, LA +, NY +, SF +, SV +
Paul Weiss, NY +/-
Perkins Coie, Sea -, SF +, SV +/-
Pillsbury, DC +, LA +, NY +, SF +, SV +
Pircher, LA +
Proskauer Rose, LA +, NY +/-
Quinn, LA -, SF +/-
Reed Smith, LA +, Oak +, SF +
Ropes & Gray, Bos +, DC -, NY +, SF +/-, SV +
Rutan, OC +
Schiff Hardin, Chi -, SF +/-
Sedgwick, -
Shartsis Friese +
Shearman & Sterling, NY +, SF +/-, SV -
Sheppard Mullin, LA +, OC +, SD +, SF +/-
Shook, Hardy & Bacon, SF +
Shulte Roth, NY +
Sidley, Chi +, DC +, LA +, NY +, SF +
Simpson, LA +/-, NY +/-, SV +/-
Skadden, HK +, LA +/-, NY +/-, SF +, SV +
Sonnenscheim, SF -, SV +
Squire, SF/SV +
Steefel, SF +/-
Steptoe & Johnson, DC +
Sullivan & Cromwell, DC -, LA +, NY +, SV -
Thelen, NY +, SF +/-, SV +
Townsend^2, SD -, SV +
Wachtell, + (rumors)/-
Weil, NY +, SV +
White & Case, LA +/-, SV +/-
Williams & Connelly +/-
Willkie Farr, NY +/-
Wilmer Hale, Bos +, DC +/-, PA +, NY +/-, SV -
Wilson Sonsini, SV +
Winston, Chi +, DC +/-, LA +/-, SF +/-

Riddle Wrapped Inside a Puzzle in an Enigma

I'm off to see the Churchill War Rooms and some other kickass W. European sites. Since Most of the action right now is with the rising 2Ls (ex 1L? Who the fu*k says that?), this is an open thread for all that's going on. CLR rejections, OCIP bids, etc.

Other classes, incoming 1Ls and 3Ls applying for clerkships or looking to explore the bay area now that you have nothing to do, are welcome to post here also to make the rising 2Ls even more miserable. Lot's of luck. I'd especially recommend reading this post by Disco Stu re OCIP.