SECOND IM ON TOP OF THE WORLD!!!!

She was a summer in the NYC office, not Washington.

I think this speaks to the relative value of LSAT scores as meaningless. If we did away with the emphasis put on them there would be no need for AA or any of this preferential garbage.

I am against AA, but I am also against the LSAT scores which make them the necessary evil they are today.

who cares?

then = hit it sober

now = wouldn't hit it drunk

If only I had written a whiny book about my mental illness...

The relative value of the LSAT is not meaningless. The test is a simple reading comprehension and logic exam. If you have great difficulties on it, you aren't that bright. Sorry.

The relative value of the LSAT is not meaningless. The test is a simple reading comprehension and logic exam. If you don't do well on it, you aren't that bright. Sorry.

In the interest of schadenfreude, I hope she gets denied admission to the Bar.

Since when does a former drug addict and criminal qualify as interesting? We've got plenty of those living upstate.

I had a better LSAT than her, I should have applied to Yale....as it is I only ended up at a second tier school and had to fight my way into BigLaw.

I'd love for her to get denied admission to the bar. I'm all for second chances, but not premier second chances.

Wow - is Wurtzel proof that the NYC office of Wilmer that much less selective/prestigious than DC/Boston? It's already a smaller office than the other two. Now this?

I got a 173 on the practice test. YOU try scoring above a 160 while coked out.

The LSAT has a great positive correlation with first-year grades. It is the strongest indicator available. Undergrad GPA correlates weakly. Being subjectively "interesting" or "diverse" aren't even measurable.

Since Yale doesn't really have grades though, it makes sense that they can ignore LSATs once in a while.

A law student willing to be a "bomb-thrower" leading the class into discussions of what's the difference in a cocaine and a crack high and whether the professor who wrote a law review article is pompous? Because THAT's what my law school was missing was someone willing to raise their hand in class and take the class completely off topic.

She's creative enough to do many things more exciting than being a lawyer. However, it also seems that she's far too unstable and self-centered to be thorough lawyer or devoted to a client. Why on god's name is she in law school? And why in god's name does she want to work in a large corporate law firm?

I think there is something to be said for the qualities that come from having a background other than "4 years at ivy league school + great LSAT." I think classroom discussions are better with diversity and diversity doesn't just mean regarding race. Ms. Wurtzel comes from a very different background than most law students, so why shouldn't that be worth a boost in admissions?

Also, I've heard more than once that taking your LSAT more than a couple of years after being in school can result in a lower score, and that law schools take that into account with non-trads. Maybe that was part of Yale's thinking, as well.

Bottom line: I can't wait to see what Wurtzel does when she gets out to practice.

2:38 - while I don't know that she is proof of it, NY is definitely less selective that DC or Boston.

I just resent the Northeastern burn. A 160 doesn't get you in here automatically. You can have her, Yale!

I just resent the Northeastern burn. A 160 doesn't get you in here automatically. You can have her, Yale!

Oh my God!? I can't believe the before and after. She used to be so hot. How does that physical transformation occur in just ten years? Coke and booze alone couldn't ravage a face like that - she must have been a tweaker.

forty year olds? gross

The LSATs are just general indicators of smarts, that simple. However, the best analogy is that using the LSATs to decide who gets into law schools is like measuring your dick with a banana. You get a general idea of what you can expect, but it's highly inaccurate. I often hear the "first-year scores/LSAT" claim but have never really seen it in action. I took the LSATs back when I had no real idea what they were. I prepared by reading the LSAC website a few days before the exam. I got a 160. However, I graduated from a decent regional NY school top 10%. I know a few people in my class who had similar (or worse) LSAT scores and did the same (or better) as I did.

Standardized tests can be gamed with a little effort; if you have the money, a little bit of patience, and a little bit of smarts, you take the courses, get a tutor, practice, practice, practice, and 'sho 'nuff, you will

Generally speaking, it's the monied class that can afford this kind of thing, which is why I would wager that you would consistently see that top standardized test scores correlate far more closely with certain economic strata than they do with post-exam performance in the target institution.

The WilmerHale "bar" is much lower than it used to be. Cutler and Pickering based their careers on upholding the law and service to their fellow man and country. They had class. Our current firm management knows nothing about class.

"critics who found her overwrought, narcissistic and relentlessly self-promoting"

She'll do juuust fine. Or, more likely, Lat is going to be out of a job 6 months after this monster graduates.

2:27 - seems like NYC is a good backdoor into one of the premier law firms in the country then!

2:53 - you bet it is. But just because the bar is lower to get in doesn't mean it's any lower to make partner - you still have to prove yourself.

2:51 - I wish all you DC complainers would just leave the firm. The firm is bigger now, get over it or get out.

I really doubt she has any intentions of practicing in biglaw for long. Someone with her life wouldn't be able to deal with the drudgery. I think Bobo at 2:53 is right... She's coming for Lat's job.

3:02, that would be really sad. It's one thing to be an ex-lawyer who started blogging because it's more fun. But if you could choose to be a writer about anything, hopefully you wouldn't spend 3 years and 100k+ to specialize in writing about something as uninteresting as biglaw gossip.

Didn't the story say that she got honors in all of her classes after 1L year? Unless YLS is giving everyone honors, that seems to undermine the argument that YLS shouldn't have accepted her b/c she only got 160. It also might be embarrassing for her classmates who are all so proud of their 180s.

2:50 - How do you measure your dick with a banana?

3:20: I don't think she has the ability to write about anything but herself, so she probably will gravitate to the legal world.

3:20 - shhh - Lat's standing right over there...

This is such bullshit. I'm busting my ass at a tier 2 law school, when a woman with worse grades/LSAT gets into Yale and biglaw because she pretends to be crazy.

This is such bullshit. I'm busting my ass at a tier 2 law school, when a woman with worse grades/LSAT gets into Yale and biglaw because she pretends to be crazy.

2:08 -- couldn't agree more.

This is why I envy people complaining of $75,000 in debt: If you go to a private T10 school, you're looking at $140,000 in debt in tuition alone, saying nothing of the loans you'll incur for rent, food, travel home, books, etc. Put all that together, and you're looking at $180,000 *easily* and more if you have a family or are living in NYC.

2:51 - you go! and remember your bigger-is-better-so-move-on attitude when you get stuck in the treads on some partner's shoe.

l2l - you HAVE written a whiny book about your mental illness. in serial format, all over the goddamn internet.

Loyola just moved into the first tier!!!

www.tubgirl.com

Don't project your issues onto L2L 3:43. Wanting a decent job is not a mental illness.

3:41,

Get a scholarship.

3:49 - no, but caring about some cokehead getting into YLS might be a sign of one.

3:44, I see your tubgirl, and raise you a 2girls1cup.com

Viva Monster Rain!!!

There is great value in spicing up the mix. However, how about spicing it up with someone who overcame the odds of having a crackhouse mother rather than admitting the crackhouse herself? (And here, I am referring to her drug use / criminal activity being the "spice," not any bona fide and serious mental illnesses she may have suffered and overcome. For the record, I think the latter is laudatory and commendable.)

I'm not against second chances, but does the second chance have to be vaulted Yale Law? I mean, I can understand why I wasn't accepted: I didn't work nearly as hard for 4-years as my talented and extremely dedicated undergrad classmates who were accepted. But it rubs me the wrong way that my admission chances might have been increased if I had totally screwed up. That she corrected herself is admirable, but no more so than those of us who managed to not mess up in the first place. (Again, referring to the fact that her notoriety/fame comes from her criminal use, not overcoming mental illnesses, the latter of which, unfortunately, seem to afflict an increasing portion of the population.)

Yale isn't accepting many 160s. Heck, it's not accepting many 165s or 168s or 169s. Accepting a 160 in a small class size is going to lower their average to the point that most of their other admittees will have to be 173+. Is this really the candidate that Yale wants to give that spot to, given that much of her fame/notoriety came from her self-imposed odds?

Before this article revealed her LSAT score, no one thought twice about whether she was qualified to attend Yale. Yet, I bet most of you automatically question the qualifications of every black student at Yale without knowing their numbers (all of whom likely scored higher than her). Oh the joy of white privilege.

She is going to have the BEST character and fitness interview.

The article fails to mention that the assignment she didn't turn in for procedure also screwed over the person (a friend of mine) she was supposed to be writing it jointly with. She said something like "normally they pay me thousands to write something, why should I bother writing this for free." If she truly has changed (as she claims in the article, but which I doubt, given that this was a mere 2 or 3 years ago), good for her, but otherwise this speaks volumes to her personality...

The article fails to mention that the assignment she didn't turn in for procedure also screwed over the person (a friend of mine) she was supposed to be writing it jointly with. She said something like "normally they pay me thousands to write something, why should I bother writing this for free." If she truly has changed (as she claims in the article, but which I doubt, given that this was a mere 2 or 3 years ago), good for her, but otherwise this speaks volumes to her personality...

4:03: You might also not have been accepted to the 'vaulted Yale Law' because you don't know the difference between vaulted and vaunted. On the other hand, YLS didn't accept me because I'm a d-bag who corrects other people's grammar.

Will Elizabeth Wurtzel pass C&F?

Looks like she's had quite a, um, history. I'm curious as to whether any state bar would actually admit her.

For instance, Stephen Glass was not admitted to the NY bar. There was also a convicted murderer who was denied admission to the Arizona bar...

On the positive side, her story teaches us a valuable lesson: it's never too late to turn it around.

BTW, prestigious law firms generally don't do criminal background checks. A good number of associates at these big firms are themselves convicted criminals. Granted, they aren't felons and most of the crimes they were convicted for are rather petty in nature (disorderly conduct, underage drinking, those sorts of crimes) but generally, big law firms look at how prestigious your academic credentials are and whether you are competent enough to handle the work.

If you have the first quality (attending a prestigious T14 law school), most law firms are willing to overlook your past transgressions.

3:43/4:00 is your classic projecting crazy. Rather than get help, they compensate by finding mental illness in others.

3:43/4:00 is your classic projecting crazy. Rather than get help, they compensate by finding mental illness in others.

As an aside, she may very well be going for Lat's job. But I doubt she'd gain his popularity, even if an excellent writer.

Part of the reason we are able to come to this site, send tips to Lat, and comment here, is that we trust Lat to keep our identities anonymous (and to not disclose them to our firms -- who surely would be interested in knowing the names of commenters or tipsters -- or to reveal them online). That trust is part internet-culture, but it is also part Lat: that we view him as credible and worthy of our trust (because, lets face it, firms would be all too happy to fire some of these tipsters or commenters). I just don't see many people placing that kind of trust and faith in EW. I wouldn't.

Fair enough, 4:15. (The shallow part of me really wants to point out that I-do-know-the-difference-but-am-writing-in-a-hurry-on-a-tabloid-blog, but it was a silly mistake and I deserved to be called out on it, especially given the context of my message.)
Love,
4:03

Everyone appears to have glossed over the fact that Wurtzel went to Harvard undergrad. At Yale, the faculty presumes that virtually anyone who went to HYP and a number of other highly selective institutions can succeed at Yale. I know of a number of Rhodes Scholars who were admitted with LSATs in the mid to low 160's who also had gone to Harvard for undergrad and graduated magna or summa. Her low score, like those of the other high achievers who were admitted, is likely a reflection of how little she studied, rather than how qualified/ unqualified she is to do the work at Yale.

Everyone appears to have glossed over the fact that Wurtzel went to Harvard undergrad. At Yale, the faculty presumes that virtually anyone who went to HYP and a number of other highly selective institutions can succeed at Yale. I know of a number of Rhodes Scholars who were admitted with LSATs in the mid to low 160's who also had gone to Harvard for undergrad and graduated magna or summa. Her low score, like those of the other high achievers who were admitted, is likely a reflection of how little she studied, rather than how qualified/ unqualified she is to do the work at Yale.

Everyone appears to have glossed over the fact that Wurtzel went to Harvard undergrad. At Yale, the faculty presumes that virtually anyone who went to HYP and a number of other highly selective institutions can succeed at Yale. I know of a number of Rhodes Scholars who were admitted with LSATs in the mid to low 160's who also had gone to Harvard for undergrad and graduated magna or summa. Her low score, like those of the other high achievers who were admitted, is likely a reflection of how little she studied, rather than how qualified/ unqualified she is to do the work at Yale.

anybody have any thoughts on the impact of the fact that Wurtzel went to Harvard undergrad?

We get it Liz, you went to harvard. Happy?

ephemera,

Top 10% of a regional NY school means nothing. If you couldn't figure out the importance of the LSAT before applying to law school, you aren't the sharpest tool in the shed.

Hey 4:47 - I outscored Wurtzel and I didn't study for the LSAT. Perhaps her low score is because she lacks problem solving skills.

But where did she go to undergrad? Cornell?

5:39: Very funny.

Andy Bernard. Pros - he's classy. He gets me. He went to Cornell. I trust him. Cons - I don't really trust him.

3:41: How in the world did you rack up $180k in debt?

I'm graduating a top 3 school with $70k in debt (of which $10k is a car loan). I've worked the whole way through. If people don't want to emerge with so much debt, try getting a job. And yes, I've supported myself and my wife in the process.

Anon, can the same presumption be given to minorities who graduated from HYP?

5:34

Suffice it to say, I wasn't particularly well-prepared to be a grad student. In fact, I had no idea of the strict hierarchy of law schools. In that sense, I was not the best-prepared student, but it says nothing of my wit, with which I can cut sticks of butter into eerily-thin slices. Your comment, though, speaks enough about you.

That said, top 10% at a strong regional school means something to some, apparently. I'm happy with my job, which - without a doubt - I am certain is more fulfilling and lucrative than what most people call "work."

Good luck in the trenches.

I was someone who (1) did not get financial aid; (2) did not get scholarships (which at my school were pretty much tied to perceived financial need or for targeted recruits); (3) did not have any help from parents; (4) was single so did not have a spouse who could at least work to cover living costs; (5) only had $10/hour parttime jobs at the law school (with the exception of my 2L summer; my 1L and 3L summers were unpaid); (6) studied abroad (expensive as hell); (7) had debt going into law school; and (8) made the mistake of borrowing from Sallie Mae whose interest started accruing immediately and whose interest rates rose each year (and are now in the double digits). Graduating from a private school, I came out at around 170K. I may be an aberration, but with the costs of tuition nearing $45K per year, don't think I'm that far removed from the mean/median.

Nope- I'll be $150k plus accrued interest (supporting family through school with law student - level jobs).

Is Jessica Cutler really going to harvard? does being a former prostitute who fvcked guys for money on her nightstand qualify her for law school?

At ~$45K/year, tuition alone is $135K. Figure another $5K in combined interest to $140K. Not hard to take out another $30K-$40K over three years, or $10K-$13K per year, to cover rent, food, books, plane tickets, clothing, car insurance, cell phone, etc. For students at private T14 schools with no financial contributions of any kind from family (parents, spouse helping with some costs, inherited money) and no financial aid or scholarship of any kind, student debt of $170K is par for the course. Depending on undergrad loans, it may be even worse. Working during law school can help offset some of these costs (if you can get enough hours; my TA work was pretty minimal) as can living frugally. But BigLaw is pretty much the only means many of us have to pay off our debt.

I've never taught law school, but I have taught pre-law and pre-med undergrads.

God, pre-law and pre-med students are boring.

Don't get me wrong--they're bright and eager and well-meaning. But they're cookie cutter boring. No study abroad, no quirky jobs, no summers they worked on a farm. Just masses and masses of automatons with strict 7 year plans.

Most of the posters here are probably boring. You were boring then and you're boring now. You have no real clue how boring you really are.

Elizabeth Wurtzel has the great benefit of not being stultifyingly boring.

ephemera,

You wrote: "Standardized tests can be gamed with a little effort; if you have the money, a little bit of patience, and a little bit of smarts, you take the courses, get a tutor, practice, practice, practice, and 'sho 'nuff, you will"

You can't game yourself into the 99th percentile.

Now go back to your insurance defense.

Ephemera,

"However, the best analogy is that using the LSATs to decide who gets into law schools is like measuring your dick with a banana. You get a general idea of what you can expect, but it's highly inaccurate. "

Is this really the best analogy?

Gosh I'm sorry I missed the hate-on-Liz Wurtzel comments... I knew her in undergraduate where she was *every bit* as awful as the comments suggest - a nasty, arrogant biatch. YLS Alum's 4:11 comment seems spot on for her. God help WilmerHale if they hire her - it'll be for the starfark value, not any inherent ability she might have.

As an aside, I do some C&F work for my state bar & I'd love to have her case file. But I'd prolly have to recuse myself. Dang.

-- ET!

She and WilmerHale are a good match for each other.

To the commenter who wrote that LSAT scores correlate with income, there is an infamous student who got a 151 on the LSAT even though she prepaared with a private tutor. She was able to transfer to and graduate from a top five law school.
I have read both of Elizabeth Wurtzel's books and seen the straight-to-DVD version of "Prozac Nation" starring Christina Ricci. It's amazing that Wurtzel got any book deals in the first place. Her writing is terrible, and I think it's a good thing that she's finding a days, nights and weekends job that she should not quit anytime soon--perhaps she can be the poster girl for bad writers-turned-lawyers. Her whiny self-indulgence is well suited for the field of law. However, narcissism coupled with coke and alcohol abuse does not render a law school candiate diverse.

2:40: I agree that she's a wretched writer. I can guarantee you that a legitimately good, but not as famous, writer wouldn't have gotten near YLS under the same circumstances.

I think all of these anonmous posters are pretty lame. Very Passive aggressive commentary....as most lawyers are.

I think it's pretty cool that she could bounce though such a crazy life and career and then all of a sudden become a lawyer.

2:40...Are you kidding? I think her writing is pretty fantastic, not because she is a conventionally beautifully classic writer, but because she so accurately depicts situations to the point that they become intensely universal.

For someone accused for being so arrogant, I find her writing refreshingly straight-forward and clear. On a side note, she's written three books, not two. But I commend you for at least having read them before commenting.

From what I've seen written here, law schools need more Wurtzels, not fewer. She is a cultural phenomenon for a reason.

By the way, friends, how many best sellers did you write at 26?

My friend was banging Lizzie a few years back so I got to spend some time with her. She's no longer the fiery revolutionary that her earlier works depict, in fact she was kind of a dull, boring, wet noodle that spent all of her time reminiscing on the couch and shopping. We actually had to sneak away from her to go out and have a good time. She got lucky with her first book, but really doesn't have much to offer the legal community as a broke, jaded, whining, inexperienced (in court) has-been writer... but then again, that's perfect lawyer material!

she's a fluke

"phenomenon"
???
she's a fluke.