Add RSS RSS

Fordham Law v. Big Law: Reed Smith’s Response

Reed Smith.jpgYesterday we covered the decision of Fordham Law School to ban Reed Smith from recruiting on-campus for the next five years, in response to the firm’s last-minute withdrawal from on-campus interviewing at Fordham. The decision was announced by Dean William Treanor in a strongly worded email message.

Dean Treanor’s email, while harsh, seemed to be well-received, at least among ATL readers. In our reader poll, over 80 percent of you deemed it an appropriate response to Reed Smith’s late pullout from Fordham EIW (Early Interview Week).

Reed Smith has now addressed the situation. From the Legal Intelligencer:

Michael B. Pollack, global head of strategy at Reed Smith, said this certainly isn’t a situation the firm was looking for and he suspects the ban isn’t a good situation for the firm or the students. He said he hopes Treanor would reconsider.

“We’re trying to run a business just like he’s trying to run a law school and I appreciate the pressures that he is under and I would hope he would appreciate the pressures we’re under,” Pollack said.

Additional comments by Pollack appear in Gina Passarella’s article.

We also reached out to Reed Smith, which sent us a detailed — and dignified — statement. Check it out, after the jump.

Here is Reed Smith’s official statement on the matter, submitted by a firm spokesperson:

Like every major law firm, Reed Smith is faced with a very difficult set of circumstances brought on by the global recession which has dramatically reduced the demand for legal services. This has resulted in layoffs, deferrals, fewer offers and now consideration about whether to have a 2010 Summer Program, and if so, at what size. Firms have taken a variety of approaches to handling the many issues raised by this environment. In all instances, Reed Smith has tried to make carefully considered business decisions and has communicated with the people affected by those decisions.

We have decided to maintain a 2010 Summer Program, although it will be a smaller program than in prior years. Because it will be a significantly smaller program, we decided to reduce the number of schools we will visit for on-campus interviews. We immediately and directly discussed our decision with all the law schools affected, including Fordham. We’ve indicated to them that while we won’t be coming on campus, we will still be considering students from their schools by reviewing resumes and conducting in-office interviews.

Fordham is an outstanding law school and we regret that our decision has caused problems for them. Reed Smith has many Fordham graduates in our lawyer ranks; all of them valued members of our team. We look forward to discussing this matter directly with Fordham and finding a way to continue our long and successful relationship with them.

Props to Reed Smith for this statement, which strikes us as a reasonable and restrained response to an admittedly awkward situation. We hope that the firm and Fordham can kiss and make up work out their differences.

If we hear anything more, we’ll update you.

Fordham bans Reed Smith [Legal Intelligencer]

Earlier: Fordham Law Lashes Out at Reed Smith Rudeness

Comments

avatar
1 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:43 AM

FIRSTTT!

avatar
2 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:43 AM

I suppose that I should know the answer to this, but is Fordham Law School accredited by the American Bar Association? A member in good standing of the Association of American Law Schools?

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:45 AM

not first.

avatar
4 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:46 AM

roflmao at fordham being called a 'great school'

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:47 AM

I think the larger point is that Reed Smith made its decision too late in the process, which is why they are being viewed as unprofessional. It doesn't matter how quickly they discussed the decision with the affected law schools.

6 Posted by Partner Emeritus | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:47 AM

Although not a peer firm, RS's statement should be applauded. I am disturbed that Fordham Law's dean would prefer that a firm conduct a sham OCI just to go through the motions. I have never been impressed by Fordham law grads so RS's firme non-grata status at Fordham's OCI won't be such a great loss.

avatar
7 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:48 AM

What's a Fordham?

avatar
8 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:49 AM

Dear Elie:

Please don't come back.

Thanks.

avatar
9 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:50 AM

ohhh yeah! this will lead to BLS taking over fordham's place as #3 in nyc!!!

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:52 AM

I think the Dean acted stupidly.

And he and the Reed Smith managing partner should go have a beer at the white house.

Death panels!!!

avatar
11 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:52 AM

Has the economy tanked so bad that Reed can't go through basic motions of professionalism and basic decency?

Instead of this whole mess, Reed Smith simply should have kept its promises, or not made them in the first place. All that requires is that they sacrifice a few billable hours by its interviewing attorneys after they'd already committed to doing an interview. Either bow out more timely, or follow through. Otherwise, the result is extreme rudeness, an insult to an entire school, and terrible PR. Their behavior in this case was despicable, and I applaud Fordham's dean for taking a stand.

avatar
12 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:52 AM

I don't think this is going to affect Read Schmidt much. Aren't they only based in Pennsylvania? I suspect their core recruiting efforts are focused at UPenn State. With it's 5 - 7 different campus locations (depending on what point in time you look at the state's take over of the State U. of Penn school system), there is already an abundance of schools/students from which this firm can recruit.

avatar
13 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:53 AM

2 is by far the worst schtick running on ATL. You constantly post a comment within minutes. How often do you hit refresh and what the hell do you do all day?

avatar
14 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:53 AM

The point is that RS could have just as easily made this decision in May (or January for that matter) but lodged its opposible digit in its nether orifice until August.

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:54 AM

Reed SmiTTTh thinks it can fix this situation with a short letter to ATL? Rofl. The firm showed 0 professionalism when it canceled interviews AFTER schedules were released yet ATL chooses to call the letter dignified? GTFO and STFU.

Reed Smith is an unprofessional shithouse.

avatar
16 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:54 AM

Riddle me this

If RS is still reviewing resumes and willing to do in office interviews why not go to OCI? That's either a nonsense answer or a lie.

The costs of going to Fordham from the NY office is a subway token, cab ride, or .31/mile by personal car. I still think the dean did the right thing.

-Not a Fordham student.

avatar
17 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:55 AM

10 for the win

avatar
18 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:55 AM

No ones cares what Fordham Law does. Please move on to a real story.

avatar
19 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:56 AM

While Reed Smith's decision was completely classless and unprofessional, do Fordham students really want to be limiting their employment opportunities?

avatar
20 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:56 AM

Reed Smith's cancellation is the penultimate example of poor taste and choosing the bottom line of profits over professionalism and keeping their word.

I hope the best candidates this year can see that and end up going elsewhere, leaving RS with their selective small class of utter douchebags that fit their slimeball mentality.

avatar
21 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:56 AM

FU Law = Stupidity. They are clearly still considering FU students so why the hostility. The market sucks, get over it. Maybe FU should consider lowering tuitions now that the jobs are drying up.

avatar
22 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:57 AM

Summer attire is horrific. I last wore Bermuda shorts in July 1978, when I reluctantly attended outdoor Captain & Tennille show in Newport.

http://twitter.com/PartnerEmeritus

avatar
23 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:57 AM

Is anyone else tiring of these MBA advertisements on ATL? I mean, I understand they need to sell space... but thanks to our pursuit of one type of useless graduate level education, most of us now will forever be CRUSHED by our debt load.
Now if we can just get that MBA...

avatar
24 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:57 AM

18

Considering this thread will end up having 200+ comments says otherwise.

avatar
25 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:58 AM

9- you mean Cardozo will take over Fordham's (nonsensical and inflated) #3 status.

avatar
26 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:58 AM

The TIMING is the issue, not the economic reality.

And no one is claiming that Fordham's ban will hurt Reed Smith - one school can't affect a firm (even if Columbia banned Reed Smith it wouldn't make much difference) - it's just a Dean sticking up for his students.

Fordham is a very good school, and will continue being so. Reed Smith is an okay law firm, and will continue (unless they follow Heller Ehrman) being so.

avatar
27 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:00 PM

Not sure who the bigger loser here is, which probably means that they both deserve each other

avatar
28 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:04 PM

Reed Smith blows chunks. That they think they can make up for this enormous faux pas by this pathetic excuse for an apology letter speaks to the enormity of their ego. Do they really think that because of the recession, they can forgo basic professionalism and good manners? Would it be THAT difficult to hop a cab over to the school and just take a day to give students some interview practice even if the firm ultimately doesn't hire anyone? Their hubris is astounding.

As to the claim that they'll do resume submissions and inhouse interviews, that's laughable. What a crock of shit.

avatar
29 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:04 PM

25- cardozo won't take over bls- what kind of law school closes its library on saturday? hth

avatar
30 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:07 PM

The Reed Smith response doesn't address the only issue that matters here: Students had to forego a choice on their OCI schedules because Reed Smith couldn't be bothered to come to a decision prior to participating in the opening stages of the OCI program at Fordham. Had they made a timely decision, none of this would matter. While polite, Reed Smith's response is a FAIL for not explaining why this decision couldn't have been made two months ago, rather than this week.

avatar
31 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:08 PM

Has the economy gotten so much worse in the last few weeks that this decision couldn't have been made and communicated in a more timely manner?

avatar
32 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:08 PM

28- maybe FU is being unprofessional? They are afterall blaming Reed Smith for the way they structure their own bidding process. Maybe if FU used a different system for interview slots there would have been no problem.

avatar
33 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:08 PM

Fordham the new bozo?

avatar
34 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:08 PM

Comment removed by moderator.

avatar
35 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:09 PM

Comment removed by moderator.

avatar
36 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:09 PM

Comment removed by moderator.

avatar
37 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:10 PM

In 20 years Fordham will be the best law school in New York City.

avatar
38 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:12 PM

37-
In 20 years Fordham will be the best law school in New York City after Columbia, NYU, BLS, and Cardozo

39 Posted by Partner Emeritus | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:14 PM

This comment is addressed to post no. 30.

Perhaps the reason the non-peer firm made the decision this week and not two months ago is due to the fact that they unreasonably relied on the false "green shoots" that the Obama administration was touting.

avatar
40 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:15 PM

37,

lets not go crazy... Fordham will never top Columbia or NYU, but it will be top 15. Its students are of higher quality than those at 15-20, so it should be there. It just gets lowered because of its facilities and other relatively meaningless categories. Rankings-wise, student body should account for 50%, job placement 30%, and then professors 20%.

avatar
41 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:15 PM

Morgan Lewis just announced it is getting rid of its London litigation practice. Partners are retiring but associates are all out on the streets.

avatar
42 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:17 PM

21 - You're an idiot. We're accepting resumes? Yeah, that means FU students are getting serious consideration. Moron.

-- Practicing Lawyer and Not an FU Grad or Reed Smith Reject, just a guy who thinks canceling interviews after students have already made their schedules is a profoundly shitty way to treat people

avatar
43 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:19 PM

BLS is a total shit hole. Sorry to burst your bubble but you're a real piece of work if you believe otherwise.

avatar
44 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:23 PM

39--

Is there anything that goes awry that can't be blamed on Obama?

avatar
45 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:24 PM

Fordham used to be a good school, but nowadays...not so much. It's gonna be run over by Cardozo in no time.

avatar
46 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:25 PM

Props to Treanor for doing this. If a student had canceled an interview after the deadline, it would be considered incredibly unprofessional, regardless of that student's personal achievement. The firm should be held to the same rules. And besides, a large size chunk of OCI interviews have always been set up by career planning, meaning the firms didn't want to meet with the students but are doing it anyway. There have always been phony OCI interivews, so the firm should keep their schedule, regardless.

As for everyone trying to disparage Fordham as not being as good as BLS and Cardozo, I'm sorry that your grades and LSATs weren't good enough for you to get into Fordham, but sour grapes really don't suit you

avatar
47 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:26 PM

46- feeling a little defensive are we? Maybe it's because you know all the Fordham haters are right.

avatar
48 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:29 PM

Is it just me, or does this make other people think that Reed Smith is in DEEP trouble? (Not that I want them to be, I have a good friend at the Philly office.)

49 Posted by Partner Emeritus | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:29 PM

This comment is addressed to post no. 44.

In the old Soviet Union, the elderly were sent on a freight train to Siberia to die. Obama now wants to borrow from a communist regime and create death panels that will decide whether it is cost efficient to provide healthcare to an ailing elder. I only hope that your grandparents don't have to go before a death panel and have their lives essentially terminated by communist bureaucrats.

avatar
50 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:29 PM

did PE just begin a Restatement 90 joke? I think I need to sit down...

avatar
51 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:31 PM

20 - if this is the penultimate example, what is the ultimate?

avatar
52 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:32 PM

YES to #5! If they are professional, they would have decided this PRIOR to receiving the schedule. Simple as that.

avatar
53 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:33 PM

PE, why aren't you on your bar trip yet? Skedaddle.

BTW, before Elie returns I have to say that having been lured to Dealbreaker a couple times by the one or two passing references to it in Lat's posts here, clearly, eggregious mistakes of spelling and usage among the sister blogs are not limited to Mr. Mystal. This does not excuse him, but it has tempered my fury.

avatar
54 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:33 PM

Fordham will never top Columbia or NYU but will always be the third best law school in New York City. The main reason is because its alumni network is much stronger than its mediocre USWNR ranking would suggest. Cardozo is impressive because it is so young but don't kid yourselves, it will never be viewed as superior to Fordham without massive changes at both places.

-Cardozo '04

avatar
55 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:34 PM

50

The subtleness of the reference is what makes it so great.

avatar
56 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:34 PM

PE- if you're quoting Sarah Palin, then you're really desperate to criticize Obama's plan. Personally, i'm against it and think it's the worst idea EVER. That being said, Sarah Palin in an imbecile, devoid of her own ideas as to how to campaign against the plan. She's just appealling to raw emotion and scare tactics. Further, comparing Nazi Germany tactics to an American political proposal (that at its core is being proposed to help citizens-even if it's poorly envisioned) is completely off-the-wall, outrageous, and unAmerican.

I expect more from you, PE.

avatar
57 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:34 PM

"Reed Smith's cancellation is the penultimate example of poor taste and choosing the bottom line of profits over professionalism and keeping their word. "
--so tell us, 20, what will the LAST example of poor taste etc. be, if this was the second-to-last one?

avatar
58 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:36 PM

50/55 = PE = Stop talking to yourself

avatar
59 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:36 PM

All they had to do was send an underused associate--and there are likely many of them as Reed Smith these days-- to Fordham for an afternoon, to indulge the OCS, the Dean, and the multitude of students who will interview but not find jobs this year. Instead they agreed to a date and backed out while the girl was already dressed and ready to go.

avatar
60 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:38 PM

2 is a laid-off junior associate from a "better" school who has nothing to do all day but post this idiotic schtick over and over again whenever an 'inferior' law school gets mentioned in a post. You have my pity, 2.

avatar
61 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:40 PM

While the situation is certainly less than ideal, I comment Reed for taking a stand. Financial restraints are hardly news to firms by now, and a decision not to recruit at certain schools could probably be made much sooner. Since there's not much work around these days, attorney time just got less valuable. And if the flight is too expensive, wasn't that so a few weeks ago. I wish more schools stood up to firms, forcing them to display the professionalism and planning that is/will be demanded of students throughout the recruiting process.

avatar
62 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:42 PM

@55

Clown boy, my prose is not even in the same realm as PE.

-55

avatar
63 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:43 PM

39, you are a douche with your "non-peer" firm references all the time. what the hell is a "peer" firm anyway. Your firm sucks probably.

avatar
64 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:43 PM

I think the entitlement of graduating law students and some law schools is absurd. If the firm really didn't think they would hiring anyone from Fordham absent some outstanding characteristic (that would show up in a resume and transcript review), they saved the students time to focus on firms that will be interested in their services and the hiring attorneys time to be billing clients and making revenue that may allow more hiring in the future. Law, and especially Big Law, may be guild, but it is the business aspects of the work that pay the bills and anything short of not showing up at the actually interview seems respectable to me.

avatar
65 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:44 PM

Comment removed by moderator.

avatar
66 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:46 PM

62- Go make friends and stop talking to yourself.

avatar
67 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:47 PM

63/65: PE's firm "sucks probably"? Well, I hope at least that it's a BIG probably!

avatar
68 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:47 PM

Slow day at ATL

avatar
69 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:50 PM

Lat: I dont think there's "differences" that "need to be worked out."

Firms should be held accountable if they want to avoid their obligations. Fordham's actions were fair and reasonable--and the Dean should be commended for advocating for his students.

avatar
70 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:50 PM

63, I don't think you get the point of PE.

avatar
71 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:51 PM

RS = no talent ass clowns

Way to go F.U.

avatar
72 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:53 PM

Kind of ironic that ReedSmith's slogan is "the business of relationships" when it royally fucked up its relationship with Fordham and its students.

avatar
73 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:54 PM

I feel the need, the need for Reed.


- Fordham Top Gunner

avatar
74 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:56 PM

@72 i dont think ReedSmith cares.

In this economy people from better law schools are still begging for jobs.

Fordham Law students stop whining!!!!!!!!!!

avatar
75 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:57 PM

So folks think RS should suck it up and sacrifice a few billable hours to maintain some professional respect. Reasonable position. But really, why do the students need to "win"? How much do students have invested in this? They have no entitlement to an interview. Their time is worth less. They spent maybe 20 minutes tweaking their docs to shoot to RS and fifteen other firms. Get over it whiners. Unless of course restatement 90 has a footnote about changing a cover letter being more than a peppercorn, or, uh, something.

avatar
76 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:58 PM

Bad move for both outfits - the bush league firms like Reed Smith need bush league law schools like Fordham, and vice versa.

avatar
77 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:04 PM

24 you better keep posting- we're still nowhere near your 200 projection- don't worry, I'll keep posting too

avatar
78 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:07 PM

Props to this firm for actually having the balls to use the term "layoffs." All these other crappy firms are saying crap like "reductions" and other bureaucratic euphemisms.

avatar
79 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:13 PM

Maybe Obama should invite them to the White House for a beer summit.

avatar
80 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:16 PM

78,

The connotation of a "layoff" is that the employee will be re-hired when there is more work:

Layoff: the act of dismissing employees, esp. temporarily.

Unless RS is planning on recalling its laid off employees, the term to use is "firings."

Yo, PE - hollaback, bro-seph!

avatar
81 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:21 PM

PE,
I think old people should be able to live as long as they want. But not on my dime. Too many mouths to feed and what return will we ever get from old people? They are obsolete. They can pay for their dotage.

avatar
82 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:25 PM

57- The award goes to Paul Hastings post uterine scraping stealth layoff.

83 Posted by Partner Emeritus | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:38 PM

This comment is addressed to post no. 81.

Your elders paved the way for you to prosper. There is a character who posts on this site, I believe a putative partner at the non-peer firm of Orrick, who claims folks like me are a barnacle on the PPP ship. Must I remind you that if it weren't for pioneers like me, there would be no PPP ship to begin with? Grow a shred of humanity and show some respect and compassion for your elders.

avatar
84 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:39 PM

13 - I suppose that I should know the answer to this, but did 2 attend a law school accredited by the American Bar Association? A member in good standing of the Association of American Law Schools?

I think the answer is NO

avatar
85 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:40 PM

PE,

"Firings" or "layoffs" - which would you use?

avatar
86 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:54 PM

number 49 - PE: PANTS ON FIRE

avatar
87 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:55 PM

My Tier 1 school forces every law firm that comes on campus to grant a few "lottery" interviews to students... aka you didn't make the cut, but they're forced to interview you anyway.

I had a ton of legit interviews, but two or three I knew I got only because of the lottery, had no chance of getting the job.

Within about 2 minutes it's readily apparent that they know your interview is a waste of time. I guess what I'm saying is that having sat through a sham interview or two, Reed Smith's decision seems fairly practical. Save everyone the grief.

avatar
88 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:56 PM

I notice that for all the flaming of 2, nobody has actually come out and said Fordham is accredited. Is it? And if so, by the American Bar Association or some other entity? It's impossible to keep track of all these new schools.

avatar
89 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:56 PM

For what it's worth, I had an on campus interview with a guy from Reed Smith at a NYC law school in 2003 or 2004 and he was a complete clod. I walked into the interview room and he was looking at my transcript, and literally before I even said hello he said, "well, you've got a few A's here so I see you managed to convince at least a few people you're not stupid." I have no idea what he meant but it sounded maybe a little mysogynistic (i.e., does he assume all young women are stupid until they prove to him otherwise?). Even if the guy didn't have odious views about women, it was a bizarre thing to say. It made me uncomfortable to think I was sitting down to an interview with someone who was assuming I was "stupid" (why bother wasting our time then?), and it also made me think there was no way I'd want to work with some cretin who just says whatever pops into his mind without any regard for whether or not it makes him look antisocial. There are a lot of people like that in our profession but why send *them* to do the interviews?

avatar
90 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:59 PM

54 gets serious props for honesty and forthrightness. ATL comment threads need more posts like yours.

Not 54.

avatar
91 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:01 PM

89 - because noone wants them in the office, and sending them to court or to talk with clients is much, much worse.

avatar
92 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:03 PM

seriously, who cares this much about what's going on with OCI at Fordham Law?

avatar
93 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:04 PM

87, and those attorneys who made it clear that your interview was a shame acted unprofessional. It is their duty to not make their interviewee feel foolish and unwanted. How hard is it to feign interest for 20-30 minutes? Lets exercise a little more respect for our fellow man/woman.

The reason the lottery system exists is because there are students who, for whatever reason (low GPA) wouldn't be the firm's top choice to interview at a particular school, but may have other things going for them that would interest the firm. The fact that some of them will be given Summer offers throughout this month at schools across the country doing OCI shows that all firms should at least give them the time of day. One's GPA is not necessarily a great indicator of how well one will do as an attorney, and interviews let other things shine through.

avatar
94 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:10 PM

89, it's not worth anything but thanks for playing. Glad to see you've let it go 6 years later.

avatar
95 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:14 PM

93.... yes, like big ta-ta's.

avatar
96 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:19 PM

MEMO TO REED SMITH:

No one from Harvard, NYU, Columbia etc wants to work at your firm -- You are lucky to get even Fordham students.

Canceling them was a bad idea.

NYU "06

avatar
97 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:26 PM

12 -

I had no idea UPenn was a state school.

How many campuses do they actually have? Is it set up like Rutgers??

avatar
98 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:27 PM

My own opinion is that this is less reflective of RS' "professionalism" than it is their managerial competence. I don't think that it's going out on a limb to suggest that law firms have been aware of the the, ummm, problems, with the economy for more than a few weeks now.

Are they really suggesting that it was only at the last minute that they figured out something needed to be done? Are they that poor planners? Either their recruiting department completely dropped the ball, or management is not competent enough to see more than a month ahead of time. Either way, FAIL.

avatar
99 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:29 PM

81, if you want to taunt PE for our entertainment purposes, come up with something more clever than calling him an "old man."

avatar
100 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:31 PM

PE,

I am disappointed that you consistently resort to political cheapshots - predictable ones at that. Every accomplished lawyer knows that a professional keeps his political opinions to himself.

Someone as well-seasoned as yourself should know that.

avatar
101 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:31 PM

fordham has a law school? wtf does anyone care it?
-hls2L-to-be

avatar
102 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:33 PM

you people who 1) think upenn is a state school and 2) never heard of fordham must be aliens. do some research about the country's schools before deciding to get a degree here, next time

avatar
103 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:34 PM

102- lighten up.

avatar
104 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:36 PM

102 - i know what upenn is, i am ivy. heard of fordham. didn't know it had a law school. sorry 102 but didn't dip into the third/fourth tier when applying to law school. -hls2l-to-be

avatar
105 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:38 PM

102, I'm not familiar with Fordham, but I don't keep up on every new law school opening. Wasn't it one of the ones formed shortly after the dot com bust?

avatar
106 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:40 PM

hey fordham dude, i mean 102, why don't you crack a 140lsat/2.5gpa before deciding to opine on what harvard kids should research?

avatar
107 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:41 PM

105, think it is a religious school in westchester

avatar
108 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:43 PM

107 - Jesuit and midtown East

avatar
109 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:46 PM

Yes 106, Fordham students have sub 140 lsat scores. Correct.

avatar
110 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:49 PM

105, you, sir, are funny, laughed out loud

avatar
111 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:51 PM

103-106 = pwned. Clearly you all took the bait of an obvious flame.

avatar
112 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:53 PM

111: correct, hls losers have been the best source of entertainment during my summer

avatar
113 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:58 PM

I would not want to waste my time 1)interviewing with a firm that was not going to hire me and 2) going on a date with someone not interested in me (see #59).

The firm could have sent someone over to hold "mock" interviews, but why get everyone's hopes up?

I think the firm was just being honest. And, maybe they did not know how slim the 2010 class would be until shortly before they cancelled.

This is just another example of the sense of entitlement that Gen Y suffers from.

avatar
114 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:58 PM

112: TTT grads getting fired has been mine
-hls2l-tobe

avatar
115 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:05 PM

I would not want to waste my time 1)interviewing with a firm that was not going to hire me and 2) going on a date with someone not interested in me (see #59).

The firm could have sent someone over to hold "mock" interviews, but why get everyone's hopes up?

I think the firm was just being honest. And, maybe they did not know how slim the 2010 class would be until shortly before they cancelled.

This is just another example of the sense of entitlement that Gen Y suffers from.

avatar
116 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:11 PM

99,
I didn't call PE "an old man." But I do take issue with his support of subsidized health care for impecunious geriatrics. They have had seven or more decades to save up. They should not pass the bill to our children's generation. It is unconscionable. PE is obviously a big government socialist masquerading as a Reagan Republican.

And your "entertainment purposes" are of no interest to me.

- 81

avatar
117 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:12 PM

"This is just another example of the sense of entitlement that Gen Y suffers from."

I think that's unfair, no Fordham law student could logically feel any sense of "entitlement" to anything except a job digging a ditch near Bushwood Country Club.

avatar
118 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:20 PM

54- you're a turncoat. Probably just bitter because you got laid off and no firm will hire you because you're a shitty lawyer.

avatar
119 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:23 PM

http://law.fordham.edu/

It exists. To all you tools/trolls - it might not be respected, but it exists.

avatar
120 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:24 PM

Has FU's status ever really been in question? Big law jobs = prestige.
Corporate finance in Des Moises doesn't count.
Is this nonsense about cardozo religiously motivated? Jews vs Jesuits?

avatar
121 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:37 PM

119, fine it exists. But is it accredited by the ABA? I mean, http://www.peoplescollegeoflaw.edu/ exists too and it's not accredited by the ABA. Why does nobody know Fordham's ABA status?

-- 2.

avatar
122 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:42 PM

get real people. it's a decent school, maybe above average. If I interviewed I'd take a Fordham valedictorian over someone at the bottom of his HLS class on most days

avatar
123 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:52 PM

89,

This is pretty typical of the kind of lawyer they have over at Reed Smith. Total inferiority complex because they want to go up to second tier, but with all the anger and arrogance of a tier 1 firm. Anyone else care to comment about the firm attitude? I speak from experience at the LA branch, that group of litigators is insufferable.

avatar
124 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:53 PM

89,

This is pretty typical of the kind of lawyer they have over at Reed Smith. Total inferiority complex because they want to go up to second tier, but with all the anger and arrogance of a tier 1 firm. Anyone else care to comment about the firm attitude? I speak from experience at the LA branch, that group of litigators is insufferable.

avatar
125 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:59 PM

57- The award goes to Paul Hastings post uterine scraping stealth layoff.

avatar
126 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:02 PM

121 clearly was not accepted to any ABA accredited law school

avatar
127 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:08 PM

126 doesn't know whether or not Fordham is accredited by the ABA, but is too shy to admit it. It's okay 126-- it's an obscure school, they probably aren't sure themselves.

avatar
128 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:13 PM

I can't believe there are people who don't know that UPenn is a state school.

It's part of the University of Pennsylvania State public school system. I know the mother campus is at University Park somewhere near Harrisburg. There are at least 3 or 4 law schools, the most prominent of which is located on the Philadelphia campus (or UPenn for short). I believe Dickinson, Happy Valley and Widener campuses also have law schools.

I know, I know. I was surprised, too, that Penn State has a highly ranked law school. But then again, with Joe Pa, all things are possible.

Also, I'm not positive, but I think the only law schools in Pennsylvania belong to UPenn State. So maybe I shouldn't be posting this last part, as it is unverified.

avatar
129 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:14 PM

127: listen, you troll. to apply for law school, you need to register with the LSDAS which has a complete database of all the accredited schools. i guess you didn't need to do that for non-accredited alma mater, "peoples college of law."

avatar
130 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:19 PM

128: you are a fool. there is UPenn and Penn State. UPenn is an ivy. Penn State is the state school with all the satellites. you could have easily cured your ignorance by doing a simple goggle search.

avatar
131 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:21 PM

UPenn has a law school but not Fordham? I am lost.

avatar
132 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:23 PM

129, I graduated from an ABA-accredited law school years ago and therefore no longer have access to that list. Could you check it and see if Fordham is on there? I feel that could clear up this matter very quickly. Thanks.

avatar
133 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:25 PM

UPenn grad here- I love the UPenn State schtick. To UPenn grads falling for it, you're embarrassing the rest of us, but it makes for funny reading.

avatar
134 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:25 PM

130 - do you suggest using beer goggles for the search? And which campus should we start with?

avatar
135 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:29 PM

132, You graduated from an ABA school "years ago?" You sound like you should be searching for a job, instead of checking accreditation.

avatar
136 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:29 PM

Given Reed SmiTTTh's track record of breaking promises, I'm sure more schools will be omitted from their OCI at the last minute.

avatar
137 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:33 PM

You are mostly idiots. This situation is being handled well by both parties. The Dean sent a message to the students that he had their back while sending a message to other firms not to try this crap on his watch. The firm offered a non admission- admission that the mistake was on their part. The firm applauded the law school and sought to make amends. Now the law school has sent its message loud and clear, and both parties have managed to save face. Tommorrow can be a new day. This is a political situation that is being well played by all parties involved. (Except the initial cancellation which might have been required due to reasons that we are unaware of.)

avatar
138 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:33 PM

132, I still have an abstract interest in legal education. Obviously, I'm not going back for a second JD any time soon. And, believe it or not, when you have a real job you can still use the internet for personal use. You may learn this when you graduate from the fryalator. After all these posts, nobody has verified that Fordham is ABA accredited, so I guess it's not.

avatar
139 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:34 PM

"We immediately and directly discussed our decision with all the law schools affected, including Fordham. We've indicated to them that while we won't be coming on campus, we will still be considering students from their schools by reviewing resumes and conducting in-office interviews."

Other schools? Which ones?

avatar
140 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:37 PM

24- Don't give up- let's keep posting- we'll get to 200- we can do this- I know it !

avatar
141 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:37 PM

FORDHAM HAS A LAW SCHOOL AND IT IS ACCREDITED BY THE ABA JUST BECAUSE FULS GRADS RARELY GET BIGLAW JOBS DOES NOT THEREFORE MEAN THAT THE SCHOOL DOESN'T EXIST

avatar
142 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:39 PM

141-- [CITATION NEEDED]. Okay, so there's a Fordham Law School, but is it accredited by the ABA? Where's the cite?

avatar
143 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:46 PM

Hey PE-

I've always wondered. How did you find enough time off from being a BigLaw pardner to play the President of the United States in A Clear and Present Danger? Great flik, btw. You were very convincing in that role. But, were you maddened to discover in the script that you had to get a good old telling off from dreamy Harrison Ford? Man, he made you look baaaaaaaaad.

http://www.videodetective.com/photos/125/00525304_.jpg

avatar
144 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:47 PM

I have known many Fordham people over the years. 2 stand out, one at S&C and another at Wachtel (I believe he is now a partner now, but I may be mistaken). When the dust settles (and the economy improves), what RS did won't be forgotten by potential recruits - not only by Fordham students, but by all. It is a reflection of the Firm's health (in this case I imagine of the NY office). And, no I did not go to Fordham.

avatar
145 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:50 PM

http://www.abanet.org/legaled/approvedlawschools/alpha.html

avatar
146 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:54 PM

145, great, thank you! But is it a member in good standing with the Association of American Law Schools?

avatar
147 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:57 PM

146- good question. Not sure . . .

avatar
148 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:57 PM

Where is a retired basketball star when you need one? I really need to know what the status of this seagoing vessel is...

avatar
149 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 5:01 PM

For God's sake, BIGLAW, suspend all Summer Programs....immediately. I mean, really.

avatar
150 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 5:06 PM

Let's digress. Can someone please tell me what "Owner's usual liability insurance" means as used in paragraph 11.2.1 of AIA A201 2007?

avatar
151 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 5:14 PM

fordham dean didn'TTT even attend fordham

avatar
152 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 5:17 PM

151- no, he attended Yale. What's your point?

avatar
153 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 5:33 PM

138: yes, i am a summer, but what type of "real job" gives you enough time to make phony inquires about fordham's accreditation all day?

avatar
154 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 5:51 PM

thank you, 133

avatar
155 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 6:00 PM

153, part of any attorney's job is recruiting for the firm. Familiarizing myself with the more obscure law schools, such as Fordham, is part of that. Obviously, knowing whether or not the school is accredited by the ABA and a member in good standing of the AALS is an important part of that.

avatar
156 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 6:01 PM

A "reasonable and restrained response" it may be, but it doesn't actually address any of Dean Treanor's criticisms. The Reed Smith message can be distilled down to "Yes, we cancelled interviews at Fordham. We hope Treanor will rescind his ban." Pointless.

avatar
157 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 6:04 PM

155, to think that fordham is obscure, your firm is either obscure or non-existent

avatar
158 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 7:16 PM

so is fordham accreditttttttttttttttted

avatar
159 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 7:56 PM

Surprised that no one has mentioned how Fordham recently tanked in the USNWR rankings.

They are tied with Alabama School of Law. I wonder if RS is interviewing Crimson Tide students....

avatar
160 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:01 PM

No firm cares that they cannot recruit through OCI. Firms get more than enough resumes through direct submission. Usually, a law firm takes students from a school like Fordham because of a few alums that push for their school. Those same alums will now just get more of the same letters. Dear class of 72, I am class of 2011, can you please help out a fellow Ram?

avatar
161 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:29 PM

161st through 163rd!

avatar
162 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:29 PM

161st through 163rd!

avatar
163 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:30 PM

161st through 163rd!

avatar
164 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, August 13, 2009 10:24 PM

Why even cover a post about Reed Smith? A small-time frozen salary Pittsburgh firm?

avatar
165 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, August 14, 2009 12:05 AM

Why would anyone want to interview with a firm that is not hiring 2Ls? Seems ludicrous to complain about cancelled on-campus recruiting if they are not hiring - do 2Ls at Fordham purposely seek to waste their own time?

avatar
166 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, August 14, 2009 12:16 AM

157, as noted, it's impossible to keep up with all the new third tier schools. I hope to have them all memorized someday.

avatar
167 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, August 14, 2009 12:30 PM

Well at least I finally have heard of Reed Smith, not that I had really heard of Fordham - But there stock has risen in my book.

avatar
168 Posted by guest | Permalink Saturday, August 15, 2009 1:47 AM

reed smith is going to lose absolutely nothing. this is very much a buyer's market, and even when the economy returns, i seriously doubt firms are ever going to be as enthusiastic again about hiring so many junior associates straight out of law school. junior associates rarely can add any value to clients, and increasingly, clients are refusing to pay for having them staffed on projects. if i were reed smith, i'd worry less about my image with the dean and students at fordham law and more about how clients are viewing continued efforts to hire junior lawyers who will be paid mid- six figures and billed out at $300+ per hour. as a reed smith client, the continued committment to significantly useless overhead, which adds to the bills my company has to pay for legal services, is very frustrating.

avatar
169 Posted by guest | Permalink Sunday, August 16, 2009 1:57 AM

Is Reed Smith still recruiting at Yeshiva and Brooklyn law?

Is there another reason fordham got dumped?

Why did Treanor over react?

Will 20 percent of 2ls at fordham get placed in oci?

avatar
170 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, August 18, 2009 12:35 AM

Reed Smith is a sorry excuse for a firm. These firms, like RS, make these decisions, as well as decisions to get rid of people, entirely at their convenience, assuming there will be no consequences whatsoever. Well, bravo Dean Treanor! Your gutsy action has reminded shitty firms like RS that there are real world consequences to the decisions they make which effect human beings.

Post Your Comment