Apparently, people who summered at Mayer Brown in 2009 and received an offer are still waiting to hear whether they will be able to start work in a timely manner.
Two former MB summer associates and current NYU Law students decided to take matters into their own hands. They sent out an email to everybody in Mayer Brown’s 2009 summer class. The students hoped to put grassroots pressure on Mayer Brown. I’ve redacted the students’ real names.
Hello Mayer Brown Class of 2010,
You know [Rosencrantz] if you were in New York, and [Guildenstern] if you were in Chicago. We are writing because Mayer Brown has kept us all in the dark about our futures. Their delay in formally announcing any of the plans for our class is unique among top law firms — in their total lack of official communication regarding our start dates, stipend, and health insurance over the coming year, they truly stand alone.
This letter is a call to concerted action in order to require Mayer Brown to make formal announcements regarding our future. We urge that each Mayer Brown 2009 Summer Associate ask their Law School’s Office of Career Services to call Mayer Brown and request the immediate formal announcement of the terms of our offers.
The rest of this call to action, after the jump.
The Assistant Dean at NYU School of Law will be calling Mayer Brown on our behalf this week. In fact, our Law School’s Office of Career Services encouraged us to reach out to you in this capacity. Keep in mind that our Law Schools have a lot of leverage in their dealings with law firms. Just last fall, several major firms were threatening to go outside the NALP hiring guidelines and a couple of calls from Law Schools quashed their plans. The sooner Mayer Brown announces the details of our offers, the more likely those offers will be favorable to us.
We understand there are about 40 people on this email, but we do ask that each individual “reply to all” once you have obtained agreement from your Law School to call Mayer Brown. Thank you very much for your consideration and we hope that you are as ready for real information as we are. We stress that if we all act together, the likelihood for our efforts to achieve our desired result — formal announcement regarding our futures, with a competitive package — is significantly higher.
Feel free to use this list to discuss other important information regarding our class, but please remember to keep it 100% professional.
Sincerely,
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern
J.D. Candidates 2010
NYU School of Law
Oh dear. Haven’t these guys ever heard of the collective action problem?
One tipster gives us a little background on the revolutionary summer associates:
A few things need to be pointed out, in addition to the ridiculous tone and content of the email.
– multiple people on the email list did not even receive an offer
– one of the original senders tried to get the summer class to help him write a sitcom about their experiences (he also allegedly took a half day the day Michael Jackson died because he was grieving)
I see some real potential for total craziness here.
About two hours after the initial call to action, the students were playing defense:
I have gotten some panic phone calls and fearful concerns by email, so let me break it down to you all this way:
(1) Fear not; we will all be lawyers and will be fine with or without mayer brown, but trust me they won’t do anything bad to you because your school called them, or they will end up ALL OVER THE NEWS!
(2) NO OTHER FIRM so far has deferred people for a year without a stipend included!!
(3) Mayer Brown profits per partner only dropped 4% last year, so please don’t feel sorry for them, they have the money to give us!!!
I’m just saying this to ease the unbelievable concerns that have been expressed to me. Come on folks, it’s not like you haven’t just spent 20+ years of your life in school, and don’t deserve this. You deserve this and more, but at the minimum you deserve an official statement from MB about your future, and thats all we’re really asking for at this time. If they decide to defer us without a stipend, or rescind our offers because we asked a question that they didn’t need to wait for us to ask; I personally will spend the next year being a Public Relations Disaster for MB and all the Decision Making Partners. How’s that for motivation???
Rosencrantz
Yes, your public relations disaster skills are strong.
The other summer associate organizer also added some clarification:
One final note of clarification – nobody, at any point, will be speaking on behalf of anybody else. We tried to make that clear in our initial email. All we were doing was planting a seed – “Hey, if you want information, your school will probably be happy to help you out and call the firm. If you are uncomfortable with that, at the very least, you now know that there are a lot of other people going through the same thing as you.”
Please rest 100% assured, at no point is anybody going to claim to speak on behalf of anybody else. Thanks again, and our apologies for any confusion on that point.
Guildenstern
The best part of the story is how this mini-rebellion ended. By 5:00 p.m. yesterday, the original rabble-rousers were brought to heel:
Hi Folks,
I just wanted to let everyone know that you can now cease contacting your Career Services Office and/or Mayer Brown. I just received a phone call from partners at Mayer Brown informing me that decisions are being made as we speak, and we will be informed of the decisions in a timely manner. That said, it would be nice of you to ease Mayer Brown’s workload by not initiating any further inquiries at this time. Thanks a lot.
Rosencrantz
I would have loved to have been on that phone call.
Do you think this stunt will make these two guys popular with their new colleagues? Perhaps, but Mayer Brown management will surely remember these guys, and not favorably. They’ll probably be trusted as adders fanged.
First to say this is going to end poorly for Rosencrantz & Co.
Bizarre.
And on another note, MB is not the only firm not yet having announced start dates.
“Hey guys, let’s unionize!”
Another prospective hire properly realized that if he throws these two morons under the bus, his odds of getting a start date might go up. Those two are idiots not to see that. Hope they aren’t hoping to be corp attys.
We want names, for the lawlz.
This is hilarious! I have been waiting for another “Quinn Emmanuel repurpose the Redskins” story for a long time. It looks like we may have another winner on our hands!
On a serious note, what sheer arrogance and ignorance on the part of Rosencrantz & Co. a “public relations disaster”? Um, pssst, I am going to let you in on a little secret – unemployment is at 11% right now. Do you really think America is going to care that a bunch of whiney babies can’t start their six figure jobs?
The sheer stupidity of sending out that email should get them fired. PLEASE…..when this happens, will someone let us know?
These two did nothing wrong. Their classmates are bunch of scared pussies.
Currently taking bets on the lenght of the two idiots’ tenures at MB. Current over/under at 18 months.
This is so funny! Great post Elie.
MB should make each nyu offeree certify whether they sent the letter. They can’t lie about it – ethics issue and grounds for subsequent termination. Mb should then rescind offers for such lack of loyalty, poor judgment and general stupidity.
NAMES!
yeah, MB is not at all “unique” among the “top firms” (however you define that) in this regard.
prediction: the firm will soon report that it will be deferring approximately 38 of its summers and compensating them with the money they plan to save by revoking offers from two of their colleagues.
Why would ANY company hire an employee (and get over yourselves, you half wits, you half-wits, you are EMPLOYEES, not partners, not owners, not tenured, etc) who threatens them before they even start?
6: I’ll go one better – I am going to bet those two idiots will somehow “mysteriously” get their offers rescinded and never work a day at MB.
Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are SO DEAD
Douchebags. Acting entitled to a job in which one has no entitlement is the height of arrogance. Moreover, the fact that they thought the best solution would be to badmouth the firm to every career services office they could demonstrates a seriously poor choice. And now, having brought terrible PR unto the firm – bad PR that will forever live in google – is grounds to rescind their offers.
Jesus, right here: “Mayer Brown profits per partner only dropped 4% last year, so please don’t feel sorry for them, they have the money to give us!!!”
So give us your money now, law firm partners, you don’t need it!
The only possible pr disaster is if MB does not rescind offers to these idiots. As a corporate client I will lose immense respect if the firm let’s future associates behave in such a self-entitled fashion, with no repurcussions. To cite the 4% decline in PPP as a reason that they deserve to get paid is idiotic. MB is a firm, not a soup kitchen.
MB – no-offer these two traitors. Cheaper to do it now than after they have been on the job screwing up for a year. These two have NO judgment, and no professional discretion. Who the hell has their law school complain on their behalf, and then sends followup emails that denigrate the future employer?
MOAR NAMES!!!
i agree with the majority of the above that this arises out of the entitlement of law students. talk to them 3 months in and ask them how much sway they have.
Heck of a job, Mayer Brownie!
R & G’s mistake was in the paper trail. Phones, you Gen Y shitbirds.
6 – I’ll take the under – by minus 18 months – and retire on that bet.
Lol. Biggest nail in their coffin is that these two idiots claim they wrote the email at the advice of nyu career services. Any law student who actually listens to their OCS have got to be idiots. I also like the statement to “keep it 100% professional,” as contrasted with the follow up email explaining how rich MB partners are and that they can afford to buy off the deferred summers. I pity the fools… Not really.
I think the funniest thing about this post is that these two idiots think that their law school placement offices have ANY power over anything.
If you don’t tell Mr. Cry Baby right now that he has a job, you shan’t ever set foot in our law school again!
oh yea, I can see that happening
how long before the entire OCI system is in the toliet and firms just start hiring like every other company in the world. Who needs to jump through those (OCI) hoops anymore? Not with the economy the way it is and the number of EXPERIENCE lawyers out there who need jobs.
but I guess a 24 year fresh out of law school with zero work experience would have a lot to offer a firm…those partners better beg those students to come to work right away! They have spent the past 20+ years in school! And that is not even counting the years they spent in pre-school!
In order to avoid a certain PR disaster the likes of which they have never seenm, MB also better give each and every inexperienced, fresh out of law school, 20-something a signing bonus and a 2010 BMW. Wait, the 2011s will be out next month………better wait for those
NYU looks pretty bad here too. Well played, morons. Not like they even had other options. Waiting sucks, but just accept that as your current lot.
These poor clowns are in for an awful weekend of misery, shame, and regret.
If you went to mayer Brown from NYU, you already failed.
I’m sure MB will be duly impressed by the spunk and tenacity of these two go-getters. What a great way to end the week. Any choices for a last meal?
Reminds me of this discussion:
http://volokh.com/2009/12/22/han-solo-and-the-economics-of-rebellion-against-repressive-regimes/
Ah the folly of youth…while it sucks to have to wait to hear news on one’s future, that is just what any smart prospective associate would do – maybe a discreet call to the law firm recruiting department to check on one’s status is accepted practice, but even that should be done very gingerly. It is apparent these two committed career suicide before their careers even began. The only thing they did was make it easier for the hiring committee to figure out who they need to put at the top of the rescinded offer list. This is the worst legal recession in our lifetimes and as a result it is a buyer’s market out there. Idiots.
Let’s see…..do I want to still hire these guys and deal with the “PR nightmare” threat the next time there’s to be a salary freeze, bonus cuts, etc…Hmmmm…tough question…..
Now, I know you don’t have much time to watch TV news/read the papers, etc. when you are in law school, but what news organization on this planet would report this as news?
“1) Fear not; we will all be lawyers and will be fine with or without mayer brown, but trust me they won’t do anything bad to you because your school called them, or they will end up ALL OVER THE NEWS!”
Is there some news channel achored by OCS employees that I am not aware of?
Decisions are being made this week. Here’s a guess as to what the decisions will be:
“After revoking the offers given to Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, and all those dumb enough to follow their instructions, we’ve realized that we can afford to start the remainder of the 2009 summer class on time!”
CHECK YOU PR NIGHTMARE
No one is speaking for anyone else? Grow some and don’t hide behind career services’ skirts.
Do you know who I am? Clearly you have no idea who you are dealing with. I didn’t spend 20 years in school for nothing, and I will not be pushed around. Let’s just say you will be receiving a call from one of my… my Assistant Deans. That’s right. Squirm. That’s what uou get for trying to keep the self-entitled-little-guy-who-demands160K-per-year down! Let that be a lesson to you. That’s the last time Mayer Brown will mess with a third year law student.
I have a guess that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern read ATL (or will hear about this blog from a classmate). This message is directed to R & G.
R & G:
PLEASE (please please please) write to ATL (either directly or through this comment section) and tell the rest of us……………WHAT WERE YOU THINKING????
Seriously, do you think anyone at your law school has any pull at any firm?
Please, I would love to know your mindset.
The insane facinate me.
I get the sense that guildenstern just went along for the ride, and probably hates himself right now… But not as much as he hates rosencrantz. Unfortunately, guilt by association is justified when it comes to matters of poor professional judgment. Finished. Right now somone in OCS at NYU is backpedaling saying “when I said to involve the rest of the class I didn’t mean to put it in writing, in an idiotic email!”. Bet the dean is almost as mad at these morons as the MB hiring partners in NY and CHI.
“All over the news” meant all over ATL, obviously. Only problem is that all the ATL support is on Mayer Brown’s side.
Is ATL back? This is hiarious.
How to leverage a law firm:
1. Get alternate opportunity in hand that you actually wouldn’t mind taking instead
2. Politely explain to law firm that you really want to work with them, but need to know what is going on soon as you have a decision to make
3. Hope that law firm wants you enough to actually do something about it
4. Do all this in an economy where there is not a glut of fresh talent on the market
How not to leverage a law firm:
1. Write a whiny email to your classmates threatening the law firm with some unspecified future action that will damage the law firm unless it buckles to your demands, and encouraging said classmates to join in a crusade against the law firm
2. Have that email leaked and published on ATL
Elie, feel free to have these two contact me and I’ll help them adjust to life as an unemployed NYU grad.
CHECK YOU GUILDENSTERN
I am sorely disappointed by the lack of scoop here from R&G’s classmates. Are they on spring break?
Why do they think MB is the only firm that hasn’t given firm start dates or stipend information? Willkie implied Fall 2010 start dates but nothing has been confirmed. Skadden hasn’t said anything about stipends, even though they’re deferred for a year. And I don’t think any firm has given *actual* start dates.
These two KIDS are pathetic. “I’m gonna get my big bad career services to make my future potential [sic] employer to divulge the terms of my offer.” Can you imagine how big of spineless twits these kids are?!?!? The snobbery and entitlement here is outrageous. I would rescind their offers immediately, and then blacklist them from ever being hired by anyone.
Oh, please (please!) keep us updated if you hear anything more from/about these twits. Great story ATL!
MAYER BROWN, I CRY FOR YOU… YOUR DOWNTOWN BROWN NOW MAKES ME BLUE. ALL OUR DREAMS YOUR SCORN DEVOUR, SWALLOWED BY YOUR WINSOME POWER. OUR SUMMER LOVE YOU GROUND TO DUST, BROKEN LIKE OUR EARNEST TRUST.
Kash was secretly “dating” one of them (it’s NYU after all) and told that person it was a good idea to send this e-mail, all with the sole intent to create a hilarious ATL story. Very stealth Kash.
Isn’t this activity protected by Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act? If so, they may have bought themselves some job security. It would be an 8(a)(1) & (3) Unfair Labor Practice to take adverse employment action against these brave lads. Just saying.
45 – the NLRA excludes from coverage supervisors, security personnel and douchebags. These two fall under the last exclusion.
This is hilarious. I think their plan may have backfired a bit. Such morons – enjoy your permanent deferral.
those NYU students are clueless, but the person who leaked this to ATL is an ass.
wow. these kids really have no clue.
a brief, polite and courteous email to someone at the firm who they’re close with (perhaps a mentor from the summer program) would have sufficed.
instead, they’ve demonstrated their total lack of professionalism and judgment. nice job.
There is nothing wrong with what these students did although the clueless Irene Dorzbeck should have been able to predict that this would happen. As to the poster on this blog, for a bunch of left-wing nuts, you are a bunch of corporate sellouts. It’s amazing how many liberal brow nosers claim to want to “do good” but really are just corporate lackeys.
50 = racist
@50: Brow noser? Kinky.
maybe they should have had their mommy’s call?
Hey Elie – Can we get a post about which firms have yet to tell their 2009 summer class info about start dates, deferrals, stipends and health insurance.
I agree with 48. Beyond R&G absolutely sucking at life (read a fortune cookie: “good things comes to those that wait”), the turncoat that leaked the story definitely deserves a beatdown from the other members of the summer group. So much for any type of trust within a law firm, the newbies are some of the biggest gossipers ever (remember “Swine Flu” boy this summer?). The fresh blood is either completely cutthroat or so idiotic that they think reporting to ATL isn’t going to make their whole firm look stupid. Mayer Brown summer class 2009 FTW…
You people are all wrong. Any summer associate who can take a half day off to mourn the passing of Michael Jackson on the day he died – even though he wasn’t accounced dead until approximately 6:30 PM Eastern time is obviously a clairvoyant who needs to be added to the payroll immediately, if not sooner.
Although, arguably, he should have put those skills to use to determine when his start date would be…
When should I expect to hear about a start date if I am not deferred (yet!)? Does anyone have a start date yet?
4 is right. But so is 5. And 48 is right on the money.
Why does this make Mayer Brown look stupid? (Maybe if they don’t fire R & G).
I am not sure that imploring non-employee/non-bargaining-unit careers services offices falls within protected concerted activity under the NLRA.
Beyond NLRA issues, politely questioning the firm on when it will have the desired information=OKAY.
Poking the firm in the eye in the process=POOR JUDGMENT.
I’m pretty sure I know the guy who wrote this email… sadly, a bad reflection on NYU Law
These guys are bad apples that are spoiling the whole crop of new associates. Emails like this just give the partners who control our collective futures even more moral authority to dump allegedly entitled new hires. They should have gotten the memo that the class of ‘09 isn’t the class of ‘06.
In defense of Mayer Brown’s future class, there were people included on the email who were not given offers (because R&G are obviously morons).
In any event, someone with sour grapes at getting no-offered may have forwarded this on in.
Stupid move, but hopefully it leads to some start dates at biglaw.
23 is probably inadvertently correct. Remember, these are the people who gave Lady Godiva an offer, when he made a fool of the firm in front of professional colleagues.
Also agreed with 63; in all likelihood a no-offer who got the email sent it. Regardless, whoever sent it is a dick.
Why the name choices? If you were trying to be clever, you should have realized that the Shakespeare characters were unquestioningly pro-establishment, while these guys seem to have taken the opposite tack. CHECK YOU SHAKESPEARE!
Agree with 48.
As much as I love this shit because it gives me a giggle while at work; distributing this email to ATL is heartless. You’ve effectively ruined the next three years of his life, if not his career; just for a laugh. Part of me understands why you published it (I did refresh the comments several times); part of me marvels at how shallow and insensitive it is. The kid acted foolishly. He sent a dumb email. We all do from time to time. He later retracted it. What should be merely embarrassing is now life-altering. Poor form – egregiously so on the tipster’s part, but also on ATL’s part.
66 – i love you
67 – apart from the unexceptional insight that actions have consequences, these law students need to appreciate the pros and cons of leaving a paper trail. in obama’s words, this is a teachable moment.
66 – Because they are dead. CHECK YOU MOVIE KNOWLEDGE
67 – It’s clear from the post that MB already knew who these students were. They ruined their own futures at the firm. Nobody has outted them here.
Stop the melodrama.
68 – A/S/L?
Agree with 66. Also, R&G were carrying a message to have Hamlet killed, and are most closely analogized to the firm’s hiring partners who are waiting to give the recruiting department (England) the go ahead to axe the associates.
NYU and the other schools are being asked to step in as the pirates. Yeah, that’s right, Hamlet has freaking pirates.
Common sense was definitely lacking.
The NYU career center should have contacted other career centers directly instead of advicing students to do so. Again Irene Dorzbeck is lousy.
I applaud the person that forwarded this to ATL. This story is pathetic. I can’t believe he explicitly stated they were entitled to money from the firm.
This type of attitude should be identified and shamed. There are thousands, probably tens of thousands, of lawyers who would instantly jump at the opportunites these guys USED to have.
As for ATL, congrats! Great story!
71 – what the firm likely did not know was the specific content of the email, especially the threats of creating a PR shitstorm. But no, it is not an outing.
69 – agreed. but nonetheless, it would seem here that the consequences will drastically outweigh the admittedly foolish actions.
67
67,
Of course he should suffer the consequences of his actions. Sending out this kind of email when you’re a law school graduate in the worst economy ever with a non-binding “offer” from a law firm, threatening a reputable organization with public shaming on this very blog, and generally having no sensibility at all as to the consequences in this internet/blog age shows a complete lack of judgment on the part of the students. If anything, this blog did a service to MB that their recruiting/hiring committee could not: weed out the potential liabilities before they become full blown disasters. It also taught others that if you want to succeed in corporate America, you need to be smarter than this.
Lawyers routinely work with sensitive and important client information. They also have to carefully and tactfully manage clients, as well as other attorneys and their workload. Do you trust those kinds of high pressure, high stakes jobs to someone who, at no point during the entire process maybe said “wait, perhaps I shouldn’t bite the hand that might later feed me, though it has no obligation to”? At any moment and at any point some ill-thought out retarded action (like the one shown above) could truly cripple a firm and its clients. This is a liability that no firm should tolerate, and god have mercy on the soul of the poor lads who made a huge mistake. But the kid had myriad chances along the way to make the right choices, and he did not, even following up his original email with a more ridiculous “personal” future vendetta against the firm if they didn’t appease his demands (which, though reasonable, should not have been made in the manner they were).
To the students who sent the email that is the subject of this post, welcome to a brave new world. You are an adult by law, the firms are paying you like an adult, clients and everyone will treat you as an adult; you must act like an adult and take the consequences of your actions as an adult. You are the cause in fact and proximate cause of your downfall. Accept it.
I love how the tone of that kid’s last email is a total 180 from his previous emails.
I was more thinking of Stoppard’s take that portray R&G as clueless to the larger issues they find themselves embroiled in. And, you know, what 70 said.
–Elie
shit, this serious email has it all:
underlined sentences, capitalized phrases, bold words, exclamation points, bulleted points…
man, it’s been a long time since i wrote a serious email.
i’m overdue
No info from White & Case about the deferral other than a start date of Fall 2011
I second 54. Can we get a post or an open thread on start dates for class of 2010?
Here’s all I’ve heard for NY:
Wachtell – ?
Cravath – mandatory deferral until Fall 2011, $65k
S&C – ?
Skadden – no earlier than Jan 2011, no info yet for most
Davis Polk – ?
Cleary – Fall 2010 (optional by month)
STB – ?
Weil – optional deferral until Jan 2012, $75k, must do PI, others Jan 2011
K&E – ?
Debevoise – optional deferral until ?, $75k
Paul Weiss – Sept 2010
GDC – no info yet
Sidley – some Jan 2011, some Jan 2012
Latham – ?
White&Case – ?
No info from White & Case about the deferral other than a start date of Fall 2011
@80 Elie pwns kids googling Rosencratz and Guildenstern, then pretending they get the reference from all the Shakespeare they read.
78
Wrong. I agree that one must recognize the danger of an electronic paper trail. Sure. Lawyers are trusted to handle highly sensitive client information all the time. True. This kid vastly overestimates his own importance and influence. Absolutely.
But your vitriol seems unjustified and smacks of personal resentment. The reality is, as much as stupid law students annoy me, I recognize that many lack experience and still have much to learn. The notion that a precious law school grad should enter a firm the most consummate of professionals with impeccable judgment; or else that student lacks all merit as an employee and deserves swift termination, is plainly not supported by reality. Young associates (and seasoned partners too) make mistakes of judgment all the time – ESPECIALLY when it comes to personal interaction (which is what this is, at its core). The learning process is part of life. Not many lose their jobs over something as superficial as this. Trust that this kid has learned his lesson, even if he retains his job.
He also was not the one who posted this to a blog, as you seem to indicate in the beginning of your comment. He sent to a group of summer associates, presumably with the intent that it not extend further than that circle. Tipster was, and remains, an asshat (and one that could stand to learn the value of not being a gossipy bitch).
CHECK YOU CAREER ALTERNATIVES
man, screw this, MB sucks, and this is what you get when you suck
If Lady Godiva and these two are any indication, Mayer should provide a lot of good stuff for ATL… Nice work, guys
http://www.sondheimguide.com/Stoppard/rosendvd.jpg
86,
Agree with the tipster being an asshat. However, it was the sending of the email in the first place, as well as the content of the follow up, that have cause my complete lack of sympathy for the character. I don’t know him. I probably never will. I understand law students do not have perfect professional judgment. But comprehending the consequences and what was involved here was fully within the capabilities of ANY 25 year old, let alone a top law school graduate. For an organization like this, giving out a $160,000 a year client service job that requires attention to detail, knowledge, and professional behavior, as well as HUMILITY, to someone who has demonstrated a very public lack of many of these traits is something that the company has a right to step away from.
I am all for forgiveness, but in a market where people (good people) are struggling to make ends meet (this includes non-lawyers), someone with this type of attitude should be doubly ashamed of himself. He will get a second chance. But it shouldn’t be with MB.
78,
You’re 100% correct.
86,
You are dead wrong. The number one attribute that attorney must have is keen judgment at all times. Speaking out of turn, saying the wrong things at the wrong times can lose a case for your client and get the firm sued for malpractice.
Mutiny? Isn’t that what happens when the ship be sinking?
NYU should have chucked this 419 scammer to the curb years ago.
Man there sure are a lot of ppl drinking the biglaw koolaid in here
these guys are fucked sure, but mb is the real party at fault here for not announcing.
What could possibly be holding them up STILL? They are just being dicks because they can.
All u fuckers need to get those partner dicks out of your mouth and get on the right side
sure they executed in an idiotic way. But I sympathize with their intent
95: most firms haven’t announced.
Rosencrantz has an uncanny amount of traits in common with Chuck Egbuonu of NYU Law. (Chuck just so happened to have worked at Mayer Brown last summer and recently complained about being upset at not hearing back from the firm…coincidence?)
Previously, Chuck, or whatever alias you might wish to call him by, sent the following email to his school’s SBA after they became aware of some of his shady ways. He attempted to “bully” them as well, even though the poor lad didn’t have a leg to stand on. Mayer Brown might want to think twice on bringing this guy(s?) into the flock. Make sure you pay close attention to his comments directed at the Dean, as well as how he intends to drop the school in the rankings.
(From Chuck to his law school’s SBA after learning that they would not sponsor part of his private party promotion company’s event. despite his attempts to pull the wool over their eyes.)
I’m so sad to hear this news because it will unfortunately end up costing NYU Law several thousand (or several hundred thousand) dollars in legal fees. Here’s why:
1. We will sue the SBA and the School for breach of contract because we have a written commitment from your executives
2. We will sue for discrimination because it is clear that you are refusing to keep your promise simply because
it is two black guys co-hosting the event
3. We will sue for all sorts of emotional distress and defamation related to your pulling out, and for having a competing event
The list goes on and on and on. My beloved NYU Law has done a good job training me and I’m ready to use it against it them. Unfortunately for you, we have inside sources at the SBA that have sent us documented evidence of your racism so that doesn’t help you. The even sadder news is that this event was going put NYU on the map and raise our law school rankings. This school has been so nice to me, and this was going to be my first way of paying the school back (creating the ALL NYC Law/Med/Biz/Grad-Schools coalition and giving NYU Law credit for it). I’ve also signed up to be on the class gift committee so I can use my legendary fund raising skills to make this school rich. However, on the flip side (if you pull out of this party), I will now be NYU Law’s worst critic and make sure the school drops to 20 on the U.S. News ranking by emailing above-the-law and all who care, and stressing how racist the system is here, especially using statistics that show how career services manages to ensure that black students have the worst offer rates and retention rates.
Trust me, and ask those who know me, I don’t say things I won’t do. That said, you should consult with your executives and Dean Revesz (who I will forward this email to if you pull out) to confirm that it would not be in NYU Law’s best interest to pull out of the party. The law school retains lawyers that cost $1,000 an hour and by virtue of the suit I will file in the SDNY on friday morning, they’ll spend $20,000 off the top just in responding to that suit (as required by law). Finally, I just want to let you know that I’m NOT hosting this event just to make money. The SBA was only going pay $600 but the drink tickets cost $5 each, and Joe and I told the manager we’ll cover the remainder of what it will cost to get you 200 drink tickets. Thats the kind of guys we really are, regardless of what the idiots at your meeting said. We’re doing this to help the professional and social lives of the unfortunate kids at NYU who continue to have little or no options for meeting other students who could be future business partners or clients.
You really want to talk to Revesz and your board before you do anything, as they will not forgive if you make the mistake of trying to butt heads with me. Ask those who really know me, I can be very friendly but can also be very unfriendly when my patience is tested. By the way Dean Revesz, by virtue of your age, you should that people like me ALWAYS end up rich and famous, thus NYU Law does not want to get on my bad side now, they’ll be missing out on A LOT of financial and moral contributions I always intended to repay the school with.
Also, you also failed to outline your concerns about co-sponsoring the party. You need to do that, and I can also assure you that they are NOT real concerns because you can un-officially co-sponsor the event and be indemnified from any of the stupid potential catastrophes which were mentioned at your meeting. Finally, you CANNOT have a competing event tomorrow even if you only un-officially co-sponsor the event or we will still sue. And furthermore, our event will become a monthly event which you will always unofficially co-sponsor and not compete with or you will still be sued. Trust me man, you don’t wann go there. I’m going stop now as this email is getting too long, but you should really think about the best interests of your school before you pull out of your commitment.
Mr. Chuck
“Rosenkrantz” and “Mr. Chuck (Does anyone else find it amusing that this guy refers to himself as Mr. Chuck?) seem to be power-tripping, and I wonder where and when “their” fall will come. How many toes can “they” step on before someone gives “them” a swift kick out the door? “They” will have a heavy burden moving forward if “they” are forced to carry “their” ego and all of “their” transgressions with “them”.
So to all the above posters thinking to give this guy “Rosencrantz” a second chance, I say the following: How many chances should he get?
Rosencrantz has an uncanny amount of traits in common with Chuck Egbuonu of NYU Law. (Chuck just so happened to have worked at Mayer Brown last summer and recently complained about being upset at not hearing back from the firm…coincidence?)
Previously, Chuck, or whatever alias you might wish to call him by, sent the following email to his school’s SBA after they became aware of some of his shady ways. He attempted to “bully” them as well, even though the poor lad didn’t have a leg to stand on. Mayer Brown might want to think twice on bringing this guy(s?) into the flock. Make sure you pay close attention to his comments directed at the Dean, as well as how he intends to drop the school in the rankings.
(From Chuck to his law school’s SBA after learning that they would not sponsor part of his private party promotion company’s event. despite his attempts to pull the wool over their eyes.)
I’m so sad to hear this news because it will unfortunately end up costing NYU Law several thousand (or several hundred thousand) dollars in legal fees. Here’s why:
1. We will sue the SBA and the School for breach of contract because we have a written commitment from your executives
2. We will sue for discrimination because it is clear that you are refusing to keep your promise simply because
it is two black guys co-hosting the event
3. We will sue for all sorts of emotional distress and defamation related to your pulling out, and for having a competing event
The list goes on and on and on. My beloved NYU Law has done a good job training me and I’m ready to use it against it them. Unfortunately for you, we have inside sources at the SBA that have sent us documented evidence of your racism so that doesn’t help you. The even sadder news is that this event was going put NYU on the map and raise our law school rankings. This school has been so nice to me, and this was going to be my first way of paying the school back (creating the ALL NYC Law/Med/Biz/Grad-Schools coalition and giving NYU Law credit for it). I’ve also signed up to be on the class gift committee so I can use my legendary fund raising skills to make this school rich. However, on the flip side (if you pull out of this party), I will now be NYU Law’s worst critic and make sure the school drops to 20 on the U.S. News ranking by emailing above-the-law and all who care, and stressing how racist the system is here, especially using statistics that show how career services manages to ensure that black students have the worst offer rates and retention rates.
Trust me, and ask those who know me, I don’t say things I won’t do. That said, you should consult with your executives and Dean Revesz (who I will forward this email to if you pull out) to confirm that it would not be in NYU Law’s best interest to pull out of the party. The law school retains lawyers that cost $1,000 an hour and by virtue of the suit I will file in the SDNY on friday morning, they’ll spend $20,000 off the top just in responding to that suit (as required by law). Finally, I just want to let you know that I’m NOT hosting this event just to make money. The SBA was only going pay $600 but the drink tickets cost $5 each, and Joe and I told the manager we’ll cover the remainder of what it will cost to get you 200 drink tickets. Thats the kind of guys we really are, regardless of what the idiots at your meeting said. We’re doing this to help the professional and social lives of the unfortunate kids at NYU who continue to have little or no options for meeting other students who could be future business partners or clients.
You really want to talk to Revesz and your board before you do anything, as they will not forgive if you make the mistake of trying to butt heads with me. Ask those who really know me, I can be very friendly but can also be very unfriendly when my patience is tested. By the way Dean Revesz, by virtue of your age, you should that people like me ALWAYS end up rich and famous, thus NYU Law does not want to get on my bad side now, they’ll be missing out on A LOT of financial and moral contributions I always intended to repay the school with.
Also, you also failed to outline your concerns about co-sponsoring the party. You need to do that, and I can also assure you that they are NOT real concerns because you can un-officially co-sponsor the event and be indemnified from any of the stupid potential catastrophes which were mentioned at your meeting. Finally, you CANNOT have a competing event tomorrow even if you only un-officially co-sponsor the event or we will still sue. And furthermore, our event will become a monthly event which you will always unofficially co-sponsor and not compete with or you will still be sued. Trust me man, you don’t wann go there. I’m going stop now as this email is getting too long, but you should really think about the best interests of your school before you pull out of your commitment.
Mr. Chuck
“Rosenkrantz” and “Mr. Chuck (Does anyone else find it amusing that this guy refers to himself as Mr. Chuck?) seem to be power-tripping, and I wonder where and when “their” fall will come. How many toes can “they” step on before someone gives “them” a swift kick out the door? “They” will have a heavy burden moving forward if “they” are forced to carry “their” ego and all of “their” transgressions with “them”.
So to all the above posters thinking to give this guy “Rosencrantz” a second chance, I say the following: How many chances should he get?
97 & 98,
That is incredibly f*cked up. You should not name names or accuse anyone by name on this board. Even though it will be taken down (and swiftly, I hope), this was just plain wrong.
ATL should violate its own confidentiality policy to come after you for libel, you truly discpicable person.
96: most firms are dicks
99, i assumed mr. chuck was an alias. no?
101,
Read the first line, where the guys is named.
Mayer Brown should withdraw all outstanding offers to all NYU Law students at once. If these two idiots go to that school, then the firm should not want anyone who does go to that school working for them.
I understand why these students were getting antsy, but if they wanted an update, like someone else said, all they had to do was drop a quick note to someone they know at the firm (i.e. adviser, etc.). They’re in no position to threaten MB with anything.
ATL please investigate veracity of what 97/98 claims and report back.
ATL please investigate veracity of 97/98’s claims and report back. This story has legs.
99:
Hi Chuck. You clearly deserve whatever is coming to you.
THE PLOT THICKENS
CHECK YOU EGO!
over/under on the number of hours until Chuck threatens to sue AtL over comments 97/98?
@110, my thoughts exactly. . .
Chuck’s email per 97/98 exemplifies a major societal ill caused by affirmative action. It seems to turn some minorities into people who feel just as entitled as the people they complain about. To them, it becomes a matter of everyone in the world proving that what they do is NOT about race. Guilty until proven innocent to them…
Chuck is a very resourceful individual. Give him some credit here.
http://undergradparties.com/
Everyone gives Elie a lot of shit on here, but he came correct on this one.
Also, the signing of one’s emails and website as “Mr. Chuck,” as well as having “Mr. Chuck” as one’s Facebook name, should raise an irrebuttable presumption of douchery.
Has anyone considered that the email in 97/98 is ironic (as everything from NYU is)?
CHECK YOU WALL EYE, MR CHUCK
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=31284202&id=63204467
113 -
Best. Web design. EVAR!
98 is 100% true
98 is 100% true
How did G allow himself to get mixed up with R?
Worked with Mr Chuck at MB. Was embarrassed to have ended up at the same firm as the likes of him from the beginning; now I’m positively despondent. I really should have studied harder second semester of 1L…
Ok, I read 97/98. I take it back. He gets what he deserves, and this appears to be just a sampling of his antics.
86
99-
You have to have a stake in this to be that upset. Calling 97/98 a despicable person and then suggesting a libel claim is a bit premature.
Mr. Chuck needs to email ATL and set the record straight.
Mr. Chuck or whoever wrote the threatening e-mail to the SBA is a terrible writer. If a lawyer’s sword is his pen, this guy’s offer should be rescinded regardless of his moronic extracurricular activities.
Is truth not a defense to libel?
Just sayin’….CHECK YOU DEFAMATION
This looks like a public execution.
ATL should be ashamed for posting the emails in the first place. I thought they were associates’ sides. Whether or not R&G were going to be toast at MB was a maybe before ATL posted their email. Now it is for sure.
And if that is not bad enough, 98/99 had to come in. OMG, as if it weren’t bad enough for Rosencrantz already.
Please, someone, if there is anyone still in the office, take this whole post down. Since it is Friday night, personal damage to Rosencrantz might still be somewhat contained.
127 = R or G.
This looks like a public execution.
ATL should be ashamed for posting the emails in the first place. I thought they were on associates’ sides. Whether or not R&G were going to be toast at MB was a maybe before ATL posted their email. Now it is for sure.
And if that is not bad enough, 98/99 had to come in. OMG, as if Rosencrantz were not already screwed.
Please, someone, if there is anyone still in the office, take this whole post down. Since it is Friday night, the personal damage to Rosencrantz might still be somewhat contained.
Sorry for the typos in the earlier version.
128= punk
127
127-
I don’t think ATL is on anyone’s side. Their goal is to publish news and gossip, hence the description in the headline “legal tabloid.” They’re a tabloid, and they’ll publish almost anything to increase site traffic.
But I do agree with you that this could be a public execution. The person responsible for the email posted in 97/98 is a terrible writer and probably not a great person, but he shouldn’t have been exposed in this manner. If Mr. Chuck E. really has nothing to do with this situation, then these posts are going to tarnish his reputation and maybe leave him fucked.
Dear ATL,
Please, please, please do not leave us hanging all weekend on this breaking story.
MOAR LAWLZ
Sincerely,
Your Readership
122,
Just be glad you haven’t been Lathamed… yet.
My firm hasn’t said anything about start dates since the general “we expect a fall entry” line when offers were given. I thought this was normal. Am I wrong?
Seconding 54.
134-
Neither has mine. We’ve received no information at all. But I think that’s normal for right now. I don’t know anyone who has received exact start dates or any other details.
WOW – 97/98’s writing is for real – there really is a Chuck…just googled him and found him on Linked In as “law clerk” for Mayer Brown – graduating NYU 2010. Also he has a site called the Educated Group – written by someone with horrendous spelling…
I think this guy’s days of getting his way with bully tactics is soon to end. Good riddance. What was Mayer Brown thinking making an offer to a character like this?
This guy is absolutely toxic. If MB had any decent L&E attorneys left, they’d know to get rid of him immediately. But they don’t, so they’ll do what most employers do, which is keep the guy around and let him get away with murder. But he’ll eventually sue – they always do. Or they’ll pointlessly offer the guy a lot of money for a separation and release, thus rewarding his behavior.
Better to nip this guy in the bud right now. Make a clean break. At best, he has a Section 7 claim; but he probably doesn’t, because he’s really not an employee yet, and anyway, the remedies are limited to backpay and reinstatement.
His Linkedin shows he summered at Cleary (1L) and Weil (2L); I’m sure they’re thrilled they avoided being stuck with him.
AA at its finest.
Given his history of threats, I have a feeling this guy is going to sue ATL for taking too long to censor/moderate its own board in accordance with its self purported posting policies, thus leading to defamation/malicious libel/emotional distress/etc. Not sure what duty they owe him, given that they are not posting the comments. Further, it seems most of them seem true. If anyone knew law in this area, this could be interesting.
ATL needs to do a better job of monitoring the commenting. Naming names is unacceptable. Doesn’t matter how much the person may deserve it.
Commenters on this story also appear to be especially heartless. These two kids are graduating in less than 90 days and apparently have no clue about their future. Think back to when you were a 3L. Your biggest concern was probably what bar to get drunk at on a Tuesday night. Maybe MB has their reasons for delaying a decision, but have a little sympathy for someone who obviously is very worried about their future.
PH NY secretary here. Mary Jane’s weapon of choice is the video camera. She’s been hauling in secretaries to confront them over 5 minutes of lateness all according to the videotape. What a fucking cunt.
The Educated Group = Prestige Worldwide Subsidiary
Let this be a lesson for Mr. Chuck and law students everywhere: don’t be a douche.
End transmission.
I agree with the few sympathetic posters here. Have some pity on R & G. This is a majorly stressful time for them and a lot of other people. Just waiting to hear from MB I’m sure was really miserable so they tried to get things moving. You haters shouldn’t be so bitter and nasty to them…You’ve been perfect your whole life, right?
Knowing that there was going to be some moderation of these comments, I grabbed comment 97/98 because it was just too awesome to lose Here it is with the real name edited out. I hope that’s cool with ATL.
————————–
Rosencrantz has an uncanny amount of traits in common with [redacted] of NYU Law. ([redacted] just so happened to have worked at Mayer Brown last summer and recently complained about being upset at not hearing back from the firm…coincidence?)
Previously, [redacted], or whatever alias you might wish to call him by, sent the following email to his school’s SBA after they became aware of some of his shady ways. He attempted to “bully” them as well, even though the poor lad didn’t have a leg to stand on. Mayer Brown might want to think twice on bringing this guy(s?) into the flock. Make sure you pay close attention to his comments directed at the Dean, as well as how he intends to drop the school in the rankings.
(From [redacted] to his law school’s SBA after learning that they would not sponsor part of his private party promotion company’s event. despite his attempts to pull the wool over their eyes.)
I’m so sad to hear this news because it will unfortunately end up costing NYU Law several thousand (or several hundred thousand) dollars in legal fees. Here’s why:
1. We will sue the SBA and the School for breach of contract because we have a written commitment from your executives
2. We will sue for discrimination because it is clear that you are refusing to keep your promise simply because
it is two black guys co-hosting the event
3. We will sue for all sorts of emotional distress and defamation related to your pulling out, and for having a competing event
The list goes on and on and on. My beloved NYU Law has done a good job training me and I’m ready to use it against it them. Unfortunately for you, we have inside sources at the SBA that have sent us documented evidence of your racism so that doesn’t help you. The even sadder news is that this event was going put NYU on the map and raise our law school rankings. This school has been so nice to me, and this was going to be my first way of paying the school back (creating the ALL NYC Law/Med/Biz/Grad-Schools coalition and giving NYU Law credit for it). I’ve also signed up to be on the class gift committee so I can use my legendary fund raising skills to make this school rich. However, on the flip side (if you pull out of this party), I will now be NYU Law’s worst critic and make sure the school drops to 20 on the U.S. News ranking by emailing above-the-law and all who care, and stressing how racist the system is here, especially using statistics that show how career services manages to ensure that black students have the worst offer rates and retention rates.
Trust me, and ask those who know me, I don’t say things I won’t do. That said, you should consult with your executives and Dean Revesz (who I will forward this email to if you pull out) to confirm that it would not be in NYU Law’s best interest to pull out of the party. The law school retains lawyers that cost $1,000 an hour and by virtue of the suit I will file in the SDNY on friday morning, they’ll spend $20,000 off the top just in responding to that suit (as required by law). Finally, I just want to let you know that I’m NOT hosting this event just to make money. The SBA was only going pay $600 but the drink tickets cost $5 each, and Joe and I told the manager we’ll cover the remainder of what it will cost to get you 200 drink tickets. Thats the kind of guys we really are, regardless of what the idiots at your meeting said. We’re doing this to help the professional and social lives of the unfortunate kids at NYU who continue to have little or no options for meeting other students who could be future business partners or clients.
You really want to talk to Revesz and your board before you do anything, as they will not forgive if you make the mistake of trying to butt heads with me. Ask those who really know me, I can be very friendly but can also be very unfriendly when my patience is tested. By the way Dean Revesz, by virtue of your age, you should that people like me ALWAYS end up rich and famous, thus NYU Law does not want to get on my bad side now, they’ll be missing out on A LOT of financial and moral contributions I always intended to repay the school with.
Also, you also failed to outline your concerns about co-sponsoring the party. You need to do that, and I can also assure you that they are NOT real concerns because you can un-officially co-sponsor the event and be indemnified from any of the stupid potential catastrophes which were mentioned at your meeting. Finally, you CANNOT have a competing event tomorrow even if you only un-officially co-sponsor the event or we will still sue. And furthermore, our event will become a monthly event which you will always unofficially co-sponsor and not compete with or you will still be sued. Trust me man, you don’t wann go there. I’m going stop now as this email is getting too long, but you should really think about the best interests of your school before you pull out of your commitment.
Mr. [redacted]
“Rosenkrantz” and “Mr. [redacted] (Does anyone else find it amusing that this guy refers to himself as Mr. [redacted]?) seem to be power-tripping, and I wonder where and when “their” fall will come. How many toes can “they” step on before someone gives “them” a swift kick out the door? “They” will have a heavy burden moving forward if “they” are forced to carry “their” ego and all of “their” transgressions with “them”.
So to all the above posters thinking to give this guy “Rosencrantz” a second chance, I say the following: How many chances should he get?
Good call, 146. Thanks.
It’s summer hiring decisions like these that give us TTT guys hope. Only in America!
HAHAHAHAHHA No way this is for real. I just got home from the club and am WASTED son!!!!!!! These guys have to be cartoon characters. If these guys are real, I’m honestly going to shit myself.
Whoever wrote that e-mail to the SBA is a real jerk, but this does nothing to excuse law firms who are waiting until literally the last minute to inform 3Ls of their start date or whether they will be able to start at all, so that the firms can minimize exposure and maximize their PPP (which by now you undoubtedly noticed did pretty well considering “the worst recession in 100 years!”).
The huge majority of the posts on this page nitpicking and lambasting what R&G did have exposed these ATL posters for the fraud that they are. They act all tough and rebellious, but the reality is that they all take it up the ass from their firms every day and say “Thank you Sir, may I have another!” They then come to this website and unleash their immature and stupid vitriole to hapless law students, and argue inanely about which firm or law school is TTT, while missing the entire picture the whole time. Pathetic.
“(2) NO OTHER FIRM so far has deferred people for a year without a stipend included!!”
Well, that is simply untrue.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SECURE
If I were a senior associate or partner at MB, I would hope and pray that this douche bag “Mr. Chuck” would start asap, and then I’d make his life a living hell. You want a job so bad you whiney bitch – - then work for it. I think there’s a doc review in Green Bay next winter with Mr. Chuck’s name written all over it.
Christ, there’s one of these types of people at every school
153
i would gladly take a doc review for MB in green bay in the nude with piranhas attached to my nipples.
78
Wrong. I agree that one must recognize the danger of an electronic paper trail. Sure. Lawyers are trusted to handle highly sensitive client information all the time. True. This kid vastly overestimates his own importance and influence. Absolutely.
But your vitriol seems unjustified and smacks of personal resentment. The reality is, as much as stupid law students annoy me, I recognize that many lack experience and still have much to learn. The notion that a precious law school grad should enter a firm the most consummate of professionals with impeccable judgment; or else that student lacks all merit as an employee and deserves swift termination, is plainly not supported by reality. Young associates (and seasoned partners too) make mistakes of judgment all the time – ESPECIALLY when it comes to personal interaction (which is what this is, at its core). The learning process is part of life. Not many lose their jobs over something as superficial as this. Trust that this kid has learned his lesson, even if he retains his job.
He also was not the one who posted this to a blog, as you seem to indicate in the beginning of your comment. He sent to a group of summer associates, presumably with the intent that it not extend further than that circle. Tipster was, and remains, an asshat (and one that could stand to learn the value of not being a gossipy bitch).
146 = elie/lat
I agree that the careers of these two at MB will be short. However, the careers of the other three dozen in their summer class will also be short. Don’t you younger law students and graduates get it? Law firms since the early 1980s have been Ponzi schemes. Everyone gets tossed out, as the group of baby boomers still mad that their starting salaries were $16,000 take home PPP of $750,000 and over. The Ponzi scheme was first exposed in 1991, with the American Lawyer’s classic “Shattered Dreams” article. There was rampant unemployment in law from 1990 to 1997, until the start of the dot com boom (that shot up starting salaries from $80,000 to $125,000). Then there was rampant unemployment in law from 2001 to 2005, until the housing boom (that shot up starting salaries from $125,000 to $160,000). For those of us who started law school in the 80s, $48,000 to $52,000 was a very good starting salary. Adjusted for inflation, lawyers should be starting at $90,000 to $100,000. The extra $60,000 that first years are getting upfront is making it unprofitable to keep them more than two or three years, whereas associates in the past could expect to work at least six years before being tossed off the Ponzi pyramid. The lesson to be learned is this: if you think you are (with your meager knowledge of how law truly works) entitled to $160,000, be braced for the shock of unemployment and depression in two years. If you are more realistic (and pray for a five-figure starting salary), you may get a longer career (making very low six figures) that may make it possible for you to pay off loans (perhaps over 20 years instead of 10), buy a house, and start a family. Law was never meant to sustain hundreds of thousands of graduates each demanding to be paid between $160,000 to $1 M each year for 40 years. There’s not enough room at the top. So get used to it; lower your expectations and get on with your lives. The two MBer’s are fools for demanding validation that their $160,000 lives would start soon; however, they are ahead of the curve in that they will be lowering their expectations sooner than the rest of their class. They’ll be ahead of the read of the class in five years time as a result.
the majority of people who have commented here are total pu****s and ass-kissers who wouldn’t stand up to a law firm partner under any circumstances. have some self-respect. while the emails in this post are written in a weird way, at least these guys have the balls to do SOMETHING about their predicament. it is pathetic that most commenters on this site are defenders of employers who not only treat their associates like absolute garbage, but whore themselves out to any scumbag client who walks in the door.
have noticed that many Big Law Associates that were laid off have been finding spots in East Asia with employment in law firms. At the same time, East Asian corporations don’t care who they hire and probably have the same biases, therefore an unequal playing field. Having worked in BigLaw, I can say that if you are a minority you haven’t a real chance for advancement because the white associates are bitter and competitive and will use anything, inlcuding Race to take people out of contention for promotion. That’s what’s not fair. In any case, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Putative white firms and corps are getting boxed out of the economic global pie, precisely, because they aren’t palatable culturally, i.e. associates and partners who have the goods, but lack the cultural sensitivity to maintain lifelong business ties.
159 = Mr. Chuck
142
Don’t think it’s just the cameras. Mary Jane also has her girl clique hard at work. Be careful around Rim, Jen Ass, Peggy, Helen and Joni. Limit your smoke breaks. Don’t fall victim to MJ’s nest of ass-kissing rats.
162 What a fetid bunch of cunts you have running PH NY.
Mr. Self-Entitled says, “We will sue for discrimination because it is clear that you are refusing to keep your promise simply because it is two black guys co-hosting the event.”
Beside his poor writing, his logic is also lacking. I personally don’t see how it is clear that the refusal is caused by the hosts being black. This shows that this fool is looking to be discriminated against, even when it is non-existent. Indeed, but for his black skin, he is not at NYU.
Dear Mayer Brown management, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do NOT allow this guy in the door. No offer or defer him forever!!!!!! This guy has trouble written all over him.
Respectfully,
Mayer Brown Associate
164:
Of course he’s looking for discrimination even where it doesn’t exist….that’s probably how he’s accomplished every non-trivial thing he’s ever done. Doesn’t sound like he’s competent to do much without someone handing it over for fear of a claim of discrimination.
165:
I agree, and this shameful episode shows why AA and hiring for “diversity” cause many more problems than they purportedly solve. Law schools admit certain persons for the wrong reasons; then firms hire these same persons for the wrong reasons. Perhaps it is only human that when things are handed to you, you feel entitled. And this sense of entitlement is destroying any chance for a hard-work ethic that is so needed—especially by young black men.
This prima donna needs to be tought a major life lesson. Affirmative action created this monster; Mayer Brown, don’t let diversity continue this incompetent’s assent. No matter what, it will end badly.
There is but one decision: now or later?
Either give me what I want and I’ll be your friend and support you, or you are my enemy and I will exhaust my resources trying to destroy and undermine you.
That is the kind of individual who needs to be outed immediately and publicly humiliated. No law firm in the country wants this type of person working in their ranks. Huge, huge, huge, liability risk. Unpredictable and will certainly create an unfriendly work environment. MB is lucky to be finding this out about him now rather than later.
The only way this kind of person can change is if they are publicly made aware that their actions are unacceptable. One of two people informing him that he needs to chance is not going to open his eyes (all that will do is turn those one or two individuals into his enemies).
These two just said what is on the minds of every single other summer associate who is in limbo right now. Just because someone leaked what was supposed to be a private e-mail does not justify penalizing R & G. IT’s unfortunate that this all got leaked, but it’s not completely unreasonable to ask a firm to throw a bone to incoming associates. Some people have families that will need to relocate, leases that will need to be renewed or terminated, and possibly outstanding offers from other organizations concerning the summers for deferral employment. I mean let’s throw these guys completely under the bus for one reallly really bad lapse in judgment.
cleary -> weil -> mayer brown?? wtf?
must have had some seriously bad grades.
168 said, “I mean let’s throw these guys completely under the bus for one reallly really bad lapse in judgment.”
Really? Only one bad decision. Look at what he says and how he says it:
1. He points to partner profits to prove that they have money to GIVE them. This is not fucking charity: this is big law. We are not hear to GIVE money to shit heads like this. There is one question: can this guy make me money. Obviously this guy is a fucking disaster.
2. He says they “deserve” it. Really? This guy must be from a well-off family. Anyone who has struggled knows that “deserve ain’t got nothing to do with” anything. You work hard and if things work out great. If they don’t, you tried your best. But nobody deserves anything from anyone.
3. This asshole pulled A BIG FUCKING RACE CARD AGAINST THE SCHOOL WHO ADMITTED HIM BECAUSE HE WAS BLACK!!!!! Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. THIS GUY HAS ZERO LOYALTY.
4. This guy took time off because MICHAEL JACKSON DIED!!!! Really? Really? Really? Really? Really? Really? Really? This alone makes him un-hirable. Unless he actually knew Michael Jackson (and I presume he didn’t) then this shows he is more than a little weird.
5. He showed poor judgment by emailing everyone and then threatening Mayer Brown (‘public relations nightmater”), much same way he did with NYU. This guy didn’t fathom that this would come back and bite him. Really?
All in all, there is only thing for Mayer Brown to do: cut and run.
he did it for the lulz
As someone who knows personally about the NYU situation, let me say a few things:
1) We’re calling out affirmative action here? Really? What proof do ANY of you have that affirmative action had anything to do with this? There are plenty of assholes of every make and model who get in to all sorts of schools for the wrong reasons: money, association, legacy, etc. But there’s not even a shred of proof AA had anything to do with this person.
2) There’s no definitive evidence that the person that emailed the SBA and the person from MB are the same. Yes, they both seem to be douches, but propensity evidence is inadmissible… remember?
3) How many of you would really want all the shit you’ve done and that’s been posted on facebook or email (drunk photos, racist/sexist/xenophobic jokes, etc) drug out in the open? I concur that the sender(s) of these emails are a bit full of themselves, but if so, they’ll fuck up on their own eventually, just like many of us will. Give them the chance to at least do so. When did ATL turn into a lynch mob?
4) No, I am not R, G, C, or any other letter. In fact, I’m someone who knew about the email long before ATL. I was pissed off about it. But grow the fuck up. Don’t post that shit. What’s the matter with you? And don’t keep commenting and saying people’s names. Yes, you feel secure, and high and mighty b/c you’re at home on your computer, but I bet not 1% of you would have the balls to say any of this to any of these people where your real ID could be revealed.
5) Shut up.
Mr. Chuck seems to have once created a Facebook group, “NYU Law Class of 2010,” described as “A meet and confer location for the intellectual NYU Law Class of 2010.” The group’s “office”: “Our intellectual brains is where we work.”
How special.
#167 describes the character of a big law firm I used to work for. I’ve been doing my best to open their eyes.
172:
(1) Affirmative action is always playing a role. If Chuck really belonged at NYU, then he would be at Yale. Get it. Unfortunately for blacks the only way to prove that AA had no effect is to go to Yale and excel. Otherwise, you are always were you don’t belong.
(2) They are both written by the same person.
(3) What is your point? Do you know what your point it?
(4) Although, I cannot be certain, you certainly seem to be Chuck.
(5) somebody call the wambulance.
172:
This fool could not have gotten into NYU without AA. If you can’t tell that by his reasoning and writing skills, maybe MB should have passed on you too.
All of the commenters who mention that these guys were put in a tough spot because they didn’t know their start dates are completely missing the point. If they were getting anxious, they could’ve picked up the phone or sent a polite email asking for an update. Threatening your employer, or law school or SBA, with lawsuits and bad pr is never a good solution, especially if you are trying to maintain a relationship afterwards. These guys are toxic and need to be quarantined. As in-house counsel, I would never want them working on my corporation’s business or entrust them with privileged information. My corp doesn’t use MB because it is in Boston and MB doesn’t have offices here, but as a client, I think these guys make the entire firm look very bad. If your employees are so quick to turn against your firm, how can I trust them to work with my company on sensitive matters?
Actually, instead of just Yale, I would make that Yale/Harvard/Stanford. If you go there and excel, nobody can say shit. Otherwise you are always suspect. That is why AA sucks for everyone.
-175
172 = right on
175:
That’s good to know that you understand the inner workings of all the top law school admissions so well that you can say AA ALWAYS plays a role. I did not realize that there was a person who sat on the admissions committees of all of those schools simultaneously. Your amazing connections must be the reason that you know without a doubt that they are the same person. You’ll make an AMAZING prosecutor. Just be sure to tell the jury, “He did it. Trust me. I know.”
My point is that regardless of what any of you think of this person or persons (and my own thoughts of him/them are pretty low), why do any of you want to trash them so much? If so, have the balls to confront them on facebook, instead of hiding behind “guest” on ATL.
PS: The wambulance? Really? What are you, in 7th grade?
175:
That’s good to know that you understand the inner workings of all the top law school admissions so well that you can say AA ALWAYS plays a role. I did not realize that there was a person who sat on the admissions committees of all of those schools simultaneously. Your amazing connections must be the reason that you know without a doubt that they are the same person. You’ll make an AMAZING prosecutor. Just be sure to tell the jury, “He did it. Trust me. I know.”
My point is that regardless of what any of you think of this person or persons (and my own thoughts of him/them are pretty low), why do any of you want to trash them so much? If so, have the balls to confront them on facebook, instead of hiding behind “guest” on ATL.
PS: The wambulance? Really? What are you, in 7th grade?
-172
As a client of Mayer Brown, If I ever saw either of these two jokers names on a bill, I’ll fire the firm on the spot.
181,
I have no idea what you are talking about. Why would my statement imply that one person sits on all of the committees?
I am not “trashing” but merely showing through his own actions that Mayer Brown should not hire him.
And if I wanted to confront this tool I would do it face to face, NOT on facebook (are you in seventh grade?) But why would I confront him. I don’t know him, and I don’t want to know him.
He made this mess, I just hope Mayer Brown defers this guy forever.
What shade of brown is mayer brown anyway? Is it potato-ish? And why would anyone want to work there in the first place?
183/175:
But why do you care? Did you get rejected from some top tier law school b/c you’re white? Did you not get an offer from MB or some other law firm, so you wanna screw others over if you can? If he’s really that fucked up, he’ll screw up himself. It’s not like law school students/early associates don’t have enough to worry about w/o being ripped apart by anonymous people on the internet. At least the campaign he was trying to start had something to do with him. What the hell business is it of yours, or anyone else’s on here, whether or not MB gives him a job?
The comment about one person sitting on all committees was sarcasm. Obviously no such person does, and therefore no person can make the statement truthfully that “Affirmative action is always playing a role,” as you did.
I say facebook because I seriously doubt you would ever have the nerve to go up to someone and say the stuff you have to his face. I doubt that of all of the negative posters on here. But at least if you went there, he’d know who is trying to ruin any job opportunity he may have left.
-The “Wambulance” Chaser
185 = Worried Chuck
186-
No, I’m not him, not that it’s going to convince you. I really don’t give a shit what you or anyone else on here thinks. I’m not even pursuing a firm job. But I think you should leave people’s names off of these posts unless you have the balls to give your name too. Do you?
172/181/185
Why drag AA into it when we can rip on them for being douche bags? Douchebaggery is colorblind.
Unless you go to H/Y/S and excel, the accomplishments of all white American males are suspect. Most American born white men at NYU and CLS are there because of the accomplishments of their upper middle class/rich mommies and daddies; they’re just the products of their expensive test prep courses and a society that has given them and their family every advantage for over 300 years.
These white boys at NYU would be at Fordham if NYU admitted all of the Asian and Jewish Americans that deserve to be there.
I agree with others, above, that R & G demonstrated poor strategic thinking here. Obviously MB will not forget this humiliation, and whether MB deserved the humiliation is beside the point.
What they should have done was contact the schools’ career services offices themselves, asking for confidentiality with each one. Explain the situation, and ask that all of them make this call to MB so that MB can’t figure out who started it. Had even three or four offices called, MB probably would have been unable to determine who the rabble rousers are.
Oh well, live and learn. Good luck in your job searches, R & G. At least you should have a high-paying year or two at MB while you look.
Wow, Mr. NYU really fucked himself.
189-
Haha, generally well put. As a white boy at one of those two schools though, I can tell you that no Jewish Americans are getting excluded that deserve to be there. Trust me.
N I G G E R (what a surprise)
Actually, now that they are all basically gradeless, HYS are not the best options for potential AA beneficiaries. Much better to go to NYU or Columbia and rock it (visibly, top 10%, coif, etc.). Otherwise, the racists will always assume you are unqualified or less qualified than your classmates. But this is an aspect of AA that sucks.
-Hispanic guy who graduated summa from Harvard in a no joke major, pwned the LSAT, got into HYSCN for law school and still has to listen to the “URM = AA admit = unqualified, but I’m so f-ing awesome w my buddies on teh interwebs taking poshots at people I don’t know” morons
@189 As a Jew at a peer of those two schools, with friends at both of those two schools, I can confirm what @192 says.
Any person who instinctively views all blacks in any top law school as beneficiaries of AA is a RACIST asshat.
Seriously 193? I really hope you’re not actually a lawyer or going to be one. You’re the kind of person that makes other lawyers look bad, as well as fucks up the legal system. You’re also the kind of douche that makes white people like me look bad.
194- I like what you’re saying (I think). Congrats. Just had a hard time understanding your signature line.
Are the last handful of posts implying that R & G are in fact Jewish? If yes, is this racist? And if not, what exactly is the point?
anyone baffled by the simple-minded, short-sighted nature of this letter need only be reminded that a negro was behind it all. typical negro behavior at its best.
192 (“As a white boy at one of those two schools though, I can tell you that no Jewish Americans are getting excluded that deserve to be there. Trust me.”) & 195 (“As a Jew at a peer of those two schools, with friends at both of those two schools, I can confirm what @192 says”):
How can you know unless you meet all the Jewish Americans who applied to but are NOT ENROLLED AT THOSE SCHOOLS? How did you get into HYS with such poor logic?
- not 189
someone please remove 193/199
There is irony in seeing all these posters who make stupid comments accuse the NYU students of “lacking good judgment.”
I’d be a little more subtle than @189, but his point is valid. If you are an American born white male with parents that made over $100K/year (inflation adjusted) during your formative and high school years, get into YHS or STFU.
Definition of whining loser: a white guy who blames AA for not getting admitted into HYS or some other top institution.
People, can’t we all just get along? And get back to the important business of slamming R & G?
It never ceases to amaze me how completely ignorant otherwise intelligent people can be. Yes, R & G acted irresponsibly and did not show proper judgment. I’m sure after reading through these comments they realize that they can’t send around emails of that nature again. However, jumping to conclusions about the credentials of Blacks at the top-5 law schools in the country is a stretch. I’m Black, and was still able to score in the 99th percentile on the LSAT and graduate at the top of my undergraduate class. I got into the top law schools because I earned my spot, it was not handed to me because of the color of my skin.
Above the Law – Shut this down now.
This an absolute disgrace to the legal profession.
@206 No doubt you deserve your spot. I think the point is that AA makes anyone black or latino suspect – there’s a rebuttable presumption that they got where they were because of AA.
That’s really unfair. In fact it’s total BS. And I’m not necessarily against AA. However, as long as anyone punches above their weight because of AA it will cast a pall over the achievements of all blacks and latinos, even the large number who succeed on their own merits.
Anyway, that being said, this is a diversion. Let’s get back to tearing into those ass hats R & G.
Anyone who missed it make sure you read comment 146.
- 208
Dear Rosencrantz and Guildenstern,
Maybe I’m not up to date on my pretentious Tom Stoppard references (’cause I’ve been preoccupied with law school), but I seem to recall that pissing off people in power generally ends badly. Think of your future boss as Hamlet’s stepfather – someone that doesn’t like you spreading rumors about him throughout the kingdom. True or not, shut up, grow up, and and lose the idea that you are entitled to anything because you graced a firm with your presence for a summer.
Seriously, we’re talking about two pompous, self-important, over-entitled douches who just Cleveland steamered their careers, how did all this race/AA nonsense start?
“they must be white with wealthy parents because they act entitled, no, no, i heard that they’re black- that explains their lack of foresight. yeah, that must be it, and they’re concerned about their stipend because they’re jewish and they probably got bad grades in undergrad but got into nyu because they’re part native-american. they were probably drunk when they wrote the email because they’re irish and don’t have discipline or self-control. i think we’ve cracked the case!”
Seriously, the implied, or explicit (193/199= hillbilly douche) stereotypes here are outrageous. No gender, race, culture, or any other group should be responsible for the actions of its dumbest members. We’re dealing with standards of common sense and professionalism. Regardless of their individual identities, backgrounds, and characteristics, these two failed to live up to the standard.
Funny fact about R: not only did he use his nom-de-plume (Mr. R) on all firm signup sheets – and even some emails – during the summer, he also put an unregistered trademark symbol and a registered trademark symbol after his nickname as well.
200: There are like 85 kippah wearing dudes at NYU. Trust me, they’re not being wronged in the admissions process.
@208, I think that is precisely where you are wrong. Perhaps AA “casts a pall” over *your* opinions of the achievements of blacks and latinos, but your opinions aren’t really the only ones that matter.
Every time I see a dumb white person in an institution of higher learning that is there solely because he is a legacy, I don’t think “Man, this really makes me question whether any of the white people here are deserving of being in here.” It doesn’t even make me think “I bet all the legacy admissions here are as dumb as a brick.” Instead, I think “Wow, that one particular dude is very dumb.”
It’s annoying that there are people out there who over generalize about all minorities based on the failings of a few that they’ve encountered … and then turn around and blame AA for their own over generalizations.
– white guy who doesn’t think minorities have an affirmative obligation to prove themselves to me
@214, I wouldn’t over generalize by saying that AA casts a pall in the eyes of everyone. But it does in my eyes, and in the eyes of many other people. I wish it didn’t, but it does.
- 208
207 – We here at ATL make money off providing this forum. We care about diversity of opinion because as things get nastier, more people pay attention and we make more money. Just because you find some racist banter unappealing does not mean we will do anything beyond the bare minimum to reduce our revenue. Please understand that you are the least profitable voice in the crowd, and you will remain so unless you use epithets.
It is important to remember, 207, that in our multicultural society feigning tolerance can be very lucrative. After all, we don’t want to practice law, we would rather run a gossip rag and publish anything to try to live a big law lifestyle without doing the work.
As an example of our lack of long-hour working, we went home last night at 7:45 and did not look at this post again until 10:30 am. And in the mean time the identity of Rosencrantz was revealed. But that is o.k. because it is important for everyone’s opinion to be heard. Otherwise, some voices will be stifled and our society will be worse off.
As for Rosencrantz, it is too bad that we allowed for his public shaming. But there is a bright side to the story, we made some change off of this whole incident. And rest assured when Rosencrantz sues us, as he surely will because he will not have another option if he gets cut from MB, we will be sure to remind everyone that it is not our fault – we are a gossip column and the world is a bad place, not us.
Thank you for your understanding and Namaste.
Lat, Elie, Kash, and our money.
In these situations at big firms, things always tend to get worse before they get better. There is no doubt that both Mayer and Brown (along with others in HR) are looking into their backgrounds. The firm is searching the internet, reviewing their summer e-mails, and asking about their conduct at the firm this summer.
The original e-mail to the summers actually is not that bad. Both NYU students are looking to find out about a more definite start date to plan their lives after graduation. That is certainly understandable.
However, one summer made public relations threats against the firm. That is a problem. In reality, how many news organizations are going to feel sorry for a 25 year old who has to wait a few months to start making a $160K salary?
If these guys did what is claimed on this site, then it is unfuckingbelievable. They will have a hard time being admitted to the bar, I would imagine.
216 = Rosencrantz. The threat to sue ATL gave it away.
218 might be right. Does anyone know more about the possibility of R not being admitted becuase of the SBA letter?
lol, 216!
If R & G talked to OCS about the email, I would find it hard to believe that the OCS career director would have encouraged such action.
Last week NYU OCS encouraged the students to reach out across schools and said that they would coordinate an effort to approach the firms that have not yet come out with their plans. While R&G did so untactfuly, they were following OCS’s recommendation.
While R & G are responsible for their actions, they were provided terrible advice by OCS.
PROS to hiring Mr. NYU
• Diversity
CONS
• refers to himself as Mr. Ch_ _ k.
• thinks he is owed a 160k job.
• perhaps thinks partners make too much money.
• pulls race card.
• threatens public relations nightmare.
• puts a photo of himself on his linked in profile.
• cries for Michael Jackson.
• bad writing.
• bad judgment.
What else am I missing?
Even if he does work at Mayer Brown, he may not like it . A buddy of mine at the NY office says everyone is pissed about this episode. Instead of picking up the phone or emailing a partner, he goes nuclear.
Perhaps if he apologized for his handling of this situation it would help his plight. That is if he really does regret his actions.
Regardless, this will be water under the bridge in a few months (or years).
Does this guy realize how many associates MB has canned recently? He must not, otherwise he wouldn’t be playing with fire.
227,
You mean the fact that profits-per-partner only dropped 4% didn’t prevent layoffs. I guess the partners didn’t think they deserved to make hundreds of thousands of dollars. Who would have thunk it?
My only hope is that the management at MB sees these comments and realizes that Mr. Chuck/Rosencrantz clearly railroaded this endeavor and dragged Guildenstern along for the ride. I know G, and can’t imagine he would have gone along with an outrageous plan like this without having been coerced/manipulated into doing it.
MB Associate
56 FTW
Understandable that a recipient of this email who got no offered would want to leak it, esp after reading all the self-entitled BS.
I attend NYU, and I can guarantee you that I have far better grades and better credentials than Mr. C___k. Three years ago I would have had an offer from a V-20 firm, but presently I sit without any offer (got slaughtered in the no-offers last summer).
I have come to terms with the fact that busting my ass 7 days per week without break has brought me a magna cum laude on my diploma from Top 5 school, but it won’t even bring an interview at a law firm anymore. I have come to terms with this. Really.
But when I see this fucking D-Bag loser piece of garbage worthless self-entitled prick send out e-mails like this, I lose it.
As for MB:
Fire this fucker. I have seen him at bars. He strolls around and tells everyone how he’s worked for 3 large law firms and how he goes to NYU. When he meets people from Stern, he makes sure to insinuate that the law school is better than business school.
The first time he gets a bad review he’ll threaten a Title-7 suit. Let him see what’s it like to rely on something that’s not there. He is not owed 160k — he is owed a punch in the face and a reality check.
As for NYU:
The notion that this school is anything but liberal and progressive is laughable. To insinuate that there is some behind-the-scenes racism at work is hilarious. This school, for better or worse, is absolutely and completed devoted to diversity in all aspects (both in terms of AA and in terms of sponsoring diversity clubs, etc . . .).
I think Dean Revesz should send this guy a letter and ask that the never use the NYU name ever again. NYU accepts this guy, gets him planted at THREE large firms, at least one of which gives him an offer, and this piece of garbage is angry because NYU doesn’t want to sponsor some stupid drinking party? Then he smears this school’s good name by implying racism?
Amazing. If I pass this guy in the halls before May graduation I may have to punch him. But then again, he probably call Jessie Jackson in and call it a “hate crime.”
The law school is better than the business school.
@231, Punching R in the face wouldn’t be a hate crime, unless douches are a protected class all of a sudden. As long as you punch him for being a douche, rather than for any other impermissible reason, you’re golden.
140:
Check you § 230 of the Communications
Decency Act of 1996. ATL has no worries.
this is a perfect example of blogaria
@231. Great idea ass water, publically threaten to punch someone who has demonstrated poor judgment and a lack of emotional intelligence after they have been totally flayed on ATL. Your out-of-work-magna-cum-laude rage has now given Rosencrantz all the more reason to feel physically insecure at NYU. Way to go bro, that was such a good call!
If there is any one person who will read and take to heart all of these comments it will be Rosencrantz and you, fuck jug, just took it to another level.
If I had heard your story (all top of the class but no work) in any other context, I would have felt sorry for you and said something like, “don’t worry little-nutted-one, I am sure your herpes-having ass will be just fine, you have a long career ahead of you and while your looks will get you nowhere, your smarts will shine through eventually – you are like a diamond in the rough, except you smell like baby shit.” But now I realize that the most likely reason you are unemployed is that you, like Rosencrantz, have terrible judgment.
The only difference between you and Rosencrantz is that your supervisor paid attention to how stupid you are. I can hear her now:
“You know that fucking summer who has those weird gums? He has good grades and all, but I just heard him threatening his co-workers, maybe we shouldn’t hire him. It really is a relief to me anyway, do you how he whimpers in the bathroom every fucking day? God it gets on my money grubbing nerves”
This post is getting long so I am going to peace out, but in case you did not get the drift, 231, go fuck yourself nd watch what you say while jealous.
-Bottom of the class 3L who is employed. And who could kick 231’s ass, but doesn’t threaten people with violence.
234:
Are we sure that ATL falls under the same blanket category wrt immunity as an ISP?
Keep whining East Cost T5ers. My lower/middle class colleagues and I know what hard work is and are willing to do it. A/C & document review beats digging a ditch or framing a house any day.
Keep whining. My non-T5 brethren would like to poach your interview slots.
Keep whining, and remember, while you’re whining, we’re working, and one day maybe we’ll meet in court to “compare notes.”
Coast*
Well, R & G, look on the bright side! You accomplished your stated goal–it is unlikely that you will be “kept in the dark about your future” (or, more accurately, lack thereof) for much longer…
Well, R & G, look on the bright side! You accomplished your stated goal–it is unlikely that you will be “kept in the dark about your future” (or, more accurately, lack thereof) for much longer…
Bravo ATL! This is some high octane entertainment right here.
Bravo ATL! This is some high octane entertainment right here.
236 = severely emotionally disturbed
236,
231 Here. It never really occurred to me that my post may have been taken seriously. I had meant it to be a tung-in-cheek type delivery.
Obviously that type of intonation is lost on the internet.
Also, my gums are fine.
But, just to appease you:
I do not, nor have I ever, planned on bunching anyone at NYU or anywhere else.
237:
Good question. The Fourth Circuit very recently held that immunity applied so long as the website itself was not supplying the unlawful content (the plaintiff had in fact alleged that the defendant website had done so, but the Court found the conclusary allegations insufficient to survive a 12(b)(6) motion under Iqbal). So it would seem (at least under the Fourth Circuit’s construction, I have not looked at Second Circuit case law on this section) that a prospective plaintiff would need to prove not only that the allegations were untrue, but that ATL was actively involved in posting them (which is dubious at best).
Here is the decision http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/082097.P.pdf
245:
Good to hear you are not planning on bunching anyone at NYU, though according to urbandictionary.com definition of “bunching” you would need to be a mathematician to do so (not to say you are not).
231:
NYU only got him placed at TWO big firms. His LinkedIn profile shows that he worked for Cleary in the Summer of 2007….BEFORE he was in law school. Incidentally, he also lists that title as a “Law Intern.” I find it hard to believe that he was doing anything related to law, and thus this title is fraudulent.
Would it be too much to hope for a C&F ding? Perhaps.
mr. [wood]Ch**k seems to be taking down his websites? the educamacation groop site is down. all i find is a portrait of some doot at “talent 6.”
i am starting to doubt the veracity of all these rumors and speculations. if Mr. [wood]Ch**k is really the guy, wouldn’t he be on the comments section threatening Lat nonstop? Or, he’s emailed lat and threatened him, and lat doesn’t have the balls to post about it.
Lat, please reach out to MB and get us a scoop about what they plan to do here. clearly this dood is a public figure now. tyia.
249,
obviously this dood is now shitting himself in terror and is desparately trying to lower is online profile.
229 – Agreed. This is not something I would expect from G and (although most clear-thinking people would) he did not realize what he was getting into. G probably got pulled into these emails only because R threatened him.
The Educated Group website’s description is hilarious. There are multiple grammar and spelling mistakes.
uh skadden has deferred its incoming associates a year (or at least until 2011…unclear until what month yet) without a stipend…its called fact checking dummies
OK, I’ve read the comments through twice now, and I still don’t understand all the references to Ropes and Gray. Have they not told their 2009 sumer class yet? I thought the story was about Mayer Brown.
Please advice.
- R&G 2009 Summer
Bouncers beware!!! When I’m on the “girls-only” stage doing Michael Jackson, you don’t wann interupt or else…what happens, happens!!!
254- R&G stands for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern
I know of several firms that haven’t offered any sort of stipend for deferred associates.
256, you’ve been totally pwned.
- Not 254
“Please advice.” I love it.
258, what do you mean?
256
All those who have commented that AA is to blame for this are racist. With no access to his credentials other than some incendiary emails and no knowledge of him other than that he is black, you assume that he couldn’t have gotten where he is without AA and coddling. That is racist. No doubt, all of those racist commenters will be offended at this post. Let your vitriol rage– I rarely read this blog, so I will never hear it.
This guy brought negative attention to himself and he criticized his [future] employer. This is never good for any employee at any place of business. He’ll never go to work there.
Really, if he were normal I would say he won’t realize what he has done until he does start working at a firm, but then again he seems to be one of those delusional narccissistic people who never gets it.
261 will check back often, despite what he rather rather defensively claims, so have at him.
There seems to be a very simple issue here. Does a future employee have a right to know the details of when his employment begins so that he can order his life accordingly. Maybe you think that there is such a right, and maybe you think that there is not. Or maybe you think that the unique circumstances of the legal market change the way you would usually answer. Or maybe you think the way that these individuals approached the situation changes your answer. But the way that the discourse in these comments has devolved makes me ashamed to be part of this legal community.
I understand that there is a lot of fear in the legal world right now – a lot of fear from people who don’t know if they will get jobs, and a lot of fear from people who are worried about keeping their jobs. I think this fear is probably what drove these two individuals to write the original letter, and I also think that this fear is what is driving all of the posters in these comments to such negativity. Perhaps also many young and aspiring lawyers feel tremendously grateful to their firms and are driven to defend them; perhaps many feel angry that they did not get offers and so are lashing out at those who did and who perhaps are not acting gratefully enough.
So I can understand some of the negativity in these comments. But to to use this situation to air unrelated, vicious, anonymous attacks against specific individuals, attacks laden with unacceptable racist invective, is shameful. Truly shameful.
264 = clueless 1L
265= 1L who thinks she knows what is up.
To all of you who have been unnecessarily cruel, racist, or simply named the man, I’d like to share with you that R’s father passed away very recently. Maybe his judgment was not the best, but I’m not sure mine would be at that time, either. So now he’s dealing with funeral plans and your gut-wrenching cruelty.
The thing that frightens me most about joining you all in biglaw is how much you enjoy tearing someone down, without consideration of the hurt or damage you might cause. Shame on you. I hope you find some compassion in somewhere in your cold souls.
267 – Please see comment 146, then ask again if R deserves it.
I don’t think the main intent is to tear someone down. It is to comment on R’s obnoxious e-mail. He believes he is entitled to things simply because he received an offer at a law firm. As more information came out, people criticized his writing skills and attitude.
That type of attitude is something that our legal community does not need more of going forward.
267, maybe you’re trying to help, but how do you think bringing up more personal issues in his life will help? Do you think anyone on this board needed to know that or now be more understanding? If he’s reading the posts then you’ve just brought up a lot more pain than you prevented.
HOOF ARTED
You ladies can forget about Mayer.
Come work for me, ladies, I will play straight with you. You walk and earn, I treat you right.
Holy shit!!! The latest rumors suggest the shit is about to hit the fan!
CHECK YOU CONSEQUENCES FOR YOU ACTIONS
273: please elaborate. tks.
273: pretty please with sugar on top – elaborate.
273 – are you withholding rumors in the comments section of ATL? Seriously?
Of all the posts that have been accused of being Rosencrantz, 273 seems the most like the type of hyperbolic emails typical of Rosencrantz.’s Coases posts.
266 = 2L who struck out at OCI
I’m sort of glad ATL picked up on this. Lots and lots of 3Ls are on edge right now regarding their start dates, compensation, etc. These R&G guys are like the sacrificial lambs- as a result of all of this, anyone who DIDN’T realize before that this approach was unprofessional and foolish will certainly realize it now. Now at least I don’t have to be as worried that some buttmunch from MY summer class will try to pull something like this.
50 & 75 Irene Dorzback is fantastic. You have no idea what actually happened.
So what’s the bottom line?
280-
so what actually happened?
Dem boyz at NYU be stoopit. Associates at BigLaw have no rights, particularly when they haven’t been hired yet.
273 – consequencesfor ATL posters, or for dumb 3Ls?
WOW — the email posted in comment 146 is wild. This guy is developing quite a track record.
Amazingly, MB no-offered a truckload of people this summer. But these guys made it.
Great judgment Mayer Brown!
Truly unbelievable. Just when I thought the associates at my firm were the most entitled group of whiners in the country, I read about these guys. MB needs to un-offer these guys.
17 FTW, BTW
Everyone seems to assume, just because R is allegedly black, that AA is the only reason he got into NYU Law. Even if he is unqualified, there are other possible reasons for his admission, such as having wealthy parents, or having relatives with connections in the right places. Yet these alternatives don’t even cross people’s minds because of their prejudices (blacks aren’t wealthy, blacks don’t have connections in the white establishment, etc.). Folks, open up your minds.
288, interesting that “R is allegedly black.” What standard of proof do you think is needed to make a more definite statement?
Question: Did the person who leaked R’s SBA email to ATL have a duty of confidentiality to SBA’s student-members like R? Is it permissible for our representatives to leak our communications, no matter how litigious and/or questionably unethical, outside of the law school community without permission from the SBA board?
289, stop nitpicking. You missed the main point, to which the “allegedly” makes no difference.
291, if we focused upon the main point, it would be that examining R’s actions would lead to the conclusion that he has terrible judgment. Unless this kind of behavior is the recent result of some sort of head injury it does lead to the inference that he’s received plenty of help along the way.
290:
No. Yes.
290,
That is the dumbest thing I’ve read yet. ‘Grats.
The email posted in 146 is just full of epic win. My favorite line:
“I’ve also signed up to be on the class gift committee so I can use my legendary fund raising skills to make this school rich.”
Let me just say, as a current NYU Law student, this is absolutely re-f****ing-diculous. The sense of entitlement blows my mind. His immaturity and poor judgment (and poor LEGAL judgment) are, I don’t think, indicative of NYU.
But maybe they are and maybe I am an exception, doing my work and not being a total jerk. But I doubt it. The funny thing is, I have met this guy on several occasions and always thought he was really nice. But I guess you can’t tell a person from that kind of a superficial interaction.
Is this getting out part of Rosencrantz’ diabolical plan to drop NYU to 20 in the USNWR rankings, as per comment 146? Because I think it’s working.
Why is anybody talking about race in the comments section? This is about two jackasses that shouldn’t be at NYU Law. Who cares how they got accepted. They should be gone NOW, for what they did.
298,
“2. We will sue for discrimination because it is clear that you are refusing to keep your promise simply because
it is two black guys co-hosting the event”
298, only one person made a mistake here. G just wanted information and I can’t see how he did anything wrong.
Can’t believe nobody has picked this up nearly 300 comments in, but it seems pretty clear to me that R and G have a pretty strong estoppel claim against Mayer Brown, and R has/had an equally strong claim against the SBA/NYU. People need to remember that you DON’T need a written contract in order to assert a claim based on a broken promise, as long as reasonable reliance is present (which – no matter how odd their emails – R and G would seem to have here in spades).
300,
No, Dean Revasz ALSO has made a mistake because, “by virtue of [his] age, [he] should that people like me ALWAYS end up rich and famous, thus NYU Law does not want to get on my bad side now, they’ll be missing out on A LOT of financial and moral contributions I always intended to repay the school with.”
301,
While it is good of you to point that out, “R” is WAAAY ahead of you:
“1. We will sue the SBA and the School for breach of contract because we have a written commitment from your executives”
In fairness to you, though, “NYU Law has done a good job training me and I’m ready to use it against it them.”
301,
While it is good of you to point that out, “R” is WAAAY ahead of you:
“1. We will sue the SBA and the School for breach of contract because we have a written commitment from your executives”
In fairness to you, though, “NYU Law has done a good job training me and I’m ready to use it against it them.”
303, you’re right. Holy crap he’s good. You would have to pay $1000/hour to find a lawyer capable of matching wits with R.
299:
My point is that’s all BS. Can’t we all agree that’s BS?
-298
Good point, 301. I seem to remember from my contracts class that some section of the Restatement (Second) of Contracts may be of some help here. Can anyone remember which section?
Re: 301
Regarding the rants of those emails, it seems doubtful that Mayer Brown ever had any intention to not follow through on their offers. Additionally, it seems unlikely that the firm promised knowledge by any particular date. In the tumultuous up’s and down’s of the economy, I can completely understand the firm waiting to verify details. I would much rather someone act with knowledge and consistency, as opposed to operating prematurely and being forced to change or withdraw at some point in the future. The email that started all of this chain seems to make some assumptions about what is owed that are tenuous at best, and in general appears an unwarranted overkill.
In regards to the claim against the SBA, I have seen no evidence to indicate that any person made any promise that was relied on to anyone’s detriment. Beyond the rantings and accusations thrown about in that email, I find little of substance. There is no proof put forth, and indeed from what I can discern, no proof to be found that would substantiate those claims. Your response operates under the assumption that some type of promise was made, which we don’t know. Further, you also assume that the promise was made in good faith on accurate information, which based on the content of that email seems to a doubtful presumption at best.
Personally, I find the first section of the emails to the firm to be troubling, but am shocked by what I read in the email to his school in which so many claims and threats are made. If that is the same person, he or she would do well to sit down and ponder his or her actions.
All of that said regarding the actual emails, I find the assumptions and derogatory remarks regarding race put forth on this board both sickening and disappointing. Instead of making wild racial allegations or affirmative action assumptions, perhaps we should limit our commentary to the emails themselves. One cannot surmise anything about the writer’s past or present, though perhaps one can guess where that person’s future is headed.
The substance of this discussion is indeed interesting regarding the emails, but needlessly stereotypical and racist when referring to the person’s character. Skin color is no barrier to poor judgment.
Let us judge a person by his or her actions, for they provide a look of the inner workings of a person that an external view of skincolor will not allow. In fact, anyone who wishes to make a comment on the basis of skin color does nothing but step into the shoes of bigotry, embracing ignorance, and ignoring the fact that each person is just that — an individual.
308:
This is 301. I write only to address the first three paragraphs of your post. And in doing so, I’d like to direct your attention to post 307. I’ll add to 307’s post, because I believe he/she is referring to Section 90 of the Restatement (Second) of Contracts. I admit that my contracts class was more than a year ago, so I had forgotten that the Restatement specifically addressed this issue. Although not binding, the Restatement would be persuasive authority in almost any court, and would likely be dispositive in a New York court (which is where these claims would most likely arise).
Care to revise your post now?
309.
See the word “promise’ in that Section.
Show me some proof of a promise that was broken between these parties and maybe I’ll reconsider. As it stands, I see no promise between the SBA and the rantor. As for Mayer Brown, I wasn’t aware they had made a promise regarding a specific date they would notify.
Additionally, if such a promise does exist, which again I have seen no proof of, I would refer you to the remedy available. Also, R seems to have made some communications that weren’t entirely forthcoming (via his email), that would also play a role in the use of this equitable doctrine.
The Restatement hardly addresses this specific issue for numerous reasons, But i’ll let you get a few years of practice under your belt before we discuss. :)
CHECK YOU RESTATEMENT 90 INSIDE JOKES
- 307
I was wondering where the promissory estoppel trolls had gone, reminds me of ATL’s prime.
310, don’t worry about it. Guys in my high school used to get drawn into nonsensical arguments about promissory estoppel that turned out to be longstanding inside jokes all the time. It was no big deal.
-301/309
Mike Triforce Here -
The last dozen or so posts were dumb as hell. Back to the topic at hand, those two terds who have ruined their legal careers.
Listen up you deferred retards because I am only going to say this once – There are only four activities any one of you terds should be engaged in: poker, pool, gambling on professional sports and day trading.
I mean shit, you idiots lived how long without a real paycheck and you couldn’t wait another 3, 6, 9 months?
Anyway, read more about it at
http://mydebtorsprison.com/2010/03/08/for-kids-in-limbo-the-card-the-eight-ball-the-bookie-and-the-market/
Read my other posts too, but nobody elses.
308,
SBA sent out an email the night before the party in question and 2 hours before the party an email was sent saying that they were pulling out. SBA said that they encourage people to attend and tried to put an end to all the rumors about the students in question being scam artists. I’m not sure, but I think that the word was SBA members were spreading information about the students that weren’t true. This would make me mad, but I wouldn’t send that sort of email.
- NYU Law Student
315, the NYU Law SBA pulled out of contributing school funds to the event only when it was revealed that his party promotion company was behind it. He had tried to hide this previously. No SBA members could have spread rumors about him before he sent the email because only the social chairs and the president had been interacting with him and none of them had any interest in antagonizing him. Why would anyone spread rumors about him anyway? His own actual words show what a failure he is.
Mr. Chuck has just sent this out on the Entire NYU Law listserv… I haven’t watched yet (but a very brief look through makes it look like his documentary, instead of a response), but here you go…
Dear Friends & Colleagues,
Due to the overwhelming requests that I make a comment about the atrocities committed against me on above the law, I have decided to respond. I have however decided to make my response a video response as I’ve learnt that emails can be more easily misconstrued than audiovisuals. Below are the links for my response:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RHha6fYzhY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xHbMHh9XDk
I hope you enjoy them, and please do feel free to leave comments.
Cheers,
Chuck.
The videos linked to in 320 are definitely not a response. This is just shameless promotion of another one of Mr. C’s stupid ventures, capitalizing on his recent infamy to get YouTube views. The worst part about this is how he’ll probably manage to deflect all the vitriol accruing against him right now onto the unfortunate subjects of his “documentary.” People will be mocking these kids instead of Mr. C now. Which, in addition to free publicity, might have been his intention in pretending like these videos were responses to ATL. Oh how much I hate this kid.
oh boy
just watched the YouTube videos
(yes I am really bored at work today)
now everything Mr. Chuck has said and done makes perfect sense
note to Mayer Brown: RRRRRRUUUUNNNNNNN
this guy is CRAY -ZEE
I’d like to point out the amazing background choice in the first scene of the documentary. In order to establish his prestige, Mr. Chuck is sitting in front of a bookshelf filled with law books, just like the asbestos lawyer on late night tv ads.
But Mr. Chuck doesnt have many law books; all his textbooks fit on the top shelf. So he’s filled the second shelf with commercial outlines!
It’s the little details that make all the difference. The difference between “i don’t take you seriously” and “you are the human equivalent of a Weird Al song, a parody of the rationality that supposedly separates man from beast.”
What a dull and self-indulgent documentary. Did the people in the video sign releases?
175, you’re an idiot.
Even if a black person got into Yale, that wouldn’t be enough for you. You’d say, well, his 173 really only qualifies him to go to Columbia. Get it? Jackass.
And people have various reasons for picking a school. I have a friend who turned down Yale to go to a school in the South to be close to a sick parent, and others who turned down Harvard for NYU/Columbia and cash.
Don’t ASSume he didn’t get into Yale, you dipshit.
As to that video…do you think he bothered to get authorization from the copyright holders of the music he uses? Would love to see how he defends that.
As to that video…do you think he bothered to get authorization from the copyright holders of the music he uses?
@ 326 and 327
He doesn’t need them.
328,
If you think he has a statutory exemption, he is not a school and he is broadcasting over the internet. No dice.
Clearly he took more than a de minimis amount of the song clips to use, and unless he wrote and owns the copyright, he is infringing. If you are assuming he has fair use, it is not so cut and dry. Transformative? No. New purpose or message? No. Parody? no. Profit motive? Likely. Effect on potential market? High, since people license out their songs for clips all the time. An ASCAP or BMI license doesn’t save him since this is not a public restaurant or venue that falls under it.
Simply put, he is taking music for use in promoting his for profit (or even non-profit, it probably doesn’t matter) video without giving credit or getting permission.
Someone should report his ass to ASCAP or BMI. This is a knowing and willful violation of copyright law, and could get statutory damages at the least (assuming these are registered copyrights).
Agree with 329. He has violated copying/reproduction, public performance (maybe, due to internet broadcast), and may be liable for contributory infringement (knows others will display/copy, induces it through spreading it by YouTube, others infringe).
Fair use is never clear cut, but always a balancing test in light of the purposes of copyright law. CHECK YOU SECTION 107 OF COPYRIGHT ACT.
329 + 330,
He is a close friend and/or manager of all the artists used in the film. Apply the law to those facts or just stop wasting your time and get off of ATL.
328