We’ve done a few posts on screw-ups and rudeness on the part of lawyers conducting on-campus interviews (see here and here). But what about the interviewees? They’re not perfect either — even if some of them think they are.
What are some ways that law students have torpedoed their chances of getting callbacks or summer associate offers? In this grim job market, there’s little room for error (especially if you are a 3L).
Let’s collect some examples of what NOT to do in an interview situation, so ATL readers can learn from the mistakes of others. Here’s a tale from a top ten school:
A 2L knocks on the door of an interview room when it’s his turn. Instead of waiting, he walks right in.
The interviewer and the student being interviewed both look up, shocked. The student says to them, “MY turn,” and just stands there.
The interviewer, after getting past the initial shock, asks to have a couple of minutes to finish up the first interview. The student looks at his watch, pauses, and says, “Well… I suppose….”
That’s pretty bad. Can you top it? Feel free to share (true) stories of fall recruiting bloopers and screw-ups, in the comments. Update: Check out some of our favorite tales, and vote for the one you like best, over here.
Last week, we reported that Foley & Lardner no offered 43% of their 2008 summer class from their Chicago office.
The firm has still not contacted us directly, but multiple tipsters passed along a clarification email sent to all Foley associates late last night.
Straight from the horse’s mouth (CEO Ralf Boer):
Many of you may have heard about blog comments critical of Foley’s hiring decisions from this year’s summer program which just concluded. Some of those comments indicate that we have extended offers to fewer than 50% of this summer’s 2L participants. The purpose of this e-mail is to set the record straight so that all of you have the facts, rather than the rumors which started as we made our first offers and before we completed our offer process.We literally have only completed our offer process at the office level today, and additional offers may yet be made.
As we pointed out in our initial story, some tipsters mentioned that Foley could still have been reviewing summer candidates as of last week. We couldn’t confirm those reports with the firm, but they appear to have been correct.
So what are the final numbers shaping up like?
If we look at the number of offers made to date, the offer percentage is 84% (89 offers to the 106 2Ls in the summer program). That number may go up as we complete our offer process. Thus, the percentages reported in the blogs were calculated as we were in the middle of our offer process and, accordingly, were inaccurate. Some of the blog reports related to our Chicago offer rate. We have, in fact, to date made 17 offers to a 2L class of 21, for an offer rate of 81% in Chicago, not the 50% reported on the blogs. Again, that percentage may also go up.
84% overall, 81% out of Chicago. That is a bit lower than the 90% many firms are reporting, but far better than the bloodbath it looked like last week.
More on Foley after the jump.
Steve Jobs did not invent the iPod. Neither did Bibble.
No, the inventor of the iPod is Kane Kramer, a British guy who stored three and a half minutes of music on a microchip in 1979.
In fairness to Apple, they did not “steal” Kramer’s idea. According to the Daily Mail, Kramer set up a company to develop the iPod idea:
But in 1988, after a boardroom split, he was unable to raise the £60,000 needed to renew patents across 120 countries and the technology became public property.
Patent law: how good ideas are redistributed from kooky inventors to effective businessmen.
And with that Kramer might well have been discard into the Farnsworth bin of history.
But thanks to a dispute between Apple and Burst.com, Apple needed Kramer. Apple flew Kramer to California to give crucial testimony about the prior art behind the iPod. The dispute between Apple and Burst.com was settled out of court, but Apple is stuck with the price of admitting that the iPod was invented across the pond.
Why Biglaw associates should support Apple giving money to Kane Kramer, after the jump.
* The DOJ is prepping for its antitrust showdown with Google. It has hired Hogan and Hartson partner (and former legal Mouseketeer) Sandy Litvack for the case. [Information Week]
* Berkeley tree-sitters refuse to comply with court ruling and come down for the sake of a new athletic center. Even after getting immunity for throwing their poo-poo at the po-po. [New York Times]
*The media continue to vet Sarah Palin. She let Alaska taxpayers foot bills for family travel and meals at home. For once, Joe Biden may be happy to be ignored. [Washington Post]
* In her time of woe, Nevada judge Elizabeth Halverson has a friend speak out on her behalf. We want to stop following this story, but we just can’t seem to look away. [Action News]
* J.K. Rowling’s biggest fan has suffered a legal defeat. The man who spent seven years on a Harry Potter lexicon will not be able to publish it, says judge. [New York Times]
Over the weekend, the New York Times had an interesting article about New York judges and their robes. It begins:
In Britain, judges are wedded to a tradition of elegant attire: scarlet and ermine robes, tippets over the shoulders, black girdles and, of course, the crimped, gray horsehair wig.
Minor correction: British judges have dispensed with wigs, except in criminal proceedings.
The article then discusses the robe-wearing styles of various judges. Judge ShawnDya Simpson, for example, “rarely fastens all the buttons and often accents [her robe] with a scarf or necklace,” or sometimes dispenses with a robe in favor of a lime-green suit.
Read more, after the jump.
As we’ve previously observed, “we’re not really sure how much there is to say about the MPRE. It’s not a super-difficult test, and it hasn’t exactly achieved the mythical status of the bar exam as a rite of passage for aspiring lawyers.”
But it seems, judging from all the emails we’ve received, that some of you are dying to discuss the just-released results for the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination. A few representative messages:
“The MPRE results for August are now online!”
“I didn’t study at all and got an 80. Looks like I’ll be re-upping in November.”
[Ed. note: As noted here, “[p]assing scores, which are established by each jurisdiction, currently vary between 75 and 86.”]
“I just got an e-mail with a link to my score for the August MPRE. Pretty quick turnaround time, actually — exactly a month since the test day. Thought you might want the news.”
This does seem a little earlier than usual, as we were just discussing here in the office. From an IM that Elie sent (yes, we IM each other, even though we’re about 15 feet away): “What is the usual turnaround time for MPRE scores? I don’t remember mine, other than briefly wondering if taking it hung over was really a wise decision (turned out fine).”
Here’s an open thread for discussing the MPRE. If you passed the test, congratulations. If you failed — well, prepare to be mocked, in the comments. Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE) [National Conference of Bar Examiners]
* The new Dean of Texas Tech school of law will be …? Well it should be Bobby Knight shouldn’t it? [Res Ipsa Blog]
* Yale Law Women announced their top ten family friendly firms. [Yale Law School]
* Mike Cernovich tries the end this meme that associates should pay their law firms. He uses math. [Crime & Federalism]
* … Of course, if firms wanted to drop the billable hour altogether we could talk. [Law.com]
* Is it possible that lawyers in Great Britain are even more out of touch with reality than their American counterparts? [Legal Blog Watch]
* J-E-T-S, Jets, Jets, Jets! Want a legal angle? Tom Brady had his knee non-sequitured. [ESPN]
* It’s international literacy day! Thanks to the editor of Blawg Review and all the loyal ATL readers for chipping in to get me my very own Hooked-on-Phonics master reader set. You guys are too kind. [Legal Literacy.com via Blawg Review]
Earlier today we reported that Squire, Sanders & Dempsey extended offers to 76% of their summer class, but that an untold number of those summers received staff attorney offers.
Well, after an initial “no comment” on the staff attorney question, Squire Sanders decided to clarify their statement:
The firm made one staff attorney offer. The offer was extended to accommodate a law student’s interest in a practice area that was only hiring staff attorneys for 2009. We did not include the staff attorney offer when we reported to you that 76% of the summer associates received associate offers. We intend to report associate offer numbers to NALP excluding the staff attorney offer as well.
There you go. At least the 24% of the class that was no-offered do not have to feel as bad about themselves as some commenters suggested.
I guess I can stop screaming at NALP about the purity of their report. Earlier: Nationwide No Offer Watch: Squire Sanders
Lawyer layoffs: they’re not just an American phenomenon. Last month, for example, DLA Piper laid off lawyers in London. Here’s more layoff news from that fair city, from TheLawyer.com:
More than half of the UK lawyers at US investment bank Bear Stearns have been axed since the collapsed bank was taken over by JPMorgan.
Out of 23 lawyers in London’s legal department, only 10 were offered new positions by JPMorgan, with nine accepting.
Fortunately, Bear Stearns refugees are landing new jobs without too much apparent difficulty. The Lawyer reports that ex-Bear Stearns attorneys have landed at Bingham McCutchen and Brown Rudnick, in New York and London, respectively. JPMorgan cuts Bear’s headcount [The Lawyer]
Open container laws are both massively annoying and haphazardly enforced. The mere concept of it offends the notion of freedom and remains the single best reason to move to New Orleans.
The law prevents anyone from drinking in public, which unfortunately requires lawyers to haggle over the definition of “public space” instead of going home and enjoying a frosty beverage.
Brooklyn resident Kimber VanRy got nailed with one of these ludicrous $25 citations and he is fighting it. He’ll probably lose, he was drinking a beer on his stoop when he had the misfortune of a cop rolling by. But he wasn’t drunk, he wasn’t throwing a party or using the beer bottle for lewd and deviant acts, he was just minding his own business in the middle of New York City when the government had to get all up in his grill.
Stupid laws beget stupid legal arguments. Look at what Legal Aid is arguing to defend this guy. The New York Times reports the opinion of one such lawyer, Steve Wasserman:
“This is an open question,” he said of the law. “There’s also a larger constitutional question, if a piece of your private property were being treated as if it were a public place. You couldn’t get arrested for drinking that beer in your kitchen. Now you’re sitting on your stoop. The stoop may be more like your kitchen than your sidewalk.”
Really, we have to get into a Con Law exam to answer this question? What if your kitchen has concrete counter tops while your sidewalk is made of cobblestone?
The cop who gave VanRy the open container ticket told him (after inquiring as to what kind of beer he was drinking) that if VanRy’s stoop had a gate, he would not have received a ticket. So, only people with gated stairs can enjoy some fresh air while drinking a beer?
The summer is almost at an end. In its waning days, we should all be able to enjoy some fresh air and green space with as much alcoholic libation as we can handle. I got ya’ $25 right here, NYPD. Fighting for the Right to Drink Beer on His Stoop [New York Times]
When it comes to law firm swag — and compensation, and prestige — Sullivan & Cromwell has long been a market leader. Remember their famous bonsai trees?
Last year, S&C made an appearance at the Lavender Law conference, an annual gathering for LGBT lawyers and law students. To improve their standing in the gay community, which was damaged a bit by the Aaron Charney lawsuit, they came bearing gifts: Kiehl’s products.
We were impressed: “S&C is shrewd: they know the way to our hearts is through our pores.” But others were not. Sniffed one commenter:
I guess the memo didn’t make it to the S&C gays. We don’t use Kiehl’s any longer… We’ve moved on to Malin & Goetz.
So guess what Sullivan & Cromwell gave away at this year’s Lavendar Law conference? Yup, that’s right: Malin + Goetz, in copious quantities. Even though S&C generally doesn’t respond to our requests for comment on stories about them, it seems that they read ATL — including the comments.
S&C made upgrades in other departments as well. Last year, a Lavender Law attendee described the Sullivan reps as “pallid and haggard.” This year, the S&C conference crew was “hot hot hot.”
S&C to 190K? Maybe not in 2008. But if you’re looking for high-end cosmetics and gay male eye candy, they’ve got you covered. Earlier: Sullivan & Cromwell and the Gays: Kiehling Them With Kindness
SideTaker.com might be the best example of schadenfreude ever created.
It is ostensibly a form of alternative dispute resolution for divorcing or generally unhappy couples. The concept is pretty simple. A disgruntled lover pays a $12 fee and posts his or her grievance on the website. Then he/she invites their partner to do the same. Once the two sides are online, random strangers weigh in on the dispute and vote over a 60 day period for who should prevail.
Obviously the results are not legally binding in any way (not unlike the modern day marriage certificate).
Legal Blog Watch reports that the site’s creators think they are doing some sort of service for the benefit of these couples:
Some are just, but far too many divorces, break ups, and separations happen over non-critical disputes. Over 50% of American marriages end in divorce. In a fight, each person has their side and are usually backed by their friends (on either side). When you can create a jury of anonymous peers to decide who is right or wrong in an argument, then the bias is gone and the person at fault will just have to suck it up.
I can’t imagine hating a woman enough to subject our relationship to the scathing critique of anonymous commenters. I think it’d be more humane just to throw some arsenic in the morning coffee and be done with it.
Wisdom from Side Taker’s “jury” after the jump.
Jiminy jillickers! ATL editors are going all over the place over the next month or so. Or at least all over the Eastern Seaboard. If we aren’t heading to your neck of the woods on these trips, never fear, we may hit you up on the next time around. We’ve already hit up Houston, Chicago, Seattle, San Francisco, and Los Angeles in the past year.
Kinney Recruiting’sEvan Jowers is currently in Hong Kong for client meetings and still has a few slots available through October 22. Evan will also be in Hong Kong November 14 to December 15. Further, Robert Kinney has been in Frankfurt and Munich this week and is available for meetings with our Germany based readers.
One of our key law firm clients has referred us to one of their important clients in the US, Europe and China – a leading global technology supplier for the auto industry – in order to handle their search for a new Asia General Counsel and Asia Chief Compliance Officer.
Kinney is exclusively handling this in-house search.
This position will have a lot of responsibility and include supervision of eight attorneys underneath them in the Asia in-house team. The new hire will report directly to the global general counsel and global chief compliance officer, who is based in the US. The new hire’s ability to make judgement calls is going to be as important as their technical skill set background.
The position is based in Shanghai and will deal with the company’s operations all over Asia and also in India, including frequent acquisitions in the region.
It is expected that the new hire will come from a top US firm’s Shanghai, Beijing or Hong Kong offices, currently in a top flight corporate practice at the senior associate, counsel or partner level. Of course, the candidate can be currently in a relevant in-house role.
The JOBS Act created new tools for companies to publicly advertise securities deals online. As a result, thousands of new deals have hit the market and hundreds of millions in capital has been raised, spurring a wealth of new business development opportunities for attorneys.
Fund deals, startup capital raises, PIPE deals and loan syndicates are just a handful of the transactions benefiting from the JOBS Act. InvestorID FirmTM is a platform designed to help attorneys equip their clients with the workflow, marketing and compliance tools to publicly solicit a securities offering online. By providing clients with the tools to painlessly navigate the regulatory landscape of general solicitation, InvestorID FirmTM helps attorneys add value above just legal services.
The Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (JOBS Act) went into effect in 2013 and permits Regulation D offerings of securities to be advertised publicly. This means that funds and companies can now use social media, emails and web sites to market transactions to new “accredited” investors.
However, with these new powers come new pain points. InvestorID FirmTM provides a secure, fully hosted, cloud-based platform with a breadth of tools for your clients, including: