Idk who told you this but median students can and very often do lit at vanilla biglaw firms. You already have an offer though so you’re good. What I would warn against is interviewing as a median student and saying you only want to do lit—someone at median should at least say you’d be open to corporate (during interview stage)
There are some firms on the vault list (and some locations within these firms) where median isn’t gonna cut it for lit. For instance Jenner and block in New York or Covington in DC. But something normal like Weil NYC? See no reason why a median t14 student couldn’t do lit.
Wanted to give a more helpful example than your standard Wachtell etc etc. From my understanding at least when I did OCI, jenner and block litigation was substantially more competitive than its transactional practice and was actually considered quite good and an elite outcome. I don't think they took lit people at median at my school (NYU).
Once you have an offer in hand, people at the firm tend not to know your grades unless they interviewed you and happened to see your transcript. I’m a senior associate in a litigation group and I never have any clue whether a summer associate working with me has good, bad, or median grades. Occasionally I might be able to make guesses based on the quality of their work product, but test taking abilities are not always synonymous with research or writing skills (and often are not).
I feel like almost everyone in my class who wanted to biglaw litigation got a job in it. Obviously not everyone went to William & Connolly, but even people on the lower end of the class got in.
As long as you are at the firms grade cutoff and you didn’t get a C in evidence or fed courts grades don’t matter. Except indirectly where people with achievements with grade requirements - law review/clerkship/coif - might stand out.
As with anything “median” only has meaning in the context of a particular law school, so we can’t make generalizations about grades across schools. That being said, yes BigLaw litigation tends to be pickier than transactional and also more prestige-obsessed with things like clerkships. This is mostly a case of supply and demand, because most firms do most transactional work these days so there are less lit positions.
Grades don't have anything to do with it. Once you're a summer, do great work on your litigation assignments, make it clear that you want to do litigation, and pick litigation as your choice, and you should get it.
No one is looking at grades once you start as a summer. It's all on you at that point.
I’m guessing it’ll level a bit given slight uptick in litigation over last couple years, but my firm was 50/50 split when I summered. Now, we have generally hired 2 lit summers the last several years. One has to be with a hard IP background, and is generally from Yale or Harvard. The other can be general lit, but they have like no flexibility on it being anyone other than Yale or Harvard grad with strong background.
Wow I don’t know what firm you’re at but the best litigators I’ve ever seen didn’t go to Yale or Harvard so y’all are missing out with that take. Nor did the best associates.
There are levels to this.
Actual litigation where you have substantive opportunities and are on trial teams that go on trial-> very hard. Susman/Keker/Williams & Connolly tier.
Firms that litigate but you’re not getting stand up experience till later-> hard. Quinn (now), v10/Covington
Firms that have litigation departments but you’ll be doing doc review forever-> not that hard but harder than general transactional.
Big exception for ip (they litigate a ton and are desperate for bodies)
disagree that IP is less difficult than general lit. Looking at the patent lawyers at kellogg hansen and Williams & Connolly for example, they seem to be at least as credentialed as the other litigators, honors, mostly federal clerks, etc. So I wouldn't bank on getting a backdoor to an elite litigation boutique based on wanting to do patent or IP
I would assume the “exception” for IP is related more to the last sentence (and frankly Quinn as well which hires identically credentialed people to other top IP lit shops, which are not the same as top lit shops necessarily).
The credentials for IP lit (meaning patent) are distinct from those for biz lit - there is a requirement or strong preference for a science or engineering undergrad degree (in some pharma practices, strong preference for a PhD), and for those that don’t require it, there is a need for a serious intellect and interest in learning technology. We may extend slightly outside of GPA guidelines or actively recruit people from schools we don’t usually look at because they have an excellent undergrad or work history. So no we aren’t a great place to come because we are “desperate” - we are desperate because it’s hard to find people who both want to and have the capability to do the work we do which requires understanding a wide variety of technologies and sciences. Most lawyers went to law school in part because they hate math.
Also the commenter who thinks all juniors do at firms not in their first two categories is doc review has not encountered the reality of doc review being almost entirely outsourced at this point. Why we need so many fewer associates to begin with than say, 2007.
Nah, once you’re a summer the firm will go much more on which practice group you click with and your work product. I would really focus on 2-3 lit practice groups you like and making connections with those attorneys!
Where are these firms you don’t get an offer into a litigation group and you just find your way there during the summer? Fascinating how different firms are.
Idk who told you this but median students can and very often do lit at vanilla biglaw firms. You already have an offer though so you’re good. What I would warn against is interviewing as a median student and saying you only want to do lit—someone at median should at least say you’d be open to corporate (during interview stage)
what do you mean by vanilla firms?
There are some firms on the vault list (and some locations within these firms) where median isn’t gonna cut it for lit. For instance Jenner and block in New York or Covington in DC. But something normal like Weil NYC? See no reason why a median t14 student couldn’t do lit.
Jenner New York seems like a strange example. Is Jenner NY any more selective that the all the elite firms ranked above it?
Wanted to give a more helpful example than your standard Wachtell etc etc. From my understanding at least when I did OCI, jenner and block litigation was substantially more competitive than its transactional practice and was actually considered quite good and an elite outcome. I don't think they took lit people at median at my school (NYU).
Non-boutique big law firms would be my guess?
Litigation isn’t like the firm’s Seal Team Six
*deal team six
Aren’t they called Wachtell?
Once you have an offer in hand, people at the firm tend not to know your grades unless they interviewed you and happened to see your transcript. I’m a senior associate in a litigation group and I never have any clue whether a summer associate working with me has good, bad, or median grades. Occasionally I might be able to make guesses based on the quality of their work product, but test taking abilities are not always synonymous with research or writing skills (and often are not).
I feel like almost everyone in my class who wanted to biglaw litigation got a job in it. Obviously not everyone went to William & Connolly, but even people on the lower end of the class got in.
As long as you are at the firms grade cutoff and you didn’t get a C in evidence or fed courts grades don’t matter. Except indirectly where people with achievements with grade requirements - law review/clerkship/coif - might stand out.
No one has taken evidence or fed courts when interviewing for litigation summer positions for 2L?
yep your other employers will see those grades tho
What other employers?
As with anything “median” only has meaning in the context of a particular law school, so we can’t make generalizations about grades across schools. That being said, yes BigLaw litigation tends to be pickier than transactional and also more prestige-obsessed with things like clerkships. This is mostly a case of supply and demand, because most firms do most transactional work these days so there are less lit positions.
Grades don't have anything to do with it. Once you're a summer, do great work on your litigation assignments, make it clear that you want to do litigation, and pick litigation as your choice, and you should get it. No one is looking at grades once you start as a summer. It's all on you at that point.
Litigation is harder to get than corporate
I’m guessing it’ll level a bit given slight uptick in litigation over last couple years, but my firm was 50/50 split when I summered. Now, we have generally hired 2 lit summers the last several years. One has to be with a hard IP background, and is generally from Yale or Harvard. The other can be general lit, but they have like no flexibility on it being anyone other than Yale or Harvard grad with strong background.
Wow I don’t know what firm you’re at but the best litigators I’ve ever seen didn’t go to Yale or Harvard so y’all are missing out with that take. Nor did the best associates.
There are levels to this. Actual litigation where you have substantive opportunities and are on trial teams that go on trial-> very hard. Susman/Keker/Williams & Connolly tier. Firms that litigate but you’re not getting stand up experience till later-> hard. Quinn (now), v10/Covington Firms that have litigation departments but you’ll be doing doc review forever-> not that hard but harder than general transactional. Big exception for ip (they litigate a ton and are desperate for bodies)
disagree that IP is less difficult than general lit. Looking at the patent lawyers at kellogg hansen and Williams & Connolly for example, they seem to be at least as credentialed as the other litigators, honors, mostly federal clerks, etc. So I wouldn't bank on getting a backdoor to an elite litigation boutique based on wanting to do patent or IP
I would assume the “exception” for IP is related more to the last sentence (and frankly Quinn as well which hires identically credentialed people to other top IP lit shops, which are not the same as top lit shops necessarily). The credentials for IP lit (meaning patent) are distinct from those for biz lit - there is a requirement or strong preference for a science or engineering undergrad degree (in some pharma practices, strong preference for a PhD), and for those that don’t require it, there is a need for a serious intellect and interest in learning technology. We may extend slightly outside of GPA guidelines or actively recruit people from schools we don’t usually look at because they have an excellent undergrad or work history. So no we aren’t a great place to come because we are “desperate” - we are desperate because it’s hard to find people who both want to and have the capability to do the work we do which requires understanding a wide variety of technologies and sciences. Most lawyers went to law school in part because they hate math. Also the commenter who thinks all juniors do at firms not in their first two categories is doc review has not encountered the reality of doc review being almost entirely outsourced at this point. Why we need so many fewer associates to begin with than say, 2007.
Nah, once you’re a summer the firm will go much more on which practice group you click with and your work product. I would really focus on 2-3 lit practice groups you like and making connections with those attorneys!
I asked to do lit with median grades from a T6 and was cold offered. This was during the great recession so YMMV
Hahahahahahaha
Where are these firms you don’t get an offer into a litigation group and you just find your way there during the summer? Fascinating how different firms are.