This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - nealric
Pages: 1 2  4 5 6 7 8 ... 233
« on: May 01, 2011, 04:11:28 PM »
My question is, how do I get into biglaw without going the traditional OCI route when I have no experience in any relevant practice areas?
Short answer: you don't.
Long answer: The way to do it is to either get extremely lucky with a connection or find a way to get experience in the practice areas (and/or a combination of both). For example, there is an associate at my firm who got an in-house job at a growing company through a prof. The company grew to the point that they started hiring my firm for several matters and she started working closely with partners at the firm. Eventually, they asked if she would like to come on board.
Too make a long story short I am at Touro paying half tuition, I finished in the top 10% and they will offer me more money. I am already on the transfer bandwagon and have been accepted by Brooklyn. The difference between Brooklyn and Touro over two years would be near 70k, I am wondering if it is worth it.
I think there is certainly a difference. My firm hires 1-2 Brooklyn/Cardozo grads a year but generally won't touch someone from Touro. However, I don't think you would be successful at Brooklyn OCI as a Touro transfer. If you were top 1-2% and could swing a transfer to NYU/Columbia, I think it would be unequivocally worth it. But as is I would stay put and avoid the debt. See if you can leverage your acceptances elsewhere for more scholarship money from Touro.
« on: April 18, 2011, 10:15:55 PM »
An attorney retainer will never be a number like $47,863.53 instead of $50k, nor will an hourly billable rate be something like $387.50 instead of a round $400
People don't bill out at $387.50 an hour, but few attorneys at large firms bill out in fully round numbers. It's more like $380/hr for a Jr. associate or $930 for a sr. partner.
« on: April 17, 2011, 02:18:28 PM »
Nobody really knows what kind of job you will get.
I would say that PT is the way to go if you are going to Cardozo. Work full time and take out the minimum loans possible.
« on: April 16, 2011, 03:13:54 PM »
This isn't the answer you probably want, but I would say none of the above unless:
You spent at least 250 hours studying for the LSAT and took it at least three times. The reason for maximizing LSAT isn't just about rankings, but scholarships. 5 points on the LSAT can make people go from rejection to big scholarship at a school.
Your desire to be a lawyer is so strong that you don't mind a low salary
You have a strategic post-graduation plan
You are very good at networking.
You know you want to practice in California
You have no desire or intention to practice in a large law firm or do transactional work
If all the above conditions are met, you MUST examine the scholarship retention requirements before making a commitment. Many schools have a 3.0 GPA requirement to retain scholarships, which may sound easy if you are used to undergrad courses, but is not easy if the school curves to a 2.5. Many schools essentially guarantee that more than 1/2 of scholarship recipients lose their scholarship.
« on: April 16, 2011, 01:27:19 PM »
Just echoing FalconJimmy: go where you would like to live.
« on: April 16, 2011, 01:25:25 PM »
Vaguely curious, if you don't mind: which firm in NYC? A bunch of my old law school buddies are there...
You could probably figure it out with some internet sleuthing. It's a V50-100 in lower Manhattan.
When I first saw nealric posting there, I died a little inside. Truefax.
I felt a little guilty signing up, but LSD just hasn't had much traffic for a while. I won't abandon this place though
« on: April 11, 2011, 12:06:38 AM »
I'm a 1st year tax associate in NYC biglaw. I doubt I would be where I am today without LSD. I'm still disappointed the "other"forum ended up taking all the traffic. We had a good group.
I miss certain things about being a student (such as sleeping until noon on weekdays), but I'm glad to be getting my career underway.
« on: March 13, 2011, 07:31:24 PM »
I would just talk about being sick the first time. Either way, I don't think LSAT addendums are usually necessary.
« on: March 13, 2011, 07:29:59 PM »
Thanks, actually, 8% isn't as bad as I thought given some of the graphs. It seems like Duke tends to
I guarantee almost every single one of those 8% was an under-represented minority. If you are not an underrepresented minority, your chances are probably closer to 1%. But like people said, retake the LSAT. I advise anybody who scored less than a 170 their first time to retake. You have nothing to lose but the study time and the administration fee. Both pale in comparison to the investments of time and money you will put into law school.
« on: March 13, 2011, 07:27:08 PM »
What's your goal for law school? What type of law do you seek to practice? What are your financial constraints?
As far as admissions are concerned, your primary problem is the LSAT. Also, they are going to look at your undergraduate GPA, not your MD GPA. I assume that was good if you got into medical school.
Pages: 1 2  4 5 6 7 8 ... 233