2L/3L Grades...Important? Forum

[Anonymous User]

How low do 2L/3L grades have to be to not receive a full time offer after the summer at a V20?

Please no responses about how i should start working harder.

[Neff]

You should work harder.

You should also learn to use the search function and see that this is the number one question asked on this forum.

[rpupkin]

How low do 2L/3L grades have to be to not receive a full time offer after the summer at a V20?

Please no responses about how i should start working harder.

I'm not sure what do here. One the one hand, I want to honor your request re not responding that you should work harder. On the other hand, you are going to summer at a V20, where excellence (and the hard work required to maintain that excellence) is required.

What kind of response would you like? Please advise.

[bluthmodelhome]

My firm gave offers at the end of the summer program this year without asking for our 2L grades, FWIW.

[SmokeytheBear]

You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.

[BlueParrot]

You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.

Nah, just be sure to go into corporate where bros like me don't even know what an infinitive is.

I did slack off some after 1L and my life wasn't ruined. In most cases it won't be a problem, but there's always a risk. The biggest risk is if you get no-offered and have to find another position. If you ever try to lateral, firms will always want to see your transcript as well. No idea of how much they actually care though. When I lateraled it didn't seem to matter much.

[cavalier1138]

You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.

I can't wait until a new generation of partners are in, so that ridiculous "rule" can finally disappear.

[Anonymous User]

I regret slacking off my 2L/3L years since I'm a junior and hate my firm.

[runinthefront]

You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.

FWIW, this is a dying rule

[icechicken]

You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.

FWIW, this is a dying rule

Never should have been a rule; it's something English grammarians decided we ought not do in English because it can't be done in Latin (because Latin infinitives are just inflected words). To ham-fistedly shoehorn rules from other languages into one's own is to needlessly waste time and energy.

[1styearlateral]

This thread turned out to be pretty interesting.

[albanach]

You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.

I can't wait until a new generation of partners are in, so that ridiculous "rule" can finally disappear.

Have all the new partners you want. If clients ask lawyers not to split infinitives, lawyers will continue to abide by the commonly accepted rules. Ken Adams has covered this very topic - to not/ not to - on his blog and his only reason to prefer the unsplit infinitive is to avoid pissing off those that care which, after all, is determinate when you decide to work in a service industry.

http://www.adamsdrafting.com/to-not-or-not-to/

So, if you want to make partner it might be best not to split your infinitives, whether your in corporate or litigation.

[Nagster5]

*you're

[rpupkin]

So, if you want to make partner it might be best not to split your infinitives, whether your in corporate or litigation.

That's the silliest thing I've read this week.

[Anonymous User]

You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.

I can't wait until a new generation of partners are in, so that ridiculous "rule" can finally disappear.

Have all the new partners you want. If clients ask lawyers not to split infinitives, lawyers will continue to abide by the commonly accepted rules. Ken Adams has covered this very topic - to not/ not to - on his blog and his only reason to prefer the unsplit infinitive is to avoid pissing off those that care which, after all, is determinate when you decide to work in a service industry.

http://www.adamsdrafting.com/to-not-or-not-to/

So, if you want to make partner it might be best not to split your infinitives, whether your in corporate or litigation.

[albanach]

Interesting use of anonymous to protect your emoji.

Seems some folk have trouble with a bit of Friday afternoon hyperbole. Of course it's unlikely to affect your partnership chances, but it's is still pisses off clients who retain outside counsel at $xxx/hour and receive work product that looks like it was written by a sixth grader. My point was just to say clients talk about the writing quality because it reflects on them. And, whether you're in litigation or transactions, words matter.

[albanach]

You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.

I can't wait until a new generation of partners are in, so that ridiculous "rule" can finally disappear.

Have all the new partners you want. If clients ask lawyers not to split infinitives, lawyers will continue to abide by the commonly accepted rules. Ken Adams has covered this very topic - to not/ not to - on his blog and his only reason to prefer the unsplit infinitive is to avoid pissing off those that care which, after all, is determinate when you decide to work in a service industry.

http://www.adamsdrafting.com/to-not-or-not-to/

So, if you want to make partner it might be best not to split your infinitives, whether you're in corporate or litigation.

[zhenders]

You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.

FWIW, this is a dying rule

Never should have been a rule; it's something English grammarians decided we ought not do in English because it can't be done in Latin (because Latin infinitives are just inflected words). To ham-fistedly shoehorn rules from other languages into one's own is to needlessly waste time and energy.

Come on folks, surely all of this is good for at least four or five more pages