A recent article in the Wall Street Journal talked about a law firm headed by a graduate of my alma matter who imposed a ban on hiring law school graduates from Ivy League and other elite schools.
Instead of being groomed to work as a US Supreme Court Justice or future President, Adam Bailey of the Manhattan firm of Adam Leitman Baily, PC prefers his attorneys to be “ready for battle” by taking course such as trial prep rather than constitutional theory. “Even if they were top of the class, I would never hire an Ivy League grad,” said Bailey.
Admittedly, this article and subsequent follow-up interviews have generated a lot of buzz for Adam Bailey and his firm (and a cursory review of his firm provided evidence that he already has some Ivy League grads working for him). I suspect that the “buzz” was the point of the statement. But does it make sense?
I think that there is some merit to the argument that top schools’ admissions procedures cull out good lawyers in exchange for good legal theorists, but can you make a blanket statement that you won’t hire from a top school?
Just like firms won’t consider students from lower-tier law schools, Bailey is free to opt out of hiring top candidates. As a result, I suspect that his firm will suffer. If I were a potential client, would you want a firm that systematically removes employees form top-ranked schools? I suspect that you wouldn’t if you want your legal problem resolved.
What do you think about this refusal to hire grads from top schools?