I think I have discovered another downside to non-ABA
I was approached by a partner of a fairly large law firm (220+
lawyers)for an unadvertised position they had at their firm. I have
a rather unique expertise in a specific area of tax law which is
exactly where they needed a senior level lawyer and this partner who
approached me has known me for a number of years and we had done
various presentations together, etc.
I had many interviews and discussions with various other partners at
the firm, they reviewed my existing client base, education,
experience, writing samples, drafts of various documents, etc. etc.
Everyone whom I met was very eager to have me at their firm, however
when the partners took their recommendation to the firm
administration I found out they have from what I assume a very
strict policy about hiring from non-ABA schools. The partners on my
behalf explained to the admin that I went to a year and a half at an
ABA school after Concord, had a fairly high score on the Bar, and
various other degrees and designations but to no avail.
It is my understanding that the admin partners told the partners who
needed to fill this position that they now have to advertise the
position and after several months if they find no other qualified
candidates from an ABA school, then they would consider me once
I love the education I received at Concord, and firmly believe the
quality is the same if not better than any other law school, but
without the ABA accredidation there are many closed doors. As I
mentioned in an earlier post I tried to get a reserve position with
the US army JAG but was rejected solely because of the ABA
requirement, and now I find possibly that big law firms I suppose
are cool to the non-ABA deal unless this one is an exception. It is
a shame something can't be done for Concord to get this all
important holy grail of recognitions.