In this lawyer email gem, the HR rep was too lazy to do a full-on cut and paste of standard rejectext. Instead she just forwarded a previously used rejection, leaving the indents–and the different color text–in the bulk of the email. Hey, at least they changed the first name.

Subject: Ross, Dixon & Bell, LLP

Dear [FIRST NAME],

> Thank you very much for expressing an interest in a position with our
> firm and providing us with a copy of your resume.
> We have recently completed hiring for our summer class of 200X and,
> unfortunately, will not be able to offer you a position for this
> summer. However, we hope that you remain interested in our firm and
> strongly encourage you to re-apply next Fall for the summer of 200Y.
> We wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors.
>
>
>
> [REDACTED]
> HR Assistant
> Ross, Dixon & Bell, LLP
> 2001 K Street
> Washington, DC 20006
> 202.662.2146
> www.rdblaw.com

No disclaimer!?!? Wow and this is a law firm? That alone puts this cover letter miles ahead of McDermott Will & Emery, with their whopping 83-word disclosure. So, kudos to you, lazy forwarding asses that you are.
Point breakdown after the jump:

• Objective: +1 (“thank you”) -1/5 (“unfortunately”) +2 (encouraged to reapply) = 2.8
• Subjective: -7 for the complete lack of initiative in forwarding the email (lawyer speak: punitive damages) = -7
• Total: -4.2

All-in-all, not a terrible score considering it’s a bunch of lawyers. Until next time, keep your feet on the ground and keep reaching for the forward button.

Oh you lawyers, always with the sincerity in your rejections. As we previously noted, we’ve been overrun with law school and law firm rejections. We thought that this particular law firm rejection was a good start. After all, apparently all 1,100 lawyers at McDermott Will & Emery are too busy accolading to do a mail merge with their unsuccessful candidates.
As you’ll notice below, the head recruiter delegated the menial task of the rejection letter–one of our favorite moves. But on the real, it’s pretty freaking lame that these folks didn’t even mail merge the applicants’ names in to the rejection email. And that ridiculously long disclosure at the end? Well that’s going to cost them in the points; more below.

From: [UNIDENTIFIED PERSON]
Cc: [RECRUITING COORDINATOR]
Subject:[BLANK]

Sent on behalf of [LEGAL RECRUITING MANAGER]

Thank you for your inquiry regarding summer employment at McDermott Will & Emery’s [REDACTED] office. Although we sincerely appreciate your interest in our Firm, we regret that our needs do not permit us to invite you in to interview for a position in our 200[X] Summer Program. Even though we are not able to consider you for a position this summer, we encourage you to contact us this fall regarding our 200[X] Summer Program and visit our website at www.mwe.com to learn more about us.

We look forward to hearing from you next fall. Good luck with the remainder of your first year.

Sincerely,

[LEGAL RECRUITING MANAGER]
Legal Recruiting Manager
McDermott Will & Emery LLP
340 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10173

*******************************************************************************************************************
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To comply with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained herein (including any attachments), unless specifically stated otherwise, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purposes of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter herein.
________________________________________________________________________________

This message is a PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL communication. This message and all attachments are a private communication sent by a law firm and may be confidential or protected by privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the information contained in or attached to this message is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender of the delivery error by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system. Thank you.
*******************************************************************************************************************

Please visit http://www.mwe.com/ for more information about our Firm.

Point breakdown after the jump. Here’s how the points shake out:

• Objective:-1 (lacking salutation) -1 (signatory different than typist) -2 (received via email) -3 (BCC on email) +1 (“thank you”, though this -2/5(“regret” “our needs”) +2 (encouraged to reapply) -83/10 (83 words in disclaimer, IRS disclaimer omitted) = -12.7
• Discretionary: -1 (lameness of the disclaimer, mitigated on account of these guys being lawyers and all) = -1
• Total: -13.7

Wow. As you can tell from the minimal discretionary penalty, we thought that, generally, MW&E weren’t too bad. That whole lacking mail merge thing is pretty lame, but the actual text of the letter showed some consideration for the rejected. Disclaimers can really set you back in this dog-eat-dog world of rejection letters, so watch out. Until next time, keep your feet on the ground and keep reaching for the mailbox.

It seems that law students and law students-to-be are the most spiteful of our early contributors. Over the next couple of weeks (time permitting) we’ll be posting some of the plethora of law school and law firm rejections. To begin, here’s one from the University of Chicago. An esteemed school with a Top 10 US News ranking; so esteemed, in fact, that applicants may have a hard time coping with rejection.
Actual text from the letter:

Although there is no way for me to lessen the disappointment, I would like to point out that the Committee’s decisions have been difficult.

Seriously? Two things piss us off here. First, although we’re sure the applicant in question was crying their eyes out when they received this rejection (though there are no tears on the scanned letter to indicate as such), the “lessen the disappointment” language goes too far, even for the hoity–toity law school types. Second, right after noting how difficult it will be for this applicant, U Chicago brings it back to it. I’m super sorry this is hard for you but it’s way harder for us. Pity us, this ivory tower has a lot of steps and such. Third (yes, we’re allowed to name three things even though we said two), if you look at the letter it was sent on 14 February. Valentines Day.
The full letter after the jump.
As promised (click to see the full-size image):

And now for the point breakdown.

• Objective Points: +1 (letterhead) -1/5*(3 “sorry” “unfortunately” “) + 1 (“thank you”) = +1.4
• Discretionary Points: -4 (condescending tone) -2 (self-promotion) = -6
• Total: -4.6

So, not a bad showing for the #7 law school in the nation. I hope you can deal with the disappointment of a -4.6, University of Chicago, just know that it was harder for us than it was for you. It’s not you, it’s me.

It isn’t news to anyone, but the 2000 classic animated Rejected deserves a spot here on RL.net. Written and directed by Don Hertzfeldt, Rejected shows a few shorts he created for the Family Learning Channel and Johnson & Mills around the turn of the century. (Wow, that’s the only time we’ll write “around the turn of the century” outside of an American History high school report.) But don’t feel too bad for Donny boy, he’s collaborated with the likes of Mike Judge (as in he, hehe, he he he he, he–Beavis and Butt-Head Mike Judge) and had a few other successes along the way.

Without further ado:

Looks like we’re not the only ones with our eyes on rejection these days.

It only seems fair to begin at the beginning. We wanted to start a site called RejectionLetters.com. Well, although there is no site there, no 404 page, nothing, it turns out that domain is owned by some Aussie named Garry Hardman (WHOIS). The WHOIS registry give his Web site as toptierdomains.com and so I traveled the long way of the Internets over to see about buying RejectionLetters.com. Garry is a bit of a wordsmith and clearly a trustworthy fellow. From the “About toptierdomains” page:

All domain names listed for sale at toptierdomains have been registered through accredited ICANN Registrars for possible future use by us or our affiliates. toptierdomains is a subsidiary of a registered Australian company Australian Screen Music Pty. Limited (ACN 000 529 331). This company was registered in the state of New South Wales in 1978. We can assure you that when you purchase a domain name from us that we own the rights to that domain name and a check through a whois register will provide proof of ownership details. All transactions that take place will be conducted on a purely professional basis and you can be assured that you are dealing with a reputable entity. We believe our domain names are of an extremely high standard and are as generic as possible.

So we inquired. Garry wants $1,200 for the rights of rejectionletters.com, and those are USD. Considering $1,200 is a bit silly, we thought it best to use a little humor (or “humour” as he would say) when we emailed him with my proposal of $100. We mentioned that he has owned RejectionLetters.com since 2002 (a long time) and although Web squatting can be a lucrative business, this particular domain wasn’t moving and wasn’t yielding any income.

His reply, our first rejection letter! Point value: -5, not the strongest showing, but not half bad considering its brevity.

From: sales@toptierdomains.com
Subject: rejectionletters.com

[INCORRECT FIRST NAME],

I’ve also had my wife for a number of years, but all the time she’s
bringing in income I’ll hang on to her. Any name that doesn’t perform
for us is usually sold off for meagre [sic] offers like yours or not
renewed. We’ve refused bigger offers than yours on that name in the
past, so if you want the name you’ll need to bring a realistic number
to the table.

Regards,
Garry Hardman

Fair enough, Garr-bear. But riddle us this, if rejectionletters.com is a “name that doesn’t perform,” and you will eventually sell it off for a “meagre” (in fairness, that’s the proper Commonwealth spelling) offer like ours, why not do so now? We just didn’t get it. Thus, our reply:

Gary [Note: this is a misspelling of his name],Thank you for responding to my offer, meager as you may find it. I’m not sure if I understand the analogy of your wife. I suppose what she does to bring in money is your business, though, not mine.

Best of luck.

Zing! And that’s how Rejection Letters (dot) Net was born.