Small Firm Hiring Partner Here For Any Questions. Forum

[reformed calvinist]

Thanks for taking the time to answer questions. I am interested in practicing in a small firm and this thread is of particular interest to me. I am currently a 1L and am wondering how much a A in legal writing and/or prizes (such as best memo or best brief in the 1L class) balance a single slightly below median grade in a substantive course (a C+ in torts for example)? Also how much do you consider the need for writing in an applicant's prior career? For example, I was a community college instructor in music before law school and wrote fairly extensively - conference papers, program notes, and the like.

I might depend somewhat on the small firm. Our firm handles fairly sophisticated business transactions and commercial litigation, so writing is especially important to us. Not the only thing, but a good writing grade is a big plus. Obviously, given our practice areas, torts is not real important. I look for undergraduate business majors, english majors and journalism majors as a plus and preferable over political science. Again, we are a business firm so those things are attractive. As I mentioned above, the number one reason associates fail at our firm is poor writing despite our efforts to identify candidates who we think will be able to write well in private practice.

Inability to concisely write a document, memo or pleading in a form that is unambiguous. If it is a legal agreement, knowing what representations and warranties, covenants and agreements, default provisions, special agreements and miscellaneous clauses are necessary and understanding what they mean. Using defined terms effectively. In a memo, making it direct and to the point with answer and any collateral issues easily understood. In a pleading, allegations that are clear and sequential so you lay it out in a manner a busy judge can understand. Almost like writing a story that you can easily follow and get the reader to understand what you are saying and why. It takes a lot of work even with the best new associates. I tell our new hires I expect to hand them a blank legal pad (I know it is the computer age, but they understand) in 2 years and have them draft a letter agreement from scratch without the use of templates or examples, in near perfect form in less than an hour. My mentor told me that when I was starting out and I did not believe him. But after much pain in learning and having lots of red on my drafts, I was in fact, able to do it.

At what point does a legal writing grade cease to be a metric (i.e. once you have a "real" writing portfolio, as opposed to school assignments)? Would, say, real world writing product from interning for a judge (and his positive recommendation on writing ability) adequately supersede a low legal writing grade?

[Sm Firm Hiring P]

Thanks for taking the time to answer questions. I am interested in practicing in a small firm and this thread is of particular interest to me. I am currently a 1L and am wondering how much a A in legal writing and/or prizes (such as best memo or best brief in the 1L class) balance a single slightly below median grade in a substantive course (a C+ in torts for example)? Also how much do you consider the need for writing in an applicant's prior career? For example, I was a community college instructor in music before law school and wrote fairly extensively - conference papers, program notes, and the like.

[quote="I might depend somewhat on the small firm. Our firm handles fairly sophisticated business transactions and commercial litigation, so writing is especially important to us. Not the only thing, but a good writing grade is a big plus. Obviously, given our practice areas, torts is not real important. I look for undergraduate business majors, english majors and journalism majors as a plus and preferable over political science. Again, we are a business firm so those things are attractive. As I mentioned above, the number one reason associates fail at our firm is poor writing despite our efforts to identify candidates who we think will be able to write well in private practice.[/quote]

Inability to concisely write a document, memo or pleading in a form that is unambiguous. If it is a legal agreement, knowing what representations and warranties, covenants and agreements, default provisions, special agreements and miscellaneous clauses are necessary and understanding what they mean. Using defined terms effectively. In a memo, making it direct and to the point with answer and any collateral issues easily understood. In a pleading, allegations that are clear and sequential so you lay it out in a manner a busy judge can understand. Almost like writing a story that you can easily follow and get the reader to understand what you are saying and why. It takes a lot of work even with the best new associates. I tell our new hires I expect to hand them a blank legal pad (I know it is the computer age, but they understand) in 2 years and have them draft a letter agreement from scratch without the use of templates or examples, in near perfect form in less than an hour. My mentor told me that when I was starting out and I did not believe him. But after much pain in learning and having lots of red on my drafts, I was in fact, able to do it.[/quote]

At what point does a legal writing grade cease to be a metric (i.e. once you have a "real" writing portfolio, as opposed to school assignments)? Would, say, real world writing product from interning for a judge (and his positive recommendation on writing ability) adequately supersede a low legal writing grade?[/quote]

I don't think it ever becomes irrelevant unless you have been out a few years. Writing is what most of us do so it is always a significant factor. A writing product is somewhat problematic. We can never tell how much input, guidance and corrections came from your supervisor or judge. We ask for them but don't put much stock in them (unless they are bad). Now a recommendation letter or the ability to talk to the judge directly about your writing skills, would be signficant in our eyes.

[jkay]

This is probably the best non-biglaw/clerkship thread ever on this site.

Thank you.

[Sm Firm Hiring P]

This is probably the best non-biglaw/clerkship thread ever on this site.

Thank you.

Thanks. I must admit this has been a much more rewarding experience than I first thought. Glad to help in what little way I can.

[quakeroats]

I don't think it ever becomes irrelevant unless you have been out a few years. Writing is what most of us do so it is always a significant factor. A writing product is somewhat problematic. We can never tell how much input, guidance and corrections came from your supervisor or judge. We ask for them but don't put much stock in them (unless they are bad). Now a recommendation letter or the ability to talk to the judge directly about your writing skills, would be signficant in our eyes.

Can you talk about how perception of a lawyer vis-a-vis law-school achievements changes as he leaves law school. To what degree do you still emphasize law-school-related accomplishments after 2 years, 5 years, 10 years? Does it come up at all once you get well into practice? Do you still remember which of your partners made law review and who had the highest GPA? Would you ever refer or farm out business (or not) on the basis of a something that happened in law school?

[Sm Firm Hiring P]

I don't think it ever becomes irrelevant unless you have been out a few years. Writing is what most of us do so it is always a significant factor. A writing product is somewhat problematic. We can never tell how much input, guidance and corrections came from your supervisor or judge. We ask for them but don't put much stock in them (unless they are bad). Now a recommendation letter or the ability to talk to the judge directly about your writing skills, would be signficant in our eyes.

Can you talk about how perception of a lawyer vis-a-vis law-school achievements changes as he leaves law school. To what degree do you still emphasize law-school-related accomplishments after 2 years, 5 years, 10 years? Does it come up at all once you get well into practice? Do you still remember which of your partners made law review and who had the highest GPA? Would you ever refer or farm out business (or not) on the basis of a something that happened in law school?

The farther you are out, the less the law school achievements matter. After 5 years or so, it does not matter. We generally look at associate performance levels at the 2 and 5 year mark. At 5 years, the associate should be capable of pretty much handling a matter from beginning to end with periodic strategy consults with a partner in the practice area. At that point, the law school achievements are clearly not that important as opposed to the firm achievements and the value to the firm. And, yes, I could not tell you who made law review except among our hires in the last few years. I know we have two single digiters and most are in the top 25% but not much beyond that .

[TheFailboat]

I'm surprised nobody's asked this--and if they have, my apologies if I'm repeating the question. How much weight do you put on law school rankings and regional ties when you're hiring? Would somebody from a T50 school on the East Coast with great grades, etc. receive just as much consideration as an equal candidate from your firm's region?

Thanks again for answering all these questions!

[minnbills]

Thanks so much for taking questions, this is a great thread.

[Sm Firm Hiring P]

I'm surprised nobody's asked this--and if they have, my apologies if I'm repeating the question. How much weight do you put on law school rankings and regional ties when you're hiring? Would somebody from a T50 school on the East Coast with great grades, etc. receive just as much consideration as an equal candidate from your firm's region?

Thanks again for answering all these questions!

Rankings have their importance. We generally advertise that we prefer people in the top 20-25%. Understand, most of our attorneys are local and we will give deference to high tiered schools (out of the 3 in our immediate area, 2 are ranked around 100 and one in the top 20 last time I checked). Your grades and school would give you a leg up but the ties are an issue. Like many firms in my town, we want hires that plan to stay in the area. It is an investment issue. The first couple of years and SAs are viewed as investments. Not big money makers but being groomed to be. If someone leaves after a couple of years, we are starting over again. We know we will have turnover as all firms do, but ours is much lower than the big firms who historically cared less for the most part since they had new crops of the brightest coming in each year. I have seen some change in that locally though.

[Anonymous User]

This thread is amazing! Do students at local schools need to have ties to your city or is going to the local law school enough?

[Sm Firm Hiring P]

This thread is amazing! Do students at local schools need to have ties to your city or is going to the local law school enough?

Ties are preferred but if you don't have ties, you need to demonstrate you mean to stay there. If you have family or friends that helps. I always suggest that if you are out of town you join some local group like Habitat for Humanity, the Humane Society or even your local college alumni group to show you have some commitment to the area. It is an issue, particularly in the midwest and in this market where there are so many applicants. And as mentioned above, there better not be anything on the net showing you really are committed to going back home or with a significant other you miss in another city. Kiss of death.

[thegrayman]

excellent thread, read it all the way though, just wanted to say thanks for answering all the Q's, us clueless law students appreciate it!

[Thedude737]

Thanks for taking the time to answer so many questions!

By way of background, I'm a 2L in a 4 year evening program and work nearly 40 hours a week in a small firm as a paralegal (8 attorneys). Though the majority of my work is administrative, I've been given more and more legal work like research and deposition reports. How would you advise to best parlay experience as a paralegal into a cover letter? Also, how do you view evening students as potential job candidates? Is "small firm" culture different than "big law" culture, in that, they don't look down upon evening students?

[Sm Firm Hiring P]

Thanks for taking the time to answer so many questions!

By way of background, I'm a 2L in a 4 year evening program and work nearly 40 hours a week in a small firm as a paralegal (8 attorneys). Though the majority of my work is administrative, I've been given more and more legal work like research and deposition reports. How would you advise to best parlay experience as a paralegal into a cover letter? Also, how do you view evening students as potential job candidates? Is "small firm" culture different than "big law" culture, in that, they don't look down upon evening students?

I would mention in your cover letter that you also have some legal experience as a paralegal. Our summer hire this year had the same for 1 year before law school. I was viewed as a plus for us since learning the importance of keeping legal files, calendaring, memos, billing, was already learned. Evening students are a difficult issue. We hired one many years ago and it worked out well. Several in my firm were skeptical but the applicant did a good job on selling us and giving us academic and work references that confirmed much of what this person said. So, I think you need to carefully consider putting your best face on it where needed. I think the smaller firms would be more open minded about it just looking at traditional hiring habits.

[lbg0125]

Thanks for answering so many questions.

Do you have any specific advice for 3Ls without firm experience who would like to find employment with a small firm after graduation?

[Sm Firm Hiring P]

Thanks for answering so many questions.

Do you have any specific advice for 3Ls without firm experience who would like to find employment with a small firm after graduation?

You are going to need some sort of edge in all honesty. Connections if possible. It is an employers market out there. The lack of firm experience means more down time in training which smaller firms cannot absorb as easily. However, put your attributes forward and be persuasive about your willingness to work hard and to be dedicated to the firm. I am a believer in honesty (I do realize that many not work with all firms) but you could even suggest you recognize the lack of firm experience is an issue but you would be willing to work on a phase in basis with compensation to alleviate any concern to prove that you are a good investment.

[Anonymous User]

2L here who will be a SA for a 20-40 person firm this summer. My worst grade was in Legal Writing, so I'm wondering if you have any advice on how to improve my writing before this summer, be it a book or just general principles to keep in mind. Again, Thank you for all your insight.

[kalvano]

How much does an executive board position on a journal / law review matter? Is just being a member the important part, or does having some sort of higher-up managerial function (such as being one of the top 3 people) give a boost?

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for taking questions!

I'm a 2L and I'm going to get the chance to become a certified law clerk for a government agency; thus, I will be getting some court room experience over the summer. The agency's practice focuses on white collar work. Do you think that combo would especially beneficial as a 3L in looking for small business lit firms, or would it just sit there like any other job on the resume? If it would be helpful, and advice on how to pitch working on the private side? (Of course, I'd love to work for my agency upon graduation, but budget cuts suck. )

[Anonymous User]

2L here who will be a SA for a 20-40 person firm this summer. My worst grade was in Legal Writing, so I'm wondering if you have any advice on how to improve my writing before this summer, be it a book or just general principles to keep in mind. Again, Thank you for all your insight.

I'm not the OP, but I'd like to chip in something. My worst grade in each of my 1L semesters was legal writing. However, when I went to my 1L (small) firm, the writing experience was a lot different. In legal writing class, I got very specific guidance from the professors about what they wanted, nearly all the way down to structuring the paper by paragraph. There was guidance about where and what to research, what NOT to write about, etc. Also, everyone turned in an ungraded first draft that the professor corrected, then we received them back and had quite some time to fix things without our errors affecting our grades. Then the professor graded the final drafts on a very narrow rubric that may only tenuously correlate to what is effective in practice. I scored highly on both rough drafts (both professors provided a fake grade feedback on rough drafts) but poorly on the final drafts; obviously, I spent less time on refining the drafts compared to my peers (this is relevant later).

A law firm is a lot different. First, there are no "ungraded" drafts, because the attorneys are assessing everything you create. Second, you don't have that much guidance. For example, a partner may give you a set of facts and ask you to research potential causes of action, be they in contract or tort, be they at law, in equity, statutory, whatever. He MAY give you some good guidance, or he may give you little or none. Or he may ask a discrete but difficult (that's why he doesn't already know the answer) question that directly relates to defending a major client. You may have NO FREAKING IDEA where to find the answer, but you better figure it out. Third, you don't have virtually infinite time. You see, in legal writing classes, the final draft is all that matters, and you can take as long as you want to produce it. At a firm, the quality of everything you do is balanced against your overall production. As a general rule, you're not turning in perfect work. You're turning in really damned good work that took you 60-70% of the time it would have taken you to turn in perfect work. This is because the partners may give you five or ten projects at one time, and they will keep giving you more as you go. As the summer goes, you can bet your ass they'll be taking inventory of how much work you're getting done. If you turn in perfect memos but your production is poor, you're not looking as good as if you turn in merely "very good" memos with great production. There's definitely a point of diminishing returns.

Also, you may be writing a lot of other things (e.g. NOT memos or briefs). Letters, motions, REALLY brief memos on a discrete area of law, etc. What works in a research brief doesn't work in a letter to, say, a layman city administrator who has you on retainer. You have to be versatile at a firm. You also have to be analytical and creative. Yes, creative...within certain boundaries. These writing assignments are all likely to be far less formulaic processes than you encountered in legal writing class.

So yeah, I struggled with writing in law school, but the firm ended up offering me and told me I was the best SA they'd had in many years. That includes a guy who was top 10%, editor of our review, and who went biglaw. They specifically complimented my writing and production. I'm frankly surprised that OP in this thread puts much stock in legal writing class samples, although he did acknowledge that they are flawed. I guess it's just all they have? Anyway, the point is that you may be a better writer at a firm than you think you will be. I would definitely seek feedback on your writing while at the firm if you feel it's a weak point and go from there. If you really want to work on it before, you can log onto Westlaw and actually find briefs related to cases. I'd just read critically and note the things they do and don't do. Just keep in mind that the firm saw those grades and hired you anyway, so they obviously feel you can handle the writing.



TLDR: Law school writing courses are, in general, contrived and unrealistic. They don't fully measure the tools that will help you write effectively at a firm, so a person may be a much better writer in the firm context than in the class context. I wouldn't freak out about writing ability just based on a class grade but would maybe critically read a few briefs on Westlaw and then seek out a lot of advice over the summer if I remained worried about it.

[drdolittle]

I'm frankly surprised that OP in this thread puts much stock in legal writing class samples, although he did acknowledge that they are flawed. I guess it's just all they have?

That surprised me too. The contrived nature of the class, differences between section instructors and small class sizes mean legal writing class grades can be all over the map, and seemingly disconnected from 'true' legal writing ability. Also as mentioned, in fact these classes often involve significant peer/instructor feedback where students that blindly do exactly what the instructor asks for throughout the revision process tend to get awarded the highest final grades. And everyone ends up with peer/instructor-reviewed writing samples. But I think OP noted that his/her firm has actually experienced higher legal writing class grades correlating with better writing in practice?

Along these lines, are there schools you regard as having particularly strong (or weak) legal writing programs, impacting the way you view writing class grades from such schools?

[Anonymous User]

Are federal magistrate clerkships valuable at all? When looking at the attorney profiles of reputable medium and small firms in my area, I only see COA, district, bankruptcy, state supreme, and state appellate clerkships listed.

[Thedude737]

Thanks for taking the time to answer so many questions!

By way of background, I'm a 2L in a 4 year evening program and work nearly 40 hours a week in a small firm as a paralegal (8 attorneys). Though the majority of my work is administrative, I've been given more and more legal work like research and deposition reports. How would you advise to best parlay experience as a paralegal into a cover letter? Also, how do you view evening students as potential job candidates? Is "small firm" culture different than "big law" culture, in that, they don't look down upon evening students?

I would mention in your cover letter that you also have some legal experience as a paralegal. Our summer hire this year had the same for 1 year before law school. I was viewed as a plus for us since learning the importance of keeping legal files, calendaring, memos, billing, was already learned. Evening students are a difficult issue. We hired one many years ago and it worked out well. Several in my firm were skeptical but the applicant did a good job on selling us and giving us academic and work references that confirmed much of what this person said. So, I think you need to carefully consider putting your best face on it where needed. I think the smaller firms would be more open minded about it just looking at traditional hiring habits.

What were others in your firm skeptical of? Do you mind if I shoot you a PM?

[reformed calvinist]

2L here who will be a SA for a 20-40 person firm this summer. My worst grade was in Legal Writing, so I'm wondering if you have any advice on how to improve my writing before this summer, be it a book or just general principles to keep in mind. Again, Thank you for all your insight.

I'm not the OP, but I'd like to chip in something. My worst grade in each of my 1L semesters was legal writing. However, when I went to my 1L (small) firm, the writing experience was a lot different. In legal writing class, I got very specific guidance from the professors about what they wanted, nearly all the way down to structuring the paper by paragraph. There was guidance about where and what to research, what NOT to write about, etc. Also, everyone turned in an ungraded first draft that the professor corrected, then we received them back and had quite some time to fix things without our errors affecting our grades. Then the professor graded the final drafts on a very narrow rubric that may only tenuously correlate to what is effective in practice. I scored highly on both rough drafts (both professors provided a fake grade feedback on rough drafts) but poorly on the final drafts; obviously, I spent less time on refining the drafts compared to my peers (this is relevant later).

A law firm is a lot different. First, there are no "ungraded" drafts, because the attorneys are assessing everything you create. Second, you don't have that much guidance. For example, a partner may give you a set of facts and ask you to research potential causes of action, be they in contract or tort, be they at law, in equity, statutory, whatever. He MAY give you some good guidance, or he may give you little or none. Or he may ask a discrete but difficult (that's why he doesn't already know the answer) question that directly relates to defending a major client. You may have NO FREAKING IDEA where to find the answer, but you better figure it out. Third, you don't have virtually infinite time. You see, in legal writing classes, the final draft is all that matters, and you can take as long as you want to produce it. At a firm, the quality of everything you do is balanced against your overall production. As a general rule, you're not turning in perfect work. You're turning in really damned good work that took you 60-70% of the time it would have taken you to turn in perfect work. This is because the partners may give you five or ten projects at one time, and they will keep giving you more as you go. As the summer goes, you can bet your ass they'll be taking inventory of how much work you're getting done. If you turn in perfect memos but your production is poor, you're not looking as good as if you turn in merely "very good" memos with great production. There's definitely a point of diminishing returns.

Also, you may be writing a lot of other things (e.g. NOT memos or briefs). Letters, motions, REALLY brief memos on a discrete area of law, etc. What works in a research brief doesn't work in a letter to, say, a layman city administrator who has you on retainer. You have to be versatile at a firm. You also have to be analytical and creative. Yes, creative...within certain boundaries. These writing assignments are all likely to be far less formulaic processes than you encountered in legal writing class.

So yeah, I struggled with writing in law school, but the firm ended up offering me and told me I was the best SA they'd had in many years. That includes a guy who was top 10%, editor of our review, and who went biglaw. They specifically complimented my writing and production. I'm frankly surprised that OP in this thread puts much stock in legal writing class samples, although he did acknowledge that they are flawed. I guess it's just all they have? Anyway, the point is that you may be a better writer at a firm than you think you will be. I would definitely seek feedback on your writing while at the firm if you feel it's a weak point and go from there. If you really want to work on it before, you can log onto Westlaw and actually find briefs related to cases. I'd just read critically and note the things they do and don't do. Just keep in mind that the firm saw those grades and hired you anyway, so they obviously feel you can handle the writing.



TLDR: Law school writing courses are, in general, contrived and unrealistic. They don't fully measure the tools that will help you write effectively at a firm, so a person may be a much better writer in the firm context than in the class context. I wouldn't freak out about writing ability just based on a class grade but would maybe critically read a few briefs on Westlaw and then seek out a lot of advice over the summer if I remained worried about it.

This is good to hear. I thought I was a good writer until law school broke me. I had always done well on writing assignments, even won some awards on the way (not to brag, but to illustrate a point). So I was staggered when I got below median in my legal writing class. It seems like a curved 10 person writing class is an exercise in futility (except in the Foucauldian sense). I thought learning to write was about making mistakes, trying new things, and getting feedback and trying again. And again. No, in law school it's about a narrow rubric written by the head of the department. One draft, sparse feedback, place student in grade hierarchy, done. I'm glad you provided your perspective, it helps. I'm doing whatever it takes to prove my writing ability--I'm entering as many legal writing competitions as I realistically can. Maybe I will be identified by this below median grade no matter what awards I might win or what work I produce over the summer, but I'll be damned if I let it be the only identifier.

[Renzo]

Thanks for taking the time to answer questions. I'm curious how much of your hiring is entry-level v. lateral; and, if you do a non-trivial amount of lateral hiring, is it mostly experienced associates or partners/partner candidates with portable business?