Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
I want to substantiate my anticipated choice of choosing mid-law over big-law.
Big-law pays more but mid-law is nicely over $100K. My understanding is that some choose big-law so that they can lateral over to an illustrious mid-law firm where stability and the chance to advance to partner is theoretically better. If this is indeed the rationale, why not choose mid-law from the start? Your opinion is . . .
PS – My definition of mid-law is 50 attorneys, give or take.
Big-law pays more but mid-law is nicely over $100K. My understanding is that some choose big-law so that they can lateral over to an illustrious mid-law firm where stability and the chance to advance to partner is theoretically better. If this is indeed the rationale, why not choose mid-law from the start? Your opinion is . . .
PS – My definition of mid-law is 50 attorneys, give or take.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Just keep in mind though that the number of hours worked, stress, etc. could be just as bad, if not worse at a mid-law firm (at least for a few years as an associate). That being the case, why not take more money?Anonymous User wrote:I want to substantiate my anticipated choice of choosing mid-law over big-law.
Big-law pays more but mid-law is nicely over $100K. My understanding is that some choose big-law so that they can lateral over to an illustrious mid-law firm where stability and the chance to advance to partner is theoretically better. If this is indeed the rationale, why not choose mid-law from the start? Your opinion is . . .
PS – My definition of mid-law is 50 attorneys, give or take.
-
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:50 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Sorry didnt intend for this to be anon.Anonymous User wrote:Just keep in mind though that the number of hours worked, stress, etc. could be just as bad, if not worse at a mid-law firm (at least for a few years as an associate). That being the case, why not take more money?Anonymous User wrote:I want to substantiate my anticipated choice of choosing mid-law over big-law.
Big-law pays more but mid-law is nicely over $100K. My understanding is that some choose big-law so that they can lateral over to an illustrious mid-law firm where stability and the chance to advance to partner is theoretically better. If this is indeed the rationale, why not choose mid-law from the start? Your opinion is . . .
PS – My definition of mid-law is 50 attorneys, give or take.
-
- Posts: 18203
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Midlaw firms don't typically hire law students so it's not even on most students radar.
Those kind of firms aren't nearly as standardized as big law. Pay, hours, stability wildly vary. Some firms like this intend to make you partner if you don't quit. Some firms are just as bad hours wise as big law. Some firms hire 5 SAs and give 0 offers.
But 1600 hours, no up or out, and 100K, and I'd cop dat shit every day and twice on sunday. Congrats if you actually found it.
Those kind of firms aren't nearly as standardized as big law. Pay, hours, stability wildly vary. Some firms like this intend to make you partner if you don't quit. Some firms are just as bad hours wise as big law. Some firms hire 5 SAs and give 0 offers.
But 1600 hours, no up or out, and 100K, and I'd cop dat shit every day and twice on sunday. Congrats if you actually found it.
-
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:46 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
I work at a 100+ lawyer Midwestern firm that meets most of those conditions (1900 hours, not 1600). We also typically hire all our summer associates. Unless you're one of the very precious few who hit the Big Law partner jackpot, this is a better deal IMO.Desert Fox wrote: But 1600 hours, no up or out, and 100K, and I'd cop dat shit every day and twice on sunday. Congrats if you actually found it.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Those qualities can also be found in Biglaw offices in smaller secondary markets. At least in the secondary market I'm going to, the few vault/nlj250 firms that are there hire maybe 5 SAs, have close to 100% offer rates, billable requirements around 1900, and seem to have the expectation that you are going to make partner (better than 2:1 partner to associate ratio, very low attrition, no up or out (can be made of counsel), etc.), plus have the big firm pay/benefits. Not saying these jobs are easy to get, but you don't necessarily have to give up biglaw benefits in order to be somewhere where it's not bill 2400 or gtfo.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
After a few weeks of high anxiety, I did. . .but, I am now torn. I am not yet concerned about the work hours (that will likely come soon enough). The cohorts I know are elated with their big-law offers (even those outside NYC). When I mention my mid-law firm option no one says it is a poor choice, on the other side, no one has encouraged me to sidestep big-law for mid-law.Desert Fox wrote:Midlaw firms don't typically hire law students so it's not even on most students radar.
Those kind of firms aren't nearly as standardized as big law. Pay, hours, stability wildly vary. Some firms like this intend to make you partner if you don't quit. Some firms are just as bad hours wise as big law. Some firms hire 5 SAs and give 0 offers.
But 1600 hours, no up or out, and 100K, and I'd cop dat shit every day and twice on sunday. Congrats if you actually found it.
Since mid-law tends only to hire 2-4 SAs, my guess is that an offer is as likely (or perhaps better) than big-law. I cannot validate my rationale, other than it is my feeling.
My question here is opened ended to your opinion.
PS - I am T-14, but no LR or top third GPA to boast about.
-
- Posts: 2577
- Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:56 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
I know of a couple mid size firms (one in particular) that I would take over any big law firm. With the expectancy of partner and solid work, I dont see why biglaw would be better. If you goal is to lateral into a diff. firm one day and not go in-house I think its the better choice. Even though you make less, once you make partner (at most of these firms) you are basically guaranteed over $200k for life. In lower COL cities, that is very niceAnonymous User wrote:After a few weeks of high anxiety, I did. . .but, I am now torn. I am not yet concerned about the work hours (that will likely come soon enough). The cohorts I know are elated with their big-law offers (even those outside NYC). When I mention my mid-law firm option no one says it is a poor choice, on the other side, no one has encouraged me to sidestep big-law for mid-law.Desert Fox wrote:Midlaw firms don't typically hire law students so it's not even on most students radar.
Those kind of firms aren't nearly as standardized as big law. Pay, hours, stability wildly vary. Some firms like this intend to make you partner if you don't quit. Some firms are just as bad hours wise as big law. Some firms hire 5 SAs and give 0 offers.
But 1600 hours, no up or out, and 100K, and I'd cop dat shit every day and twice on sunday. Congrats if you actually found it.
Since mid-law tends only to hire 2-4 SAs, my guess is that an offer is as likely (or perhaps better) than big-law. I cannot validate my rationale, other than it is my feeling.
My question here is opened ended to your opinion.
PS - I am T-14, but no LR or top third GPA to boast about.
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:36 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
There are alot of advantage of taking midlaw over biglaw, incl.Anonymous User wrote:I want to substantiate my anticipated choice of choosing mid-law over big-law.
Big-law pays more but mid-law is nicely over $100K. My understanding is that some choose big-law so that they can lateral over to an illustrious mid-law firm where stability and the chance to advance to partner is theoretically better. If this is indeed the rationale, why not choose mid-law from the start? Your opinion is . . .
PS – My definition of mid-law is 50 attorneys, give or take.
1. Work-life balance. Don't kid yourself, there are very few (if any) midlaw firms that have the hours expectancy, or atmosphere, that biglaw firms do. That is driven, in no small part, by their client base, which I'll get to in a minute.
2. Work. The clients, most likely, won't be as big or "glamorous" (e.g. Fortune 500), as your biglaw slate, but that being said there are still many practice areas where midlaw firms do have a Fortune 500 type of client base. Most obvious areas are, employment, IP and tax. But even without the glamorous clients, the work at midlaw can be more substantial than at most biglaw firms because the leverage is lower and the nature of the cases are smaller (read: less doc review and more depos).
3. Practice area. If the midlaw firm is in an area where you know you want to practice in and specialize, than it's most likely better to go to midlaw than biglaw. Obvious examples are, again, tax, bankruptcy, entertainment or IP.
4. Partnership track. Generally, speaking it is shorter.
5. Stability. There's less turnover, so you get to know the people. Definitely a more personal atmo.
So, to answer, your question, no, there is nothing wrong with going to midlaw.
And, really, the question shouldn't be, "Should I choose midlaw over biglaw" ... but rather, "Should I choose biglaw over a firm I really like better simply because it is 'biglaw'"?
Good luck with your decision.
- Veyron
- Posts: 3595
- Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:50 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
This.Desert Fox wrote:But 1600 hours, no up or out, and 100K, and I'd cop dat shit every day and twice on sunday. Congrats if you actually found it.
Also this. Although "biglaw" in secondary markets and "midlaw" is often indistinguishable.Those qualities can also be found in Biglaw offices in smaller secondary markets. At least in the secondary market I'm going to, the few vault/nlj250 firms that are there hire maybe 5 SAs, have close to 100% offer rates, billable requirements around 1900, and seem to have the expectation that you are going to make partner (better than 2:1 partner to associate ratio, very low attrition, no up or out (can be made of counsel), etc.), plus have the big firm pay/benefits. Not saying these jobs are easy to get, but you don't necessarily have to give up biglaw benefits in order to be somewhere where it's not bill 2400 or gtfo.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
not OP, but have a similar question.
In a secondary market is it preferable to work at the main office of a NLJ250 or a satellite office of a V50? Salary is roughly identical.
In a secondary market is it preferable to work at the main office of a NLJ250 or a satellite office of a V50? Salary is roughly identical.
- nevdash
- Posts: 418
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:01 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Better exit options out of the V50, but that only matters if you're trying to for something like an AUSA position down the road. If your exit plan is midlaw, might as well just begin in midlaw.Anonymous User wrote:not OP, but have a similar question.
In a secondary market is it preferable to work at the main office of a NLJ250 or a satellite office of a V50? Salary is roughly identical.
-
- Posts: 706
- Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:42 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
If you can snag midlaw in the first place, great.
But I thought midlaw SA and first year associate positions were as rare as unicorns.
But I thought midlaw SA and first year associate positions were as rare as unicorns.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Veyron
- Posts: 3595
- Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:50 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Not necessarily. Exit options depend more on the relative regard in which the firms are held in a given market, chambers band (if moving into a relevant field), closeness with which you worked with clients (if going in-house since a large % of the time, lawyers go in-house for clients that they've done work for at their firms) and what you actually did (i.e. if you get more substantive work experience at the NLJ 250 that might be better for you in the long run). V ranking only matters for a limit subset of exits like M&A to banking.nevdash wrote:Better exit options out of the V50, but that only matters if you're trying to for something like an AUSA position down the road. If your exit plan is midlaw, might as well just begin in midlaw.Anonymous User wrote:not OP, but have a similar question.
In a secondary market is it preferable to work at the main office of a NLJ250 or a satellite office of a V50? Salary is roughly identical.
-
- Posts: 772
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 12:41 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Depends on what you want to do. If you want to work in that area, the main office may have better name recognition... Where I am there are a few firms ranked higher than any native big laws, but their offices consist of 10-15 people + support staff, and they almost never hire a summer.Anonymous User wrote:not OP, but have a similar question.
In a secondary market is it preferable to work at the main office of a NLJ250 or a satellite office of a V50? Salary is roughly identical.
- Lasers
- Posts: 1579
- Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 6:46 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
i feel mid law is a myth, at least for us looking to summer.
almost all don't seem to have a summer associate program, and the few that do will hire only 1-2 students.
almost all don't seem to have a summer associate program, and the few that do will hire only 1-2 students.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
I chose a smaller firm over big firms. My firm has much less than 50 attorneys!
The firm requires a minimum 1500 hours, no up or out, and compensation is just based on how much you want to work. A first year only billing 1500 hours gets $125k. Lots of the people are former partners from other firms or people who just have no interest in partnership. A lot of the people seem like they only work 2-3 days/week.
I think that it just depends on the field of law. I imagine many specialized fields are like this.
The firm requires a minimum 1500 hours, no up or out, and compensation is just based on how much you want to work. A first year only billing 1500 hours gets $125k. Lots of the people are former partners from other firms or people who just have no interest in partnership. A lot of the people seem like they only work 2-3 days/week.
I think that it just depends on the field of law. I imagine many specialized fields are like this.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
on exit options, it seems like movement from mid-law to big-law is minimal. confirm?Veyron wrote:Not necessarily. Exit options depend more on the relative regard in which the firms are held in a given market, chambers band (if moving into a relevant field), closeness with which you worked with clients (if going in-house since a large % of the time, lawyers go in-house for clients that they've done work for at their firms) and what you actually did (i.e. if you get more substantive work experience at the NLJ 250 that might be better for you in the long run). V ranking only matters for a limit subset of exits like M&A to banking.nevdash wrote:Better exit options out of the V50, but that only matters if you're trying to for something like an AUSA position down the road. If your exit plan is midlaw, might as well just begin in midlaw.Anonymous User wrote:not OP, but have a similar question.
In a secondary market is it preferable to work at the main office of a NLJ250 or a satellite office of a V50? Salary is roughly identical.
-
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 2:04 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Firms like this exist?Anonymous User wrote:I chose a smaller firm over big firms. My firm has much less than 50 attorneys!
The firm requires a minimum 1500 hours, no up or out, and compensation is just based on how much you want to work. A first year only billing 1500 hours gets $125k. Lots of the people are former partners from other firms or people who just have no interest in partnership. A lot of the people seem like they only work 2-3 days/week.
I think that it just depends on the field of law. I imagine many specialized fields are like this.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Thoughts on $95,000 in mid-law for 1,750 hours versus biglaw for $125,000 at 1,900 hours? Seems similar to DF's statement above, but I have offers from both types of firms and would love to hear thoughts.
-
- Posts: 18203
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Take 125. That 1750 could be totally bullshit. Big law only requires 2000, but that's bullshit too.Anonymous User wrote:Thoughts on $95,000 in mid-law for 1,750 hours versus biglaw for $125,000 at 1,900 hours? Seems similar to DF's statement above, but I have offers from both types of firms and would love to hear thoughts.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 941
- Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:00 pm
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Rare as unicorns from what I hear.RickyDnwhyc wrote:Firms like this exist?Anonymous User wrote:I chose a smaller firm over big firms. My firm has much less than 50 attorneys!
The firm requires a minimum 1500 hours, no up or out, and compensation is just based on how much you want to work. A first year only billing 1500 hours gets $125k. Lots of the people are former partners from other firms or people who just have no interest in partnership. A lot of the people seem like they only work 2-3 days/week.
I think that it just depends on the field of law. I imagine many specialized fields are like this.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
FYI: hours minimums are very, very different from hours expectations. Most New York biglaw firms have official hours requirements in the 1900-2000 range, and even then usually the only explicit negative repercussion is that you don't get your year-end bonus (which have been pretty paltry the last few years anyways). Realistically, however, you'll have partners constantly pushing work at you, and while it's possible to regularly turn down work and settle in at/near the minimum, that level of effort puts you in a very precarious position with regards to job security, especially ITE. I'd say most New York associates in good standing average around 2200 billables a year (including pro bono), which is a far cry from the 1950 or 2000 or whatever they're pushing on the website/Chambers/etc.
That said, I imagine similar dynamics are at play with the midlaw firm-- I would ask around and see how reliable those hours estimates really are. It's very possible that you might only bill 1500 hours but are expected to put in a lot of hours in business development, administrative hours, etc. which pushes the end result closer to biglaw hours.
That said, I imagine similar dynamics are at play with the midlaw firm-- I would ask around and see how reliable those hours estimates really are. It's very possible that you might only bill 1500 hours but are expected to put in a lot of hours in business development, administrative hours, etc. which pushes the end result closer to biglaw hours.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
Just accepted a bit over $100K/yr for mid-law in a desirable secondary market. So happy right now.
-
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Opting for Mid-Law over Big-Law
I think if one of your main goals is to see how little you have to bill then biglaw is clearly not the best place for you and you're probably being smart by focusing on midlaw. Just be careful that the hours are less, there's a lot of midlaw that's the same hours just less pay, less interesting work and less opportunities. Try to find a "lifestyle" firm, if such a thing truly exists...
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login