resume question

[rpupkin]

Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

This is horrible advice.

You are right. Having a "results" oriented resume is horrible advice. Yeah, okay. I used to get paid to write resumes.

Sounds right.

Yeah, but ask me how I got Big Law Interviews despite being well below median and pre-law school interviews at McKinsey and Bank of America I-Banking despite not being a finance grad. I'm a resume writing expert - studied all the greats, Martin Yate, Joyce Lain Kennedy.

Perhaps your "results-oriented" schtick works in I-Banking (I wouldn't know), but it's poor advice for a young attorney. A law firm, for example, would generally rather hire a mid-level associate who managed discovery and motion practice in a losing case than a similarly experienced attorney who claimed they "won" two motions to dismiss.

I review resumes, dude. I would question the judgement of someone who claimed to have "won" something that was a group effort on behalf of a party. Such a resume would stand out, but not in a good way. Lawyers don't think of desirable associate skills in terms of "winning" and "losing." Whatever the value of your advice in other areas, it's a poor fit for most law firms.

[Anonymous User]

Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

This is horrible advice.

You are right. Having a "results" oriented resume is horrible advice. Yeah, okay. I used to get paid to write resumes.

Sounds right.

Yeah, but ask me how I got Big Law Interviews despite being well below median and pre-law school interviews at McKinsey and Bank of America I-Banking despite not being a finance grad. I'm a resume writing expert - studied all the greats, Martin Yate, Joyce Lain Kennedy.

Perhaps your "results-oriented" schtick works in I-Banking (I wouldn't know), but it's poor advice for a young attorney. A law firm, for example, would generally rather hire a mid-level associate who managed discovery and motion practice in a losing case than a similarly experienced attorney who claimed they "won" two motions to dismiss.

I review resumes, dude. I would question the judgement of someone who claimed to have "won" something that was a group effort on behalf of a party. Such a resume would stand out, but not in a good way. Lawyers don't think of desirable associate skills in terms of "winning" and "losing." Whatever the value of your advice in other areas, it's a poor fit for most law firms.

Writing a motion for summary judgment and then winning is not a group effort. Additionally, if there is no oral arguments on the motion then its not a group effort. At the end of the day, client's hire firms because they want a problem solved. They want winners. But it's fine. I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written and similar to how they approach writing their yearly reviews. Also been told by a head hunter my results oriented resume was good and that they usually spend time having to tell the canddiates to provide achievements/results. But continue to act like I don't know what i'm talking about.

[rpupkin]

Writing a motion for summary judgment and then winning is not a group effort. Additionally, if there is no oral arguments on the motion then its not a group effort. At the end of the day, client's hire firms because they want a problem solved. They want winners. But it's fine. I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written and similar to how they approach writing their yearly reviews. Also been told by a head hunter my results oriented resume was good and that they usually spend time having to tell the canddiates to provide achievements/results. But continue to act like I don't know what i'm talking about.

I'm not acting; I genuinely believe that you don't know what you're talking about. Indeed, your most recent post is full of statements which suggest that you have never actually practiced law. A motion for summary judgment is not a group effort? Huh? And what does oral argument have to do with it? You're arrogantly telling people how to apply for legal jobs when you have—at best—second hand information ("I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written"). Pathetic.

[Anonymous User]

Writing a motion for summary judgment and then winning is not a group effort. Additionally, if there is no oral arguments on the motion then its not a group effort. At the end of the day, client's hire firms because they want a problem solved. They want winners. But it's fine. I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written and similar to how they approach writing their yearly reviews. Also been told by a head hunter my results oriented resume was good and that they usually spend time having to tell the canddiates to provide achievements/results. But continue to act like I don't know what i'm talking about.

I'm not acting; I genuinely believe that you don't know what you're talking about. Indeed, your most recent post is full of statements which suggest that you have never actually practiced law. A motion for summary judgment is not a group effort? Huh? And what does oral argument have to do with it? You're arrogantly telling people how to apply for legal jobs when you have—at best—second hand information ("I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written"). Pathetic.

Maybe at your pathetic firm a MSJ is a group effort, but where I work the Associate is writing the entire thing and arguing the motion or the Partner is arguing the motion. Regardless, if the motion is granted, you best believe I am putting down that I won. If there are no oral arguments to the motion and it is decided by the pleadings then that just is even better because it shows that the attorney can draft a motion that is so good that they win on the pleadings....But continue to focus on how you don't like resumes that say, "Won."

[ballouttacontrol]

Who cares if you drafted and revised motions for summary judgment. What is important is whether you won. You need to "show" not "tell" what you did. "Won motion for summary judgment in a $2M breach of contract case."

This is horrible advice.

You are right. Having a "results" oriented resume is horrible advice. Yeah, okay. I used to get paid to write resumes.

Sounds right.

Yeah, but ask me how I got Big Law Interviews despite being well below median and pre-law school interviews at McKinsey and Bank of America I-Banking despite not being a finance grad. I'm a resume writing expert - studied all the greats, Martin Yate, Joyce Lain Kennedy.

Perhaps your "results-oriented" schtick works in I-Banking (I wouldn't know), but it's poor advice for a young attorney. A law firm, for example, would generally rather hire a mid-level associate who managed discovery and motion practice in a losing case than a similarly experienced attorney who claimed they "won" two motions to dismiss.

I review resumes, dude. I would question the judgement of someone who claimed to have "won" something that was a group effort on behalf of a party. Such a resume would stand out, but not in a good way. Lawyers don't think of desirable associate skills in terms of "winning" and "losing." Whatever the value of your advice in other areas, it's a poor fit for most law firms.

Writing a motion for summary judgment and then winning is not a group effort. Additionally, if there is no oral arguments on the motion then its not a group effort. At the end of the day, client's hire firms because they want a problem solved. They want winners. But it's fine. I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written and similar to how they approach writing their yearly reviews. Also been told by a head hunter my results oriented resume was good and that they usually spend time having to tell the canddiates to provide achievements/results. But continue to act like I don't know what i'm talking about.

Usually I'm all for challenging the TLS echo chamber, but, OP, do not listen to this guy (who I'm sure is the same person as Sparty, the original idiot above.

This is really, really bad advice for applying to at least large and midsize law firms. Maybe this poster works in shitlaw, where I could see "results" being more dispositive, but NO ONE in biglaw will expect, or even believe, a 1L summer intern will have won their firm a case.

[ballouttacontrol]

Writing a motion for summary judgment and then winning is not a group effort. Additionally, if there is no oral arguments on the motion then its not a group effort. At the end of the day, client's hire firms because they want a problem solved. They want winners. But it's fine. I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written and similar to how they approach writing their yearly reviews. Also been told by a head hunter my results oriented resume was good and that they usually spend time having to tell the canddiates to provide achievements/results. But continue to act like I don't know what i'm talking about.

I'm not acting; I genuinely believe that you don't know what you're talking about. Indeed, your most recent post is full of statements which suggest that you have never actually practiced law. A motion for summary judgment is not a group effort? Huh? And what does oral argument have to do with it? You're arrogantly telling people how to apply for legal jobs when you have—at best—second hand information ("I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written"). Pathetic.

Maybe at your pathetic firm a MSJ is a group effort, but where I work the Associate is writing the entire thing and arguing the motion or the Partner is arguing the motion. Regardless, if the motion is granted, you best believe I am putting down that I won. If there are no oral arguments to the motion and it is decided by the pleadings then that just is even better because it shows that the attorney can draft a motion that is so good that they win on the pleadings....But continue to focus on how you don't like resumes that say, "Won."

how's insurance defense bro? how many times have you successfully defended your policy limits?

[Anonymous User]

Writing a motion for summary judgment and then winning is not a group effort. Additionally, if there is no oral arguments on the motion then its not a group effort. At the end of the day, client's hire firms because they want a problem solved. They want winners. But it's fine. I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written and similar to how they approach writing their yearly reviews. Also been told by a head hunter my results oriented resume was good and that they usually spend time having to tell the canddiates to provide achievements/results. But continue to act like I don't know what i'm talking about.

I'm not acting; I genuinely believe that you don't know what you're talking about. Indeed, your most recent post is full of statements which suggest that you have never actually practiced law. A motion for summary judgment is not a group effort? Huh? And what does oral argument have to do with it? You're arrogantly telling people how to apply for legal jobs when you have—at best—second hand information ("I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written"). Pathetic.

Maybe at your pathetic firm a MSJ is a group effort, but where I work the Associate is writing the entire thing and arguing the motion or the Partner is arguing the motion. Regardless, if the motion is granted, you best believe I am putting down that I won. If there are no oral arguments to the motion and it is decided by the pleadings then that just is even better because it shows that the attorney can draft a motion that is so good that they win on the pleadings....But continue to focus on how you don't like resumes that say, "Won."

how's insurance defense bro? how many times have you successfully defended your policy limits?

Yawn. How's doc review, bro? Still waiting to talk to the client? You thought you were cute with your comment, but you hurt no one.

[ballouttacontrol]

how's insurance defense bro? how many times have you successfully defended your policy limits?

Yawn. How's doc review, bro? Still waiting to talk to the client? You thought you were cute with your comment, but you hurt no one.

you just made my point.

[rpupkin]

Writing a motion for summary judgment and then winning is not a group effort. Additionally, if there is no oral arguments on the motion then its not a group effort. At the end of the day, client's hire firms because they want a problem solved. They want winners. But it's fine. I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written and similar to how they approach writing their yearly reviews. Also been told by a head hunter my results oriented resume was good and that they usually spend time having to tell the canddiates to provide achievements/results. But continue to act like I don't know what i'm talking about.

I'm not acting; I genuinely believe that you don't know what you're talking about. Indeed, your most recent post is full of statements which suggest that you have never actually practiced law. A motion for summary judgment is not a group effort? Huh? And what does oral argument have to do with it? You're arrogantly telling people how to apply for legal jobs when you have—at best—second hand information ("I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written"). Pathetic.

Maybe at your pathetic firm a MSJ is a group effort

Yes, firms that file motions for summary judgment based on several different grounds—and where different attorneys are responsible for different sections of the motion—are "pathetic." You write that at "your firm" you get to write and argue the motion, but I continue to suspect that you don't actually practice law as a licensed attorney. Given that you're acting like an authority figure ITT, and considering that you're giving advice to law students about how to apply to firms, I think it would be more than reasonable to out your little anon self if it turns out that you're not actually an attorney. Now, would you care to double down on your implication that you work as an associate at a law firm?

[Anonymous User]

how's insurance defense bro? how many times have you successfully defended your policy limits?

Yawn. How's doc review, bro? Still waiting to talk to the client? You thought you were cute with your comment, but you hurt no one.

you just made my point.

YOu had no point.

[Anonymous User]

Writing a motion for summary judgment and then winning is not a group effort. Additionally, if there is no oral arguments on the motion then its not a group effort. At the end of the day, client's hire firms because they want a problem solved. They want winners. But it's fine. I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written and similar to how they approach writing their yearly reviews. Also been told by a head hunter my results oriented resume was good and that they usually spend time having to tell the canddiates to provide achievements/results. But continue to act like I don't know what i'm talking about.

I'm not acting; I genuinely believe that you don't know what you're talking about. Indeed, your most recent post is full of statements which suggest that you have never actually practiced law. A motion for summary judgment is not a group effort? Huh? And what does oral argument have to do with it? You're arrogantly telling people how to apply for legal jobs when you have—at best—second hand information ("I was told in law school by a JAG Attorney that my results oriented resume is well written"). Pathetic.

Maybe at your pathetic firm a MSJ is a group effort

Yes, firms that file motions for summary judgment based on several different grounds—and where different attorneys are responsible for different sections of the motion—are "pathetic." You write that at "your firm" you get to write and argue the motion, but I continue to suspect that you don't actually practice law as a licensed attorney. Given that you're acting like an authority figure ITT, and considering that you're giving advice to law students about how to apply to firms, I think it would be more than reasonable to out your little anon self if it turns out that you're not actually an attorney. Now, would you care to double down on your implication that you work as an associate at a law firm?

I'm really not concerned with whether you think I practice law. Continue to write your no frills resumes and attorney bio.

[rpupkin]

I'm really not concerned with whether you think I practice law. Continue to write your no frills resumes and attorney bio.

An attorney bio has a different purpose than a resume, and it's telling that you don't appreciate the difference. The intended audience for an attorney bio consists of potential clients; the intended audience for a resume consists of law-firm attorneys. Attorney bios tend to have more puffery; resumes tend to focus more on skills.

Anyway, I'm sorry for the disrespect. Please tell us more about how judges sua sponte convert motions for summary judgement into motions for judgment on the pleadings based on whether there is oral argument or not.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Sparty, stop being an abrasive asshole, or get banned.

[TatteredDignity]

would this language be correct

Prepared and revised legal instruments including demand letters, mechanic’s liens, motions including motion for entry of default judgment and motion for summary judgment, original petitions, and post judgment writs of garnishment.

thanks

Use either "post-judgment" or "postjudgment"--preferably the former.