Great tips UTLaw, especially about taking trial advocacy courses (which look really fun too) and doing mock trial activities to get an idea of how to act in a court room.

I definitely agree with you about criminal law. I couldn't see myself doing it, at least on the defense side, because I'd be afraid of getting criminals off the hook if I performed too well (not that I don't believe in their constitutional right to have representation, but it just seems like a morally challenging position to take).

From reading JDU and areyouinsane's posts, it seems like another pitfall of starting off in a small firm is trying to get clients who have money and will pay you on time. How do you deal with people who are just calling to "kick the tires", and clients who don't want to/have the means to pay? Also, do you advertise at all in media, or do you just rely on networking to get your cases?

I'm over it, I'm over it
Breathe deep. Breathe deep


Sorry, it just seemed wrong to me, even though I know it was intended as a compliment

That is a great point. Getting clients that pay. That is a problem. However, that's where targeted marketing comes into play. I can't stress enough how important it is to be a business man. Law firms of all sizes, have poor business acumen. Obviously, some are much better than others.

Most small firms and solos are terrible business men/women. I personally think that is the main reason why they struggle. If you have a hard time obtaining clients that can pay, you must do whatever it takes to network with potential clients that can pay. It's a simple solution. But it is very hard to execute. You have to be incredibly smart and savy about it.

I've had my fair share of clients who can't pay. It just made me more determined to find clients who can. It's all about TARGETED marketing. It takes a lot of thought and ingenuity, and most lawyers, heck people in general, are too lazy to pull this off. But you HAVE to find a way, otherwise, you're just not going to make the amount of money you should.

One must treat the business side of a law practice as important as the law practicing side. Truth be told, it's probably more important.

I forgot to answer your question about advertising. I don't do advertising. I just network including online social networking.

I just think it's more effective depending on your practice areas. It's just much more effective to engage in target networking for what I practice.

I agree, one might as well jump off a bridge or cut off their penis for insurance money if they don't get a minimum of 100k because YOU WILL DIE OF STARVATION

Not sure if srs...

Yeah, they are extremely realistic, like this guy is like a modern day shakespeare or some shit if he is making it up. Like he should be given a Tv show with like a huge budget, I swear he would win a few emmies and grammies.

LOL, I never even heard about Gandi the terrorist thread, I'm gonna look that up for a good laugh.

I don't think drugs were his MAIN problem but I can tell you, not even a millionaire can save money addicted to drugs and he did admit to drug addiction.

I think UTlaw is very impressive, sick for all those years, and couldn't work and then able to start up a succesful practice.

It kinda sucks AYI couldn't recover given he went to a t-14

Well both Netherlands and Turkey have legal prostitution. Wages for a foreigner who teaches english will be higher for a American with his background in Turkey. An English teach can pull a decent amount of cash in Turkey relative to his dutch counterpart whose high cost will erode his pay. Dutch are well of, first world country, dope is gonna be more expensive, it is farther a way and is an end point for dope. Turkey is a hub for dope, the real hurdle to smuggling dope into europe is getting it in the eu zone (and also where the most markup is too).

I disagree with bold. Its easy to buy coke in Colombia or marijuana in a mexican border town known for smuggling, because there are tonnes of people walking around openly with the shit if you know the right place to go, which a drug user will know. Hell people come up to you just for being white trying to sell: you drugs/hookers/tours/bullshit/anything illegal in turkey, and for that matter any third world drug/hooker hub.

Smugglers are looking for any live body to just strap marijuana to in mexico/colombia/turkey. They'd be more than glad to sell dope to some gringo. I don't know if you know this but only like 1 in 10 to 1 in 4 smugglers get through customs. Meaning that smugglers would rather to sell you drugs at cost GUARANTEED in turkey than to lose 75% of their shipment.

In Turkey breaking out of prison, or sneaking out or bribing out is far more possible than in netherlands. In most 3rd world jails, guards do not even come into the living areas. They just lock you all up inside the prison and makesure no one walks out the front door. Hell in Guatamala they have guns in prison.

If I ask you whether the sun is shining, don't tell me that thè sky is blue.

Have you been to Turkey? The Netherlands? Northern England, even? (where ecstasy is cheaper than beer)
And since when are Columbia and Mexican border towns pertinent to a conversation about Europe?

I don't think AYI went to a T-14. I'm pretty sure he went to Seton Hall, actually, because he bashes that institution more than anywhere else. He also talks about how he went to a "TTT", which for him is any school in the NYC area below Fordham. I consider myself a AYI expert, since I've read every one of his posts, haha, because he's hilarious.

UTLaw, seriously thanks for all the great responses! This thread has alittle bit of everything: small practice advice, pontificating physicians, where to get the best drugs in Europe. Very versatile. I'm very pleased.

TLS at its finest

Its true... Fully entertained for a solid half hour.

Just bumping this thread since it was very informative and entertaining.

I apologize for being late to this thread, but it's actually been eye-opening.

I was curious from the list of law areas you mentioned what the typical salary ranges for them are and whether there is any opportunity to move up in the salary ranges (while still practicing in those areas)?

I ask, because you say that it's not salary that distinguishes what is "s**t" law, but rather prestige.

Is it possible that an attorney in these areas might be able to make, say, upper five figures (e.g., $85-90K/year)? I would think that such a salary range in a non-high COL area (not NYC or the like) would provide a decent living.

I recognize that the vast majority of people graduating from law school likely won't ever make it to or last very long in big law, so I'm curious what the other options are and their pay ranges for all of the non-big law areas.

Appreciate your help and feedback everyone! Thanks very much.


ETA: Oddly, I see quoted text from "areyouinsane," but not the actual posts by him/her on this thread. Very odd...

This is quite eye-opening if true and completely unembellished.

Pretty sure areyouinsane got the can from TLS' admins.



There is such a range regarding the salaries of each particular type of practice listed that no one could give you a clear answer. There are some DUI practitioners that have the name brand and reputation which brings them a large volume of cases--translating into a nice profit. There are also DUI guys not making a dime. This illustration probably rings true for most of those areas listed.

areyouinsane, i imagine, provides anecdotes of the absolute worst case scenarios.

Yes, I was definitely leery of some hyperbole there. Nevertheless, I had a sudden sense of sadness overcome and envelop me when reading his disheartening descriptions of what it can potentially be like to practice in these areas of law (I actually greatly dislike the term "s**t law," so prefer to use the term "non-big law" for lack of a better label at this time).



I see. Appreciate it.

I think it'd still be nice to have some figures to look at, given that the majority of lawyers are not in big law and thus labor in non-big law by default (many of these areas listed).

Hi utlaw2007,

It was interesting reading some of your posts on this thread (which I'm still working through, btw).

You've made the case in numerous posts that non-big law (I personally refuse to use the term "s**t law," as I finding it a demeaning term/label) jobs can sometimes be quite lucrative - even more so than big law. To follow-up and clarify a bit, are these mostly trial lawyers in non-big law that you are referring to who have these lucrative careers? Or, are there non-trial lawyers doing non-big law, who you've seen have lucrative careers as well?

I'm curious to know more about the career trajectories, personal skills, and background of those whom you referenced as building lucrative careers in non-big law work. What differentiated them from other non-big law attorneys? And how rare do you find it to have these lucrative non-big law legal careers?

And, finally, I'm curious as to whether or not there is a path into big law from non-big law for one who has made a name and/or lucrative career outside of it? I often get the impression if one does not enter into big law out of law school that it is next to impossible to get in later in life. But would attorneys building highly successful/lucrative practices or making a "name" for themselves outside of big law have a chance to then move into big law (based on their success outside of it)?

Thanks very much for your time and insights! Greatly appreciate it!!!

The champ is back. I'm totally being silly. You have to remain stress free and you have to keep it light when you are a lawyer.

Thank you very much for the kind words. I'm glad that you got something out of what I said.

Like others pointed out to me quite a while back, I'm not making any representations that what I see and experience are the norm. However, I am saying that if you work very hard and even more importantly, work very smartly, you stand a much better chance at success at opening your own law firm.

But there are several hurdles. I'm not a business guru, but from what I've observed, the key to generating much revenue with ANY business is volume. Whether you sell products or services you have to have volume. Even if you are trying large cases like I am, you still have to have a few cases. That means, your marketing has to be very effective.

The only exception that I have seen to needing volume is a plaintiff lawyer's trial practice. It depends on the type of cases that you get. But a plaintiff's lawyer can make a huge amount of money off of one case. Sure, there are those lawyers that make 50 million dollars off of one case. I'm not referencing those guys. I'm referring to the ones like my colleague who routinely makes 100k to 500k of one one case. I don't know how routine it is, but I do know that he lives in one of the richest neighborhoods in Houston.

And it's very rough getting started. You have to be willing to work those suck a$$ jobs to fund your practice and to put food on the table while you grow your business. You do NOT want to work at a law firm while you grow your business unless they contractually let you keep all the spoils from your cases. That's how a former law school classmate of mine made lots of money. He worked at a small firm and the owner let him take on his own cases on the side. He had tons of volume and then hit the jackpot with a large personal injury case.

Forgive me if I'm repeating myself. It's been a long time.

The easiest way to generate a very lucrative career working for yourself outside of any law firm is to become a plaintiff's lawyer. The payouts from contingency fee cases are just too large. In the beginning. It's best to find a more experienced law firm that will aid you in a big case because trying that big case is going to cost you money that you just don't have starting out. My suggestion would be to develop a FEW of these arrangements. When you try those big cases, unless your client got run over by a bus and it was clear that the bus driver was doing a headstand in the driver's seat at the time of the accident, it's going to cost you a some money to try the case. Why would a more experienced lawyer aid your case in that way, you say? Because you brought that case to them. Lawyers are pretty bad marketers compared to other business owners. That's where you want to excel. That increases your value to those more experienced smaller firms who have the money to help you try your products liability case.

Also, you want to get to know lawyers that have a practice, but aren't necessarily trial lawyers. That way, you offer a reason why that lawyer should team up with you. This is especially helpful if they have had their practice longer. The longer they've been around, even for a couple of years before you, the more likely they are to get cases more effectively than you. I have a partner who's a former law school classmate who hates litigation. She also just can't do it effectively. Mind you, many lawyers can't, but they bluff. While this is better than nothing, there's nothing like having more leverage for settlement negotiations because you are not afraid to go to trial.

I don't personally know that many lawyers who have lucrative transactional practices. I do know a few. However, these practices aren't as lucrative as Big Law associate positions. My partner that I just referred to earlier has a transactional practice. Her practice is pretty lucrative. She probably makes over a 150 grand. However, I don't think she can compete with Big Law salaries. My best friend's step dad makes about the same with a transactional practice. But he's been in business forever. I've met some other transactional attorneys with their own practices, some do ok and some struggle and have been for a number of years. You just have to have that volume to make that kind of practice go if you want it to be a lucrative practice that approaches that of a Big Law associate salary.

Contrast that transactional practice to a plaintiff's practice. It's like night and day. Or it can be like night and day.

People on this board sleep on criminal lawyers. I don't know any criminal lawyers that struggle. Some make quite a bit more than Big Law associates and some make right below Big Law associates. But the criminal lawyer who is not trying murder cases or other high level felonies that require scientific evidence has the cushest job of any attorney from what I've seen. Those guys get paid their $5000 for a case. And then they plea to a deal that takes all but 10 minutes. And they're done. Low level felonies and misdemeanors of any kind can be pretty lucrative. Again, you aren't going to out do Big law, but in terms of effort expended per every dollar you make, it's no comparison. And if you want to step up to the plate and try those murder cases or rape cases, the money really starts raining in. Those guys do make more money than big law associates. The problem with criminal law though, is that you have to have a little volume if you want to have a lucrative practice. And it's kinda hard to be a very successful criminal lawyer without a reputation. And that takes some time to build. Reputation is not really important in civil matters. It helps, but it is not necessary because your money earned from those cases is larger.

As to your question about whether one can move into big law later down the road from non big law out of school, that just won't happen unless you become mayor of a major metropolitan area and the firm makes you a partner because you can bring in tons of business. I don't know if this rule is absolute, but I've never seen it happen any other way. That's not to say it doesn't happen. That is to say that I, myself, have never seen it happen. From what I've seen with big law here in Texas, a few firms even look at your law school grades 10 years removed from law school. That's what we were told while I was in school from actual big law firm reps. It's a very insulated area. I would guess this is true nationwide, but I definitely know it's true here in Texas. You might have an outside shot if you went to a t-14 plus Texas or Vanderbilt but just chose not to go big law. But if you tried big law from any school and just did not make the cut when you were coming out of school, it's likely not going to be different if you try for a move down the road into big law.

And lastly, those trial lawyers that I have referenced are better business men/women than everyone else. That is why they succeed so well. I would say it's somewhat rare to have so much success that you are making a mil a year. But it's not "lottery chance in hell" rare. But all the trial lawyers I referenced make about 2-3+ million a year. If you approach the business and marketing aspects of firm practice with much more importance than anything, than you stand a very good chance to become that successful, especially if you are able to take risks. I would say that is one of the most important factors. But you have to be smart about it and you have to operate your marketing to precision. Otherwise, the cases won't be there.

But adhering to those principles allows you to easily make six figures. But you have to really work hard at getting out there and marketing your firm.

You're welcome. I actually am even MORE appreciative this time around! You really put in some time to share your knowledge with us here. Thanks so very much!

But, also, the other reason I appreciated your comments was because it was a different perspective of things - a departure from the more common stories of struggle, un/underemployment, and resentment against law school or the legal economy. It's helpful to see all the various sides to an issue and I was glad to hear of your unique view of things.

I do try to learn from all the perspectives that I hear from - being as thoroughly informed as I can before making a decision on law school.



You mention working "smart." ...Could you possibly elaborate on this (any specific examples of it)?

(continued from above...)



That's where I'm curious. If one is literally fresh out of law school with no experience and decides to go into small/solo law practice, then he or she market him/herself? Why would anyone trust a new lawyer with zero experience to handle their cases?

Or, is it that these lawyers charge a lower rate in order to obtain business (away from costlier lawyers)?

(again...continuing from above...)


Masry & Vititoe of Erin Brockovich fame, correct? ...an amazing person, by the way!


I remember Masry doing this from the Erin Brockovich film. They had to get "help" from a more experienced lawyer - although, I don't recall whether or not they called for help due to financial constraints or in order to get his intellectual/legal expertises (or possibly both).



Any suggestions on HOW to successfully market? I'm guessing those are your trade secrets, huh?

(Also, would you spend money to hire a marketing expert?)

(again....yet another continuation...)



What is a "transactional practice," by the way?

Yeah, I'm not sure if I'd be the trial lawyer type either - hard to say. But, nevertheless, this is helpful information to have! It's just good to know these things for perspective, options, and, of course, tips. I'd have to look into what skills a good trial lawyer would need. But I am not sure if that suits me best or not.

Still, very interesting.


Actually, utlaw2007, $150K in Houston would seem quite high. Adjusted for cost of living, it might very well be better than a NYC associate salary. ...But then again, I don't know what NYC associates make after their $160K starting salaries. I do recall, however, Houston having a low cost of living.


This is surprising to me, because I had always thought that criminal lawyers - aside from the Johnnie Cochrane types - did poorly financially.

So to confirm, you're saying high level felonies or murder cases that DO need scientific evidence provide the lowest returns? But, would those cases not take a longer time and thus be billed for more?

(continuing from above once again....)



Ah, so this is where some genuine confusion has set in...I was under the impression from your earlier comments that rape and murder (or other serious felony) cases did NOT do as well as lesser crimes? Perhaps I'm misreading/misunderstanding?


Very interesting perspective, utlaw2007. Thanks so much for your time and insights!!

When you say that one has to take "risks," what did you mean by that above?