Also, there are also very few ways to get into big law other than OCI, unless you either already did some big law and then left to come back (clerkship, gov't). So once you've opted out, usually, you've opted out for good (unless you're doing something really legit instead for a while and you have cognizable added value I guess)worldtraveler wrote:This isn't directed at me, but I don't regret not going into big law, even though lots of people told me I would and that my choice would hinder my career.d cooper wrote:Do any of the attorneys here in biglaw wish they had just said "screw the debt" and gunned for government, midlaw, or otherwise rode the PAYE train? Or do you feel your time investment has been or will be worth it?
But I am insanely lucky and I think for 90% of law students, pursuing big law and starting at a firm is probably the best call because the alternative has a pretty high failure rate.
The BigLaw hate buffet Forum
- jbagelboy
- Posts: 10361
- Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
- worldtraveler
- Posts: 8676
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:47 am
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
Well I have the job I have now because of that experience not being killed in war zones. Given most people are not going to do that, I think big law might be a better way to get there. I have colleagues who took the big law route and we both ended up the same place.MarkinKansasCity wrote:I think at some point you get credit for being above average after not getting killed while touristing batshit crazy war zones and you have a unicorn job. I'm gonna say its more than luck at this point.worldtraveler wrote:This isn't directed at me, but I don't regret not going into big law, even though lots of people told me I would and that my choice would hinder my career.d cooper wrote:Do any of the attorneys here in biglaw wish they had just said "screw the debt" and gunned for government, midlaw, or otherwise rode the PAYE train? Or do you feel your time investment has been or will be worth it?
But I am insanely lucky and I think for 90% of law students, pursuing big law and starting at a firm is probably the best call because the alternative has a pretty high failure rate.
- MKC
- Posts: 16246
- Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:18 am
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
Judging by this thread, backpacking through war zones is probably both more fun AND healthier.worldtraveler wrote:Well I have the job I have now because of that experience not being killed in war zones. Given most people are not going to do that, I think big law might be a better way to get there. I have colleagues who took the big law route and we both ended up the same place.MarkinKansasCity wrote:I think at some point you get credit for being above average after not getting killed while touristing batshit crazy war zones and you have a unicorn job. I'm gonna say its more than luck at this point.worldtraveler wrote:This isn't directed at me, but I don't regret not going into big law, even though lots of people told me I would and that my choice would hinder my career.d cooper wrote:Do any of the attorneys here in biglaw wish they had just said "screw the debt" and gunned for government, midlaw, or otherwise rode the PAYE train? Or do you feel your time investment has been or will be worth it?
But I am insanely lucky and I think for 90% of law students, pursuing big law and starting at a firm is probably the best call because the alternative has a pretty high failure rate.
- JusticeHarlan
- Posts: 1516
- Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 2:56 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
Keep my head above water long enough to go in-house somewhere was the plan, but who knows. Definitely not doing this forever.Mal Reynolds wrote:What's your exit strategy big lawyer bros.
- Holly Golightly
- Posts: 4602
- Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:30 am
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
Towards the end of my SA, my firm got new Internet blocking software that blocked every website people could possibly have fun looking at. One of the juniors I hung out with a lot told me he couldn't even go to his bank's website...and his bank was a client.rayiner wrote:My firm's intranet had a link to ESPN 360 and some other ways to kill time.Mal Reynolds wrote:This is a very weird, middle school fixation on free time. Will we get in trouble for looking at ESPN???
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- MKC
- Posts: 16246
- Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:18 am
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
Did they block 3rd party VPNs? Because I'm thinking of a loophole...Holly Golightly wrote:Towards the end of my SA, my firm got new Internet blocking software that blocked every website people could possibly have fun looking at. One of the juniors I hung out with a lot told me he couldn't even go to his bank's website...and his bank was a client.rayiner wrote:My firm's intranet had a link to ESPN 360 and some other ways to kill time.Mal Reynolds wrote:This is a very weird, middle school fixation on free time. Will we get in trouble for looking at ESPN???
- Holly Golightly
- Posts: 4602
- Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:30 am
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
They had blocked some of them, but not all.MarkinKansasCity wrote:Did they block 3rd party VPNs? Because I'm thinking of a loophole...Holly Golightly wrote:Towards the end of my SA, my firm got new Internet blocking software that blocked every website people could possibly have fun looking at. One of the juniors I hung out with a lot told me he couldn't even go to his bank's website...and his bank was a client.rayiner wrote:My firm's intranet had a link to ESPN 360 and some other ways to kill time.Mal Reynolds wrote:This is a very weird, middle school fixation on free time. Will we get in trouble for looking at ESPN???
- OneMoreLawHopeful
- Posts: 1191
- Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
I've heard of this before,but it seems really problematic; random internet surfing was the basis of a lot of discovery motions I saw as an SA (e.g. motion to compel because you advertise a product on your website but did not disclose its sales in your financial documents production, or the ever popular "friend that guy on FB and see if he has any posts that might help us prove x")Holly Golightly wrote:Towards the end of my SA, my firm got new Internet blocking software that blocked every website people could possibly have fun looking at. One of the juniors I hung out with a lot told me he couldn't even go to his bank's website...and his bank was a client.rayiner wrote:My firm's intranet had a link to ESPN 360 and some other ways to kill time.Mal Reynolds wrote:This is a very weird, middle school fixation on free time. Will we get in trouble for looking at ESPN???
If most sites are blocked, this stuff becomes onerous and unmanageable (I.e. getting permission and IT help for a five minute search).
- t-14orbust
- Posts: 2130
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 4:43 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
Posting this on my wall. thanksthesealocust wrote:100% worth it. The training, which isn't training but rather sink-or-swim-figure-it-out-or-die-trying, actually is terrific. If there's any merit to the 10,000 hours rule, then there's merit to the long hours early in the career. I'd scrub toilets for $160,000 per year. Living frugally is really easy when somebody else is paying for your meals + transportation and taking away any time you had for debauchery.d cooper wrote:Do any of the attorneys here in biglaw wish they had just said "screw the debt" and gunned for government, midlaw, or otherwise rode the PAYE train? Or do you feel your time investment has been or will be worth it?
"You can do anything for a year" - or even two or three - is actually true, and dolla dolla bills yo.
It's still a constant nightmare and a long-form existential crisis, but I wouldn't have done it differently given the chance and full disclosure about how it would pan out.
-
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:29 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
You're kidding yourself if you think personal injury is somehow more righteous. Aside from the fact that the clients are the same (some are legit, some are faking it), where do you think the money comes from? The larger your payout, the more the insurance company paid, which means premiums for all insureds go up, even those who make no claims, need little healthcare, and are barely scraping by to afford the insurance. Maybe they are paying for it outright or they having it taken out of their paychecks, making it harder to pay their bills, feed their kids, live their lives. But that's not all - after settlement, on the back end, you still have to negotiate with the doctors who provided their treatment and services to the injured client. That means negotiating their surgery fee from $100,000 to two-thirds or half that. That means that doctor charges higher fees overall so that he can make up the difference over the entire book of patients, which means higher costs for his other patients who pay individually or their insurance companies, if insured, so you run into the same problem as above. Or worse, if the client is on Medicare and/or whatever is their state equivalent, instead of causing overall premiums to increase, you're causing a lower pool of money to be paid to very needy people and increasing everyone's taxes.Question Everything wrote:OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:I'm curious about your views on money, because when it comes to small firms making money, you were eager to advise others that:Question Everything wrote:Agreed. And, just for the record, I'd much rather spend my life as a prole than defending Inner Party members, trying desperately to convince myself that money and "prestige" is worth sacrificing my soul for Big Brother, until I one day realize I'll never rise to become morn than a Outer Party peon with a bleeding ulcer and varicose veins.So is dat personal injury cash more green somehow? Does it just smell sweeter? Or is it maybe possible that your shit stinks as bad as anyone else's?Question Everything wrote:Start looking for small personal injury firm jobs, if you are interested in that type of work, like litigation, and are at least somewhat of a people person.These firms don't care much about grades and the environment is quite similar to that of a startup. If you really posses the entrepreneurial mindset you've mentioned, and are willing to work hard and hustle your ass off, you could end up out earning the BigLaw bound assholes on here that are telling you to drop out.
Yes, it is much greener and smells so very much sweeter -- just like my shit. I'd much rather spend my days fighting for the victims of greedy corporations than defending those bad actors. Plenty of you are willing to devote your energies to doing the latter already. I could not look myself in the mirror if I had to be part of a team that defends companies such as General Motors, who sat on information for over 10 years that could've saved countless lives, Bank of America, who repeatedly defrauded consumers, or Pfizer, who paid physicians kickbacks to prescribe their pharmaceuticals, just to name a few that come to mind. If that's what you choose/chose to do, so be it, I realize that not everyone can care as much for their common man as I do, but you assholes need to stop stomping around like you're somehow superior. In my book, those who go into BigLaw are nothing more than risk-averse cowards who've painted themselves into a corner and now must try to disassociate from the realization that they are not only wasting their lives, but perpetuating wrongs.
Personal injury is soul sucking. You will go home feeling shitty on some days. Most days you'll try to do a good job and derive satisfaction that you've represented your client well, which is what your job is about. But don't for a second think that PI will somehow make you a better person or a better citizen.
-
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:55 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
Preposterous. You're making the same, ridiculous argument that insurers and other large companies always make when it concerns equitable compensation for a plaintiff's injuries. It's like you copied John Voight's closing argument from The Rainmaker word for word and pasted it here. The premise that someone who has been wronged shouldn't receive all that they're due because the wrongdoer will pass the costs of their actions onto other consumers belies reason. Such beliefs aren't based upon any rational public policy minded motive -- it's an excuse to shield large corporations from liability. If it was up to you, we'd never hold these parties responsible at all. Taking a page from the too big to fail lexicon, you want to live in nation where some defendants are too big to sue.echooo23 wrote:You're kidding yourself if you think personal injury is somehow more righteous. Aside from the fact that the clients are the same (some are legit, some are faking it), where do you think the money comes from? The larger your payout, the more the insurance company paid, which means premiums for all insureds go up, even those who make no claims, need little healthcare, and are barely scraping by to afford the insurance. Maybe they are paying for it outright or they having it taken out of their paychecks, making it harder to pay their bills, feed their kids, live their lives. But that's not all - after settlement, on the back end, you still have to negotiate with the doctors who provided their treatment and services to the injured client. That means negotiating their surgery fee from $100,000 to two-thirds or half that. That means that doctor charges higher fees overall so that he can make up the difference over the entire book of patients, which means higher costs for his other patients who pay individually or their insurance companies, if insured, so you run into the same problem as above. Or worse, if the client is on Medicare and/or whatever is their state equivalent, instead of causing overall premiums to increase, you're causing a lower pool of money to be paid to very needy people and increasing everyone's taxes.Question Everything wrote:OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:I'm curious about your views on money, because when it comes to small firms making money, you were eager to advise others that:Question Everything wrote:Agreed. And, just for the record, I'd much rather spend my life as a prole than defending Inner Party members, trying desperately to convince myself that money and "prestige" is worth sacrificing my soul for Big Brother, until I one day realize I'll never rise to become morn than a Outer Party peon with a bleeding ulcer and varicose veins.So is dat personal injury cash more green somehow? Does it just smell sweeter? Or is it maybe possible that your shit stinks as bad as anyone else's?Question Everything wrote:Start looking for small personal injury firm jobs, if you are interested in that type of work, like litigation, and are at least somewhat of a people person.These firms don't care much about grades and the environment is quite similar to that of a startup. If you really posses the entrepreneurial mindset you've mentioned, and are willing to work hard and hustle your ass off, you could end up out earning the BigLaw bound assholes on here that are telling you to drop out.
Yes, it is much greener and smells so very much sweeter -- just like my shit. I'd much rather spend my days fighting for the victims of greedy corporations than defending those bad actors. Plenty of you are willing to devote your energies to doing the latter already. I could not look myself in the mirror if I had to be part of a team that defends companies such as General Motors, who sat on information for over 10 years that could've saved countless lives, Bank of America, who repeatedly defrauded consumers, or Pfizer, who paid physicians kickbacks to prescribe their pharmaceuticals, just to name a few that come to mind. If that's what you choose/chose to do, so be it, I realize that not everyone can care as much for their common man as I do, but you assholes need to stop stomping around like you're somehow superior. In my book, those who go into BigLaw are nothing more than risk-averse cowards who've painted themselves into a corner and now must try to disassociate from the realization that they are not only wasting their lives, but perpetuating wrongs.
Personal injury is soul sucking. You will go home feeling shitty on some days. Most days you'll try to do a good job and derive satisfaction that you've represented your client well, which is what your job is about. But don't for a second think that PI will somehow make you a better person or a better citizen.
-
- Posts: 31195
- Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
This escalated quickly.
- spleenworship
- Posts: 4394
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
As much as I hate to be on the same side as QE, I do have to say that no one I have worked with in personal injury would call it soul sucking. A few I've met at demand letter mills where they have to settle or win 10 cases a month doing all that piddly whiplash claim shit seem unhappy. But mostly with the hours and pressures. They don't really say its soul sucking. When they invariably move on to a smaller and more selective firm they are universally happy in my experience.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- spleenworship
- Posts: 4394
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
It's because QE is a hyperbolic 0L with a chip on his shoulder the size of Everest and an inability to relate well to others.CounselorNebby wrote:This escalated quickly.
- A. Nony Mouse
- Posts: 29293
- Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
It does seem sort of unhelpful to talk about PI claims driving up insurance premiums/medical costs, in that it suggests that even if you have a legitimate claim you still shouldn't bring it. We have a tort system for the very purpose of letting people recover for legitimate injuries.
That said, there are a crapload of shady PI lawyers out there and false claims, and working on those would make me feel pretty awful. They're what makes it harder for people who are legitimately injured to get recourse.
But I imagine QE has some justification for that, too, since they're sticking it to the man.
That said, there are a crapload of shady PI lawyers out there and false claims, and working on those would make me feel pretty awful. They're what makes it harder for people who are legitimately injured to get recourse.
But I imagine QE has some justification for that, too, since they're sticking it to the man.
-
- Posts: 31195
- Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
This thread should be mandatory reading for all 1Ls. It would have been better than 80% of the stuff career services presentations.
-
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:55 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
If others = biglaw lawyers and wannabes that think they are superior, you are 100% correct.spleenworship wrote:It's because QE is a hyperbolic 0L with a chip on his shoulder the size of Everest and an inability to relate well to others.CounselorNebby wrote:This escalated quickly.
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: 58
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:55 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
Man, you guys are really starting to understand me.A. Nony Mouse wrote:It does seem sort of unhelpful to talk about PI claims driving up insurance premiums/medical costs, in that it suggests that even if you have a legitimate claim you still shouldn't bring it. We have a tort system for the very purpose of letting people recover for legitimate injuries.
That said, there are a crapload of shady PI lawyers out there and false claims, and working on those would make me feel pretty awful. They're what makes it harder for people who are legitimately injured to get recourse.
But I imagine QE has some justification for that, too, since they're sticking it to the man.
-
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:29 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
I'm not saying that people with legitimate claims shouldn't bring them. I never said anything like that. I'm just saying that whether you work in BigLaw or in personal injury there will be clients that suck and clients that don't. Some clients you will feel really good representing, and some that you're like, "Goddamn you're a liar." In the end, whether you represent a big corp or small individual, there are going to be consequences, and there is no reason to say that BigLaw lawyers are shitty individuals who should kill themselves but personal injury lawyers make the world a better place. My point only is to refute QE's "big law = bad, personal injury = good" statement.A. Nony Mouse wrote:It does seem sort of unhelpful to talk about PI claims driving up insurance premiums/medical costs, in that it suggests that even if you have a legitimate claim you still shouldn't bring it. We have a tort system for the very purpose of letting people recover for legitimate injuries.
That said, there are a crapload of shady PI lawyers out there and false claims, and working on those would make me feel pretty awful. They're what makes it harder for people who are legitimately injured to get recourse.
But I imagine QE has some justification for that, too, since they're sticking it to the man.
-
- Posts: 1650
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:42 am
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
For current associates in big law, what amount of money (lump sum payment) would you accept to leave big law for good (not just your firm, any big law firm) and either practice a different type of law or change professions?
- dresden doll
- Posts: 6797
- Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
Yeah, taking donor dollars in order to engage in egregious self-aggrandizement while doing nothing with any tangible effect on the people you profess to care about never ever ever happens in nonprofit.IAFG wrote:Yeah I don't really care about this either.Question Everything wrote:I've got news for you. If this doesn't bother you, you're a terrible person. What's more, the fact that you felt the need to explicitly preface your comment with "IAFG wrote:Something that doesn't bother me but seems to really get to other people is when it's your job to screw over people (investors, claimants, whatever) to keep rich people rich.omething that doesn't bother me but seems to really get to other people...", as if to ensure that no one mistakenly construes that you possess any empathy, while at the same time making clear your bemusement at those that do, is near definitive evidence that you're a psychopath.
Maybe that's why I'm actually relatively happy in my job. Let's have a competing thread where we list personality traits that make biglaw tolerable. Oh, wait, we do.
But yeah, enjoy saving the world or whatever you plan to do instead of biglaw. I'm sure you won't just suck up donor dollars trying to elevate the prestige of your org's president or anything.
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
- dresden doll
- Posts: 6797
- Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
Several people from my nonprofit exited into firms in the past, but our lit is of the sort that can have value for a firm (so, not family/housing/immigration and the like). It's definitely super rare.jbagelboy wrote:
Also, there are also very few ways to get into big law other than OCI, unless you either already did some big law and then left to come back (clerkship, gov't). So once you've opted out, usually, you've opted out for good (unless you're doing something really legit instead for a while and you have cognizable added value I guess)
-
- Posts: 2213
- Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:21 am
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
How prestigious is the view from the window?
- 84651846190
- Posts: 2198
- Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:06 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
1.7 million.Hutz_and_Goodman wrote:For current associates in big law, what amount of money (lump sum payment) would you accept to leave big law for good (not just your firm, any big law firm) and either practice a different type of law or change professions?
- IAFG
- Posts: 6641
- Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm
Re: The BigLaw hate buffet
All it would take is a job offer at a stable p firm.Hutz_and_Goodman wrote:For current associates in big law, what amount of money (lump sum payment) would you accept to leave big law for good (not just your firm, any big law firm) and either practice a different type of law or change professions?
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login