What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice) Forum

Use this forum to discuss different legal practice areas with other attorneys.
Post Reply
jbp15860

New
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:12 pm

What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by jbp15860 » Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:44 am

I know Big Law seems to be the dream of most people, but I'm not sure I'm one of those people. I'm not saying I'm not, but I'm not completely clear on what it all entails, and I'm hoping y'all can help me, as it could help me make a tough decision when it comes time to choose a law school. That is, between U of H and UT (in Texas).

It seems to me that most Big Law jobs revolve around finance and/or business or some sort. Is that correct? It seems that many of the jobs require some background, or at least some great knowledge in business economics, corporate finances, etc... If that's the case, well, I know absolutely nothing about any of that and I don't think I really care to. I am pretty positive that I want to be a litigator, unless I find something really interesting about certain transactional work.

So, I guess what I'm asking is: what the hell do all the Big Law firms do? Is it all based around M&A for the most part, and stuff like that? What about real estate and copyright law? Is that more mid size? Any information or experience would be appreciate. Take the LSAT this September so I really need to think about whether or not it's even worth it to try and squeeze my way into UT.

RedPurpleBlue

Silver
Posts: 569
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:41 pm

Re: What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by RedPurpleBlue » Thu Apr 19, 2018 8:15 pm

jbp15860 wrote:I know Big Law seems to be the dream of most people, but I'm not sure I'm one of those people. I'm not saying I'm not, but I'm not completely clear on what it all entails, and I'm hoping y'all can help me, as it could help me make a tough decision when it comes time to choose a law school. That is, between U of H and UT (in Texas).

It seems to me that most Big Law jobs revolve around finance and/or business or some sort. Is that correct? It seems that many of the jobs require some background, or at least some great knowledge in business economics, corporate finances, etc... If that's the case, well, I know absolutely nothing about any of that and I don't think I really care to. I am pretty positive that I want to be a litigator, unless I find something really interesting about certain transactional work.

So, I guess what I'm asking is: what the hell do all the Big Law firms do? Is it all based around M&A for the most part, and stuff like that? What about real estate and copyright law? Is that more mid size? Any information or experience would be appreciate. Take the LSAT this September so I really need to think about whether or not it's even worth it to try and squeeze my way into UT.
Big law jobs require no particular background or knowledge (minus patent work, which requires a STEM degree or substantial STEM coursework to sit the patent bar). Big law jobs can be doing legal work in taxation, labor and employment, intellectual property (patents, trademarks, and copyright), government investigations, regulatory fields, litigation of various types, etc. Of course, almost everything is business related, because all the major clients at firms are business entities. Some firms have huge M&A groups and everything else might as well be a support group, but a lot of firms have strong practices outside of M&A. There are big firms that do both real estate and copyright law. I'm not sure how big IP groups (and specifically copyright teams in those groups) are, but real estate groups are generally relatively decently sized (10-30 attorneys). Though, the real estate blends with the M&A group, the bigger the group will probably be. If it's a true real estate group, it's unlikely to be 80 attorneys.

What distinguishes the work from smaller firms? The clients are more prestigious/wealthy. The hours are longer. The pay is better. The work is generally more complex but your responsibility early on in your career is also generally much less. Many litigation associates spend 6+ years at a big law firm and never participate in a trial, let alone run one. Transnational folk spend a great deal of their team making sure commas didn't get misplaced in mindlessly boring documents. In general, it's almost universally considered a terrible experience. The only people who don't mind it are (1) unusually competitive people who will jump through hoops no matter how awful it is and just NEED to become a partner and (2) the people who just really like what they can do with the money and can tolerate the job. People spend a great deal of time looking for "tolerable" or "good" big law firms, because they just can't accept the reality that it's a terrible job. There will be exceptions to the norm: firms with low facetime requirements, partners/practice groups at specific firms that give real responsibility early on, etc. bu they are the exception and not the norm.

Squeezing your way into UT is almost definitely a waste of time if it means you are paying sticker. Even in-state, that's probably $200k. Go to a regional school on a huge scholarship and practice ad a small or mid-sized firm if you don't need the $200k/yr., high stress, crushing debt, and prestige.

jbp15860

New
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:12 pm

Re: What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by jbp15860 » Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:37 pm

RedPurpleBlue wrote:
jbp15860 wrote:I know Big Law seems to be the dream of most people, but I'm not sure I'm one of those people. I'm not saying I'm not, but I'm not completely clear on what it all entails, and I'm hoping y'all can help me, as it could help me make a tough decision when it comes time to choose a law school. That is, between U of H and UT (in Texas).

It seems to me that most Big Law jobs revolve around finance and/or business or some sort. Is that correct? It seems that many of the jobs require some background, or at least some great knowledge in business economics, corporate finances, etc... If that's the case, well, I know absolutely nothing about any of that and I don't think I really care to. I am pretty positive that I want to be a litigator, unless I find something really interesting about certain transactional work.

So, I guess what I'm asking is: what the hell do all the Big Law firms do? Is it all based around M&A for the most part, and stuff like that? What about real estate and copyright law? Is that more mid size? Any information or experience would be appreciate. Take the LSAT this September so I really need to think about whether or not it's even worth it to try and squeeze my way into UT.
Big law jobs require no particular background or knowledge (minus patent work, which requires a STEM degree or substantial STEM coursework to sit the patent bar). Big law jobs can be doing legal work in taxation, labor and employment, intellectual property (patents, trademarks, and copyright), government investigations, regulatory fields, litigation of various types, etc. Of course, almost everything is business related, because all the major clients at firms are business entities. Some firms have huge M&A groups and everything else might as well be a support group, but a lot of firms have strong practices outside of M&A. There are big firms that do both real estate and copyright law. I'm not sure how big IP groups (and specifically copyright teams in those groups) are, but real estate groups are generally relatively decently sized (10-30 attorneys). Though, the real estate blends with the M&A group, the bigger the group will probably be. If it's a true real estate group, it's unlikely to be 80 attorneys.

What distinguishes the work from smaller firms? The clients are more prestigious/wealthy. The hours are longer. The pay is better. The work is generally more complex but your responsibility early on in your career is also generally much less. Many litigation associates spend 6+ years at a big law firm and never participate in a trial, let alone run one. Transnational folk spend a great deal of their team making sure commas didn't get misplaced in mindlessly boring documents. In general, it's almost universally considered a terrible experience. The only people who don't mind it are (1) unusually competitive people who will jump through hoops no matter how awful it is and just NEED to become a partner and (2) the people who just really like what they can do with the money and can tolerate the job. People spend a great deal of time looking for "tolerable" or "good" big law firms, because they just can't accept the reality that it's a terrible job. There will be exceptions to the norm: firms with low facetime requirements, partners/practice groups at specific firms that give real responsibility early on, etc. bu they are the exception and not the norm.

Squeezing your way into UT is almost definitely a waste of time if it means you are paying sticker. Even in-state, that's probably $200k. Go to a regional school on a huge scholarship and practice ad a small or mid-sized firm if you don't need the $200k/yr., high stress, crushing debt, and prestige.
Thanks for the thorough response. That has been my plan up until now: go to UH since I want to practice in Houston, and I have housing in Houston, and UH is second only to UT in the Houston market. I don't think I would "squeeze" into UT. That was a bit of a mischaracterization on my part. But, I definitely don't have the GPA to get a significant scholarship. Also, I realize it's foolish to "pick" a path before law school, seeing as how I only have second hand knowledge of areas of practice, but as of right now, being a prosecutor with the DA seems particularly attractive at this point for various reasons. And students from UH regularly get those positions as long as they intern throughout law school and participate in mock trials and all that. The legal market in Houston is the fifth largest in the country and UH is well respected so I think that's the right choice. I was just wanting some insight into big law because it's basically the only reason to go to UT. That and federal clerkships, I guess, and I definitely don't want to do that. Though, the top 20% at UH regularly get Big Law positions in Houston, anyway. And as far as 200k a year. I don't really need that. BUt the DAs office starts at 65k and within five years every one who is still there is up over 100k and people who have been there close to or more than 10 years are all over 120k, at least from the data that is available online. So, there's that. Thanks, though, for the insight.

User avatar
mrs.miawallace

New
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 6:41 am

Re: What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by mrs.miawallace » Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:58 pm

I think right now if UH or UT are both doable (you need 168+ to get into UT for sure even with strong grades), always go to the better-ranking law school if you can afford to (40% scholarship etc) than full ride, opens more doors, not just big law. there are other desirable law-related jobs other than big law that looks at your resume.

danishblue

New
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2022 11:08 am

Re: What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by danishblue » Sun Aug 07, 2022 10:58 am

BiggyLaw NYC, what percent of assoc make partner? I hear it can be 10%?

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


User avatar
nealric

Moderator
Posts: 4265
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:53 am

Re: What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by nealric » Mon Aug 08, 2022 2:00 pm

danishblue wrote:
Sun Aug 07, 2022 10:58 am
BiggyLaw NYC, what percent of assoc make partner? I hear it can be 10%?
The vast majority of associates leave biglaw voluntarily before they come up for partner. Of course there are levels of voluntary. Some will decide on their own they just can't stand biglaw despite having a decent shot at partnership, some will be told they don't have a high likelihood of making partner (or they will figure it out on their own based on feedback and internal politics) and decide on their own to leave, some will be outright dismissed.

As for percentages. There are no hard numbers, and it depends on the exact question.

If the question is: "what is the percentage who make partner at the exact firm they start with", I think 10% is a rouge guesstimate. A few more percent will get "of counsel" titles which essentially means they can stay on as long as they like in what is fundamentally a senior associate role.

If the question is: "what is the percentage who make partner somewhere that could reasonably called biglaw", I think you probably double that number to maybe 20%.

If the question is: "what percentage make partner in any private practice firm (biglaw or not)?", I think you get into the 30-40% range"

If the question is: "What percentage of associates who stick around long enough to be formally up for partner actually make it?" The answer is probably better than 50%.

User avatar
nealric

Moderator
Posts: 4265
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:53 am

Re: What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by nealric » Mon Aug 08, 2022 2:14 pm

RedPurpleBlue wrote:
Thu Apr 19, 2018 8:15 pm
jbp15860 wrote:I know Big Law seems to be the dream of most people, but I'm not sure I'm one of those people. I'm not saying I'm not, but I'm not completely clear on what it all entails, and I'm hoping y'all can help me, as it could help me make a tough decision when it comes time to choose a law school. That is, between U of H and UT (in Texas).

It seems to me that most Big Law jobs revolve around finance and/or business or some sort. Is that correct? It seems that many of the jobs require some background, or at least some great knowledge in business economics, corporate finances, etc... If that's the case, well, I know absolutely nothing about any of that and I don't think I really care to. I am pretty positive that I want to be a litigator, unless I find something really interesting about certain transactional work.

So, I guess what I'm asking is: what the hell do all the Big Law firms do? Is it all based around M&A for the most part, and stuff like that? What about real estate and copyright law? Is that more mid size? Any information or experience would be appreciate. Take the LSAT this September so I really need to think about whether or not it's even worth it to try and squeeze my way into UT.
Big law jobs require no particular background or knowledge (minus patent work, which requires a STEM degree or substantial STEM coursework to sit the patent bar). Big law jobs can be doing legal work in taxation, labor and employment, intellectual property (patents, trademarks, and copyright), government investigations, regulatory fields, litigation of various types, etc. Of course, almost everything is business related, because all the major clients at firms are business entities. Some firms have huge M&A groups and everything else might as well be a support group, but a lot of firms have strong practices outside of M&A. There are big firms that do both real estate and copyright law. I'm not sure how big IP groups (and specifically copyright teams in those groups) are, but real estate groups are generally relatively decently sized (10-30 attorneys). Though, the real estate blends with the M&A group, the bigger the group will probably be. If it's a true real estate group, it's unlikely to be 80 attorneys.

What distinguishes the work from smaller firms? The clients are more prestigious/wealthy. The hours are longer. The pay is better. The work is generally more complex but your responsibility early on in your career is also generally much less. Many litigation associates spend 6+ years at a big law firm and never participate in a trial, let alone run one. Transnational folk spend a great deal of their team making sure commas didn't get misplaced in mindlessly boring documents. In general, it's almost universally considered a terrible experience. The only people who don't mind it are (1) unusually competitive people who will jump through hoops no matter how awful it is and just NEED to become a partner and (2) the people who just really like what they can do with the money and can tolerate the job. People spend a great deal of time looking for "tolerable" or "good" big law firms, because they just can't accept the reality that it's a terrible job. There will be exceptions to the norm: firms with low facetime requirements, partners/practice groups at specific firms that give real responsibility early on, etc. bu they are the exception and not the norm.

Squeezing your way into UT is almost definitely a waste of time if it means you are paying sticker. Even in-state, that's probably $200k. Go to a regional school on a huge scholarship and practice ad a small or mid-sized firm if you don't need the $200k/yr., high stress, crushing debt, and prestige.




I think this is overly pessimistic. While I didn't stay in biglaw for all that long, I didn't leave because I hated it. I was relocating and had the pick of another biglaw job or an in-house job, and decided on the in-house job. It was the better of what I think were multiple good options. I was personally ambivalent about making partner (certainly not a hard core partnership gunner). On one hand, the pay and prestige can be extremely attractive. On the other hand, I wasn't sure I wanted to commit to biglaw hours for my whole career.

Biglaw can have some very interesting work (as far as any legal work is interesting). While some juniors are stuck hunting for misplaced commas and making signature blocks, you pretty quickly progress into substantive understanding of fairly sophisticated deals/cases. In most spheres of legal practice, you aren't given leeway to really get into tricky issues when they come up because there isn't time/budget. Biglaw actually rewards chasing down legal rabbit holes (more billables), while a small firm might tell you to ignore them because the client won't pay, or you might be too overworked at the DA's office.

Another advantage of biglaw is "sophisticated clients." I realize that's a bit of a cliche, but you can trust that most of your clients are going to be highly educated people who can understand the substantive legal issues you are working on. Most of your direct client contacts will be lawyers themselves (with similar backgrounds to you). At a small firm doing personal injury or a public defender's office (for example), your clients are going to be the general public. That can be good if you like getting into people issues, but your personal injury client is probably not interested in the nuances of some tricky jurisdictional issue you have discovered and as such may have unrealistic expectations of what you can accomplish. Also, while some biglaw clients are passionate, for the most part they are just doing a job- it's not personal. When the general public has to deal with a lawyer, it's probably because they are going through a tough time and you may be dealing with some powerful emotions.

Now, this doesn't gloss over that the hours can be brutal and many biglaw situations are indeed quite unpleasant. Some partners can be disrespectful of your time and even abusive. But even within biglaw there are good people to work for/with and hours that are reasonable. No, you probably won't find any biglaw gig that allows you to work a 9-5, but relatively predicable 50 hour weeks can be possible in the right practice group/firm/situation.

Finally, biglaw isn't a life sentence. Even if you dislike it, it can be a good jumping off point for a variety of other legal career paths. Biglaw experience is a near-prerequisite for a high quality in-house gig, for example. While I probably wouldn't go back into biglaw today (well, maybe for the right partner role), I'm very glad I did it to start with. While I didn't take out $200k (about $150k between myself and my spouse), I don't think even sticker debt is by itself crushing in biglaw if you are willing to buckle down and focus on repayment. What is crushing for some folks is when they hate biglaw and don't feel like they can leave because of the debt. If you don't hate biglaw, it's not nearly so big of a burden.

Anyhow, since you haven't even gone to law school, it's probably a bit premature to decide on whether you want biglaw or not. After you've confirmed you have the credentials to get an offer (i.e. above top xx% depending on school, or being at the right school regardless of rank), you can start giving it a harder look.

danishblue

New
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2022 11:08 am

Re: What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by danishblue » Thu Aug 11, 2022 8:51 am

If you want litigation in Biggest Law, isn't it true you can be there 6 years and not participate in a trial, let alone run a trial?

User avatar
nealric

Moderator
Posts: 4265
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:53 am

Re: What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by nealric » Thu Aug 11, 2022 1:55 pm

danishblue wrote:
Thu Aug 11, 2022 8:51 am
If you want litigation in Biggest Law, isn't it true you can be there 6 years and not participate in a trial, let alone run a trial?
Yes. Biglaw is not the place to be if you want to be a trial lawyer. There are litigation partners in biglaw who have never been to trial.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


KEbro93

New
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:15 pm

Re: What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by KEbro93 » Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:35 pm

danishblue wrote:
Thu Aug 11, 2022 8:51 am
If you want litigation in Biggest Law, isn't it true you can be there 6 years and not participate in a trial, let alone run a trial?
I remember my first deposition. It was an awesome day because so much led up to that experience.

AuthorDWRandolph

New
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2022 11:25 am

Re: What really goes in in Big Law? (areas of practice)

Post by AuthorDWRandolph » Sat Dec 24, 2022 12:38 am

If you want to know about the main types of practice areas that most Big Law firms have, how the work experience in each differs day-to-day, and what your work life is likely to be like as a Big Law attorney in each practice group, check out the book Big Law Confidential. The book provides detailed descriptions of litigation, transactional, and specialist practices, as well as example daily schedules for attorneys in each type of practice at varying experience levels (e.g., junior/mid-level/senior associates and partners). Many law students go into Big Law thinking that they want to become litigators and expecting that their work lives as attorneys will involve certain things and offer them certain opportunities, and then are surprised (unpleasantly) when they experience the reality of Big Law legal practice (i.e., potentially never seeing the inside of a courtroom for the first [5] years of law practice). Other law students have never heard of/have no idea what it means to be a transactional lawyer, and fall into it. Still other law students wind up being specialists, and then find themselves pigeonholed and with few exit options. Do your research before you go into Big Law, gain experience in one practice area, and find it difficult or impossible to switch or get out if you want to do so. (The book covers those topics, too, though.)

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Post Reply

Return to “Discussion of Practice Areas”