DF Thread Forum

[XxSpyKEx]

Isn't that what doing pro bono shit is for?

PB is where Big Lawyers practice malpractice.

That's funny.

As an aside, Mid-law, while not as presthigious, seems to give practical legal experience to associates much earlier in their careers. For example, I work at a large Detroit firm, and within a month of getting my bar card I had filed a complaint against a city and municipal police department, appeared in court, negotiated with the opposing city attorney, spoke with a police detective, and made the defendants roll and give my client exactly what he wanted. That was cool, and I had no fucking idea what I was doing. I didn't even know which side of the podium to stand on in court. But I was the only attorney of record for my client, and I won. Fuck yeah. It seems strange, but there are probably 6th year Big Law attorneys I could destroy in court simply because all they've ever done is respond to discovery. But that's reality.

I think this is 100% true, even across the board.

People will say, "BUT they don't get the juicy work." But guess what, doing doc review on a prefstigious case does shit for your career. Even getting decent biglaw lit experience will be useless for your career UNLESS you make biglaw partner. Otherwise you are going to end up in midlaw or shitlaw. And nobody is making Lit partners anymore, and the few who do, almost always did a stint in a place that did trust them do actual work.

In some ways, an advantage to biglaw is that other biglaw firms will take a 5th year biglaw loser with no practical experience over an attorney that was in midlaw or shitlaw solely because of the "prestige" of having biglaw on his/her resume. But you're right that it doesn't really matter long-term, since you won't make partner and will probably struggle to get midlaw/small-law once you're out of biglaw since those firms prefer to hire people with more practical experience. Guess the biggest benefit of biglaw is getting the fat paychecks up front. Kind makes you wonder why most people in biglaw are so retarded and don't stash away more of those big paychecks while they can.

"I'm from a tiny country, and I worked my way up to a Captain in the military after college. It was ok, the hours were good, and I had a lot of responsibilities, but ultimately Al-Queda offered me more money, better exit opportunities (more virgins), and a really high-profile position haplessly firing outdated RPGs at people from V5 countries. We're in the news on a daily basis, and I'm looking forward to this prestigious role, even though I have to start out on the low end and put in my time as a suicide bomber."

HAHA!!

[Desert Fox]

So i shouldnt feel like shit for striking out?

Well you are still going to be poor.

[NotMyRealName09]

Isn't that what doing pro bono shit is for?

PB is where Big Lawyers practice malpractice.

That's funny.

As an aside, Mid-law, while not as presthigious, seems to give practical legal experience to associates much earlier in their careers. For example, I work at a large Detroit firm, and within a month of getting my bar card I had filed a complaint against a city and municipal police department, appeared in court, negotiated with the opposing city attorney, spoke with a police detective, and made the defendants roll and give my client exactly what he wanted. That was cool, and I had no fucking idea what I was doing. I didn't even know which side of the podium to stand on in court. But I was the only attorney of record for my client, and I won. Fuck yeah. It seems strange, but there are probably 6th year Big Law attorneys I could destroy in court simply because all they've ever done is respond to discovery. But that's reality.

And by that logic, some small town shitlaw attorney in a place like Bemidji, MN who spends four days a week in court would piss all over you in court. But that's reality.

Yeah probably. I've tangled with some good ones with good claims who we settle with, and I've dealt with some amazingly shitty, incompetent ones who probably see more court in a year than I will in my life. Quantity and quality of experience are factors too. DUI trial experience is valuable, but that experience may not translate to dealing with a more complex, higher dollar value commercial cases. Small-law (I don't like "shitlaw") may deal in more high-volume cases and get more day-in day-out court experience, but they may not have the resources to prosecute larger, more complex cases. There's a sliding scale, that's all I'm saying.

[NotMyRealName09]

$160,000 is the only reason I am choosing biglaw over small/midlaw. I know I will be pushing papers for the first few years. I'd rather push papers for $3000/wk than do substantive legal work for $1500/wk (or whatever).

You say that now, but after working 80 hours of straight doc review and tagging with no real prospect for substantive legal work in sight, you might sing a different tune. Money doesn't always salve the soul - your mind will do funny things (like make you sad) when its bored and knows that tomorrow will bring only more money and boredom.

[5ky]

Can you say the same thing (in terms of substantive work) for Corporate?

I don't have any real knowledge, but I think it's the opposite.

Associates do 100% of the substantive legal work, and the partners are just bringing in work, supervising, managing, and handling big negotiations.

People claim that midlevels will run entire deals.

Lit midlevels don't run their own cases. Not even close.

This is basically right. The partner assists with supervision, providing guidance to big questions, client handholding, etc. Actual execution of the deal is left to the associates.

Midlevels absolutely run entire deals. Of course, the partner will have to be consulted on certain issues, etc.

[smallfirmassociate]

Yeah probably. I've tangled with some good ones with good claims who we settle with, and I've dealt with some amazingly shitty, incompetent ones who probably see more court in a year than I will in my life. Quantity and quality of experience are factors too. DUI trial experience is valuable, but that experience may not translate to dealing with a more complex, higher dollar value commercial cases. Small-law (I don't like "shitlaw") may deal in more high-volume cases and get more day-in day-out court experience, but they may not have the resources to prosecute larger, more complex cases. There's a sliding scale, that's all I'm saying.

Fair enough. My point was only that, in many cases, courtroom experience isn't a good measure of courtroom skill. One of the most prolific criminal defense attorneys in my area is also uniformly regarded as one of the worst, if not the absolute worst. The best is a guy who has a trial maybe once every 3-4 years.

I'm guessing I am much more skilled in the courtroom than the vast majority of biglaw associates, but who knows. I've been surprised before. I've surprised others before. I've just learned to never underestimate other attorneys, overestimate other attorneys, or get caught up on who's "better" than others. It matters a little bit, but unlike the movies, lawyers don't really win (civil) cases. Granted, some can lose cases.

A little courtroom experience is important, but the more I practice, the more I feel like the important skills are either something you're born with or something you're not. Debate team, moot court, public speaking experience, all of that can polish a turd a little bit, but it doesn't make a good trial attorney. If someone has "it," he can walk out of law school, or out of three years in biglaw, and hold his own in the courtroom with some minimal training/experience.

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone have a sense of where BL labor & employment fits in? Not in terms of court room experience but in terms of substantive experience generally and the ability to move on to other things from BL. I get the sense it is better than general litigation at a large firm because of the frequency with which L&E issues come up for corporations, but I would be interested to hear if anyone has any comparisons. I'm talking about large firm defense side labor & employment, which includes litigation and counseling and possibly advising on transactions.

Note: anon because I'm pretty sure this post, combined with some of my previous posts, would out me.

[brazleton]

.

[dixiecupdrinking]

"I like to work at Wal-Mart because I get to stock shelves with products from hundreds or thousands of companies from all around the world!"

Hilariously and sadly accurate comparison.

[dixiecupdrinking]

this circle-jerk is awesome.

1) many biglaw firms have armies of contract attorneys doing the doc review, so the junior associates are...not

2) If you would like to be an attorney for 25-30 years, what's wrong with slowly building up each component skill of the job? So you, third year shit law attorney would "smoke" a 3rd year BL associate in court. Who cares? He'll smoke you in 10 years (when he's probably lateraled to your market), make more money doing it and have a better grasp on how to organize a large complex litigation, because he's done all aspects of it.

3) In general, how about a little debate on this site, instead of the DF makes stupid claim --> people lap it up --> rinse --> repeat

What is there to debate? He's 100% correct.

[patogordo]

this circle-jerk is awesome.

1) many biglaw firms have armies of contract attorneys doing the doc review, so the junior associates are...

"supervising" i.e., redoing all their work

[Rahviveh]

"I like to work at Wal-Mart because I get to stock shelves with products from hundreds or thousands of companies from all around the world!"

Hilariously and sadly accurate comparison.

Only if the the Walmart employee gets shitcanned after 3-4 years and exits to an unprestigious mom n pops store that pays less

[El Pollito]

this circle-jerk is awesome.

1) many biglaw firms have armies of contract attorneys doing the doc review, so the junior associates are...not

2) If you would like to be an attorney for 25-30 years, what's wrong with slowly building up each component skill of the job? So you, third year shit law attorney would "smoke" a 3rd year BL associate in court. Who cares? He'll smoke you in 10 years (when he's probably lateraled to your market), make more money doing it and have a better grasp on how to organize a large complex litigation, because he's done all aspects of it.

3) In general, how about a little debate on this site, instead of the DF makes stupid claim --> people lap it up --> rinse --> repeat

No, what happens is the senior associate gets the K attys to appease the partner who wants to appease the client, but the midlevel managing the doc review doesn't trust the turds, so the juniors will have to QC almost every single document.

[smallfirmassociate]

this circle-jerk is awesome.

1) many biglaw firms have armies of contract attorneys doing the doc review, so the junior associates are...not

No, they're just doing other mindless, soul-draining work. I mean, do you know any biglaw attorneys? I know several, and out of those, one of them claims to think his job is "o.k." The others don't even try to lie about it. The anecdotal evidence about biglaw work is so overwhelming that arguing biglaw work is rewarding is like arguing dog shit smells good. I mean ... you know ... it's kind of hard to prove that it doesn't, ya know?

2) He'll smoke you in 10 years (when he's probably lateraled to your market), make more money doing it and have a better grasp on how to organize a large complex litigation, because he's done all aspects of it.

Oh man, you are hopelessly ignorant if you think you know how small law firm recruiting works, the nature of the practices, and how much talent is out at some of the firms. My firm has two partners who went to CCN (two different schools out of those three) and five others who were either T-14 or graduated with honors from T-30's. There are only two attorneys who don't fall into those categories, and only one attorney at our firm went to a school that isn't a tier one. Several have served as chairpersons on bar associate committees and the like. These are smart people with a lot of courtroom experience. If you think you're going to school them in court, good luck. If you think you're going to school them in complex litigation on commercial cases or trusts, or in appellate litigation, good luck on that too. And if you think any of them are going to have any slight bit of interest in hiring a third year biglaw associate for a penny more than they pay someone right out of law school, I wish you especially good fucking luck on that.

[brazleton]

.

[Desert Fox]

this circle-jerk is awesome.

1) many biglaw firms have armies of contract attorneys doing the doc review, so the junior associates are...not

2) If you would like to be an attorney for 25-30 years, what's wrong with slowly building up each component skill of the job? So you, third year shit law attorney would "smoke" a 3rd year BL associate in court. Who cares? He'll smoke you in 10 years (when he's probably lateraled to your market), make more money doing it and have a better grasp on how to organize a large complex litigation, because he's done all aspects of it.

3) In general, how about a little debate on this site, instead of the DF makes stupid claim --> people lap it up --> rinse --> repeat

1) Even as a first year, I'm not really allowed to doc review on most cases because I cost too much. But it's still all just legal research and writing and then fact collection and analysis. Most juniors aren't even allowed to second chair depos. Most mid levels aren't allowed to first chair, and senior associates are barely allowed to first chair shit tier witnesses.

2) Because we won't get 25 year in big law. We'll get AT BEST 8 year. And then WE drop into his level, not the other way around.

There is a reason why lit exit options suck. We are cannon fodder for partners. Someone to do the bitchwork.

[brazleton]

.

[smallfirmassociate]

this circle-jerk is awesome.

1) many biglaw firms have armies of contract attorneys doing the doc review, so the junior associates are...not

No, they're just doing other mindless, soul-draining work. I mean, do you know any biglaw attorneys? I know several, and out of those, one of them claims to think his job is "o.k." The others don't even try to lie about it. The anecdotal evidence about biglaw work is so overwhelming that arguing biglaw work is rewarding is like arguing dog shit smells good. I mean ... you know ... it's kind of hard to prove that it doesn't, ya know?

2) He'll smoke you in 10 years (when he's probably lateraled to your market), make more money doing it and have a better grasp on how to organize a large complex litigation, because he's done all aspects of it.

Oh man, you are hopelessly ignorant if you think you know how small law firm recruiting works, the nature of the practices, and how much talent is out at some of the firms. My firm has two partners who went to CCN (two different schools out of those three) and five others who were either T-14 or graduated with honors from T-30's. There are only two attorneys who don't fall into those categories, and only one attorney at our firm went to a school that isn't a tier one. Several have served as chairpersons on bar associate committees and the like. These are smart people with a lot of courtroom experience. If you think you're going to school them in court, good luck. If you think you're going to school them in complex litigation on commercial cases or trusts, or in appellate litigation, good luck on that too. And if you think any of them are going to have any slight bit of interest in hiring a third year biglaw associate for a penny more than they pay someone right out of law school, I wish you especially good fucking luck on that.

Chairperson on a bar committee? Holy shit!

Good morning and may it please the court. Your honors, I'll note no other issues were preserved for appeal. This concludes my oral argument.

[patogordo]

holy shit you schooled him, do you work at a small firm by any chance?

[Desert Fox]

this circle-jerk is awesome.

1) many biglaw firms have armies of contract attorneys doing the doc review, so the junior associates are...not

2) If you would like to be an attorney for 25-30 years, what's wrong with slowly building up each component skill of the job? So you, third year shit law attorney would "smoke" a 3rd year BL associate in court. Who cares? He'll smoke you in 10 years (when he's probably lateraled to your market), make more money doing it and have a better grasp on how to organize a large complex litigation, because he's done all aspects of it.

3) In general, how about a little debate on this site, instead of the DF makes stupid claim --> people lap it up --> rinse --> repeat

1) Even as a first year, I'm not really allowed to doc review on most cases because I cost too much. But it's still all just legal research and writing and then fact collection and analysis. Most juniors aren't even allowed to second chair depos. Most mid levels aren't allowed to first chair, and senior associates are barely allowed to first chair shit tier witnesses.

2) Because we won't get 25 year in big law. We'll get AT BEST 8 year. And then WE drop into his level, not the other way around.

There is a reason why lit exit options suck. We are cannon fodder for partners. Someone to do the bitchwork.

You are welcome to view your job that way. Some people bitch about everything, some take advantage of what's around them and build a skill set. I hope for you that you find a way to get out from under this black cloud of self-pity that seems to define you. Many people would KILL for your job, and you would write them off as prestige-whores or ignorant. Maybe they are right and you are wrong. Just maybe.

Well its not my fault they aren't smart enough to get my job.

[smallfirmassociate]

holy shit you schooled him, do you work at a small firm by any chance?

No, but I did four years at a V10, culminating with my magnum opus: a deposition. It has thereafter inspired me to greatness.

[brazleton]

.

[jbagelboy]

Isnt this the driving appeal of quinn/boies/irell/munger

Why are people talking about small firms and shit

[patogordo]

Isnt this the driving appeal of quinn/boies/irell/munger

Why are people talking about small firms and shit

i have bad news for you...

[jbagelboy]

Isnt this the driving appeal of quinn/boies/irell/munger

Why are people talking about small firms and shit

i have bad news for you...

I didn't say I buy the sales pitch generating the appeal, just that the appeal exists and they've played up this army-of-doc-review-attys versus trial lawyers perception pretty successfully around the premise of this thread