Fourth-Year BigLaw Associate Answering Questions Forum

[Anonymous User]

Deps*

[October25]

What's your perspective on clerking? Did you do it? How much of an impact do you think it has in hiring or promotion decisions? What about boutiques, at this stage have you come across any that care if you clerked or not?

[Anonymous User]

I did not clerk because I wanted to start making real money right away to buy a house and support my family. I regret it. I highly recommend it. Everyone cares. One boutique explicitly said it wasn't why it didn't hire me.

[Anonymous User]

How does your firm perceive people who come back into biglaw after a couple years of clerking or government work?

I'm clerking now and will be working with the government another year next year. I want to come back to biglaw (possibly to what i am guessing is your market) after, for $$ and other reasons. I wonder if I'll be almost behind a bit in building partner relations and connections as opposed to people who clerked for zero or only one year though. Also wondering if I'll miss hours and not get a bonus for lack of work/integration with the firm.

[magnum_law]

Can you give us a hint to what market you're in, even if just the region of the US?

Your work still sounds demanding, but the lifestyle (i.e. house in the suburbs + home in time for dinner) sounds like a dream compared to all the NYC horror stories.

[El Pollito]

I don't get the feeling anyone notices or cares what time you leave. They don't know where you're going or what you're doing. Partners typically leave early. When there's more work to be done, I work on it on the train or at home after the kids are in bed. I'm sure people fret because I'm always in so early compared to them. It's all relative.

We always lived in the suburbs.

I wouldn't say we're even living the biglaw lifestyle now. We haven't really had a real vacation. We did a "staycation" where we got a hotel in the city with the kids and went to the museums and so forth. We went to the Kentucky Derby last year, which was just two nights. Our mortgage payment is around $3,100. We have the same two cars we had in law school - one of them from before law school. Then there's food for four people, which adds up. Kids are very, very expensive.

My hope is to land at a litigation boutique eventually and become a partner at a place like that.

must be nice not to work for a workaholic

[Devlin]

Can you give us a hint to what market you're in, even if just the region of the US?

Your work still sounds demanding, but the lifestyle (i.e. house in the suburbs + home in time for dinner) sounds like a dream compared to all the NYC horror stories.

I assume Chicago given the White Sox and Blackhawk references.

[Anonymous User]

I wouldn't want any part of New York. Not worth it. One thing you guys will realize in due time is that some of the things you obsess about now, particularly "prestige," become really inconsequential to you. It matters as you construct your resume, but not as an end unto itself. It will stop defining you, at some point. What you'll really care about is the day-to-day engagement with practicing law at a high level, and getting compensated well enough to build a life for yourself outside of work. Right now, I know you think it is a red letter that you didn't get a Cravath offer. In two years, you will not care. I swear to you. I know a guy who clerked on the Supreme Court who is practicing in a college town now. Chose that, I assume, over whatever riches and power N.Y. and D.C. we're willing to throw his way. Your priorities change.

[Anonymous User]

I don't get the feeling anyone notices or cares what time you leave. They don't know where you're going or what you're doing. Partners typically leave early. When there's more work to be done, I work on it on the train or at home after the kids are in bed. I'm sure people fret because I'm always in so early compared to them. It's all relative.

We always lived in the suburbs.

I wouldn't say we're even living the biglaw lifestyle now. We haven't really had a real vacation. We did a "staycation" where we got a hotel in the city with the kids and went to the museums and so forth. We went to the Kentucky Derby last year, which was just two nights. Our mortgage payment is around $3,100. We have the same two cars we had in law school - one of them from before law school. Then there's food for four people, which adds up. Kids are very, very expensive.

My hope is to land at a litigation boutique eventually and become a partner at a place like that.

must be nice not to work for a workaholic

Not OP and I don't want to hijack his thread but there is a common misconception on TLS that partner is a "type" or a series of types and associates have to all deal with them similarly. Partners are human and different. Some leave early and therefore want you there late while they work remotely. Some stay late and don't care if you are there as long as you are on call. Others need you there because they like to have in-person discussions on the spur of the moment. But almost any partner, like almost any human being, has something to recommend them. Associates often have more input than TLS thinks into whom they work for and under what circumstances.

[Anonymous User]

I did not clerk because I wanted to start making real money right away to buy a house and support my family. I regret it. I highly recommend it. Everyone cares. One boutique explicitly said it wasn't why it didn't hire me.

Does this advice hold for someone who is starting at a boutique in a specialized field (i.e., patent lit)? I'll be 32 with 2 kids when I start work after the bar this summer, and I chose not to clerk for a lot of the same reasons you did. Wondering if I should consider applying to clerk after a year or two of firm work, and whether doing so would meaningfully improve my career outlook, including the ability to bring in clients.

[Anonymous User]

I can't say for sure, because I'm not too familiar with the world of specialized boutique litigation. But my default answer would be to clerk. You'll realize pretty quickly that the profession, at the biglaw (or its equivalents) level is essentially a series of boxes that you have to check. If a box isn't checked, I wouldn't exactly say it's a "red flag," but it puts you at a competitive disadvantage in the marketplace. The whole crawl to partnership (or an A-USA job) is basically an obstacle gauntlet. It sounds stupid, I know. But it is what it is. My brother went to a fringe top 50 school and had trouble finding work anywhere when he graduated. (He's doing fine now.) I would never think to say something to him about not clerking hurting my career, because, to him and his co-workers, me even being in biglaw at all is the pinnacle. It's all relative. Personally, I often feel like a complete professional loser, having no clerkship or journal experience. And, damn, I'm making $210K a year, went to a T6, and have lasted going on four years at a V20 firm.

[Anonymous User]

I wouldn't want any part of New York. Not worth it. One thing you guys will realize in due time is that some of the things you obsess about now, particularly "prestige," become really inconsequential to you. It matters as you construct your resume, but not as an end unto itself. It will stop defining you, at some point. What you'll really care about is the day-to-day engagement with practicing law at a high level, and getting compensated well enough to build a life for yourself outside of work. Right now, I know you think it is a red letter that you didn't get a Cravath offer. In two years, you will not care. I swear to you. I know a guy who clerked on the Supreme Court who is practicing in a college town now. Chose that, I assume, over whatever riches and power N.Y. and D.C. we're willing to throw his way. Your priorities change.

Dont know if this is OP but I really hear what you're saying here. but I wonder about this...it seems like this kind of thinking sets in after a few years when whatever the goal was starts to feel unattainable, or like it's just gonna require too many more years of misery for no certain reward. and then people tell themselves, I'm just gonna focus on the day to day and my hobbies and kids and forget whatever ambitious thing I had in mind because it wasn't worth it anyway.
What I'm saying is, maybe that's just the misery talking, people are just devaluing whatever they used to want because it's gonna take too much to get there. I wonder if that shift in priorities is really just lack of stamina (rather than a new "adult" perspective)--if I could handle being halfway miserable for this long, for some degree of success, maybe a little extra misery could get you all the way there.

[Anonymous User]

also I've heard that about Supreme court clerks, sometimes they get that deer in the headlights thing after they clerk where it's like nothing can ever top that experience

[Anonymous User]

I wouldn't want any part of New York. Not worth it. One thing you guys will realize in due time is that some of the things you obsess about now, particularly "prestige," become really inconsequential to you. It matters as you construct your resume, but not as an end unto itself. It will stop defining you, at some point. What you'll really care about is the day-to-day engagement with practicing law at a high level, and getting compensated well enough to build a life for yourself outside of work. Right now, I know you think it is a red letter that you didn't get a Cravath offer. In two years, you will not care. I swear to you. I know a guy who clerked on the Supreme Court who is practicing in a college town now. Chose that, I assume, over whatever riches and power N.Y. and D.C. we're willing to throw his way. Your priorities change.

Dont know if this is OP but I really hear what you're saying here. but I wonder about this...it seems like this kind of thinking sets in after a few years when whatever the goal was starts to feel unattainable, or like it's just gonna require too many more years of misery for no certain reward. and then people tell themselves, I'm just gonna focus on the day to day and my hobbies and kids and forget whatever ambitious thing I had in mind because it wasn't worth it anyway.
What I'm saying is, maybe that's just the misery talking, people are just devaluing whatever they used to want because it's gonna take too much to get there. I wonder if that shift in priorities is really just lack of stamina (rather than a new "adult" perspective)--if I could handle being halfway miserable for this long, for some degree of success, maybe a little extra misery could get you all the way there.

You sound like a K-JD. I was at one point as well, and thought the same way. The one thing I cannot stress enough is that there is little to no correlation between the effort you put in or the skills you have, and your outcome. The people who make partner are in many cases the people who did the right things, but also happened to be in the right group, get the right deal, etc. None of this is in your control. I know you think it is, because up until this point there has been a clear correlation between effort, performance and outcome, but it simply is not. I've seen plenty of associates who came in and got fucked from day 1. They randomly drew the insane partner to work for, their group never was busy and no one cared enough to help them into something else, or people worked them to the point of a nervous breakdown. They never had a chance. I've seen plenty of others who by a stroke of luck got a cushy deal or a reasonable partner and they stick around for years without serious effort.

The people you work for are not fair and do not care about you. It's not that they are assholes or mean people, they just really do not care. You are a name on a bill to them and if the math doesn't add up in your favor, whether it's your fault or not, whether you are good or not, whether they like you or not, you are done. Remember, these firms must get a vast majority of the associates to leave at a certain point, so the system is designed to get you to leave, and to break down the people who think they can just tough it out. The one's that make it are lucky, and usually the sort that do not actually find the job miserable. If you find the job miserable to the point where it feels like you are forcing yourself to sticking it out, then you will not make it.

It's not that your goals change, it's that you see the ugly reality of the goal you set out for yourself. If your goal was to make partner but you find yourself miserable because you spend 16 hours a day dealing with meaningless minutia, you probably won't continue on with that goal. It's because you can't achieve it (even though you probably cannot and you probably realize it), it's because you see it for what it is and it simply isn't the destination you imagined it would be.

[Anonymous User]

I am just a first year but totally agree with the above.

One year ago, I was so happy to be heading into this job. I felt like I won law school coming from a non-t14 with minimal biglaw placement in a major market. Now, all I want is to get out. Some days are great when things are slow (but not too slow) and other days (like today) just absolutely suck when I do not want to think about this minutia and know that I will piss people off if I mess up the minutia for a fake deadline that seemingly no one else in the world cares about except for the partner.

It is not breaking news on this website, but "winning" at law school is such a hollow prize - a blessing and a curse. At least that is how it seems to me. That being said, at least this prize will allow me to pay off my loans quickly.

[Anonymous User]

I'm the OP here. Word for word on the prior post. I came into a slow group. Then, in my second year, I was put on a project, working for a single senior associate, that has little to do with the kind of litigation tasks one gets on a regular basis. Two years in and, boom, through little fault of my own, I've barely advanced from the starting line. I had my review a couple weeks ago, and went in happy because I thought they were all terrific. Instead, the whole session ends up being about how "these are good, not great reviews," largely because I "have not yet gravitated to a particular practice area."

Regarding the "devaluing" of prior goals because it just gets too hard: Maybe that's part of it, but that's not exactly what I was getting at. What I mean is that something like working for Cravath or Skadden just doesn't really matter that much to your daily happiness any more. There's a whole economic principle in this area, I think, where people just get used to their present situation, and want more, no matter how great it seems from the outside.

Seriously, when you are reviewing your 3,000th inscrutable document of the week, you won't care that it's for Cravath. (You'll care about the Cravath paycheck, of course). You'll say, "Shit, I just want to practice law!" Or, "I want to have some control over my time!" Or control over the matter you're working on.

People in mid-law or boutique firms aren't failed biglaw attorneys. And there's no shame in it whatsoever. The endless rat race you are in right now ... you just realize you don't have the time or mental energy for it anymore. There's law to do.

[Anonymous User]

People are so obsessed with biglaw as a means of paying off loans. I'm on the PAYE plan, and I'm starting to sock a little bit away each paycheck for the possible tax bomb down the road. If Congress changes the law, then it's a windfall for me. Yay!

I've used my biglaw job to set up a life for myself. I bought a beautiful dream home in the 'burbs. I started saving in the old 401(k) for retirement. I've started stashing away money for college for the kiddies. Had some fun along the way.

[patentlitigatrix]

I'm the OP here. Word for word on the prior post. I came into a slow group. Then, in my second year, I was put on a project, working for a single senior associate, that has little to do with the kind of litigation tasks one gets on a regular basis. Two years in and, boom, through little fault of my own, I've barely advanced from the starting line. I had my review a couple weeks ago, and went in happy because I thought they were all terrific. Instead, the whole session ends up being about how "these are good, not great reviews," largely because I "have not yet gravitated to a particular practice area."

Regarding the "devaluing" of prior goals because it just gets too hard: Maybe that's part of it, but that's not exactly what I was getting at. What I mean is that something like working for Cravath or Skadden just doesn't really matter that much to your daily happiness any more. There's a whole economic principle in this area, I think, where people just get used to their present situation, and want more, no matter how great it seems from the outside.

Seriously, when you are reviewing your 3,000th inscrutable document of the week, you won't care that it's for Cravath. (You'll care about the Cravath paycheck, of course). You'll say, "Shit, I just want to practice law!" Or, "I want to have some control over my time!" Or control over the matter you're working on.

People in mid-law or boutique firms aren't failed biglaw attorneys. And there's no shame in it whatsoever. The endless rat race you are in right now ... you just realize you don't have the time or mental energy for it anymore. There's law to do.

OP, I could have written this. Also a 4th year, and used to work at a "prestigious" firm with a slow group, hard to work with partners, no control over my practice, and no hope of really ever doing things like depos, hearings, client meetings, etc. I am now at mid-size-ish firm with normal people, a busy group with really neat clients, a lot of control over the matters I work on (including type and client), lots of client contact (for better or worse), and lots of responsibility on my matters including actually going to court. I am 1000 times happier, and my pay is the same to boot.

[Anonymous User]

I'm the OP here. Word for word on the prior post. I came into a slow group. Then, in my second year, I was put on a project, working for a single senior associate, that has little to do with the kind of litigation tasks one gets on a regular basis. Two years in and, boom, through little fault of my own, I've barely advanced from the starting line. I had my review a couple weeks ago, and went in happy because I thought they were all terrific. Instead, the whole session ends up being about how "these are good, not great reviews," largely because I "have not yet gravitated to a particular practice area."

Regarding the "devaluing" of prior goals because it just gets too hard: Maybe that's part of it, but that's not exactly what I was getting at. What I mean is that something like working for Cravath or Skadden just doesn't really matter that much to your daily happiness any more. There's a whole economic principle in this area, I think, where people just get used to their present situation, and want more, no matter how great it seems from the outside.

Seriously, when you are reviewing your 3,000th inscrutable document of the week, you won't care that it's for Cravath. (You'll care about the Cravath paycheck, of course). You'll say, "Shit, I just want to practice law!" Or, "I want to have some control over my time!" Or control over the matter you're working on.

People in mid-law or boutique firms aren't failed biglaw attorneys. And there's no shame in it whatsoever. The endless rat race you are in right now ... you just realize you don't have the time or mental energy for it anymore. There's law to do.

Same anon from above, and I'm actually the furthest thing from a K-JD...I've had a ton of so-called real world experience and have several totally unrelated jobs in my past. I knew my post was going to be interpreted as criticism, it wasn't really meant that way, I'm not calling you guys failures. I know some people get fucked over from the start, I just wonder, and I don't think there is any way to answer this accurately, when you get fucked over, you can give up and say, this isn't going to work out, or you can say, that was unfair but there's some creative way I can get around this, which is maybe going to add several years to my career path and going to require forging more connections and working my ass off, but I could still get there. I'm not necessarily talking specifically about making partner in biglaw, I'm talking more generally about some job that only a few people will ever do, let's say, Sect. of Homeland Security, if that's your thing. I'm sort of thinking about this from the point of view of, to what extent do your connections determine your success, and is it possible to make connections if you didn't start out with them (say, you're not lifelong family friends with Arne Duncan)
People change their perspective as they get older, about everything (not just career, every facet of their life) and I know it's usually considered that you get more right as you get older. But that's something I've always been skeptical about.
I also was probably being too vague-- I'm definitely not one of those people who think Cravath is the great shining path to happiness and success. I kind of agree with you, I'm just playing devil's advocate because I know my perspective is starting to change, like yours, But I don't know that that's a good thing.

[Anonymous User]

I wouldn't want any part of New York. Not worth it. One thing you guys will realize in due time is that some of the things you obsess about now, particularly "prestige," become really inconsequential to you. It matters as you construct your resume, but not as an end unto itself. It will stop defining you, at some point. What you'll really care about is the day-to-day engagement with practicing law at a high level, and getting compensated well enough to build a life for yourself outside of work. Right now, I know you think it is a red letter that you didn't get a Cravath offer. In two years, you will not care. I swear to you. I know a guy who clerked on the Supreme Court who is practicing in a college town now. Chose that, I assume, over whatever riches and power N.Y. and D.C. we're willing to throw his way. Your priorities change.

Dont know if this is OP but I really hear what you're saying here. but I wonder about this...it seems like this kind of thinking sets in after a few years when whatever the goal was starts to feel unattainable, or like it's just gonna require too many more years of misery for no certain reward. and then people tell themselves, I'm just gonna focus on the day to day and my hobbies and kids and forget whatever ambitious thing I had in mind because it wasn't worth it anyway.
What I'm saying is, maybe that's just the misery talking, people are just devaluing whatever they used to want because it's gonna take too much to get there. I wonder if that shift in priorities is really just lack of stamina (rather than a new "adult" perspective)--if I could handle being halfway miserable for this long, for some degree of success, maybe a little extra misery could get you all the way there.

It's not that your goals change, it's that you see the ugly reality of the goal you set out for yourself. If your goal was to make partner but you find yourself miserable because you spend 16 hours a day dealing with meaningless minutia, you probably won't continue on with that goal. It's because you can't achieve it (even though you probably cannot and you probably realize it), it's because you see it for what it is and it simply isn't the destination you imagined it would be.

I meant, not that you'd want to keep on being miserable once you realize you picked a goal that is only going to keep you miserable. I was talking more about people who knew from the start that biglaw is miserable, but go into it as a stepping stone to whatever it is that they really want to do. I think those people have a realistic idea about what they're getting themselves into and how much misery they'll have to go through before they even get anywhere close to what they want. I'm wondering: if that particular type of person changes their mind, say halfway through the misery, I think it could be a mistake not to power through and try to keep going.
I think we're probably talking about two different things here and I'm not being very clear, without specific examples.

[WhiteCollarBlueShirt]

I think it could be a mistake not to power through and try to keep going.
I think we're probably talking about two different things here and I'm not being very clear, without specific examples.

They're more related than you think. The end result is not necessarily desirable. I felt as though I had 100% control over my career outcome at my NYC biglaw firm. However, I quickly realized that my goal of making partner or joining a client's executive suite is not the "goal." That's just the beginning. Very few are truly satisfied or at rest until they are the elder statesmen walking the halls for largely relationship purposes--and my goal was never to achieve bliss at 60+, I have outside interests.

The only person with an arguably worse job than senior associate is junior partner. There's no winning in your mid-30's.

[Anonymous User]

I think it could be a mistake not to power through and try to keep going.
I think we're probably talking about two different things here and I'm not being very clear, without specific examples.

They're more related than you think. The end result is not necessarily desirable. I felt as though I had 100% control over my career outcome at my NYC biglaw firm. However, I quickly realized that my goal of making partner or joining a client's executive suite is not the "goal." That's just the beginning. Very few are truly satisfied or at rest until they are the elder statesmen walking the halls for largely relationship purposes--and my goal was never to achieve bliss at 60+, I have outside interests.

The only person with an arguably worse job than senior associate is junior partner. There's no winning in your mid-30's.

Yeah, you could be right about all this.
At some point you might realize you're charting out a course that's going to extend the misery over the greater part of your career (or even your life), and then you start to ask yourself why the hell you're doing it.

[mu13ski]

OP- At what point do associates start to seriously consider whether making partner is an option?