ITT restructuring associates mourn practice choice Forum

[Anonymous User]

I'm summering at a V10 and splitting between their real estate and restructuring groups. I have to make a decision by the end of the summer on which group I'm going in. What should I be considering? I'm 50/50 right now.

The economy will likely tank soon but I heard the real estate group is insulated since they do a lot of the bankruptcy real estate work. I'm not really sure about the exit options for either practice group. I'm not married to being a lawyer forever and real estate seems to offer options outside of the legal realm. However I think restructuring is intellectually interesting and I could see myself enjoying the litigation aspect of it.

Is making a decision not a huge deal? Could I switch to something more general like corporate if I find out I don't like either area within the first couple of years?

Debtor-side midlevel from earlier.

A few things I'd consider: does the group do mostly debtor or creditor side work (and, relatedly, does the group do any out of court deals); how many matters are associates staffed on at once; what types of work streams are they on; what is your interaction with more mid/senior associates and partners; if not at one of the big debtor shops, what do BK associates do if deal flow is slow. A few of my colleagues have switched groups: more traditional M&A/corp stuff; debt fin is pretty popular and a natural transition.

I'd be wary of the bolded. Yes, you get to go to court for hearings, and BK attorneys argue BK motions/pleadings, but it isn't traditional litigation, which is handled by actual litigators, with BK playing a support role.

We don't interact a ton with our real estate associates, and when they're on a case, they're mostly in a specialist role and kind of work at our whim--I've heard it's not a great experience, but ymmv.

As for exit options out of BK, that's been discussed on here a bit, but: other large/smaller firms; FAs; sometimes ibanks depending on circumstances.

[Anonymous User]

I'm summering at a V10 and splitting between their real estate and restructuring groups. I have to make a decision by the end of the summer on which group I'm going in. What should I be considering? I'm 50/50 right now.

The economy will likely tank soon but I heard the real estate group is insulated since they do a lot of the bankruptcy real estate work. I'm not really sure about the exit options for either practice group. I'm not married to being a lawyer forever and real estate seems to offer options outside of the legal realm. However I think restructuring is intellectually interesting and I could see myself enjoying the litigation aspect of it.

Is making a decision not a huge deal? Could I switch to something more general like corporate if I find out I don't like either area within the first couple of years?

Debtor-side midlevel from earlier.

A few things I'd consider: does the group do mostly debtor or creditor side work (and, relatedly, does the group do any out of court deals); how many matters are associates staffed on at once; what types of work streams are they on; what is your interaction with more mid/senior associates and partners; if not at one of the big debtor shops, what do BK associates do if deal flow is slow. A few of my colleagues have switched groups: more traditional M&A/corp stuff; debt fin is pretty popular and a natural transition.

I'd be wary of the bolded. Yes, you get to go to court for hearings, and BK attorneys argue BK motions/pleadings, but it isn't traditional litigation, which is handled by actual litigators, with BK playing a support role.

We don't interact a ton with our real estate associates, and when they're on a case, they're mostly in a specialist role and kind of work at our whim--I've heard it's not a great experience, but ymmv.

As for exit options out of BK, that's been discussed on here a bit, but: other large/smaller firms; FAs; sometimes ibanks depending on circumstances.

The group does debtor side chapter 11. I'll definitely look into what you posted.

The litigation aspect of BK isn't a deal breaker by any means, but it's good to know it's different from other litigation.

I think bankruptcy is very interesting, but I would be a fool if I was not worried about my shelf life in big law billing 2500+ consistently with exit options limited to roles with similar paces of work.

[Anonymous User]

Definitely agree we don't do real litigation (doc review, depositions, exam and cross-exam, etc.). However, the practice, on the debtor side especially, is very litigationy. As a first year, a big part of what you will do is legal research.

And everyone drafts (or reviews) motions. As a first year, the motions are usually just plugging in basic facts into a template, but every case is unique, so there are plenty of bespoke motions that require research and fresh legal analysis and writing.

Then there are replies. Sometimes the litigators will help you, but most often its primarily the restructuring associate doing the heavy lifting. For smaller matters (contested matters that don't really affect the overall restructuring plan), juniors/midlevels can even get a lot of say in structuring the legal argument/strategy.

Finally, you do get to speak in court. Even as a junior (not first year), you may get an opportunity to speak in court. It's usually just "Here is the motion, there are no objections/we resolved objections," but still a cool experience for people who want that kind of thing.

So no, it's definitely not "real" litigation, but you do plenty of litigation-like work. To be clear, not really arguing with the poster who said it's not litigation, just wanted to flesh that idea out a bit.

Overall, I think it is a great practice, but the elephant in the room is definitely exits. Some people end up in finance, but it's a relatively small number. Most seem to leave big restructuring shops for smaller restructuring shops. Not sure that's as bad as it may sound for someone who doesn't want to work these kind of hours forever. Market share is heavily concentrated in a handful of firms, so a lot of places have small restructuring groups that aren't that active. Firms need these groups because everyone has clients that are going to run into bk issues in some capacity, and the corporate teams need someone they can pull in for some quick answers.

[Anonymous User]

It’s almost not even an exaggeration to say that weil BFR associates are giving notice in DROVES... another one yesterday and 2 within the last week

[Anonymous User]

Biglaw junior in a smaller restructuring group that does secured creditor and some debtor work. What is the general consensus on best approach to transition into a corporate group either at the same or different firm?

[Anonymous User]

It’s almost not even an exaggeration to say that weil BFR associates are giving notice in DROVES... another one yesterday and 2 within the last week

Actually surprised that number is that low, would expect more given their caseload...

Biglaw junior in a smaller restructuring group that does secured creditor and some debtor work. What is the general consensus on best approach to transition into a corporate group either at the same or different firm?

Probably easiest to go through finance/securities depending on how your firm organizes those practices. The other groups will depend on need. But make the ask as early as you can while you're still a junior. If they say no or it appears like they'll drag you along, start looking elsewhere. I've gotten a few inbounds from firms looking to re-tool restructuring associates into finance.

[Anonymous User]

Overall, I think it is a great practice, but the elephant in the room is definitely exits. Some people end up in finance, but it's a relatively small number. Most seem to leave big restructuring shops for smaller restructuring shops. Not sure that's as bad as it may sound for someone who doesn't want to work these kind of hours forever. Market share is heavily concentrated in a handful of firms, so a lot of places have small restructuring groups that aren't that active. Firms need these groups because everyone has clients that are going to run into bk issues in some capacity, and the corporate teams need someone they can pull in for some quick answers.

Can associates who do almost only debtor side work get picked up by one of these smaller firms who do primarily creditor work? Or does working for the debtor leave you with mostly/only debt-side options?

[Anonymous User]

I'm the quoted poster, and an associate at Weil/K&E.

People I've seen have had no trouble lateraling to other bk groups. And, most of those are not debtor-focused places (there aren't many debtor-focused places).

It also makes sense to me associates at debtor-focused firms wouldn't have trouble. First, its important to remember these places don't solely do debtor work. A majority of the work is debtor, but these places do plenty of lender work as well. Second, I think debtor work does a great job preparing you for other types of roles. You just get so much exposure to the process and the host issues that pop up.

No idea what the statistics on it are, but the general consensus is that creditor-shops have better non-firm exits. I think that is mostly a function of having more exposure to repeat players (e.g., if you represent Wells Fargo all the time, you have a better chance of building relationships you can leverage when an in-house position pops up). I don't see that affecting exits to firms.