Top Law Schools

I'm a 0L planning on going into biglaw... if possible.

I only say so because I'm told biglaw is the best path towards "paying your dues" - getting good experience, paying off debt, etc.

Everyone talks about biglaw but nobody seems to talk about what to do after biglaw. I assume people move out to the suburbs and become partners of small firms? This is a mystery to me.

Ideally, I will not be doing law forever. I like the idea of trying to work for a VC company or doing RE investing etc. Or doing law but on a less than hectic basis when I reach my 40s and hope to have a family. This may be a pipe dream but I'd like to know how possible it is. I don't want to be kissing bosses' asses for my entire adult life.

Anonymous User wrote:I'm a 0L planning on going into biglaw... if possible.

I only say so because I'm told biglaw is the best path towards "paying your dues" - getting good experience, paying off debt, etc.

Everyone talks about biglaw but nobody seems to talk about what to do AFTER biglaw.|

No one knows, you only get out of big law through suicide.

I guess it depends on your beliefs on what happens after Biglaw.

0L talking here as well but from people I've spoken to who've done big law (and absolutely despised it) they made a move to in-house counsel for various companies.

.

sounds like you shouldn't go to law school.

So what is partner anyway?

I mean it's a senior level member of the firm, but do you "own" it in any real way, or have privileges above just being a high-paid employee?

Anonymous User wrote:.

yeah... you shouldn't worry about the prospect of biglaw.

Anonymous User wrote:So what is partner anyway?

I mean it's a senior level member of the firm, but do you "own" it in any real way, or have privileges above just being a high-paid employee?

You get a share of the firm's profits as opposed to just a salary. I'd imagine you have a say in how the firm is run/managed depending on how big the firm is. You also have more responsibility regarding the cases you handle (i.e. you run the case rather than doing bitch work for someone else).

booyakasha45 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:.

yeah... you shouldn't worry about the prospect of biglaw.

Nah, he's going to use that ladder to climb to the top of Wachtell.

Exit avenues from Biglaw are numerous, but they tend to fall into some broad general patterns. The two biggest variables are what department one worked in and the stage at which one leaves the firm.

For corporate lawyers, moving in-house is the most common exit strategy. Almost all companies of a certain size will have an internal legal department that minds the shop and supervises outside counsel on big-ticket matters. Moving in-house is especially common for those who worked Biglaw for only 1-5 years or so. (Example: moi.) You'll sometimes see more senior associates (6-9 years) leave Biglaw for partner-track positions at smaller firms. These are associates who are very experienced and who might have a small book of business (or be perceived as having potential to develop a book) who for whatever reason aren't going to be made partner at the Biglaw firm.

For litigators, it's much more frequent to see associates move to mid-size or smaller law firms, and less frequent to see them move in-house. Most companies are too small to hire an in-house litigator, and will rely on outside counsel to handle the great majority of litigation. Even at bigger companies, the ratio of in-house corporate lawyers to in-house litigators is generally pretty high (except for insurance companies, I suppose).

For other "service" departments, in-house movement is even more restricted. But it has always seemed to me that Biglaw firms don't spit out their service department associates at quite the same level as they do for corporate and litigation.

yeah... you shouldn't worry about the prospect of biglaw.

.

Kochel wrote:Exit avenues from Biglaw are numerous, but they tend to fall into some broad general patterns. The two biggest variables are what department one worked in and the stage at which one leaves the firm.

For corporate lawyers, moving in-house is the most common exit strategy. Almost all companies of a certain size will have an internal legal department that minds the shop and supervises outside counsel on big-ticket matters. Moving in-house is especially common for those who worked Biglaw for only 1-5 years or so. (Example: moi.) You'll sometimes see more senior associates (6-9 years) leave Biglaw for partner-track positions at smaller firms. These are associates who are very experienced and who might have a small book of business (or be perceived as having potential to develop a book) who for whatever reason aren't going to be made partner at the Biglaw firm.

For litigators, it's much more frequent to see associates move to mid-size or smaller law firms, and less frequent to see them move in-house. Most companies are too small to hire an in-house litigator, and will rely on outside counsel to handle the great majority of litigation. Even at bigger companies, the ratio of in-house corporate lawyers to in-house litigators is generally pretty high (except for insurance companies, I suppose).

For other "service" departments, in-house movement is even more restricted. But it has always seemed to me that Biglaw firms don't spit out their service department associates at quite the same level as they do for corporate and litigation.

What about moving into public interest or a position at a federal agency?

I think of moving to a government position as just another in-house move: it's very common for midlevel associates to make this move. This is one in-house area where litigators will be welcome.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of many Biglaw associates who moved to a public interest employer. I'm sure it happens, but I can't guess as to its frequency.

.

Anonymous User wrote:

booyakasha45 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

yeah... you shouldn't worry about the prospect of biglaw.

Anyone who fixes someones spelling or grammar on an internet forum is really a douche.

That may be the case, but there are plenty of douches in BigLaw. People who can't differentiate between words, on the other hand...

d34dluk3 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

booyakasha45 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I'm luckier than most, but I will only be leaving law school with 20-30k in debt. Because of this, I've found myself more and more leaning towards cutting out the "biglaw step" altogether, and starting off in a medium sized firm. I'm hoping I'll have a better shot at becoming partner, work at least a little bit less, and still get paid a respectable amount. I figure I'll do that for 5-10 years until I either become partner (in which case I'll stay), or am told I have no shot at partnership. In the case of the ladder, I was thinking of starting my own business or working for a VC firm. Entrepreneurship has always been really interesting to me.

yeah... you shouldn't worry about the prospect of biglaw.

Anyone who fixes someones spelling or grammar on an internet forum is really a douche.

That may be the case, but there are plenty of douches in BigLaw. People who can't differentiate between words, on the other hand...

nevermind

..

.

..