Top Law Schools

Looking at options for my 2L summer. Some firms bill themselves as trial specialists, anyone know if working for these firms would be the same as litigating for a biglaw firm, or would there be a lot more hands on stuff and trials?

Veyron wrote:Looking at options for my 2L summer. Some firms bill themselves as trial specialists, anyone know if working for these firms would be the same as litigating for a biglaw firm, or would there be a lot more hands on stuff and trials?

It really depends. You have to understand that in some sense calling the firm a group of "trial specialists" is a promotional tool. You also have to be aware of the fact that few cases go to trial anymore. IMO, the only real way to get a sense for how much hands-on stuff you'll get to do with any given firm is to have a candid conversation with the young associates at the firm.

Aqualibrium wrote:

Veyron wrote:Looking at options for my 2L summer. Some firms bill themselves as trial specialists, anyone know if working for these firms would be the same as litigating for a biglaw firm, or would there be a lot more hands on stuff and trials?

It really depends. You have to understand that in some sense calling the firm a group of "trial specialists" is a promotional tool. You also have to be aware of the fact that few cases go to trial anymore. IMO, the only real way to get a sense for how much hands-on stuff you'll get to do with any given firm is to have a candid conversation with the young associates at the firm.

True but some trial firms (litigation boutiques) just have a significantly lower number of lawyers. That generally means you'll be closer to the action than you would be at a biglaw firm. You can often tell by reading the bios of the first and second year associates. Some of them have been second or third chair at a trial and generally put that in their blip.

Kronk wrote:

Aqualibrium wrote:

Veyron wrote:Looking at options for my 2L summer. Some firms bill themselves as trial specialists, anyone know if working for these firms would be the same as litigating for a biglaw firm, or would there be a lot more hands on stuff and trials?

It really depends. You have to understand that in some sense calling the firm a group of "trial specialists" is a promotional tool. You also have to be aware of the fact that few cases go to trial anymore. IMO, the only real way to get a sense for how much hands-on stuff you'll get to do with any given firm is to have a candid conversation with the young associates at the firm.

True but some trial firms (litigation boutiques) just have a significantly lower number of lawyers. That generally means you'll be closer to the action than you would be at a biglaw firm. You can often tell by reading the bios of the first and second year associates. Some of them have been second or third chair at a trial and generally put that in their blip.

Agreed.

thesealocust wrote:

Just in case you're not being sarcastic: While most associates will get to shadow the trials, they are stuck in endless doc review at Quinn.

The only true big firms that I've seen go to trial and give significant trial experience are Gibson, Kirkland, and maybe Paul Weiss.

seriouslyinformative wrote:

thesealocust wrote:

Just in case you're not being sarcastic: While most associates will get to shadow the trials, they are stuck in endless doc review at Quinn.

The only true big firms that I've seen go to trial and give significant trial experience are Gibson, Kirkland, and maybe Paul Weiss.

I'm seeing that most of the firms that advertise themselves as "trial" firms tend to be midlaw sized. I really don't care what the size of the firm I work for is as long as I get to be in the courtroom, just trying to figure out what SA that will get me there.

Veyron wrote:

seriouslyinformative wrote:

thesealocust wrote:

Just in case you're not being sarcastic: While most associates will get to shadow the trials, they are stuck in endless doc review at Quinn.

The only true big firms that I've seen go to trial and give significant trial experience are Gibson, Kirkland, and maybe Paul Weiss.

I'm seeing that most of the firms that advertise themselves as "trial" firms tend to be midlaw sized. I really don't care what the size of the firm I work for is as long as I get to be in the courtroom, just trying to figure out what SA that will get me there.

So, there are the well-known litigation firms like Barlit Beck. They are smaller and you would certainly get to be in the courtroom, but getting an offer there is extremely difficult (they may only hire post-clerkship). Other examples are Keker in the Bay Area. I don't know since I am only looking in my own market, but there is one firm in particular in my market that is well-known for litigation. They generally pay as much or more than BigLaw firms, but are also as much or more selective.

Go to http://www.benchmarklitigation.com/ and look up the state you are interested in practicing in. It will show the "highly recommended" and "recommended" firms for that area. Obviously you can ignore the firms you know are BigLaw firms. Put the other names into NALP and see how many lawyers in the office and that might give you a rough idea of whether or not you'd be seeing litigation work early on. I'd say around fifty lawyers and fewer and you might be more likely to see the inside of a courtroom. There are generally at least 1-2 litigation boutiques per area.

Kronk wrote:

Veyron wrote:

seriouslyinformative wrote:

thesealocust wrote:

Just in case you're not being sarcastic: While most associates will get to shadow the trials, they are stuck in endless doc review at Quinn.

The only true big firms that I've seen go to trial and give significant trial experience are Gibson, Kirkland, and maybe Paul Weiss.

I'm seeing that most of the firms that advertise themselves as "trial" firms tend to be midlaw sized. I really don't care what the size of the firm I work for is as long as I get to be in the courtroom, just trying to figure out what SA that will get me there.

So, there are the well-known litigation firms like Barlit Beck. They are smaller and you would certainly get to be in the courtroom, but getting an offer there is extremely difficult (they may only hire post-clerkship). Other examples are Keker in the Bay Area. I don't know since I am only looking in my own market, but there is one firm in particular in my market that is well-known for litigation. They generally pay as much or more than BigLaw firms, but are also as much or more selective.

Go to http://www.benchmarklitigation.com/ and look up the state you are interested in practicing in. It will show the "highly recommended" and "recommended" firms for that area. Obviously you can ignore the firms you know are BigLaw firms. Put the other names into NALP and see how many lawyers in the office and that might give you a rough idea of whether or not you'd be seeing litigation work early on. I'd say around fifty lawyers and fewer and you might be more likely to see the inside of a courtroom. There are generally at least 1-2 litigation boutiques per area.

Dude, this site is way solid. Thanks.