V15 Partner/OCI Interviewer Answering Questions... Forum

[roranoa]

Do you think lawyers are mostly work hard play hard types like investment bankers or mostly just work hard types?

Where do you fit in?

[Anonymous User]

Hello,

I have an unusual question:

My grades from 1L are quite poor. I am at a top law school. Several days before beginning my first year, a member of my nuclear family passed away. I haven't mentioned this to....well, anyone. I imagine it affected my grades, but I never want to use this "story" in applications or with professors because I feel it somehow desecrates my family member's memory - almost like I am blaming his death on my performance. All the same, I do not think that my grades are representative of how I would have performed under normal circumstances.

Anyway, my question is: Is this something that recruiters would be interested in knowing when applying to a firm? I know it is late in the game now, but for future reference...

[anon168]

Hello,

I have an unusual question:

My grades from 1L are quite poor. I am at a top law school. Several days before beginning my first year, a member of my nuclear family passed away. I haven't mentioned this to....well, anyone. I imagine it affected my grades, but I never want to use this "story" in applications or with professors because I feel it somehow desecrates my family member's memory - almost like I am blaming his death on my performance. All the same, I do not think that my grades are representative of how I would have performed under normal circumstances.

Anyway, my question is: Is this something that recruiters would be interested in knowing when applying to a firm? I know it is late in the game now, but for future reference...

Sure, I would mention it but don't make it a highlight of your application materials. Part of life, and part of being a lawyer, is overcoming adversity. Don't overplay the sympathy card. No one likes a whiner.

[Anonymous User]

Hello,

I have an unusual question:

My grades from 1L are quite poor. I am at a top law school. Several days before beginning my first year, a member of my nuclear family passed away. I haven't mentioned this to....well, anyone. I imagine it affected my grades, but I never want to use this "story" in applications or with professors because I feel it somehow desecrates my family member's memory - almost like I am blaming his death on my performance. All the same, I do not think that my grades are representative of how I would have performed under normal circumstances.

Anyway, my question is: Is this something that recruiters would be interested in knowing when applying to a firm? I know it is late in the game now, but for future reference...

Sure, I would mention it but don't make it a highlight of your application materials. Part of life, and part of being a lawyer, is overcoming adversity. Don't overplay the sympathy card. No one likes a whiner.

Thanks for responding! I agree, re: whiner. It is about what you do with what you have that says the most about you in the end.

[roranoa]

What are the most common reason for those who left your firm?
Are people mostly pushed out? (in whatever form)

I'm curious if someone can stay on as long as +10 years at Biglaw if he/she is determined to stay. Or is it the case that those who are off partner track pressured to leave.

[anon168]

What are the most common reason for those who left your firm?
Are people mostly pushed out? (in whatever form)

I'm curious if someone can stay on as long as +10 years at Biglaw if he/she is determined to stay. Or is it the case that those who are off partner track pressured to leave.

Some people get pushed out, some leave on their own. Who falls into what group is almost impossible to tell because even those that get pushed out rarely ever say they are leaving biglaw because they're no longer wanted.

If you stay 10+ years, it's usually because you are on partnership track.

Regarding partnership track. Take your typical V10 firm. They probably have anywhere from 100-150 first years starting every year, probably more (my numbers may be off as I'm doing this off the to top of my head). And each year, when a V10 announces partnership classes it's usually in the single digits, e.g. 5-7 people make partner. And of those 5, maybe 2 or 3 are laterals.

So, just consider the percentages, and you can figure out the relationship between being partnership track and wanting to stay on "for 10+ years".

[Anonymous User]

What is the relevance of “super lawyers?” Optimately, how long does it take to qualify for this distinction? Certain firms tend to herald this achievement. Seems that this recognition would add to job security versus just a pat on the back.

[anon168]

What is the relevance of “super lawyers?” Optimately, how long does it take to qualify for this distinction? Certain firms tend to herald this achievement. Seems that this recognition would add to job security versus just a pat on the back.

The relevance of "super lawyers" is how much your firm's marketing dept. (or you yourself) care to trumpet your own existence on the face of this earth.

[desertlaw]

I assume that out of those 100-150, there are plenty who self-select out of trying for partner, right? So you're not truly competing against all 100-150, but those who are open to being partner or make it a goal, right?

What's the amount of those people that want to stay for long haul? 30%? 10%? 50%? As a 3L, it seems like most BigLaw bound friends of mine are pretty honest that we want to be in for 3-5 years but no longer.

[anon168]

I assume that out of those 100-150, there are plenty who self-select out of trying for partner, right? So you're not truly competing against all 100-150, but those who are open to being partner or make it a goal, right?

What's the amount of those people that want to stay for long haul? 30%? 10%? 50%? As a 3L, it seems like most BigLaw bound friends of mine are pretty honest that we want to be in for 3-5 years but no longer.

That's a good question, and I honestly don't know the answer.

It's also a bit complicated because there's a bit of a response bias when you look at the 3Ls or even midlevel associates who say that they are in it only for 3-5 years. Given that everyone sort of knows that making partner at biglaw is next to near impossible, just about everyone self-selects themselves out of the process. It's like the supermodel effect. Everyone is shocked that the supermodel doesn't have a date lined up for each hour of the week, but that's because everyone just assumes she's either already taken or that you have no shot at getting a date with her because she's drop dead gorgeous.

I just wonder what the answer would be if it was phrased this way, "If given the choice, would you want to be a biglaw partner if making partner only entailed billing an average of 2100 hours/year for 8 years."

While most people realize that making partner at biglaw is next to near impossible, I think most people fail to comprehend just how much brass is actually in that ring when they do decide to fit you with one.

[Anonymous User]

Between now and day one of SA, is there anything in particular one should do? Perhaps staying in touch in some way? Also what is day 1 and week 1 like?

[anon168]

Between now and day one of SA, is there anything in particular one should do? Perhaps staying in touch in some way? Also what is day 1 and week 1 like?

Don't get arrested, convicted, or serve any prison time. Don't flunk out of school.

It's been a while, but from what I recall, Day 1 is alot of paperwork, meeting people, learning about firm logistics (e.g. IT, phones, WP, etc.), and lunch with maybe your mentor or a couple of associates relevant to your practice group and/or interests.

Week 1 is pretty much the same but sub in paperwork and firm logistics with SA summer projects. Wash, rinse, repeat for Weeks 2-10 (or whatever).

[84651846190]

While most people realize that making partner at biglaw is next to near impossible, I think most people fail to comprehend just how much brass is actually in that ring when they do decide to fit you with one.

Making partner at most firms means nothing more than a change of title from "senior associate" to "partner." Unless you have a stable of clients already loyal to you (and you only), you're not going to get equity in a firm. If you had a stable of clients, you could go solo or join any other law firm and make a lot of money, so it really wouldn't be a big deal if you missed out on partnership anyway. So everything boils down to who has clients.

[Anonymous User]

While most people realize that making partner at biglaw is next to near impossible, I think most people fail to comprehend just how much brass is actually in that ring when they do decide to fit you with one.

Making partner at most firms means nothing more than a change of title from "senior associate" to "partner." Unless you have a stable of clients already loyal to you (and you only), you're not going to get equity in a firm. If you had a stable of clients, you could go solo or join any other law firm and make a lot of money, so it really wouldn't be a big deal if you missed out on partnership anyway. So everything boils down to who has clients.

Sounds a lot like sales. Going out on your own to network, joining clubs/organizations and having a country club membership. Given the amount of advertising many firms often do, I have to ask about call-ins, how are those distributed?

[Anonymous User]

How would a litigator develop a stable of loyal clients at this stage? seems like those would tend to be more one-offs and any institutional relationships are probably already snapped up.

[84651846190]

While most people realize that making partner at biglaw is next to near impossible, I think most people fail to comprehend just how much brass is actually in that ring when they do decide to fit you with one.

Making partner at most firms means nothing more than a change of title from "senior associate" to "partner." Unless you have a stable of clients already loyal to you (and you only), you're not going to get equity in a firm. If you had a stable of clients, you could go solo or join any other law firm and make a lot of money, so it really wouldn't be a big deal if you missed out on partnership anyway. So everything boils down to who has clients.

Sounds a lot like sales. Going out on your own to network, joining clubs/organizations and having a country club membership. Given the amount of advertising many firms often do, I have to ask about call-ins, how are those distributed?

At my firm it is extremely rare to have (litigation) clients call you unless you already have a good relationship with them already. I guess the closest thing would be case pitches when a client would ask multiple firms to submit something similar to bids on big cases they have to deal with. Again, you don't get asked to pitch your firm to the client unless you already have some kind of relationship with the client.

[84651846190]

How would a litigator develop a stable of loyal clients at this stage? seems like those would tend to be more one-offs and any institutional relationships are probably already snapped up.

This is why it's so difficult to make *equity* partner in biglaw firms. Institutional clients are closely guarded and (sometimes) viciously fought over by people who are already partner. What makes you think you have a chance at winning over institutional clients if you're not even a partner yet? It's not impossible, but again, it's very difficult.

[Anonymous User]

When someone calls in (responding to a print or TV ad) seeking council, how are these call-ins usually distributed? Probably talking about firms with less than 50 attorneys that advertise to the general market.

[anon168]

While most people realize that making partner at biglaw is next to near impossible, I think most people fail to comprehend just how much brass is actually in that ring when they do decide to fit you with one.

Making partner at most firms means nothing more than a change of title from "senior associate" to "partner." Unless you have a stable of clients already loyal to you (and you only), you're not going to get equity in a firm. If you had a stable of clients, you could go solo or join any other law firm and make a lot of money, so it really wouldn't be a big deal if you missed out on partnership anyway. So everything boils down to who has clients.

That's not accurate. There are many V10 firms that will make you equity as long as you can effectively service the firm's institutional clients.

As far as going solo, that's just stupid. V10 partners that have portable books of business may move amongst different V10 firms, or downsize to a midlaw type firm, but going solo is a nonstarter. How many solos do you know that can handle M&A? Or C/F? Think Apple will hire a solo to go up against Samsung over iPhone patent infringements? NFW.

Clients of V10 firms are simply not suited to solo practitioners -- no matter how good you are. There isn't a F500 company that would even go to Law Offices of Watchell (if such a thing existed) and When Boise bolted, he started a firm with a bunch of other lawyers.

[anon168]

How would a litigator develop a stable of loyal clients at this stage? seems like those would tend to be more one-offs and any institutional relationships are probably already snapped up.

Hustle, and kick ass in your cases. F500 GC's are loyal like your favorite call girl is "loyal" to you.

[84651846190]

While most people realize that making partner at biglaw is next to near impossible, I think most people fail to comprehend just how much brass is actually in that ring when they do decide to fit you with one.

Making partner at most firms means nothing more than a change of title from "senior associate" to "partner." Unless you have a stable of clients already loyal to you (and you only), you're not going to get equity in a firm. If you had a stable of clients, you could go solo or join any other law firm and make a lot of money, so it really wouldn't be a big deal if you missed out on partnership anyway. So everything boils down to who has clients.

That's not accurate. There are many V10 firms that will make you equity as long as you can effectively service the firm's institutional clients.

As far as going solo, that's just stupid. V10 partners that have portable books of business may move amongst different V10 firms, or downsize to a midlaw type firm, but going solo is a nonstarter. How many solos do you know that can handle M&A? Or C/F? Think Apple will hire a solo to go up against Samsung over iPhone patent infringements? NFW.

Clients of V10 firms are simply not suited to solo practitioners -- no matter how good you are. There isn't a F500 company that would even go to Law Offices of Watchell (if such a thing existed) and When Boise bolted, he started a firm with a bunch of other lawyers.

Since when is the V10 = "most law firms?" Also, your analysis of solo practioners may be accurate for corporate matters, but you're 100% wrong when it comes to litigation. Plenty of F500 litigation is handled by smaller law firms and the trend is to have more of these smaller firms handling litigation matters. I know an associate who just left who has expertise in a niche area of litigation. He started his own firm and presumably most of his work will come from a very large corporation for which he worked at my firm. It makes absolutely no fucking sense at all to hire Kirkland and Ellis to handle a contract dispute (paying $600 per hour for a midlevel to slowly grind out some flawless work) when you could have it handled by a smaller firm which will do the same work faster at 1/10th the price.

[anon168]

Since when is the V10 = "most law firms?" Also, your analysis of solo practioners may be accurate for corporate matters, but you're 100% wrong when it comes to litigation. Plenty of F500 litigation is handled by smaller law firms and the trend is to have more of these smaller firms handling litigation matters. I know an associate who just left who has expertise in a niche area of litigation. He started his own firm and presumably most of his work will come from a very large corporation for which he worked at my firm. It makes absolutely no fucking sense at all to hire Kirkland and Ellis to handle a contract dispute (paying $600 per hour for a midlevel to slowly grind out some flawless work) when you could have it handled by a smaller firm which will do the same work faster at 1/10th the price.

This was a thread originally for V15 folks.

I'm sorry you work for a TTT V16-20. My bad. Carry on.

[84651846190]

Since when is the V10 = "most law firms?" Also, your analysis of solo practioners may be accurate for corporate matters, but you're 100% wrong when it comes to litigation. Plenty of F500 litigation is handled by smaller law firms and the trend is to have more of these smaller firms handling litigation matters. I know an associate who just left who has expertise in a niche area of litigation. He started his own firm and presumably most of his work will come from a very large corporation for which he worked at my firm. It makes absolutely no fucking sense at all to hire Kirkland and Ellis to handle a contract dispute (paying $600 per hour for a midlevel to slowly grind out some flawless work) when you could have it handled by a smaller firm which will do the same work faster at 1/10th the price.

This was a thread originally for V15 folks.

I'm sorry you work for a TTT V16-20. My bad. Carry on.

tyft

[Anonymous User]

My firm has no minimum billing requirement, though there is somewhat of an unspoken minimum. How many years can I stick around by doing the minimum or a little bit over? Additionally, assuming you do competent work and aren't a jackass, how much will the firm help you in finding another job as it eases you out? Or do you rely on headhunters?

[itbdvorm]

My firm has no minimum billing requirement, though there is somewhat of an unspoken minimum. How many years can I stick around by doing the minimum or a little bit over? Additionally, assuming you do competent work and aren't a jackass, how much will the firm help you in finding another job as it eases you out? Or do you rely on headhunters?

Probably awhile if you're good. But your question in practicality doesn't really work.

If you're on a deal, or a case, and you do the "minimum", it's a very big difference from doing the "minimum" in number of hours.

And in many cases you can't control the number of matters/cases you get put on.

If you do the "minimum" on a matter it may be hard to do it competently. And when that happens, you'll become the last resort for people staffing matters. And when that happens, you won't make the minimum.

As far as helping you find work, people can be pretty helpful. If you're a 4th-5th year and aren't the star of your class but are reasonably well-liked and you have a frank conversation w/a partner you trust you can probably get some nice help in placement.

Frankly, if you're a 4th-5th year you should have a frank conversation with a partner you trust anyway.