Top Law Schools

In the rare scenario that someone does make equity partner and works at a firm for many years, do they retain their equity and share of the firm's profits when they retire? Or do they have to "sell out" their share of the law firm and retire on the otherwise plentiful stash of cash they already have?

Anonymous User wrote:In the rare scenario that someone does make equity partner and works at a firm for many years, do they retain their equity and share of the firm's profits when they retire? Or do they have to "sell out" their share of the law firm and retire on the otherwise plentiful stash of cash they already have?

I think it would depend on the particular partnership agreement, but I've never heard of a firm where they didn't have to sell back their portion.

When do you become a equity partner?

SuperCool23 wrote:When do you become a equity partner?

Depends on the firm. Some firms have 1 tier partnership tracks where you go from associate to equity partner. Most have 2 tier tracks where you go from associate to non-equity partner to equity partner.

7-8 --> Non-equity 2-3 --> equity is fairly common.

Although obviously not everyone makes it to the next stage even if they've put in the requisite number of years.

Veyron wrote:

SuperCool23 wrote:When do you become a equity partner?

Depends on the firm. Some firms have 1 tier partnership tracks where you go from associate to equity partner. Most have 2 tier tracks where you go from associate to non-equity partner to equity partner.

7-8 --> Non-equity 2-3 --> equity is fairly common.

Although obviously not everyone makes it to the next stage even if they've put in the requisite number of years.

This seems a bit misleading. "Not everyone"? Quite a few firms have non-equity partner tracks that never (actually or practically) lead to equity partnerships. The two tracks are "7-8 -> equity partner" or "7-8 -> non-equity partner" and that's it. There are some firms that actually use non-equity partner as a stepping stone, but I don't think it's as "common" generally as you claim.

The vast majority of firms I spoke with have a fork in the road system in which, after your time as an associate is up, you have a chance to become either an equity or non-equity partner. Should they make you a non-equity parter, you may get reconsidered again, but you missed your main chance and the odds are now very slim. This site often makes attaining equity partnership sound quite easy, whereas from speaking to people in the real world (especially in large firms) the chances are very slim of ever attaining that position.

Nobody really makes partner these days. A good way to think about it isn't like a track (which implies there is a path), but more like a crapshoot (which implies it is a crapshoot).

I think your chances as a new associate of making Partner, equity or non-equity are less than 1% once you equalize everything.

vanwinkle wrote:

Veyron wrote:

SuperCool23 wrote:When do you become a equity partner?

Depends on the firm. Some firms have 1 tier partnership tracks where you go from associate to equity partner. Most have 2 tier tracks where you go from associate to non-equity partner to equity partner.

7-8 --> Non-equity 2-3 --> equity is fairly common.

Although obviously not everyone makes it to the next stage even if they've put in the requisite number of years.

This seems a bit misleading. "Not everyone"? Quite a few firms have non-equity partner tracks that never (actually or practically) lead to equity partnerships. The two tracks are "7-8 -> equity partner" or "7-8 -> non-equity partner" and that's it. There are some firms that actually use non-equity partner as a stepping stone, but I don't think it's as "common" generally as you claim.

Ah, again with the NYC centric board. I always forget to use NYC firms as the baseline when dealing with you people. Well, OP, if you DON'T work in NYC firms in the markets I'm familiar with usually require a stint as a non-equity partner before they consider you for equity partnership.

Veyron wrote:Ah, again with the NYC centric board. I always forget to use NYC firms as the baseline when dealing with you people.

NYC is the biggest hiring market, and many people here are NYC-focused. It's misleading to call something "common" when it's not common in the biggest market, especially if you know it's not. You should work on giving information that's less misleading, instead of irrationally blaming the people who want accurate information.

once you retire from the firm you give up compensation. that's why older partners sue all the time now for age discrimination. they dont want to stay for the love of the job

vanwinkle wrote:

Veyron wrote:Ah, again with the NYC centric board. I always forget to use NYC firms as the baseline when dealing with you people.

NYC is the biggest hiring market, and many people here are NYC-focused. It's misleading to call something "common" when it's not common in the biggest market, especially if you know it's not. You should work on giving information that's less misleading, instead of irrationally blaming the people who want accurate information.

Ummm, I don't know very much about the NYC partnership track at all. It may be the biggest market, but there far more legal jobs outside of NYC than in it. Its really stupid to assume that NYC sets the standard when it is such a small part of overall hiring.

MrAnon wrote:once you retire from the firm you give up compensation. that's why older partners sue all the time now for age discrimination. they dont want to stay for the love of the job

i paralegaled at a big firm (v15) and only know what partner pension is there, but retired partners (that is former partners now "of counsel") get $300K a year pension.

Veyron wrote:Ummm, I don't know very much about the NYC market at all.

Then you should not make broad generalized statements about how things work everywhere, because you end up wrong a lot, and misleading a lot of people who are interested in the nation's largest hiring market. You know that's what many people are looking for, you said that yourself, so you should be careful not to be so misleading toward all those people.

vanwinkle wrote:

Veyron wrote:Ummm, I don't know very much about the NYC market at all.

Then you should not make broad generalized statements about how things work everywhere, because you end up wrong a lot, and misleading a lot of people who are interested in the nation's largest hiring market.

Wow, did the OP specify he was interested in NYC? I thought not. Something can be generally true but uncommon in the City (like getting your own office as a first year).

DrGuano wrote:

MrAnon wrote:once you retire from the firm you give up compensation. that's why older partners sue all the time now for age discrimination. they dont want to stay for the love of the job

i paralegaled at a big firm (v15) and only know what partner pension is there, but retired partners (that is former partners now "of counsel") get $300K a year pension.

300k a year? fml.

Veyron wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:

Veyron wrote:Ah, again with the NYC centric board. I always forget to use NYC firms as the baseline when dealing with you people.

NYC is the biggest hiring market, and many people here are NYC-focused. It's misleading to call something "common" when it's not common in the biggest market, especially if you know it's not. You should work on giving information that's less misleading, instead of irrationally blaming the people who want accurate information.

Ummm, I don't know very much about the NYC market at all. It may be the biggest market, but there far more legal jobs outside of NYC than in it. Its really stupid to assume that NYC sets the standard when it is such a small part of overall hiring.

I have only heard of firms doing either the two-track system or just having a one track, equity partnership system. I've never heard of associate-->non-equity-->equity (though it's entirely possible I'm forgetting seeing that described on NALP some firms at the beginning of this semester). I only know firms in Texas though.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:

Veyron wrote:

vanwinkle wrote:

Veyron wrote:Ah, again with the NYC centric board. I always forget to use NYC firms as the baseline when dealing with you people.

NYC is the biggest hiring market, and many people here are NYC-focused. It's misleading to call something "common" when it's not common in the biggest market, especially if you know it's not. You should work on giving information that's less misleading, instead of irrationally blaming the people who want accurate information.

Ummm, I don't know very much about the NYC market at all. It may be the biggest market, but there far more legal jobs outside of NYC than in it. Its really stupid to assume that NYC sets the standard when it is such a small part of overall hiring.

I have only heard of firms doing either the two-track system or just having a one track, equity partnership system. I've never heard of associate-->non-equity-->equity (though it's entirely possible I'm forgetting seeing that described on NALP some firms at the beginning of this semester). I only know firms in Texas though.

Curious. What do these forms say? "At the end of 7 1/2 years we decide whether to keep you as an associate, make you a non-equity partner or make you an equity partner?"

Because every nalp form I've read that involved non-equity and equity levels said "X amount of years to non-equity consideration, after X years as non-equity you will be considered for equity"

Veyron wrote: Wow, did the OP specify he was interested in NYC? I thought not.

He didn't specify he wasn't, so he could have been, and OP isn't the only person reading the thread. Your attitude seems to be that it's okay to mislead people who want to work in NYC, and you've said yourself you know a lot of readers here are focused on NYC. You should be more careful to not say things that sound universally true but aren't.

vanwinkle wrote:

Veyron wrote: Wow, did the OP specify he was interested in NYC? I thought not.

He didn't specify he wasn't, so he could have been, and OP isn't the only person reading the thread. Your attitude seems to be that it's okay to mislead people who want to work in NYC, and you've said yourself you know a lot of readers here are focused on NYC. You should be more careful to not say things that sound universally true but aren't.

There are far more people interested in working outside of NYC than in NYC. Let me know when that changes, will you?

Sample NALP copy and paste from V&E (their website confirms they only have equity partners):

PARTNERSHIP DATA
Does the firm have two or more tiers of partner? N
If no, how many years is the partnership track? 8
If yes, how many years is the non-equity track?
How many years is the equity track?
Additional partnership progression information:
New partners are not required to make capital contributions upon admission to the partnership.

Veyron wrote: Curious. What do these forms say? "At the end of 7 1/2 years we decide whether to keep you as an associate, make you a non-equity partner or make you an equity partner?"

No firm will keep an associate for 7.5 years without planning to make them a partner. If you're not going to make partner they'll start pushing you out the door by year 5. By 7.5 the only question is whether you're going to be equity or non-equity; if you're still there they intend to make you partner, if not immediately, then soon.

Veyron wrote:There are far more people interested in working outside of NYC than in NYC. Let me know when that changes, will you?

Five posts ago you called this board "NYC centric". Besides, it wouldn't change the fact that you need to stop making blanket statements that are untrue.

vanwinkle wrote:

Veyron wrote:There are far more people interested in working outside of NYC than in NYC. Let me know when that changes, will you?

Five posts ago you called this board "NYC centric". Besides, it doesn't change the fact that you need to stop making blanket statements that are untrue.

Most common =! blanket statement.

Look, they very way that the NALP forms are organized proves that I'm right.


Does the firm have two or more tiers of partner?
If no, how many years is the partnership track?
If yes, how many years is the non-equity track?
How many years is the equity track?


So, for example, a form explanation:

Lewis and Roca

Does the firm have two or more tiers of partner? Y
If no, how many years is the partnership track?
If yes, how many years is the non-equity track? 7.5
How many years is the equity track? 3

A written explanation:

Bryan Cave

Does the firm have two or more tiers of partner? Y
If no, how many years is the partnership track?
If yes, how many years is the non-equity track? 8.5
How many years is the equity track?
Additional partnership progression information:
Associates are first considered for advancement to non-equity partner after 8.5 years of practice. There is no set track for advancement to equity partner.



Good day sir!

Veyron wrote:Most common =! blanket statement.

You didn't say "most common". You said "common" and described what "some" firms and "most" firms do. You made it sound like you were covering all the possibilities. Even now, you're still trying to "prove you were right", when I never said what you described never happens, I said it's not as common as you made it sound, especially in New York.

Which is true, and makes what you said misleading to anyone who cares about NYC, which is a lot of readers here.

vanwinkle wrote:

Veyron wrote: Curious. What do these forms say? "At the end of 7 1/2 years we decide whether to keep you as an associate, make you a non-equity partner or make you an equity partner?"

No firm will keep an associate for 7.5 years without planning to make them a partner. If you're not going to make partner they'll start pushing you out the door by year 5. By 7.5 the only question is whether you're going to be equity or non-equity; if you're still there they intend to make you partner, if not immediately, then soon.

For real? The NYC firm I worked at this summer had at least 4 Senior associates with more than 7.5 years.

disclaimer: they were all women and I have no idea how the maternity process works at large firms or if that had anything to do why they weren't made partner in the normal amount of time. Plus the firm I worked at was notorious for lateraling partners from other firms instead of growing their own.