The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
- reasonable troll
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:34 pm
The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
A partner I spoke with said that she was unimpressed when students were unable to commit to one or the other during an interview, but TLS forums are full of people warning OCI hopefuls to hedge.
So what's better - expressing a fairly firm interest in Lit or Corp, or hedging with something like "Gee, I haven't had the chance to do any transactional work yet, but I'd really relish the opportunity to explore that side of the field at your firm"?
Firm-specific caveats welcome.
So what's better - expressing a fairly firm interest in Lit or Corp, or hedging with something like "Gee, I haven't had the chance to do any transactional work yet, but I'd really relish the opportunity to explore that side of the field at your firm"?
Firm-specific caveats welcome.
- El_Sol
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:00 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
The partner is wrong.
Committing to litigation or corporate, as a rising 2L, without doing either, is not smart. Plus, firms want you to be flexible in case their need is corporate and you want lit, or vice versa.
Committing to litigation or corporate, as a rising 2L, without doing either, is not smart. Plus, firms want you to be flexible in case their need is corporate and you want lit, or vice versa.
-
- Posts: 122
- Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:26 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
"Well, right now I'm leaning toward litigation. I feel like law school is best designed to give me a sense of what litigation is like, and the research and writing component of litigation is really what initially drove me to want to go to law school. That said, I think the positive sum nature of transactions work is pretty intriguing. I'd like to give that a shot this summer, too. I think I read that you encourage summers to take assignments in a variety of practice areas, is that true?"
I said this in (almost) every interview. I received offers from litigation focused firms and from transactionally focused firms. I never felt as though an interviewer questioned this answer. The question at the end I felt helped the interviewer (regardless of the department he or she was in) move beyond questioning my motives (if he/she did). I felt like this left me open to spending 2L deciding what I really wanted and the firms not feeling like I led them to believe on thing or another. This to me felt like a good middle ground between the hedge and the commit.
I said this in (almost) every interview. I received offers from litigation focused firms and from transactionally focused firms. I never felt as though an interviewer questioned this answer. The question at the end I felt helped the interviewer (regardless of the department he or she was in) move beyond questioning my motives (if he/she did). I felt like this left me open to spending 2L deciding what I really wanted and the firms not feeling like I led them to believe on thing or another. This to me felt like a good middle ground between the hedge and the commit.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
Stealing this. Hope you don't mind.ClarDarr wrote:"Well, right now I'm leaning toward litigation. I feel like law school is best designed to give me a sense of what litigation is like, and the research and writing component of litigation is really what initially drove me to want to go to law school. That said, I think the positive sum nature of transactions work is pretty intriguing. I'd like to give that a shot this summer, too. I think I read that you encourage summers to take assignments in a variety of practice areas, is that true?"
I said this in (almost) every interview. I received offers from litigation focused firms and from transactionally focused firms. I never felt as though an interviewer questioned this answer. The question at the end I felt helped the interviewer (regardless of the department he or she was in) move beyond questioning my motives (if he/she did). I felt like this left me open to spending 2L deciding what I really wanted and the firms not feeling like I led them to believe on thing or another. This to me felt like a good middle ground between the hedge and the commit.
-
- Posts: 122
- Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:26 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
I'm happy to pass along my scripted wisdom.Anonymous User wrote:Stealing this. Hope you don't mind.ClarDarr wrote:"Well, right now I'm leaning toward litigation. I feel like law school is best designed to give me a sense of what litigation is like, and the research and writing component of litigation is really what initially drove me to want to go to law school. That said, I think the positive sum nature of transactions work is pretty intriguing. I'd like to give that a shot this summer, too. I think I read that you encourage summers to take assignments in a variety of practice areas, is that true?"
I said this in (almost) every interview. I received offers from litigation focused firms and from transactionally focused firms. I never felt as though an interviewer questioned this answer. The question at the end I felt helped the interviewer (regardless of the department he or she was in) move beyond questioning my motives (if he/she did). I felt like this left me open to spending 2L deciding what I really wanted and the firms not feeling like I led them to believe on thing or another. This to me felt like a good middle ground between the hedge and the commit.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
ClarDarr wrote:I'm happy to pass along my scripted wisdom.Anonymous User wrote:Stealing this. Hope you don't mind.ClarDarr wrote:"Well, right now I'm leaning toward litigation. I feel like law school is best designed to give me a sense of what litigation is like, and the research and writing component of litigation is really what initially drove me to want to go to law school. That said, I think the positive sum nature of transactions work is pretty intriguing. I'd like to give that a shot this summer, too. I think I read that you encourage summers to take assignments in a variety of practice areas, is that true?"
I said this in (almost) every interview. I received offers from litigation focused firms and from transactionally focused firms. I never felt as though an interviewer questioned this answer. The question at the end I felt helped the interviewer (regardless of the department he or she was in) move beyond questioning my motives (if he/she did). I felt like this left me open to spending 2L deciding what I really wanted and the firms not feeling like I led them to believe on thing or another. This to me felt like a good middle ground between the hedge and the commit.

But they expect you to say something like this right? I mean 1L is basically all lit.
-
- Posts: 122
- Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:26 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
Yeah. The good thing is, though, corporate guys and gals ALL agree that 1L is largely designed to make you want lit, and thus you build a little rapport with them. Yet, at the same time, it tells lit people that you've identified that what you do during 1L is similar to being an associate in a lit department.Anonymous User wrote:ClarDarr wrote:I'm happy to pass along my scripted wisdom.Anonymous User wrote:Stealing this. Hope you don't mind.ClarDarr wrote:"Well, right now I'm leaning toward litigation. I feel like law school is best designed to give me a sense of what litigation is like, and the research and writing component of litigation is really what initially drove me to want to go to law school. That said, I think the positive sum nature of transactions work is pretty intriguing. I'd like to give that a shot this summer, too. I think I read that you encourage summers to take assignments in a variety of practice areas, is that true?"
I said this in (almost) every interview. I received offers from litigation focused firms and from transactionally focused firms. I never felt as though an interviewer questioned this answer. The question at the end I felt helped the interviewer (regardless of the department he or she was in) move beyond questioning my motives (if he/she did). I felt like this left me open to spending 2L deciding what I really wanted and the firms not feeling like I led them to believe on thing or another. This to me felt like a good middle ground between the hedge and the commit.
But they expect you to say something like this right? I mean 1L is basically all lit.
- reasonable troll
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:34 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
So what about the opposite scenario then? Something like "Well I'm leaning corporate because the constructive nature of doing deals really appeals to me, but I've obviously had more experience with lit during my 1L year and Summer, and I find the research and analysis aspects gratifying as well. I think I read on your site... etc."ClarDarr wrote: Yeah. The good thing is, though, corporate guys and gals ALL agree that 1L is largely designed to make you want lit, and thus you build a little rapport with them. Yet, at the same time, it tells lit people that you've identified that what you do during 1L is similar to being an associate in a lit department.
I do think I have an honest preference for corporate, but nothing on my resume substantiates that. Is the above safe to say or is it just better to say I lean lit and then hope I can do corporate instead? I should mention that I don't think I would hate lit, but I don't want to ding myself w/r/t corporate work.
-
- Posts: 122
- Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:26 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
I think your phrasing would be wonderful.reasonable troll wrote:So what about the opposite scenario then? Something like "Well I'm leaning corporate because the constructive nature of doing deals really appeals to me, but I've obviously had more experience with lit during my 1L year and Summer, and I find the research and analysis aspects gratifying as well. I think I read on your site... etc."ClarDarr wrote: Yeah. The good thing is, though, corporate guys and gals ALL agree that 1L is largely designed to make you want lit, and thus you build a little rapport with them. Yet, at the same time, it tells lit people that you've identified that what you do during 1L is similar to being an associate in a lit department.
I do think I have an honest preference for corporate, but nothing on my resume substantiates that. Is the above safe to say or is it just better to say I lean lit and then hope I can do corporate instead? I should mention that I don't think I would hate lit, but I don't want to ding myself w/r/t corporate work.
- reasonable troll
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:34 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
I like your use of adjectives. How much would it cost to get you to come tell me how wonderful I am during the post-callback, pre-offer stage?ClarDarr wrote:I think your phrasing would be wonderful.

- jess
- Posts: 18149
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:27 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
.
Last edited by jess on Thu Oct 26, 2017 9:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 122
- Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:26 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
Given you won't have an offer, I can take you on pro bono.reasonable troll wrote:I like your use of adjectives. How much would it cost to get you to come tell me how wonderful I am during the post-callback, pre-offer stage?ClarDarr wrote:I think your phrasing would be wonderful.
- Ikki
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 3:37 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
Might be a bit off-topic, but I don't get the "corporate or litigation" divide. Shouldn't it be "transactional v. litigation?" Saying corporate when one means transactional just sounds off.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- reasonable troll
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:34 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
You are a credit to this profession.ClarDarr wrote:Given you won't have an offer, I can take you on pro bono.reasonable troll wrote:I like your use of adjectives. How much would it cost to get you to come tell me how wonderful I am during the post-callback, pre-offer stage?ClarDarr wrote:I think your phrasing would be wonderful.
- reasonable troll
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:34 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
I certainly mean transactional work when I say corporate. I was under the impression that the terms are used sort of interchangeably in this context, but I could be wrong. I do agree though that its a misnomer, as one could do corporate litigation just as one could do corporate transactions.Ikki wrote:Might be a bit off-topic, but I don't get the "corporate or litigation" divide. Shouldn't it be "transactional v. litigation?" Saying corporate when one means transactional just sounds off.
- Ikki
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 3:37 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
That's what I meant. I did a mock-interview with a V10 senior associate and when he asked me that question he said corporate and quickly corrected himself and said transactional. This is probably no big deal but just wanted to point out that some might think it's a misnomer.reasonable troll wrote:I certainly mean transactional work when I say corporate. I was under the impression that the terms are used sort of interchangeably in this context, but I could be wrong. I do agree though that its a misnomer, as one could do corporate litigation just as one could do corporate transactions.Ikki wrote:Might be a bit off-topic, but I don't get the "corporate or litigation" divide. Shouldn't it be "transactional v. litigation?" Saying corporate when one means transactional just sounds off.
- reasonable troll
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:34 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
So "Commit" seems to be pulling ahead. I guess I should have defined the options more precisely to get a more precise answer, but is that coming from people who agree with ClarDarr's sort of soft commitment, or ghosts who think that articulating an even more definite preference is in order?
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- jess
- Posts: 18149
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:27 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
.
Last edited by jess on Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
Interesting thread. So the consensus seems to be "stay flexible." Cool. What about in cover letters? Should I say I have an interest in your corporate practice areas, specifically X,Y,Z? Or just say general corporate? Or say nothing about practice areas at all?
-
- Posts: 432497
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
Some firms require you to commit at the interview stage -- most famously, Cravath.El_Sol wrote:The partner is wrong.
Committing to litigation or corporate, as a rising 2L, without doing either, is not smart. Plus, firms want you to be flexible in case their need is corporate and you want lit, or vice versa.
- reasonable troll
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:34 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
+1, wondering this as wellAnonymous User wrote:Interesting thread. So the consensus seems to be "stay flexible." Cool. What about in cover letters? Should I say I have an interest in your corporate practice areas, specifically X,Y,Z? Or just say general corporate? Or say nothing about practice areas at all?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- reasonable troll
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:34 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
Anonymous User wrote:Some firms require you to commit at the interview stage -- most famously, Cravath.El_Sol wrote:The partner is wrong.
Committing to litigation or corporate, as a rising 2L, without doing either, is not smart. Plus, firms want you to be flexible in case their need is corporate and you want lit, or vice versa.
lol Cravath has never heard of Hastings, but thanks on behalf of those for whom that particular firm might be a legitimate prospect.
are there any others that you know of that do this? if so, do they make it explicitly known, or do they just drop the question and ding you if you don't know to commit?
- drmguy
- Posts: 1004
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:43 am
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
I am very interested in answers to this.
-
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 11:31 pm
Re: The "Corporate or Litigation?" Question
In Chicago, MWE makes you commit to a group at the interview stage. Also, "hedge" is not TCR. If you're genuinely on the fence, be honest about that. If you're not on the fence, say so.reasonable troll wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Some firms require you to commit at the interview stage -- most famously, Cravath.El_Sol wrote:The partner is wrong.
Committing to litigation or corporate, as a rising 2L, without doing either, is not smart. Plus, firms want you to be flexible in case their need is corporate and you want lit, or vice versa.
lol Cravath has never heard of Hastings, but thanks on behalf of those for whom that particular firm might be a legitimate prospect.
are there any others that you know of that do this? if so, do they make it explicitly known, or do they just drop the question and ding you if you don't know to commit?
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login