Top Law Schools

There are good reasons to go to a large law firm in a major market but this is a terrible one.

Unless you get a boner from seeing your matter name in the WSJ, in which case have at it.

The most interesting work I get as a jr. is probably from low-bono cases we will do as a favor or in conjunction w something bigger where I just get to handle the whole thing

rad lulz wrote:The most interesting work I get as a jr. is probably from low-bono cases we will do as a favor or in conjunction w something bigger where I just get to handle the whole thing

This. The work I do on the "big" cases I am on is research, drafting discovery responses, etc. Mostly boring. The really small, low value cases that I am basically doing on my own are awesome.

It's not total BS either, and it really depends on exactly what the work is. There's some awesome stuff that doesn't go down anywhere but the biggest firms with the biggest clients, and there are some intolerable grinds at firms with small clients (insurance defense mills anyone?).

Having said that, I think I'd rather do journal tryouts for the rest of my life than be doc review supervising drone 3Q56 at certain large firms with large clients.

DELG wrote:There are good reasons to go to a large law firm in a major market but this is a terrible one.

Unless you get a boner from seeing your matter name in the WSJ, in which case have at it.

Well now I'm wondering if I should choose a firm based on the things that give me a boner...maybe someone should start that advice thread.

thesealocust wrote:It's not total BS either, and it really depends on exactly what the work is. There's some awesome stuff that doesn't go down anywhere but the biggest firms with the biggest clients, and there are some intolerable grinds at firms with small clients (insurance defense mills anyone?).

Having said that, I think I'd rather do journal tryouts for the rest of my life than be doc review supervising drone 3Q56 at certain large firms with large clients.

In lit, I am pretty sure it's 100% BS.

thesealocust wrote:It's not total BS either, and it really depends on exactly what the work is. There's some awesome stuff that doesn't go down anywhere but the biggest firms with the biggest clients, and there are some intolerable grinds at firms with small clients (insurance defense mills anyone?).

Having said that, I think I'd rather do journal tryouts for the rest of my life than be doc review supervising drone 3Q56 at certain large firms with large clients.

I think this is right.

Quality of posts in this forum quickly going downhill

.

.

brotherdarkness wrote:

DELG wrote:

thesealocust wrote:It's not total BS either, and it really depends on exactly what the work is. There's some awesome stuff that doesn't go down anywhere but the biggest firms with the biggest clients, and there are some intolerable grinds at firms with small clients (insurance defense mills anyone?).

Having said that, I think I'd rather do journal tryouts for the rest of my life than be doc review supervising drone 3Q56 at certain large firms with large clients.

In lit, I am pretty sure it's 100% BS.

Are you really suggesting that litigating slip and fall cases is just as interesting as litigating the matters handled by the biggest firms?

A lot of middle ground there. Also "litigating the matters handled by the biggest firms" is a stupid metric to chose between firms as a junior associate.

DELG wrote: Unless you get a boner from seeing your matter name in the WSJ, in which case have at it.

brotherdarkness wrote:

DELG wrote:

thesealocust wrote:It's not total BS either, and it really depends on exactly what the work is. There's some awesome stuff that doesn't go down anywhere but the biggest firms with the biggest clients, and there are some intolerable grinds at firms with small clients (insurance defense mills anyone?).

Having said that, I think I'd rather do journal tryouts for the rest of my life than be doc review supervising drone 3Q56 at certain large firms with large clients.

In lit, I am pretty sure it's 100% BS.

Are you really suggesting that litigating slip and fall cases is just as interesting as litigating the matters handled by the biggest firms?

pretty sure Godspeed is the happiest lawyer on this site

And def has the best client reviews

DELG wrote:

thesealocust wrote:It's not total BS either, and it really depends on exactly what the work is. There's some awesome stuff that doesn't go down anywhere but the biggest firms with the biggest clients, and there are some intolerable grinds at firms with small clients (insurance defense mills anyone?).

Having said that, I think I'd rather do journal tryouts for the rest of my life than be doc review supervising drone 3Q56 at certain large firms with large clients.

In lit, I am pretty sure it's 100% BS.

+1. Big firm litigation work is like 95% doc review and 4.99% discovery bullshit.

DELG wrote:There are good reasons to go to a large law firm in a major market but this is a terrible one.

Unless you get a boner from seeing your matter name in the WSJ, in which case have at it.

This is where corporate vs litigation makes a big difference. The top firms really do get the most interesting deals. You won't be a junior associate doing diligence forever.

For litigation you really have to separate tasks from substance. On a substantive level, the high profile cases have the most fascinating legal issues/business implications. But as a junior lawyer that won't really matter because your life will be largely driven by tasks that are unrelated to high level issues. Instead, you will be dealing with all sorts of terrible tasks (doc review, priv logs, taking notes, etc) that need to be done but that no senior lawyer wants to touch. Shit rolls downhill and these tasks will end up consuming your life.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:

DELG wrote:

thesealocust wrote:It's not total BS either, and it really depends on exactly what the work is. There's some awesome stuff that doesn't go down anywhere but the biggest firms with the biggest clients, and there are some intolerable grinds at firms with small clients (insurance defense mills anyone?).

Having said that, I think I'd rather do journal tryouts for the rest of my life than be doc review supervising drone 3Q56 at certain large firms with large clients.

In lit, I am pretty sure it's 100% BS.

+1. Big firm litigation work is like 95% doc review and 4.99% discovery bullshit.

Depends on the firm I guess. I have about 25% doc review, 25% discovery disputes motions/letters, 50% failing at assignments I'm not qualified to do - "why don't you take a crack at a motion to dismiss?" - Hand it in, "what is this garbage?"

I genuinely thought this was going to be a fat client thread.

TTRansfer wrote:I genuinely thought this was going to be a fat client thread.