Top Law Schools

I just received an offer from my 2L summer associate firm and I'm trying to decide if I should consider seeking to "trade up" (as I have seen some describe it on this site - unfortunately I couldn't find any precedent discussing the merits). Here is some context:

In short, I transferred to Michigan after finishing at the top of my 1L class at a T1 and was able to land big law (in a secondary southern market) with a V100 firm paying full market ($160K). I felt extremely lucky at the time to have landed this job and still do. However, after 2L I am at least top 5 top 10 percent at Michigan and can't help but think I may be selling myself short and am considering using my new credentials to try trading up. I understand that there are several major V20 and V10 firms that would consider hiring 3Ls (who have a standing offer) to supplement their incoming class (including several coming to OCI). However, I also understand these positions are tough to get. And I should clarify I am mainly interested in D.C. or one of the national firms in Houston (NY is out of the question) but I would consider other major warm-weather markets (e.g., LA, Dallas, SF).

Edit: I was thinking this would be a potentially good move for career trajectory reasons (i.e., exit options, etc.). I'm not interested in prestige for prestige's sake. Rather the opportunities that come with it. So I'm trying to determine if there is a bona fide difference between what I have and whats out there. Sorry I wasn't more clear initially.

Questions:
(1) Does anyone have experience with this?
(2) Does starting your career at a V10 or V20 make that big a difference over a regional V100 to make trying this worth it?
(3) Is there any chance my 2L SA firm would find out about this and rescind my offer?
(4) Any other thoughts are welcomed.

Let me get this straight: You have an offer from a firm that will pay you $160k/yr in a southern secondary market in which you want to practice. Why do you want to look elsewhere? I hope you realize that Vault rankings are based on surveys submitted disproportionately by corporate associate in NYC offices. Why do you care what they think? Why would you consider leaving what seems like a good situation so that you can go to another office--where you don't know the attorneys--and where you'll make the same salary in an area with a higher cost of living?

You might consider this choice as progressing towards an eventual career goal. Where do you want to live? What kinds of exit options do you want? What kind of practice do you want to be in? There might be a reason to switch markets & firm, but you've got to know that reason first. Doing it for preftiege is a bad idea, imo.

Your NY hate is 180 though.

rpupkin wrote:Let me get this straight: You have an offer from a firm that will pay you $160k/yr in a southern secondary market in which you want to practice. Why do you want to look elsewhere? I hope you realize that Vault rankings are based on surveys submitted disproportionately by corporate associate in NYC offices. Why do you care what they think? Why would you consider leaving what seems like a good situation so that you can go to another office--where you don't know the attorneys--and where you'll make the same salary in an area with a higher cost of living?

OP here. Thanks for your thoughts and sorry I should have been more clear. I was thinking career trajectory (i.e., exit options, etc.). I'm not interested in prestige for prestige's sake. Rather the opportunities that come with it. So I'm trying to determine if there is a bona fide difference between what I have and whats out there. Thanks.

Are you trying to trade up just for prestige?

If so that's pretty dumb

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:Let me get this straight: You have an offer from a firm that will pay you $160k/yr in a southern secondary market in which you want to practice. Why do you want to look elsewhere? I hope you realize that Vault rankings are based on surveys submitted disproportionately by corporate associate in NYC offices. Why do you care what they think? Why would you consider leaving what seems like a good situation so that you can go to another office--where you don't know the attorneys--and where you'll make the same salary in an area with a higher cost of living?

OP here. Thanks for your thoughts and sorry I should have been more clear. I was thinking career trajectory (i.e., exit options, etc.). I'm not interested in prestige for prestige's sake. Rather the opportunities that come with it. So I'm trying to determine if there is a bona fide difference between what I have and whats out there. Thanks.

Without saying what it is you want to exit into, you saying you wand to trade up for "exit opportunities" sounds like a nicer way f saying "I want to trade up for the prestige"

just take the offer. 160k in a secondary market that probably has much lower COL than any market you would "trade up" into is pretty sexy. Especially since it is the market you would want to stay in. The only time I could see trading up would be if it was at a firm in the same market that is hands down better, or at least better in the field you want to specialize in.

congrats on the offer!

You're competitive for federal clerkships; you should apply and, if you succeed, you will have a chance to interview with other firms and reexamine your options at that time.

baal hadad wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:Let me get this straight: You have an offer from a firm that will pay you $160k/yr in a southern secondary market in which you want to practice. Why do you want to look elsewhere? I hope you realize that Vault rankings are based on surveys submitted disproportionately by corporate associate in NYC offices. Why do you care what they think? Why would you consider leaving what seems like a good situation so that you can go to another office--where you don't know the attorneys--and where you'll make the same salary in an area with a higher cost of living?

OP here. Thanks for your thoughts and sorry I should have been more clear. I was thinking career trajectory (i.e., exit options, etc.). I'm not interested in prestige for prestige's sake. Rather the opportunities that come with it. So I'm trying to determine if there is a bona fide difference between what I have and whats out there. Thanks.

Without saying what it is you want to exit into, you saying you wand to trade up for "exit opportunities" sounds like a nicer way f saying "I want to trade up for the prestige"

OP here. If better long term opportunities come with having a more prestigious resume then sure I'm trying to trade up for prestige. What I'm trying to figure out whether the long term opportunities would make this effort worthwhile. What are your thoughts?

sundance95 wrote:You're competitive for federal clerkships; you should apply and, if you succeed, you will have a chance to interview with other firms and reexamine your options at that time.

OP here. Thank you for the suggestion. However, as a 3L now most of the 2015-16 clerkships are filled and I am focused on transactional work.

Pikappraider wrote:just take the offer. 160k in a secondary market that probably has much lower COL than any market you would "trade up" into is pretty sexy. Especially since it is the market you would want to stay in. The only time I could see trading up would be if it was at a firm in the same market that is hands down better, or at least better in the field you want to specialize in.

congrats on the offer!

OP here. Thank you!

Anonymous User wrote:

baal hadad wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:Let me get this straight: You have an offer from a firm that will pay you $160k/yr in a southern secondary market in which you want to practice. Why do you want to look elsewhere? I hope you realize that Vault rankings are based on surveys submitted disproportionately by corporate associate in NYC offices. Why do you care what they think? Why would you consider leaving what seems like a good situation so that you can go to another office--where you don't know the attorneys--and where you'll make the same salary in an area with a higher cost of living?

OP here. Thanks for your thoughts and sorry I should have been more clear. I was thinking career trajectory (i.e., exit options, etc.). I'm not interested in prestige for prestige's sake. Rather the opportunities that come with it. So I'm trying to determine if there is a bona fide difference between what I have and whats out there. Thanks.

Without saying what it is you want to exit into, you saying you wand to trade up for "exit opportunities" sounds like a nicer way f saying "I want to trade up for the prestige"

OP here. If better long term opportunities come with having a more prestigious resume then sure I'm trying to trade up for prestige. What I'm trying to figure out whether the long term opportunities would make this effort worthwhile. What are your thoughts?

Again, what long term opportunities are you trying to achieve

Can't answer w out even some tentative goals bro

Anonymous User wrote:I just received an offer from my 2L summer associate firm and I'm trying to decide if I should consider seeking to "trade up" (as I have seen some describe it on this site - unfortunately I couldn't find any precedent discussing the merits). Here is some context:

In short, I transferred to Michigan after finishing at the top of my 1L class at a T1 and was able to land big law (in a secondary southern market) with a V100 firm paying full market ($160K). I felt extremely lucky at the time to have landed this job and still do. However, after 2L I am at least top 5 top 10 percent at Michigan and can't help but think I may be selling myself short and am considering using my new credentials to try trading up. I understand that there are several major V20 and V10 firms that would consider hiring 3Ls (who have a standing offer) to supplement their incoming class (including several coming to OCI). However, I also understand these positions are tough to get. And I should clarify I am mainly interested in D.C. or one of the national firms in Houston (NY is out of the question) but I would consider other major warm-weather markets (e.g., LA, Dallas, SF).

Edit: I was thinking this would be a potentially good move for career trajectory reasons (i.e., exit options, etc.). I'm not interested in prestige for prestige's sake. Rather the opportunities that come with it. So I'm trying to determine if there is a bona fide difference between what I have and whats out there. Sorry I wasn't more clear initially.

Questions:
(1) Does anyone have experience with this?
(2) Does starting your career at a V10 or V20 make that big a difference over a regional V100 to make trying this worth it?
(3) Is there any chance my 2L SA firm would find out about this and rescind my offer?
(4) Any other thoughts are welcomed.

Lmao. Please say this in an SF firm interview.

baal hadad wrote: Can't answer w out even some tentative goals bro

OP here. In house.

Anonymous User wrote:

baal hadad wrote: Can't answer w out even some tentative goals bro

OP here. In house.

In house doing what

Also where

At a hospital? A bank? What?

.

brazleton wrote: To the idiots: prestige for prestige sake is a worthy response to someone concerned that their V32 is not a V25, but stop pretending that, in many cases, V10 is not a better place to start (in terms of career trajectory) than a V100.

Gee, thanks. Of course a V10 can be a better place to start than a V100 for many career trajectories. But OP has given no indication of what he wants out of a career. If, for example, OP would prefer to exit into his relatively small secondary market, then his "V100" might be better than the satellite office of a V10.

rpupkin wrote:

brazleton wrote: To the idiots: prestige for prestige sake is a worthy response to someone concerned that their V32 is not a V25, but stop pretending that, in many cases, V10 is not a better place to start (in terms of career trajectory) than a V100.

Gee, thanks. Of course a V10 can be a better place to start than a V100 for many career trajectories. But OP has given no indication of what he wants out of a career. If, for example, OP would prefer to exit into his relatively small secondary market, then his "V100" might be better than the satellite office of a V10.

This

.

rpupkin wrote:

brazleton wrote: To the idiots: prestige for prestige sake is a worthy response to someone concerned that their V32 is not a V25, but stop pretending that, in many cases, V10 is not a better place to start (in terms of career trajectory) than a V100.

Gee, thanks. Of course a V10 can be a better place to start than a V100 for many career trajectories. But OP has given no indication of what he wants out of a career. If, for example, OP would prefer to exit into his relatively small secondary market, then his "V100" might be better than the satellite office of a V10.

agreed; the problem with OP's post was that he/she framed it in vault terms, which is simply a prestige marker, as opposed to something a little more informed like, there are four or five firms in my current market that do higher caliber work/higher chambers band/ect than my current firm and I think I'm competitive, or alternatively, there are these firms I'm really interested in this market because they do X and I want to switch.

By the vault reasoning, you could leave Munger LA for White & Case to "trade up," or V&E Houston for Jones Day, when by all other considerations those are trades down in those markets.

brazleton wrote:

baal hadad wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

brazleton wrote: To the idiots: prestige for prestige sake is a worthy response to someone concerned that their V32 is not a V25, but stop pretending that, in many cases, V10 is not a better place to start (in terms of career trajectory) than a V100.

Gee, thanks. Of course a V10 can be a better place to start than a V100 for many career trajectories. But OP has given no indication of what he wants out of a career. If, for example, OP would prefer to exit into his relatively small secondary market, then his "V100" might be better than the satellite office of a V10.

This

And what if you are not totally sure what your exact goals are but you want, say, options? Would that be prestige for prestige sake?

Depends what options you want dingus

.

brazleton wrote: And what if you are not totally sure what your exact goals are but you want, say, options? Would that be prestige for prestige sake?

What are these abstract "options" you're talking about? You've got to have some context, particularly if, as in the OP's case, you have no interest at all in the NYC market.

To pick an an example from a non-NYC market, let's say you're in Silicon Valley and you've got a choice between "V100" Fenwick & West in Mountain View and "V5" Skadden in Palo Alto. If your goal is to maximize in-house exit options into tech companies, I think I'd rather be at Fenwick than Skadden. I could actually limit my "options" by going with the V5.

brazleton wrote:

jbagelboy wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

brazleton wrote: To the idiots: prestige for prestige sake is a worthy response to someone concerned that their V32 is not a V25, but stop pretending that, in many cases, V10 is not a better place to start (in terms of career trajectory) than a V100.

Gee, thanks. Of course a V10 can be a better place to start than a V100 for many career trajectories. But OP has given no indication of what he wants out of a career. If, for example, OP would prefer to exit into his relatively small secondary market, then his "V100" might be better than the satellite office of a V10.

agreed; the problem with OP's post was that he/she framed it in vault terms, which is simply a prestige marker, as opposed to something a little more informed like, there are four or five firms in my current market that do higher caliber work/higher chambers band/ect than my current firm and I think I'm competitive, or alternatively, there are these firms I'm really interested in this market because they do X and I want to switch.

By the vault reasoning, you could leave Munger LA for White & Case to "trade up," or V&E Houston for Jones Day, when by all other considerations those are trades down in those markets.

Come on man. You are cherry picking the worst scenario for using vault. Why can't we critique Vault appropriately without being ridiculous?

see tho, if I wasn't at work and attempting to be marginally productive I could point out dozens of these scenarios. these might be extreme examples but it's hardly a 'exception that proves the rule' kind of thing. vault is riddled with bullshit and really only serves as a proxy for NY

eta; see rpupkin just provided another

Someone should make a TLS guide to exit options. The common level of knowledge is seems to be near 0.