Top Law Schools

Beginning to write my note for LawReview/Journal, and I'm wondering what effect my topic could have on future career prospects/advancement prospects. I have a job with a top firm lined up next summer. Assuming that I get an offer after the summer, could my topic ever come back to haunt me? Like will partners or clients shun me in any way lol?

I am writing a paper that essentially argues for a curtailment of corporate rights in one VERY narrow sense, applying only to one VERY narrow type of corporation (I don't want to get into detail and out myself). I am taking more a theoretical civ pro approach to the paper than a policy-driven, "anti-corporate," mindset (I'm not remotely anti-corporate, I know exactly what type of clients I will be serving as a lawyer in that regard), but the result would indeed open these types of corporations up to a new type of liability.

Any input is appreciated. Thanks.

lol

DportIA wrote:lol

can you elaborate? lol

Anonymous User wrote:Beginning to write my note for LawReview/Journal, and I'm wondering what effect my topic could have on future career prospects/advancement prospects. I have a job with a top firm lined up next summer. Assuming that I get an offer after the summer, could my topic ever come back to haunt me? Like will partners or clients shun me in any way lol?

I am writing a paper that essentially argues for a curtailment of corporate rights in one VERY narrow sense, applying only to one VERY narrow type of corporation (I don't want to get into detail and out myself). I am taking more a theoretical civ pro approach to the paper than a policy-driven, "anti-corporate," mindset (I'm not remotely anti-corporate, I know exactly what type of clients I will be serving as a lawyer in that regard), but the result would indeed open these types of corporations up to a new type of liability.

Any input is appreciated. Thanks.

Yes, the corporations will be very upset when Important People read your note and then change the law.

I was on LR board and had a note published; I say that only so you will trust me when I say that law reviews don't matter. Academics are the only people who care about them at all.

This is a pretty weak humblebrag.

sundance95 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Beginning to write my note for LawReview/Journal, and I'm wondering what effect my topic could have on future career prospects/advancement prospects. I have a job with a top firm lined up next summer. Assuming that I get an offer after the summer, could my topic ever come back to haunt me? Like will partners or clients shun me in any way lol?

I am writing a paper that essentially argues for a curtailment of corporate rights in one VERY narrow sense, applying only to one VERY narrow type of corporation (I don't want to get into detail and out myself). I am taking more a theoretical civ pro approach to the paper than a policy-driven, "anti-corporate," mindset (I'm not remotely anti-corporate, I know exactly what type of clients I will be serving as a lawyer in that regard), but the result would indeed open these types of corporations up to a new type of liability.

Any input is appreciated. Thanks.

Yes, the corporations will be very upset when Important People read your note and then change the law.

I was on LR board and had a note published; I say that only so you will trust me when I say that law reviews don't matter. Academics are the only people who care about them at all.

Yeah I figured no one reads them, but still. It was just a hypothetical. Would rather know now than find out the hard way later on I guess.

ClubberLang wrote:This is a pretty weak humblebrag.

How is it humblebragging on alegal employment forum when someone says they have a job? OP didn't say what firm, what "V range," or anything. He did say "top firm" but "top firms" are the one who deal the most with corporate clients, so I think it was relevant. People on here get butthurt really easily lately.

True fact: You could be a goddamn card-carrying Communist and firms wouldn't care as long as you bill big numbers.

Actually do know of a situation where someone wrote a topic on a particular area of law and then their biglaw firm argued against such position on behalf of a client in a litigation matter. Long story short, it's arguable about whether it "hurt" that persons career prospect, but they were immediately pulled off the matter after a messy situation. I don't think the firm was "upset" but the client was... so whether that is imputed to the firm and the anger onto the associate is beyond me.

that sounds apocryphal

patogordo wrote:that sounds apocryphal

This.

In that scenario the associate sounds like a huge asset, not a liability; he or she would have a ton of beforehand knowledge of the arguments on both sides and relevant authorities.

What's the downside, the other lawyer telling the judge "lol ur honor opposing counsel once wrote the opposite, herp?" I can't imagine a judge thinking too much of the lawyer that did that; everyone understands that we're hired guns.

sundance95 wrote:

patogordo wrote:that sounds apocryphal

This.

In that scenario the associate sounds like a huge asset, not a liability; he or she would have a ton of beforehand knowledge of the arguments on both sides and relevant authorities.

yea, exactly. also not sure how the issue would ever come up in the case. it's not relevant and not a conflict.

Call it what you want - just saying what happened. Client found out and got mad as fuck, called firm wanted him OFF, firm obviously obliges and client got pissed bc this assoc had lots of knowledge of case already and did a lot of work on it.

Everyone speculating about the practicality in court you're all wasting your time. None of that shit matters. All that matters is client got mad as fuck.

Love everyone talking about the practicality like him knowing the arguments and being an asset. LOL at a biglaw partner telling a client he's an asset after client says they want him off the case lmao

Wtf are you even talking about? The client got mad because an associate was familiar with the topic area? You're anon, just realize that you passed on an obviously fake story and disappear into the ether.

patogordo wrote:Wtf are you even talking about? The client got mad because an associate was familiar with the topic area? You're anon, just realize that you passed on an obviously fake story and disappear into the ether.

Anon bc it'd out me to ppl familiar to the story idiot. Not a fake story and your accusations are baseless sorry you don't understand? Client found out with like a simple search of the associate, saw the note got outraged an associate who took a contrary position was repping them. Keep on thinking everyone's rational though... it'll help u go far in life

Sounds like a lucrative client, definitely base your decision to publish on that edge case

Anonymous User wrote:LOL at a biglaw partner telling a client he's an asset after client says they want him off the case lmao

LOL at idea of client being aware of an associate's existence, let alone said's associate publication citation, let alone looking up that citation in order to read and understand the substance of the associate's argument.

Clients are that dumb

Use some common sense. If you want to be a PD don't write a note on the Sentencing Guidelines being too lax. If you plan to defend NPEs, don't write on how patent trolls are undermining the IP rights regime.

You never know when someone will be thorough in their research. Having opposing counsel drop a see, e.g. your publication isn't the greatest feeling. (Yes, I have seen attorney's articles cited this way.) It also looks ridiculous to have an article completely antithetical to your practice on your bio (and really, the only benefit of publishing is to have something to take up that white space, so it would be a shame to not list it).

sundance95 wrote:True fact: You could be a goddamn card-carrying Communist and firms wouldn't care as long as you bill big numbers.

Can confirm. Have mentioned Marx in every paper I've written in law school. Will be working for a V5 next year.