Top Law Schools

There is a lot of talk on TLS about how "vault doesn't matter" and that "chambers is the most important" for choosing a firm.

So, my question is, does it makes sense to choose midlaw over biglaw if the former is Band 1 on Chambers and the latter is unranked on chambers?

I'm having this dilemma. All my biglaw friends say that I shouldn't turn down biglaw because having a vault firm on your resume is crucial for career development and it would be stupid to pass up that opportunity. They also claim training will be better at a biglaw firm.

However, I'm very tempted to join the midlaw firm since they're very highly regarded in my desired practice area. I'll make less money but i'm not concerned about that.

I would like to hear more input.

which firm do you want to work at

Asscociate at DLPiper (V37)

also curious if anyone has thoughts on this.

Desert Fox wrote:Asscociate at DLPiper (V37)

read as "ass-cock-iate," some of your finer work

Anonymous User wrote:also curious if anyone has thoughts on this.

If chambers is accurate ( i have no idea) and you want to, and can, stay in this practice area ( no idea) then your exit options will likely be better at the firm that is better at your practice area.

OP here. What about the issue of skipping out on biglaw? Is that going to hurt my lateral prospects?

I don't doubt that most people coming out of the midlaw firm's practice group do well, but they also all tend to have biglaw experience.

In other words, is biglaw a required line item on a resume for future success?

If the midlaw firm really is nationally one of the most highly regarded firms in the given practice area (and a Band 1 Chambers rank would suggest it is), then the value of "biglaw" as a brand is pretty much irrelevant. Anyone looking to hire in your particular field will have heard of and respect the midlaw firm you are considering. However, there are other important considerations, such as whether you will be able to join and stay in that particular practice area at the midlaw firm, that we can't answer (at least without knowing the practice area/firm).

Also, it surprises me a bit that a midlaw firm would be Band 1 on something on Chambers. Is this IP- or tax-related? Those are the main fields where smaller firms sometimes shine.

Anonymous User wrote:If the midlaw firm really is nationally one of the most highly regarded firms in the given practice area (and a Band 1 Chambers rank would suggest it is), then the value of "biglaw" as a brand is pretty much irrelevant. Anyone looking to hire in your particular field will have heard of and respect the midlaw firm you are considering. However, there are other important considerations, such as whether you will be able to join and stay in that particular practice area at the midlaw firm, that we can't answer (at least without knowing the practice area/firm).

Also, it surprises me a bit that a midlaw firm would be Band 1 on something on Chambers. Is this IP- or tax-related? Those are the main fields where smaller firms sometimes shine.

There are band 1 firms with like 5 attorneys. A firm that's band 1 in real estate in Albuquerque is not necessarily going to have a national reputation.

you should pm some of the actual lawyers here with the firms you are choosing between. in general, i think your exist options from the biglaw firm will be better. but there are lots of exceptions and qualificiations to this. in general, midlaw is a MUCH better place to work and people don't really need exit options because they emphasize it as a place to actually develop an spend one's entire career.

but again, very general advice that varies firm to firm and practice to practice so tread with caution.

OP here. The firm is Band 1 nationwide, alongside biglaw firms. I don't want to say more than that. But midlaw may not be the correct term. I don't even really know what the definition of midlaw is. But its not a Vault firm.

JohannDeMann wrote:you should pm some of the actual lawyers here with the firms you are choosing between. in general, i think your exist options from the biglaw firm will be better. but there are lots of exceptions and qualificiations to this. in general, midlaw is a MUCH better place to work and people don't really need exit options because they emphasize it as a place to actually develop an spend one's entire career.

but again, very general advice that varies firm to firm and practice to practice so tread with caution.

Yea this is what I am concerned about. I'd be interested in hearing from others.

While the QOL of "midlaw" is appealing, I can't know that i'm going to want to stay there forever so lateral options are still a concern.

Anonymous User wrote:However, there are other important considerations, such as whether you will be able to join and stay in that particular practice area at the midlaw firm, that we can't answer (at least without knowing the practice area/firm).

Can you elaborate on this? How will I know/inquire as to whether I can stay in a particular practice area?

Jay2716 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:If the midlaw firm really is nationally one of the most highly regarded firms in the given practice area (and a Band 1 Chambers rank would suggest it is), then the value of "biglaw" as a brand is pretty much irrelevant. Anyone looking to hire in your particular field will have heard of and respect the midlaw firm you are considering. However, there are other important considerations, such as whether you will be able to join and stay in that particular practice area at the midlaw firm, that we can't answer (at least without knowing the practice area/firm).

Also, it surprises me a bit that a midlaw firm would be Band 1 on something on Chambers. Is this IP- or tax-related? Those are the main fields where smaller firms sometimes shine.

There are band 1 firms with like 5 attorneys. A firm that's band 1 in real estate in Albuquerque is not necessarily going to have a national reputation.

Band 1 in Albuquerque is not the same as Band 1 nationwide.

Anonymous User wrote:

Jay2716 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:If the midlaw firm really is nationally one of the most highly regarded firms in the given practice area (and a Band 1 Chambers rank would suggest it is), then the value of "biglaw" as a brand is pretty much irrelevant. Anyone looking to hire in your particular field will have heard of and respect the midlaw firm you are considering. However, there are other important considerations, such as whether you will be able to join and stay in that particular practice area at the midlaw firm, that we can't answer (at least without knowing the practice area/firm).

Also, it surprises me a bit that a midlaw firm would be Band 1 on something on Chambers. Is this IP- or tax-related? Those are the main fields where smaller firms sometimes shine.

There are band 1 firms with like 5 attorneys. A firm that's band 1 in real estate in Albuquerque is not necessarily going to have a national reputation.

Band 1 in Albuquerque is not the same as Band 1 nationwide.

Right, that was my point. OP just said "band 1" and that could have meant anything. My point was saying "band 1" is worthless without context, just like saying "vault" is worthless without context.

ETA- and the poster I was responding to didn't seem to realize "chambers band 1" could mean different things.

Jay2716 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Jay2716 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:If the midlaw firm really is nationally one of the most highly regarded firms in the given practice area (and a Band 1 Chambers rank would suggest it is), then the value of "biglaw" as a brand is pretty much irrelevant. Anyone looking to hire in your particular field will have heard of and respect the midlaw firm you are considering. However, there are other important considerations, such as whether you will be able to join and stay in that particular practice area at the midlaw firm, that we can't answer (at least without knowing the practice area/firm).

Also, it surprises me a bit that a midlaw firm would be Band 1 on something on Chambers. Is this IP- or tax-related? Those are the main fields where smaller firms sometimes shine.

There are band 1 firms with like 5 attorneys. A firm that's band 1 in real estate in Albuquerque is not necessarily going to have a national reputation.

Band 1 in Albuquerque is not the same as Band 1 nationwide.

Right, that was my point. OP just said "band 1" and that could have meant anything. My point was saying "band 1" is worthless without context, just like saying "vault" is worthless without context.

ETA- and the poster I was responding to didn't seem to realize "chambers band 1" could mean different things.

OP here. I already said it was Band 1 Nationwide so i'm not sure why we're still talking about band 1 in albuquerque.

Anonymous User wrote:OP here. The firm is Band 1 nationwide, alongside biglaw firms. I don't want to say more than that. But midlaw may not be the correct term. I don't even really know what the definition of midlaw is. But its not a Vault firm.

JohannDeMann wrote:you should pm some of the actual lawyers here with the firms you are choosing between. in general, i think your exist options from the biglaw firm will be better. but there are lots of exceptions and qualificiations to this. in general, midlaw is a MUCH better place to work and people don't really need exit options because they emphasize it as a place to actually develop an spend one's entire career.

but again, very general advice that varies firm to firm and practice to practice so tread with caution.

Yea this is what I am concerned about. I'd be interested in hearing from others.

While the QOL of "midlaw" is appealing, I can't know that i'm going to want to stay there forever so lateral options are still a concern.

Anonymous User wrote:However, there are other important considerations, such as whether you will be able to join and stay in that particular practice area at the midlaw firm, that we can't answer (at least without knowing the practice area/firm).

Can you elaborate on this? How will I know/inquire as to whether I can stay in a particular practice area?

Well if you don't want to say more than that then noone can give you specific advice. Just compare the clients of the two firms. That should give you an idea about exit options. If one firm is doing work for Walgreens, JPMorgan, and Google and the other is doing work Dick's Sporting Goods, Quintiles, etc then you have a very basic idea. But again, this depends on the work being done and practice area.

Impossible to answer this question without more information. Don't even know if it's litigation or transactional. Pointless thread.

And that's not even mentioning that you're already anon. Lol.