Is it worth it to leave a V20 if I can't get my practice group of choice?
Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2016 11:27 am
I'm a 2015 grad doing litigation at a V20. Problem is, I wanted tax. Tax wasn't even on my radar until 3L, when I took Corporate Tax, so my summer was 100% litigation. I tried to get a tax spot, but my firm understandably gave limited tax positions to folks that the tax people already knew.
Right now I'm pretty unhappy, but I don't think I have any attractive options. My firm has all but said that transferring to the tax department won't happen. I have applied to NYU's LLM, but that would be a huge expense both in terms of tuition and in terms of opportunity cost. I've also talked to headhunters and even put some lateral apps out, but everyone wants more than a stub year's experience. I could wait and try to lateral after a year or two, but how much will further experience in litigation change anything?
Or, of course, I could just stick it out at my current firm and be a litigator. I've convinced myself that the main thing I don't like about litigation is the uneven/unpredictable workflow. I also have no desire to ever be the guy in court or the person making high level strategic decisions: I'd rather just do research and writing, and any amount of responsibility scares the shit out of me. I basically have nothing to work towards in litigation because any advancement would draw me into stuff I just don't want to do. Based on reading TLS threads, tax wouldn't have at least some of these problems and, based on my experience in class, it would be more interesting too.
So which option is the best? I think at this point I'm leaning toward the LLM over staying at my firm (I don't think lateraling into tax will ever be realistic), but maybe that's stupid. Maybe it's all just biglaw and I will be unhappy wherever I end up.
Right now I'm pretty unhappy, but I don't think I have any attractive options. My firm has all but said that transferring to the tax department won't happen. I have applied to NYU's LLM, but that would be a huge expense both in terms of tuition and in terms of opportunity cost. I've also talked to headhunters and even put some lateral apps out, but everyone wants more than a stub year's experience. I could wait and try to lateral after a year or two, but how much will further experience in litigation change anything?
Or, of course, I could just stick it out at my current firm and be a litigator. I've convinced myself that the main thing I don't like about litigation is the uneven/unpredictable workflow. I also have no desire to ever be the guy in court or the person making high level strategic decisions: I'd rather just do research and writing, and any amount of responsibility scares the shit out of me. I basically have nothing to work towards in litigation because any advancement would draw me into stuff I just don't want to do. Based on reading TLS threads, tax wouldn't have at least some of these problems and, based on my experience in class, it would be more interesting too.
So which option is the best? I think at this point I'm leaning toward the LLM over staying at my firm (I don't think lateraling into tax will ever be realistic), but maybe that's stupid. Maybe it's all just biglaw and I will be unhappy wherever I end up.