Top Law Schools

Sorry if this has already been addressed, but I just wanted some clarification on "non-partner track" positions. Does this mean that those people will never be considered for a partner or just that just affect compensation structure? I know it may vary by firm, but I'd like to know whether it is worth pursuing or is a potential dead end move (i.e. doc review).

Never say never, but it's extremely unlikely at most firms.

doc review sounds like a dead-end gig but there may be some hope for staff attorney positions http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=259086

You will always be considered for partner if you are bringing in work.

It is extremely hard to bring in work in litigation. I think it might be easier for corporate (?).

In other words, once you get the "of counsel" label in litigation, you're basically stuck with it for life.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:You will always be considered for partner if you are bringing in work.

It is extremely hard to bring in work in litigation. I think it might be easier for corporate (?).

In other words, once you get the "of counsel" label in litigation, you're basically stuck with it for life.

Of Counsel seems like an awesome gig for someone who (1) likes doing substantive litigation work, (2) doesn't mind making a good salary but substantially less than partners, and (3) would rather not have the stress of having to bring in a lot of business. I am personally really interested in this track for these reasons. What are the downsides I am not seeing? (I have already thought about how these positions might be more prone to layoffs in bad times since you are basically an over-paid associate...)

patentlitigatrix wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:You will always be considered for partner if you are bringing in work.

It is extremely hard to bring in work in litigation. I think it might be easier for corporate (?).

In other words, once you get the "of counsel" label in litigation, you're basically stuck with it for life.

Of Counsel seems like an awesome gig for someone who (1) likes doing substantive litigation work, (2) doesn't mind making a good salary but substantially less than partners, and (3) would rather not have the stress of having to bring in a lot of business. I am personally really interested in this track for these reasons. What are the downsides I am not seeing? (I have already thought about how these positions might be more prone to layoffs in bad times since you are basically an over-paid associate...)

Big Law hours for life. At least when partners do it they making 1M+.

WeeBey wrote:

patentlitigatrix wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:You will always be considered for partner if you are bringing in work.

It is extremely hard to bring in work in litigation. I think it might be easier for corporate (?).

In other words, once you get the "of counsel" label in litigation, you're basically stuck with it for life.

Of Counsel seems like an awesome gig for someone who (1) likes doing substantive litigation work, (2) doesn't mind making a good salary but substantially less than partners, and (3) would rather not have the stress of having to bring in a lot of business. I am personally really interested in this track for these reasons. What are the downsides I am not seeing? (I have already thought about how these positions might be more prone to layoffs in bad times since you are basically an over-paid associate...)

Big Law hours for life. At least when partners do it they making 1M+.

Exactly, I think you only make what 300k/400k? per year but you're on the beck and call every partner and working terrible hours for life. I don't know why anyone would want to be of counsel at a large firm anymore.

To be fair, I'm not sure why anyone even wants to be partner at a big law firm - on average they seem to lead terrible lives.