Top Law Schools

Hey guys,

My background is as follows: T20 top 15% grades. 2 years regional big law corporate & tech trans, 2 years in-house at a middle size publicly traded company. I handle mostly technology and data privacy work along with some corporate work.

I am thinking about going back to a law firm and I've gotten a decent traction at a couple of big law firms.

I actually like the people that I work with and I am pretty happy about my pay. The main reason why I want to go back is so that I can work on more sophisticated transactions and learn more about the law. Occasionally my work gets very mundane and boring. Even after going back to a firm, I think eventually I would like to go back to in-house. I think that having more big law experience will probably allow me to get a higher position in-house later on in my career either as an assistant general counsel or other VP level position. Does that make sense?

Do people have a negative view of someone who goes from big law - in-house - big law and then back in-house again?

Anonymous User wrote:Do people have a negative view of someone who goes from big law - in-house - big law and then back in-house again?

Maybe. I think the problem is that the people hiring are likely to be asking themselves, are we OK with spending the time and effort training the guy on how our firm does things, when they're likely to bail on us in a few years? Obviously the attrition rate if BigLaw is pretty high, and they are expecting some people to leave the firm each year, but you're coming in already tagged with "I'm more likely than the average associate to bail on you in a few years." You've admitted as much in your post. After all, from a BigLaw attorney perspective, some will perceive anyone who leaves BigLaw as someone who couldn't handle the BigLaw lifestyle, and that if you couldn't handle it the first time, what makes this time different?

That's not to say it's not possible or that you shouldn't try. But be aware some people might have some of those perceptions you need to dispel and overcome (although from your own admission in this case, their perception is accurate, so it might be more difficult to do so).

Of course, if you have some unique skills or connections, all of this might be irrelevant.

Makes sense. I was thinking given that I get a big law job again. I was wondering more about going from law firm to in-house again for the second time how that would be viewed.

OP I don't think so. Most people I know who have come back to a firm after being in-house have been placed at a lower class level at the firm but have had no problem exiting (soonest I saw was about 25 months) back into an in-house role.

I'm just debating which path is easier to getting to higher positions inhouse. Going back to biglaw to get more experience or just waiting it out inhouse and moving to a separate inhouse company.