Top Law Schools

I realize this is an iteration of the Plaintiff v. Biglaw thread but I think it is distinct enough to be worth asking. The smaller firm I'm considering wouldn't really be an "elite" firm in that it doesn't really have a national presence. It is very focused in one area and has a lot of big clients in within that field.

What are the downsides to going to a small, specialized litigation firm over going to a more generalized Biglaw litigation group? The smaller firm deals almost exclusively with the industry I'm interested in but I don't know how the choice would play out long term.

If the eventual goal is in-house, would working for a smaller firm where much more client contact would be available and where you'd get more and quicker real experience be better than Biglaw? Would the "prestige" of a Biglaw firm trump all of that when it comes to making the transition?

Any other major upsides or downsides to either option?

Don't do lit if you want in house.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Don't do lit if you want in house.

At least, not general lit. Things like employment litigation will lead to in-house options, but thats partly because labor & employment practice has a big counseling aspect to it that goes along with the litigation.

Is it that bad for lit to go in house? Maybe it is industry specific but I know that in the industry I'm looking at, every major company has a decently sized in house litigation group. They use them both to direct regular litigation and for international arbitration/dispute resolution.