Doc Review to Permanent Position? Forum

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Fri May 27, 2016 1:27 am

What do you guys think about an ad for a prestigious mid-sized firm that says they are looking for an "independent contractor for about 9 months...for a large document review project starting immediately with the possibility of a permanent position after the project is complete."

Is doc review really a way into a firm's heart? Or do they just get used for the project and then done?

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Fri May 27, 2016 1:28 am

To my knowledge my firm has not ever, even once, hired a contract attorney into a full time partner track position.

Lacepiece23 · Post by **Lacepiece23** » Fri May 27, 2016 8:19 am

My firm just did it. They hired a guy to fill a need after being a doc review attorney for 5 years.

TLSModBot · Post by **TLSModBot** » Fri May 27, 2016 8:27 am

(Disclaimer: Am not a doc reviewer but worked with them and their associate/partner masters for about a decade as a discovery consultant. Exception to the rules below obviously exist - these are general points):

Doc Review looks bad on a resume. It will make future employers think you aren't a real lawyer or even capable of being one. It is very hard to become a permanent associate afterwards - anywhere. You *may* be able to get a staff attorney or project attorney role which is permanent but is A. not partner-track, B. permanently less lucrative than what even junior associates get, and C. still tends to require crushing amounts of work (the last point is really firm and role dependent, though).

Firms definitely do hire contract attorneys that are competent and work well with the team and existing systems. But it is NOT:

a. a way into a higher-functioning role. You will still be doing doc review and that is all they will likely think you are good for.

b. any more secure a job than a contract role other than the absence of a definitive end date. You are still first on the chopping block if work slows or times get tough

c. a way to get more "respect" from your resume. Law firms seem to treat their project attorneys little better than the temporary contract attorneys, although I guess the livestock you know is capable of producing is better than the ones you don't.

I'm not commenting on the validity of this hierarchy either way - just pointing out that it very much does exist at the large firms (I've personally seen it at a little over a dozen NY/Philly/DC firms - and have heard stories from project attorney friends/consultant colleagues from easily a dozen more firms).

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Fri May 27, 2016 10:36 am

Anonymous User wrote:What do you guys think about an ad for a prestigious mid-sized firm that says they are looking for an "independent contractor for about 9 months...for a large document review project starting immediately with the possibility of a permanent position after the project is complete."

Is doc review really a way into a firm's heart? Or do they just get used for the project and then done?

It's interesting that a "prestigious" firm included the language of "possibility of a perm position". Let's say you are the top person out of the whole lot and you gain full time employment with them - it will only be for doc review. Not for anything else.

Doc review is rarely a way into any firm's heart. Considering the job market, do it to get some extra cash.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Fri May 27, 2016 3:34 pm

It looks like they are hiring just one attorney for this project.

Can you mask the "doc review stigma" on your resume by just saying during these months you were solo, so "Law Offices of Anonymous User" and if you work on different litigation projects on the side, just say on your resume that you did litigation, writing, research, and also doc review?

kellyfrost · Post by **kellyfrost** » Fri May 27, 2016 4:01 pm

Instead of "Doc Review" on your resume, dress up the title by saying "Independent Contract Attorney" or "Supplementary Counsel."

TLSModBot · Post by **TLSModBot** » Fri May 27, 2016 4:04 pm

lol @ the idea of law firms being fooled by any masking attempt though. Like, for sure dress it up however you like (but DON'T LIE), but firms aren't stupid; they'll know or they'll ask what you did before they hire you.

20160810 · Post by **20160810** » Fri May 27, 2016 6:35 pm

It has certainly happened but it's unwise to assume it is likely to happen.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Fri May 27, 2016 8:04 pm

SBL wrote:It has certainly happened but it's unwise to assume it is likely to happen.

I agree with this. I'm at a v50ish firm. We've hired lots of doc review temps in the office. Only one turned into a full time associate, and he was pretty lucky. If I had to guess, here's why it worked for him: (1) he had the stats for our office, but graduated in 2012, so he didn't have a job; (2) the firm just landed a huge case and so it was instantly understaffed in the litigation group; (3) the dude's undergraduate degree and pre-law school experience was in the same industry as the case and the partners thought his experience could be valuable; (4) he was a super goodlooking and likeable guy; and (5) he did good as a doc review temp.

He's treated the same as all the other associates from his year and, as far as I know, he has the same (laughable) chance as partnership.

bearsfan23 · Post by **bearsfan23** » Fri May 27, 2016 8:27 pm

Capitol_Idea wrote:lol @ the idea of law firms being fooled by any masking attempt though. Like, for sure dress it up however you like (but DON'T LIE), but firms aren't stupid; they'll know or they'll ask what you did before they hire you.

Stop giving bad advice. You literally just graduated law school and aren't an attorney yet. I'm pretty sure you're out of your league here

TLSModBot · Post by **TLSModBot** » Fri May 27, 2016 8:29 pm

bearsfan23 wrote:
Capitol_Idea wrote:lol @ the idea of law firms being fooled by any masking attempt though. Like, for sure dress it up however you like (but DON'T LIE), but firms aren't stupid; they'll know or they'll ask what you did before they hire you.
Stop giving bad advice. You literally just graduated law school and aren't an attorney yet. I'm pretty sure you're out of your league here

Did you miss the part where I worked with numerous Biglaw firms in doc review (as a litigation consultant) for a decade? I have personally worked with a dozen large law firms for anywhere from 3 months to 3 years each(literally daily e-mails/calls with the associates on down - rarely with seniors ornpartners BC why would they deal with discovery), and made friends with a shit ton of contract attorneys, project attorneys, and staff attorneys who would (and HAVE) said exactly what I write above.

Edit: go fuck yourself with a razor blade you creepy piece of shit.

kellyfrost · Post by **kellyfrost** » Sat May 28, 2016 8:33 am

bearsfan23 wrote:
Capitol_Idea wrote:lol @ the idea of law firms being fooled by any masking attempt though. Like, for sure dress it up however you like (but DON'T LIE), but firms aren't stupid; they'll know or they'll ask what you did before they hire you.
Stop giving bad advice. You literally just graduated law school and aren't an attorney yet. I'm pretty sure you're out of your league here

I agree. That advice is bad. Don't listen to someone who isn't even licensed yet. Jesus Christ!

TLSModBot · Post by **TLSModBot** » Sat May 28, 2016 9:08 am

kellyfrost wrote:
bearsfan23 wrote:
Capitol_Idea wrote:lol @ the idea of law firms being fooled by any masking attempt though. Like, for sure dress it up however you like (but DON'T LIE), but firms aren't stupid; they'll know or they'll ask what you did before they hire you.
Stop giving bad advice. You literally just graduated law school and aren't an attorney yet. I'm pretty sure you're out of your league here
I agree. That advice is bad. Don't listen to someone who isn't even licensed yet. Jesus Christ!

This is a sad trolling attempt

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Sun May 29, 2016 4:06 pm

Yeah, I am wondering about this too. BI graduated in 2014, worked for a tiny (2 partner) firm for a year and a half before the partners split and laid me off and have been doing doc review on a 3 mo contract with a small firm. It's a high profile case and one of the partners seems to think they would have enough work for me for a year but I'm not sure it's smart for me to stay with the hope of an offer (because I generally really like the firm) or to just accept the first non-doc review offer (legal or otherwise) that comes my way (even if it's not perfect). The last 2 recent grads they hired as assocs started out doing doc review (and one of them just left to go to a new firm). I'm not sure they were treated any differently than other assocs (there are maybe 5 assocs). I am in a small market here and have been looking (no success) for a full time job in my current (small) market as well as DC (bc bar waive in and I have a free place to live). I'm wondering if it just makes more sense for me to move to DC and look for full time work there, but I don't want to jeopardize my chances with this firm (assuming they even exist). Any one have any idea at what point it makes sense to give up on a permanent offer and just pick up and move?

Doc Review to Permanent Position? Forum

Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?

Re: Doc Review to Permanent Position?