Top Law Schools

Looking for some advice. I'm sitting on a few V-50 offers and would like to know what data points I should look for before deciding.

Should the focus be on Chambers Bands? Client list? Lock-step?

Or is purely a gut decision based on where you thought you "clicked"

Sounds cliché, but mostly the people (whether or not you can envision yourself working with them) and a combination of strength in practice areas you're interested in (so chambers band rankings)

IMO, think about you. What do you want to get out of the firm? This usually means mainly training rather than money. Does the firm deal with what you're interested in? How are tasks assigned? Free market v. non free market and everything in between. Is there a rotation system? I think pigeonholing could be one of the worst things that could happen to you if your really don't like what you do.

OP here.

What about PPP, or Partner:Associate ratio? Does that matter at all?

Anonymous User wrote:OP here.

What about PPP, or Partner:Associate ratio? Does that matter at all?

My personal opinion is that PPP/Leverage should not matter when looking at a firm as an entry level. Leverage cuts both ways in terms of whether it's "good" or not and doesn't speak to typical staffing and isn't consistent across groups. You should care about a firm's financial health but PPP isn't a great proxy for that.

Is chambers band rating more meaningful than vault specific area ranking? Specifically I am interested in IP litigation and prosecution rankings. There are also corporate counsel, etc a variety of rankings out there.

Also, should I consider ranking nationwide or regionally as well. Vault has those regional ranking as well.

mvp99 wrote:IMO, think about you. What do you want to get out of the firm? This usually means mainly training rather than money. Does the firm deal with what you're interested in? How are tasks assigned? Free market v. non free market and everything in between. Is there a rotation system? I think pigeonholing could be one of the worst things that could happen to you if your really don't like what you do.

What do you mean by free market v. non free market?

Having recently lateraled, these are the things I would focus on personally if I could do it again:

Practice group strength - what do you want to do? Just because a firm has an A+ reputation generally doesn't mean that they'll have the type of work that you want to do. Chambers is a good start, though not perfect.

Free market vs Top-down staffing: IMO free market staffing is awful, though it's hard to know whether you'll feel the same way without actually being at a firm.

And of course the usual things (compensation, hours expectations, "fit," general financial performance, etc.)

I would not look at partnership profits, partnership structure, or partnership chances at all except to the extent those things bleed into other categories.

Anonymous User wrote:Having recently lateraled, these are the things I would focus on personally if I could do it again:

Free market vs Top-down staffing: IMO free market staffing is awful, though it's hard to know whether you'll feel the same way without actually being at a firm.

So much this. I thought free market was going to be great. I thought that I'd have my pick of people to work with, and that I wouldn't get stuck working for awful people because I could control my own destiny. Well that only really works if your firm is so busy that every associate is indispensable. Instead, I find myself always fighting to stay busy and stressing because I don't know where the next assignment will come from or whether work will dry up.

I'd imagine if we were not free market I'd just do the work assigned to me. That would reduce so much stress.