Top Law Schools

Current 2L SA, stuck deciding between litigation and a transactional group as to what to practice when I come back. How did you guys weigh different factors when making this decision (getting along with people, the substance of the work, hours, prestige of the group, exit options, etc). Could really use some help, thanks!

Anonymous User wrote:Current 2L SA, stuck deciding between litigation and a transactional group as to what to practice when I come back. How did you guys weigh different factors when making this decision (getting along with people, the substance of the work, hours, prestige of the group, exit options, etc). Could really use some help, thanks!

lol, it depends on your firm.

This is a tough question. Because who you work with is probably the most important factor to whether you like the job However, picking a practice because you like a certain group of people is not always the best move. Associates come and go in big law. Half the associates you know as a SA will probably not be there when you start (or will be gone by the time you are through your first year). Second, partners are hard to judge when you are a SA. Everyone seems fun and nice.... but you really don't get to see someone's personality until you start working with them.

Thus I would suggest picking the practice area you like better. (1) it will probably be your practice area for life (even if/when you leave the firm), and (2) you can hopefully find enjoyment in the work you do even if the people are not the best.

Which transactional practice group are you thinking about? If it's like bankruptcy or antitrust, then you should def follow the above advice about choosing which one you like the best. If it's between lit and M&A, then you should probably do some more introspective thinking about what kind of legal work, broadly speaking, you are interested in.

deepseapartners wrote:Which transactional practice group are you thinking about? If it's like bankruptcy or antitrust, then you should def follow the above advice about choosing which one you like the best. If it's between lit and M&A, then you should probably do some more introspective thinking about what kind of legal work, broadly speaking, you are interested in.

Why the difference between bankruptcy and M&A? Just curious

Anonymous User wrote:

deepseapartners wrote:Which transactional practice group are you thinking about? If it's like bankruptcy or antitrust, then you should def follow the above advice about choosing which one you like the best. If it's between lit and M&A, then you should probably do some more introspective thinking about what kind of legal work, broadly speaking, you are interested in.

Why the difference between bankruptcy and M&A? Just curious

I think the question is more of an, are you debating between broad types of law, like corporate and lit, or groups within one of the broader sets, like tax vs. employee benefits?

Anonymous User wrote:

deepseapartners wrote:Which transactional practice group are you thinking about? If it's like bankruptcy or antitrust, then you should def follow the above advice about choosing which one you like the best. If it's between lit and M&A, then you should probably do some more introspective thinking about what kind of legal work, broadly speaking, you are interested in.

Why the difference between bankruptcy and M&A? Just curious

I assume it because bankruptcy is a specialty group that kind of does its own thing in most firms. M&a is more just general corporate. Bankruptcy involves much different activities like litigation-ish stuff and is code based. So basically if you pick bk you are picking a more niche specialty area whereas m&a has a more general applicability to other corp groups

Anonymous User wrote:Current 2L SA, stuck deciding between litigation and a transactional group as to what to practice when I come back. How did you guys weigh different factors when making this decision (getting along with people, the substance of the work, hours, prestige of the group, exit options, etc). Could really use some help, thanks!

It's weird that you're asking us about the bolded when you work at the firm and we don't.

Here's my suggestion: Over the final weeks of your SA, really try to figure out if you'd prefer lit or trans. They're very different. I would've been absolutely miserable as a transactional associate, but I know folks who feel the opposite.

If you don't have a preference by the end of the summer, that's actually a pretty bad sign, but I guess at that point I'd pick trans because the in-house exit options are generally better.

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Current 2L SA, stuck deciding between litigation and a transactional group as to what to practice when I come back. How did you guys weigh different factors when making this decision (getting along with people, the substance of the work, hours, prestige of the group, exit options, etc). Could really use some help, thanks!

It's weird that you're asking us about the bolded when you work at the firm and we don't.

Here's my suggestion: Over the final weeks of your SA, really try to figure out if you'd prefer lit or trans. They're very different. I would've been absolutely miserable as a transactional associate, but I know folks who feel the opposite.

If you don't have a preference by the end of the summer, that's actually a pretty bad sign, but I guess at that point I'd pick trans because the in-house exit options are generally better.

This is interesting. I am preparing for OCI right now and some people are suggesting I really pick either lit or transaction before interview and show some flexibility within those categories. Does it hurt chances to be open to either (with a solid explanation as to why)?

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Current 2L SA, stuck deciding between litigation and a transactional group as to what to practice when I come back. How did you guys weigh different factors when making this decision (getting along with people, the substance of the work, hours, prestige of the group, exit options, etc). Could really use some help, thanks!

It's weird that you're asking us about the bolded when you work at the firm and we don't.

Here's my suggestion: Over the final weeks of your SA, really try to figure out if you'd prefer lit or trans. They're very different. I would've been absolutely miserable as a transactional associate, but I know folks who feel the opposite.

If you don't have a preference by the end of the summer, that's actually a pretty bad sign, but I guess at that point I'd pick trans because the in-house exit options are generally better.

Re bolded: Is this because it prob means you're gonna hate your job either way? If so, then uh oh..

nrthwst4now wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Current 2L SA, stuck deciding between litigation and a transactional group as to what to practice when I come back. How did you guys weigh different factors when making this decision (getting along with people, the substance of the work, hours, prestige of the group, exit options, etc). Could really use some help, thanks!

It's weird that you're asking us about the bolded when you work at the firm and we don't.

Here's my suggestion: Over the final weeks of your SA, really try to figure out if you'd prefer lit or trans. They're very different. I would've been absolutely miserable as a transactional associate, but I know folks who feel the opposite.

If you don't have a preference by the end of the summer, that's actually a pretty bad sign, but I guess at that point I'd pick trans because the in-house exit options are generally better.

This is interesting. I am preparing for OCI right now and some people are suggesting I really pick either lit or transaction before interview and show some flexibility within those categories. Does it hurt chances to be open to either (with a solid explanation as to why)?

It'll only hurt your chances if you say you want to do M&A at Boies or Quinn, but that's more of a general (but extremely important) point to remember what each firm you interview with mostly does or doesn't do.

Word on the street is Cov LA desperate for untrained M&A talent.

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Current 2L SA, stuck deciding between litigation and a transactional group as to what to practice when I come back. How did you guys weigh different factors when making this decision (getting along with people, the substance of the work, hours, prestige of the group, exit options, etc). Could really use some help, thanks!

It's weird that you're asking us about the bolded when you work at the firm and we don't.

Here's my suggestion: Over the final weeks of your SA, really try to figure out if you'd prefer lit or trans. They're very different. I would've been absolutely miserable as a transactional associate, but I know folks who feel the opposite.

If you don't have a preference by the end of the summer, that's actually a pretty bad sign, but I guess at that point I'd pick trans because the in-house exit options are generally better.

I don't think OP is asking what the bolded is like at his/her firm, I think OP is asking how important each of those things are and how much each should influence a decision. As in, if lit has awesome people and prestige but terrible hours and you're doing doc reviews for years...but corporate has terrible people but manageable hours, how do you weigh the two?

OP, I take it you legitimately did not prefer one over the other during your summer? Did you take work from both groups? Was there a favorite person you enjoyed working with? A favorite assignment you got? A specific case/matter that you found yourself wishing you could continue to work on?

How is it possible to not have a preference between two vastly different practices in which the day to day work is completely different?

FascinatedWanderer wrote:How is it possible to not have a preference between two vastly different practices in which the day to day work is completely different?

I guess the answer is to have an equal interest in two vastly different practices in which the day to day work is completely different?