Top Law Schools

Removed

Generally not done, especially with only 2 years at local prosecutor's office. Combine that with you jumping ship from a big firm after only six months, I'd say your chances are approximately zero until you handle some complex, high profile felony cases that really show off your skills.

Networking is probably your only shot right now, and even with a lot of hustle there, I don't see it happening anytime soon.

Anonymous User wrote:Generally not done, especially with only 2 years at local prosecutor's office. Combine that with you jumping ship from a big firm after only six months, I'd say your chances are approximately zero until you handle some complex, high profile felony cases that really show off your skills.

Networking is probably your only shot right now, and even with a lot of hustle there, I don't see it happening anytime soon.

Removed

I have seen several examples of people who otherwise come from a biglaw mold (requisite schools, clerkships, former biglaw firm) leave private practice for federal prosecution (USAO, main Justice, JAG) and are allowed to return. I've also seen a couple of other examples of people with the same background return to biglaw after stints as a federal public defender or appellate/habeas attorney. I know of one example of someone - again, with the same pre-criminal background - who went to a DA's office and came back.

I think the challenge is twofold:

1. You don't have the background that would make you competitive for biglaw in the first place.

2. Your trial experience cuts two ways. In theory, you've got an uncharacteristic and unusually desirable skillset. But you won't get to use it much, if at all, as a biglaw associate. And arguably not even as a partner. If you've done 115 trials in two years, the types of trials you're doing really have nothing to do with the work that we do in biglaw: they're small, simple, and criminal. Most firms think that any advantage there is to having criminal court experience can be obtained in spades by the 3-4 month rotations they pay for you to do at the DA's office as a midlevel or senior associate (which usually leads to 5-10 trials). So I doubt you'd be seen as having outsize relevant experience. If you are perceived that way, it may also trigger partner insecurities because I guarantee you none of them have 115 trials. Not even the ones who have spent years at a USAO (and who are believed to have relevant experience if they did white collar felonies.) But whether or not your experience is perceived as relevant, it will make you look like a flight risk: you already left one civil litigation firm in six months, *and* you appear to have a taste for in-court trial experience. So you may well leave after a year or two when you're barely allowed in the courtroom. More than one of the people I listed above in fact left private practice to return to government trial work after missing being in the courtroom.

I think your chances of biglaw (i.e. V100) are meager at best. I also think you shouldn't let naysayers on the Internet dissuade you. In terms of next steps, you should confer with strong headhunters who work with the Chicago biglaw shops to see if they can place you. (If not, that's a further sign.) If not, you can certainly submit directly to law firms--but you should also be networking to find an "in" with a firm. If you can build ties to partners whom you can convince you're serious about this and you're talented, that's likely to be your best "entre" as an unconventional candidate.

Listen, my SIL went to Nova Southeastern for law school. Never heard it? Yeah. That's the point of this story. She had good grades. She worked as a prosecutor in several states until she rose to be the head of the felony division in a major city. She was a super-dynamic person--fun and funny, personable, professional. Someone she got roped into doing corporate law in that city in biglaw, and she did that for several years before she "retired" because she became a mom at age 40. So yeah...is it possible. Sure. But not after 2 years. She worked almost seven years before she moved over to biglaw. Good luck!

I've seen a couple people with a profile similar to yours who ended up in biglaw, but as the other poster mentioned, they worked as a prosecutor for more than five years before making the switch. Your experience wouldn't really be very useful as a junior or mid-level because the work you'd be doing is very different than what you've been doing as a prosecutor.

Try boutiques rather than biglaw. Biglaw doesn't give a fuck how many cases you've tried and how good you are at taking witnesses or arguing in court...... Unless you're basically at the partner level where litigators will hand you the case to try if they fail at getting it killed or settled before trial. Boutiques -- at least ones that actually try cases -- are far more likely to see trials and courtroom experience as a plus.

Networking is probably the best way to find whatever firm might be interested in trial exp.

Very unlikely. As someone else noted, trial experience doesn't mean you're good at the stuff you'll do as a biglaw associate, ie discovery, writing, and case management. Courtroom skills are not that relevant in a job where you're lucky to argue a nondispositive motion as an associate.

Very confused how you can be a prosecutor for a few years and also transferring to UChicago at the same time????? Literally..... so confused.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... #p10050378

Anonymous User wrote:Very confused how you can be a prosecutor for a few years and also transferring to UChicago at the same time????? Literally..... so confused.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... #p10050378

Wow OP's post history is a mess. Outed as a flame.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/s ... 2&sr=posts

Anonymous User wrote:Very confused how you can be a prosecutor for a few years and also transferring to UChicago at the same time????? Literally..... so confused.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... #p10050378

Yeah OP respond to this with a decent explanation or I'm locking this thread and giving you a perma. PM to me or another mod is fine.

BlendedUnicorn wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Very confused how you can be a prosecutor for a few years and also transferring to UChicago at the same time????? Literally..... so confused.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... #p10050378

Yeah OP respond to this with a decent explanation or I'm locking this thread and giving you a perma. PM to me or another mod is fine.

I transferred to U of C. This post is about my sister and her work situation.

BlendedUnicorn wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Very confused how you can be a prosecutor for a few years and also transferring to UChicago at the same time????? Literally..... so confused.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... #p10050378

Yeah OP respond to this with a decent explanation or I'm locking this thread and giving you a perma. PM to me or another mod is fine.

It's a pretty interesting, realistic, hypothetical even OP is a flame.

Graybrow wrote:It's a pretty interesting, realistic, hypothetical even OP is a flame.

People who try to post helpful stuff on threads like these are often attorneys taking a small break from billing hours. (Current students generally just wouldn't know enough unless they've seen someone else go through it.) It's not a great feeling to have my time wasted on a hypothetical when I thought it's something somebody is actually going through and has questions about. I actually enjoy answering questions and random banter around here but when something ends up being a waste of time I really wish I had just pounded through another 0.1 or 0.2 on some work bullshit instead.

lolwat wrote:

Graybrow wrote:It's a pretty interesting, realistic, hypothetical even OP is a flame.

People who try to post helpful stuff on threads like these are often attorneys taking a small break from billing hours. (Current students generally just wouldn't know enough unless they've seen someone else go through it.) It's not a great feeling to have my time wasted on a hypothetical when I thought it's something somebody is actually going through and has questions about. I actually enjoy answering questions and random banter around here but when something ends up being a waste of time I really wish I had just pounded through another 0.1 or 0.2 on some work bullshit instead.

That's very fair.

lolwat wrote:

Graybrow wrote:It's a pretty interesting, realistic, hypothetical even OP is a flame.

People who try to post helpful stuff on threads like these are often attorneys taking a small break from billing hours. (Current students generally just wouldn't know enough unless they've seen someone else go through it.) It's not a great feeling to have my time wasted on a hypothetical when I thought it's something somebody is actually going through and has questions about. I actually enjoy answering questions and random banter around here but when something ends up being a waste of time I really wish I had just pounded through another 0.1 or 0.2 on some work bullshit instead.

Removed