Top Law Schools

What is the rule regarding how long you should stay at a firm before switching to not appear as a job hopper? Thanks in advance.

to go where ? My sense is if you're going to another firm you might want to stay two years but if you're leaving to do like in house or public interest a year is fine

Source: nothing but my gut

There's no rule of thumb for this. People move at all stages. It just gets easier to move at certain stages (third through fifth year) than at other stages (stub through first year and after sixth year).

If you leave your firm after less than one year (so your stub year and your first full year), it's not easy to lateral, but it happens. You're going to need a good story that is not about having to work with a dick parter--like, for example, a story about getting slotted into the practice group you didn't want to be in or something like that.

The story lines change as you move up the ranks.

Or for early moves a legitimate reason to switch cities, esp a city your firm does not have an office in.

Feel free to leave as soon you have an offer you would prefer. But if you do leave quickly only go where you expect to be content for at least a couple years. Multiple short stints will raise eyebrows.

tyroneslothrop1 wrote:Feel free to leave as soon you have an offer you would prefer. But if you do leave quickly only go where you expect to be content for at least a couple years. Multiple short stints will raise eyebrows.

Yeah if I see like multiple 1-2year stints, I'm concerned. If I see like a 1-year stint followed by 3+ solid years at the next place then I'm not really concerned.

OP here. 1 yr at plaintiff then lateraled to large insurance defense 1.5 yrs. is not wanting to do ID work good enough reason to jump ship again?

Anonymous User wrote:OP here. 1 yr at plaintiff then lateraled to large insurance defense 1.5 yrs. is not wanting to do ID work good enough reason to jump ship again?

You can say you left the Plaintiff firm b/c you wanted to do defense and your reason you want to leave ID is because there are limited growth opportunities, etc. I wouldn't necessarily say you don't like ID work.

lolwat wrote:

tyroneslothrop1 wrote:Feel free to leave as soon you have an offer you would prefer. But if you do leave quickly only go where you expect to be content for at least a couple years. Multiple short stints will raise eyebrows.

Yeah if I see like multiple 1-2year stints, I'm concerned. If I see like a 1-year stint followed by 3+ solid years at the next place then I'm not really concerned.

how do you feel about multiple 2.5 year stints? serious.

gaddockteeg wrote:

lolwat wrote:

tyroneslothrop1 wrote:Feel free to leave as soon you have an offer you would prefer. But if you do leave quickly only go where you expect to be content for at least a couple years. Multiple short stints will raise eyebrows.

Yeah if I see like multiple 1-2year stints, I'm concerned. If I see like a 1-year stint followed by 3+ solid years at the next place then I'm not really concerned.

how do you feel about multiple 2.5 year stints? serious.

Lol. Here's my thought process generally: Is the applicant going to last at the firm I'm at? If I see a 1-year stint followed by a solid 3+ years, that looks like the first firm just didn't click. If I see multiple 1-2 year stints, that looks like a problem with the applicant jumping ship (or doing enough to skate by collecting paychecks before getting fired). Multiple 2.5 year stints is harder to analyze. If you've only had two jobs and you're leaving your second one after 2.5 years, I don't think I'd care much. But I know someone who has a lot of them--like, five 2-3 year stints on his resume--and to me that doesn't look good. I mean why are you leaving a job every 2-3 years, and what makes you think you'll stay at my firm for longer than that? Of course, this all sort of assumes I'm looking for someone that I hope will stay long term.

OP here. 1 yr at plaintiff then lateraled to large insurance defense 1.5 yrs. is not wanting to do ID work good enough reason to jump ship again?

It's a good reason to leave, yes, but not a good reason to tell firms you're applying to. You should re-package it to say why the firm(s) you're applying to are better fits for you rather than why you want to leave your current firm. Like: "I'm applying for this commercial litigation position because it's awesome and I'll get to see tons of different kinds of cases involving all sorts of different facts and clients and stuff" versus "I'm applying for this commercial litigation position because I don't want to do insurance defense work anymore."

SmokeytheBear wrote:There's no rule of thumb for this. People move at all stages. It just gets easier to move at certain stages (third through fifth year) than at other stages (stub through first year and after sixth year).

If you leave your firm after less than one year (so your stub year and your first full year), it's not easy to lateral, but it happens. You're going to need a good story that is not about having to work with a dick parter--like, for example, a story about getting slotted into the practice group you didn't want to be in or something like that.

The story lines change as you move up the ranks.

I moved after 1.5 years because of this. Firms I interviewed with understood. I was hesitant to move because, as some other posters have suggested, if I try to make a move again in 2-3 years (when most people jump from biglaw) it might look like I am a job-hopper. But getting in the right group outweighed that fear.