The dark side Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
- coramnonjudice
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:34 am
The dark side
I hear a lot of folks talking about going into biglaw and even mid-size/smaller regional firms, government, etc. on this site, but never really hear anything about plaintiff's firms. I've been tossing around the idea of going to the dark side but can't find any reliable information about what life as a plaintiff's lawyer is like (other than the high-end boutiques sometimes vaguely referenced here). Obviously there isn't a guaranteed, steady income and the initial pay is less, but I see a lot of moronic PLs consistently making bank despite filing horrible briefs that barely cite any case law. It seems like some of the high-achieving BL associates could really excel as plaintiff attorneys?
What am I missing here guys? Are we all just too risk-averse?
What am I missing here guys? Are we all just too risk-averse?
- Lacepiece23
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:10 pm
Re: The dark side
Yes, and we like prestige. I've been thinking about it a lot lately. There seems to be much less competition on the other side.coramnonjudice wrote:I hear a lot of folks talking about going into biglaw and even mid-size/smaller regional firms, government, etc. on this site, but never really hear anything about plaintiff's firms. I've been tossing around the idea of going to the dark side but can't find any reliable information about what life as a plaintiff's lawyer is like (other than the high-end boutiques sometimes vaguely referenced here). Obviously there isn't a guaranteed, steady income and the initial pay is less, but I see a lot of moronic PLs consistently making bank despite filing horrible briefs that barely cite any case law. It seems like some of the high-achieving BL associates could really excel as plaintiff attorneys?
What am I missing here guys? Are we all just too risk-averse?
-
- Posts: 4478
- Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:58 am
Re: The dark side
I’m spitballing, but (depending on your market and the firms you’re thinking about I’d imagine) it seems to me that successful PI work depends a lot on managing clients and volume of cases, and I don’t know that most biglaw associates feel especially good at either of those things. (That is, they’re very different kinds of clients.)
-
- Posts: 10752
- Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm
Re: The dark side
Successful PI work depends on attracting good clients, picking the right cases, and managing them with as little resources as possible. And tolerance for risk and deferred payments. Biglaw teaches us to be risk adverse and have a different set of priorities.nixy wrote:I’m spitballing, but (depending on your market and the firms you’re thinking about I’d imagine) it seems to me that successful PI work depends a lot on managing clients and volume of cases, and I don’t know that most biglaw associates feel especially good at either of those things. (That is, they’re very different kinds of clients.)
I do think biglaw associates can make great PI lawyers, as long as they can still function the same within the different set of constrains. I believe that better quality work will ultimately generate better results, and over time a practice have a good chance to prosper.
And, it's the LIGHT side. Insurance defense is the dark side.
- nealric
- Posts: 4391
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:53 am
Re: The dark side
People rarely talk about plaintiff's side stuff simply because good plaintiffs firms hire far fewer brand new lawyers. Even the high end plaintiff's boutiques (i.e. Sussman) that do hire new lawyers often require a clerkship- they don't want to deal with training someone who is completely green because they are much leaner operations from biglaw and they actually benefit from efficiency (while biglaw benefits from inefficiency).coramnonjudice wrote:I hear a lot of folks talking about going into biglaw and even mid-size/smaller regional firms, government, etc. on this site, but never really hear anything about plaintiff's firms. I've been tossing around the idea of going to the dark side but can't find any reliable information about what life as a plaintiff's lawyer is like (other than the high-end boutiques sometimes vaguely referenced here). Obviously there isn't a guaranteed, steady income and the initial pay is less, but I see a lot of moronic PLs consistently making bank despite filing horrible briefs that barely cite any case law. It seems like some of the high-achieving BL associates could really excel as plaintiff attorneys?
What am I missing here guys? Are we all just too risk-averse?
Keep in mind there's a big difference between a PI settlement mill and a high-end plaintiff's firm. Sloppy briefs are the norm at a settlement mill- it's all about keeping the volume of cases up. You are more likely to settle 50 car accident cases for an average of $10,000 each than to settle one $500,000 case- you don't have time to write brilliant briefs for all 50- barely adequate is more likely. At the higher end firms, they tend to swing for the fences, which can mean very lumpy income, but also more legally interesting work.
Many biglaw associates can and do make good plaintiff's lawyers but they are often different personalities. Joe Jamail was quoted as having lasted "about two weeks" in biglaw. The most successful plaintiff's lawyers have to be smart, but they also tend to have personalities that don't jive in large organizational structures. On the other hand, most biglaw attorneys who love writing complex briefs on legal nuances might find organizing a large PI docket stultifying.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- PeanutsNJam
- Posts: 4670
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:57 pm
Re: The dark side
There’s a difference between (successful) personal injury firms and boutiques like Susman or Bartlit that do plaintiffs work (antitrust, IP lit, etc). The latter is hyper selective. The former is all tiny <10 lawyers offices.
-
- Posts: 10752
- Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm
Re: The dark side
Actually at least in my neck of the woods successful PI firms are a bit larger:PeanutsNJam wrote:There’s a difference between (successful) personal injury firms and boutiques like Susman or Bartlit that do plaintiffs work (antitrust, IP lit, etc). The latter is hyper selective. The former is all tiny <10 lawyers offices.
42 @ Kline and Spector
31 @ Saltz Mongeluzzi Barrett & Bendesky
A few others that comes to mind that does med mal cases are quote sizeable too.
-
- Posts: 432505
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: The dark side
Speaking of which, what are the top plaintiffs firms in DC? Junior in biglaw wanting to make the switch, but not to any run of the mill auto accident shop. However credentials slightly below necessary for Susman for example.
-
- Posts: 1986
- Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:05 pm
Re: The dark side
If they have the volume for that many lawyers, they probably also have (a) a sizeable marketing budget, and (b) lots of referrals through word of mouth.r6_philly wrote:
Actually at least in my neck of the woods successful PI firms are a bit larger:
42 @ Kline and Spector
31 @ Saltz Mongeluzzi Barrett & Bendesky
A few others that comes to mind that does med mal cases are quote sizeable too.
A new firm needs to compete against both of those.
-
- Posts: 10752
- Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm
Re: The dark side
I agree. Even I was thinking about referring to them. (PA allows the payment of true referral fees, which is probably they are that big) If some of you want to leave biglaw and join me to compete, you know where to find mealbanach wrote:If they have the volume for that many lawyers, they probably also have (a) a sizeable marketing budget, and (b) lots of referrals through word of mouth.r6_philly wrote:
Actually at least in my neck of the woods successful PI firms are a bit larger:
42 @ Kline and Spector
31 @ Saltz Mongeluzzi Barrett & Bendesky
A few others that comes to mind that does med mal cases are quote sizeable too.
A new firm needs to compete against both of those.

-
- Posts: 396
- Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:06 am
Re: The dark side
I think this is a good piece of anecdata that fits in with what I've seen: although there aren't tons and tons of firms that qualify, there is a respectable midground between low-end PI work and boutique jobs like Susman. At the higher end and quite close to Susman, there are also a handful of firms you don't hear about as much that are competitive and recruit clerks for high-end antitrust class actions and securities litigation, like Cohen Milstein.r6_philly wrote:Actually at least in my neck of the woods successful PI firms are a bit larger:PeanutsNJam wrote:There’s a difference between (successful) personal injury firms and boutiques like Susman or Bartlit that do plaintiffs work (antitrust, IP lit, etc). The latter is hyper selective. The former is all tiny <10 lawyers offices.
42 @ Kline and Spector
31 @ Saltz Mongeluzzi Barrett & Bendesky
A few others that comes to mind that does med mal cases are quote sizeable too.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login