Top Law Schools

Hi,

I am currently clerking on the Third Circuit and am looking at my next step, which will be at a firm in the Tampa market. I have had interviews for a national biglaw firm's labor and employment group and a large regional firm's general litigation group. My plan is to stay at whatever firm I go to for approximately 5 years, potentially make partner if that path is realistic at the firm I choose, and then lateral to government, most likely prosecution, attorney general's office, etc. I am also interested in doing appellate litigation, either at a firm, a public interest organization, or the government (e.g., the FL capital appeals office is in Tampa). I am trying to keep my future plans in consideration when I decide which job to choose for after my clerkship (assuming I an lucky enough to get several offers to be able to choose from). Given my current two potential options, which would give me better exit options for government criminal or litigation work (AUSA, etc) or appellate litigation (firm, public interest, etc)? I know general lit typically has the worst exit options, but would working as an L&E litigator cabin me to employment law for the future or could I transition that litigation experience into other criminal or appellate litigation positions?

For background, I went to GW law, graduated top 10%, worked at big firm doing general litigation in DC for two years, and am from the Tampa area, so I have the local ties. The L&E partners I interviewed with said they do approximately 85% litigation and 15% client counseling, and that the issues they work on are generally staffed lean, giving younger associates more substantive work. And that there's an investigative element to the litigation that associates take part in. Those substantive elements seem like the L&E option would prepare me more for a later position as a government litigator, but I'm worried that having the L&E label on my experience will limit me to L&E options in the future. I know general lit has the worst exit options, but given that I'm interest in doing appellate law and/or other litigation-focused exit options, would that be a better option?

Thanks!

GiveMeLiberty wrote:Hi,

I am currently clerking on the Third Circuit and am looking at my next step, which will be at a firm in the Tampa market. I have had interviews for a national biglaw firm's labor and employment group and a large regional firm's general litigation group. My plan is to stay at whatever firm I go to for approximately 5 years, potentially make partner if that path is realistic at the firm I choose, and then lateral to government, most likely prosecution, attorney general's office, etc. I am also interested in doing appellate litigation, either at a firm, a public interest organization, or the government (e.g., the FL capital appeals office is in Tampa). I am trying to keep my future plans in consideration when I decide which job to choose for after my clerkship (assuming I an lucky enough to get several offers to be able to choose from). Given my current two potential options, which would give me better exit options for government criminal or litigation work (AUSA, etc) or appellate litigation (firm, public interest, etc)? I know general lit typically has the worst exit options, but would working as an L&E litigator cabin me to employment law for the future or could I transition that litigation experience into other criminal or appellate litigation positions?

For background, I went to GW law, graduated top 10%, worked at big firm doing general litigation in DC for two years, and am from the Tampa area, so I have the local ties. The L&E partners I interviewed with said they do approximately 85% litigation and 15% client counseling, and that the issues they work on are generally staffed lean, giving younger associates more substantive work. And that there's an investigative element to the litigation that associates take part in. Those substantive elements seem like the L&E option would prepare me more for a later position as a government litigator, but I'm worried that having the L&E label on my experience will limit me to L&E options in the future. I know general lit has the worst exit options, but given that I'm interest in doing appellate law and/or other litigation-focused exit options, would that be a better option?

Thanks!

I don't think it matters. I decided against the AUSA route. Just didn't want to be a prosecutor in the end. But they cared most about the fact that I had jury trial experience. That got me the interview. Try to get a prisoner's rights case and hope that it makes it past summary judgment. Or, better yet, get a case that's past summary judgment and trial ready.

I tend to think that biglaw is a better route in than trial experience alone for large USAOs. Smaller ones tend to put more of a premium on trial experience, but it's hardly sufficient alone in my experience. I've applied to probably 75 USAOs in a couple years. Have had about 8 interviews now, all in smaller offices except two in the DC Superior Court Division. I don't have biglaw or clerkship experience, but do have a dozen jury trials and a couple hundred bench trials. I can get interviews, but I've noticed the people they hire generally have a couple civil jury trials + clerkships/biglaw, as opposed to people with purely state level prosecution experience.

I'm not really sure that L&E will get you where you want to go. General lit seems like a better option. The thing is that for AUSA options, the network you have makes a big difference. The same is likely true for the appellate options you're considering. So the partners you would work with will also make a difference (I know of a large regional firm in Tampa that has some lit partners that are connected to FL USAOs).

I'm a little surprised that you haven't found a Tampa firm that will let you dabble in appellate. That'll obviously be easier than to sell for an appellate job down the road.

Necroing this because I've been searching TLS and have the same question. I clerked and have a choice between biglaw general lit and biglaw L&E. Ultimate goal is to be an AUSA, but I would be really happy with other government lawyer jobs as well. Leaning towards biglaw L&E because of the better overall exit options, but would be happy in general lit. Does doing L&E make it harder to become an AUSA?