Switching from P-side to Defense Forum

[Anonymous User]

SO, I'm at a fairly well-known P-side shop doing class cases and some labor stuff. I'm trying to transition to defense side, mainly b/c of better career opportunities and pay to be quite frank. Even some prestige.

I've got interviews coming up with a bunch of defense side biglaw-ish or boutique firms either in commercial/class/labor litigation. I know the question is going to come up-- anyone have ideas on how to best answer?

It's mainly a career move. I also don't love the marketing/mill aspect of plaintiff work. I want to work with clients, help navigate issues and be an advisor on high-level litigation/stakes. But not sure that's a good enough answer.

Help?

[Sackboy]

That answer is fine.

[Anonymous User]

I worked for one of the big L&E boutiques and we routinely hired from P's firms without any issues. Here's my 2 cents.

The firm will know one of your big motivators is making more money, and they will not care at all. It's the main motivator for almost all attorneys in private firms. I would not flat out say, "I want this job because I want to make more money," but I think it's perfectly fine to say (in an appropriate way) that you're not satisfied with your current firm, don't like its focus on business generation over litigating cases, and are more interested in what big firms have to offer (e.g., sophisticated clients, more career and professional development opportunities, staff perks, if applicable, and so on).

If you are genuinely interested in advice and counseling, I would definitely harp on that because it's one of the few things you will never do at a P's firm that you'd do at a defense-side firm. I would also be prepared to answer whether you're a "true believer" or not and why you initially chose a P's side firm, and whether you'd be able to defend "the big guy" over "the little guy."

This also may not be relevant, but if you're interviewing specifically for a class action position, I would also emphasize your love of class action civil procedure and why your work as a P's attorney will help the firm defend cases. At my firm, associates who really knew how to run a class action were highly valuable.

[Anonymous User]

Since you appear to be talking about civil, I agree that you should be fine. Lots of smaller firms that I've know do both. Obviously not directly comparable, but still worth noting.

At some point in every Plaintiff lawyers career they take a few cases Defendant, and vice versa. If you have a large client, you do that. I remember one well know Plaintiffs Attorney in particular in court with the Judge openly on the record asking if he was standing in the wrong desk (half-joking). It was since his partners secretary's husband was a deadbeat is the long and short of it. No one seemed to have any beef with it, especially since he was so charismatic that he had already worked out a settlement plan with the rookie appearance-agency debt buyer attorney who seemed happy just to be in a suit and in court for the $45 or whatever those appearance agencies were paying at the time.


In some ways it's good marketing. You see the former prosecutors who go defense try that gimmick all the time "I know how the other side thinks, I was they".

Enjoy the new career. Wishing you only the best with it.

[Anonymous User]

At a big law firm doing labor & employment litigation (e.g., Jones day, Morgan Lewis, Proskauer). I think we’d love to hire a plaintiff side lawyer from a reputable p-side firm. Rightly or wrongly, making the switch will largely depend on the reputation of your current firm. Lots of (pretentious) firm partners see plaintiff firms as sloppy, mill-like operations. But there are several top notch plaintiff firms that they would want laterals from. The p-side experience would be valuable in pitches, in active litigation (e.g., what strings to pull to resolve cases), plus you likely have more substantive experience (deps, trials) vs the average big law associate.

[Anonymous User]

At a big law firm doing labor & employment litigation (e.g., Jones day, Morgan Lewis, Proskauer). I think we’d love to hire a plaintiff side lawyer from a reputable p-side firm. Rightly or wrongly, making the switch will largely depend on the reputation of your current firm. Lots of (pretentious) firm partners see plaintiff firms as sloppy, mill-like operations. But there are several top notch plaintiff firms that they would want laterals from. The p-side experience would be valuable in pitches, in active litigation (e.g., what strings to pull to resolve cases), plus you likely have more substantive experience (deps, trials) vs the average big law associate.

Former anon L&E litigator above, and I agree with this.

Good point re the reputation of the p's firm. There are a few I can think of that we regularly opposed who my former firm would probably not consider due to past terrible experiences with them. Some p's firms rightly have reputations for being mills with bad, unethical lawyers, and that reputation understandably trickles down to associates. There are also p's firms who, despite being competent lawyers, have been so awful to work against that my firm likely wouldn't consider associates for political reasons. But plenty of p's firms do good work and are reasonable and ethical when opposing them. I can actually think of a few p's firms that my old firm would gladly poach associates from because it would be useful to get their perspective in opposing the p's firm they came from.