Top Law Schools

My firm doesn't make us pick a practice group for something like 18 months, so I have some flexibility (just started this fall). I'm currently staffed on matters for a fairly small transactional group and work mostly with seniors who try to give me "interesting," challenging work. While everyone has been super nice and I appreciate their willingness to train me, I really don't see myself making it to mid-level. I kinda just wanna crank out enough easy, low-responsibility hours to fly under the radar a few years before doing something else. I've read diligence/doc review is good for this, but my group doesn't seem to have a lot of diligence--is this more common in M&A? Should I just hop around between groups for a few years?

I know about the coasting thread, but it doesn't seem super geared towards juniors. Any tips welcome!

I’m also curious about this. I have no debt and a decent amount in savings, so I really just want the resume line. I don’t mind taking a pay cut and would like to go in house as soon as possible. Just trying to make it 2-3 years relatively painlessly.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 4:07 pm

I’m also curious about this. I have no debt and a decent amount in savings, so I really just want the resume line. I don’t mind taking a pay cut and would like to go in house as soon as possible. Just trying to make it 2-3 years relatively painlessly.

OP here. From what I've read on this forum, you do need to have actually developed substantive skills to go in house, so I'm not sure coasting on diligence would be the way to go if that's your goal. But others with actual experience can chime in here.

I think you should take the novel approach of trying hard, learning how to practice, establish relationships with attorneys in your office and folks in the industry(ies) you might be interested in, and keeping an open mind.

Or you can be a POS for 2.5 years, be miserable to be around, not learn anything, and build a reputation in your legal market/community of being lazy and a coaster--good luck!

LawrenceGazebo wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 4:48 pm

I think you should take the novel approach of trying hard, learning how to practice, establish relationships with attorneys in your office and folks in the industry(ies) you might be interested in, and keeping an open mind.

Or you can be a POS for 2.5 years, be miserable to be around, not learn anything, and build a reputation in your legal market/community of being lazy and a coaster--good luck!

Just an epic first post

LawrenceGazebo wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 4:48 pm

I think you should take the novel approach of trying hard, learning how to practice, establish relationships with attorneys in your office and folks in the industry(ies) you might be interested in, and keeping an open mind.

Or you can be a POS for 2.5 years, be miserable to be around, not learn anything, and build a reputation in your legal market/community of being lazy and a coaster--good luck!

Cool advice and all but I actually have a life and don't plan on practicing law long term (never mind in my current market) so, pass. Thanks for your contribution.

LawrenceGazebo wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 4:48 pm

I think you should take the novel approach of trying hard, learning how to practice, establish relationships with attorneys in your office and folks in the industry(ies) you might be interested in, and keeping an open mind.

Or you can be a POS for 2.5 years, be miserable to be around, not learn anything, and build a reputation in your legal market/community of being lazy and a coaster--good luck!

yep it's definitely exactly one of these two options. this guy gets it

Junior associate work isn't that hard, IMO. Your goal should be to bill no more than 2000 hours and to do as little non-billable work as possible. Learn when it's OK to say no. Rejecting work from a rainmaker is usually a bad idea, but when a service partner surprises you on a Friday evening with a non-billable assignment due Monday, it's fine to say you don't have time.

If you want to go in-house you'll want to work closely with clients and gain substantive experience; hiding away doing doc review isn't the best approach. That said, I've seen plenty of associates do as little as possible for 3-5 years and then land decent in-house positions.

As for practice areas to look into, it depends on your long term goals. Do you want to go in-house? I'd suggest M&A, since that probably gives you the widest range of exit options. Are you eyeing a government/PI job? Then maybe you should look into litigation. (I found doc review to be as mindless and even easier than diligence when it comes to grinding out hours). How about geography? If you want to get out of NY, I wouldn't recommend finance.

As for getting by - you can use the SKATE method. Stay under the radar, Keep calm and to yourself, Act busy, Try hard, Enjoy yourself. But, I really wouldn't recommend this.

I know this is absolute blasphemy on these forums, but I love my job in biglaw (totally unexpected!). Everyone I work with is incredibly smart, I have amazing flexibility (WFH, control over my hours, etc.) and I'm working right around 2000 hours/year. Obviously, this isn't everyone's situation, but it's possible. You know yourself better than I do, but I think you should at least keep an open mind about the possibilities in Biglaw.

For what it's worth, I would never ever take an in-house role. I'd rather leave law completely than be stuck in that hellhole.

LawrenceGazebo wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 4:48 pm

I think you should take the novel approach of trying hard, learning how to practice, establish relationships with attorneys in your office and folks in the industry(ies) you might be interested in, and keeping an open mind.

Or you can be a POS for 2.5 years, be miserable to be around, not learn anything, and build a reputation in your legal market/community of being lazy and a coaster--good luck!

Bootlicker. Oh golly, you think we should kills ourselves to appease our partnership god kings?

CovidLurker wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:06 pm

As for practice areas to look into, it depends on your long term goals. Do you want to go in-house? I'd suggest M&A, since that probably gives you the widest range of exit options. Are you eyeing a government/PI job? Then maybe you should look into litigation. (I found doc review to be as mindless and even easier than diligence when it comes to grinding out hours). How about geography? If you want to get out of NY, I wouldn't recommend finance.

As for getting by - you can use the SKATE method. Stay under the radar, Keep calm and to yourself, Act busy, Try hard, Enjoy yourself. But, I really wouldn't recommend this.

I know this is absolute blasphemy on these forums, but I love my job in biglaw (totally unexpected!). Everyone I work with is incredibly smart, I have amazing flexibility (WFH, control over my hours, etc.) and I'm working right around 2000 hours/year. Obviously, this isn't everyone's situation, but it's possible. You know yourself better than I do, but I think you should at least keep an open mind about the possibilities in Biglaw.

For what it's worth, I would never ever take an in-house role. I'd rather leave law completely than be stuck in that hellhole.

I actually like my biglaw job too but its made 10x more bearable by WFH full time. Not sure how I'll feel if we get called back, which we have been told will happen in January.

I had WFH flexibility pre-Covid. Admittedly, if I actually had to be in the office ever, the job would be way more miserable. I was already working 2 days/week from home even pre-Covid.

CovidLurker wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:06 pm

As for practice areas to look into, it depends on your long term goals. Do you want to go in-house? I'd suggest M&A, since that probably gives you the widest range of exit options. Are you eyeing a government/PI job? Then maybe you should look into litigation. (I found doc review to be as mindless and even easier than diligence when it comes to grinding out hours). How about geography? If you want to get out of NY, I wouldn't recommend finance.

As for getting by - you can use the SKATE method. Stay under the radar, Keep calm and to yourself, Act busy, Try hard, Enjoy yourself. But, I really wouldn't recommend this.

I know this is absolute blasphemy on these forums, but I love my job in biglaw (totally unexpected!). Everyone I work with is incredibly smart, I have amazing flexibility (WFH, control over my hours, etc.) and I'm working right around 2000 hours/year. Obviously, this isn't everyone's situation, but it's possible. You know yourself better than I do, but I think you should at least keep an open mind about the possibilities in Biglaw.

For what it's worth, I would never ever take an in-house role. I'd rather leave law completely than be stuck in that hellhole.

This is helpful, thank you. And I'm glad you've had such a good experience. To clarify a bit, I'm definitely still keeping an open mind. The problem I see right now is that the workflow in biglaw just doesn't match how I like to work. For me, working 12 hours on one (or a few) thing(s), and getting fully focused and immersed in that, is way less exhausting than 6 hours of dozens of little tasks (responding to emails, phone calls, updating a checklist, etc.). It's not the raw hours so much as the constant focus-shifting and project management. From what I understand, this only gets worse the more senior you get in biglaw. Lit may be somewhat better in this regard, so I'm gonna try to get staffed on a couple of cases once my current deals close--though it may raise some eyebrows since I'm sure the firm has me unofficially pegged as a transactional person already. I haven't pinned down what I want to do after this, but leaning towards clerking for a year or two and then maybe exiting the law entirely.

Dcc617 wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:17 pm

LawrenceGazebo wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 4:48 pm

I think you should take the novel approach of trying hard, learning how to practice, establish relationships with attorneys in your office and folks in the industry(ies) you might be interested in, and keeping an open mind.

Or you can be a POS for 2.5 years, be miserable to be around, not learn anything, and build a reputation in your legal market/community of being lazy and a coaster--good luck!

Bootlicker. Oh golly, you think we should kills ourselves to appease our partnership god kings?

Yes that is what I said and meant. Alternatively, I meant that it doesn't seem very likely to do a poor job, hide out for a couple years, and then suddenly emerge ready to take on the world with a totally cushy, laid back in-house job.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:37 pm

CovidLurker wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:06 pm

As for practice areas to look into, it depends on your long term goals. Do you want to go in-house? I'd suggest M&A, since that probably gives you the widest range of exit options. Are you eyeing a government/PI job? Then maybe you should look into litigation. (I found doc review to be as mindless and even easier than diligence when it comes to grinding out hours). How about geography? If you want to get out of NY, I wouldn't recommend finance.

As for getting by - you can use the SKATE method. Stay under the radar, Keep calm and to yourself, Act busy, Try hard, Enjoy yourself. But, I really wouldn't recommend this.

I know this is absolute blasphemy on these forums, but I love my job in biglaw (totally unexpected!). Everyone I work with is incredibly smart, I have amazing flexibility (WFH, control over my hours, etc.) and I'm working right around 2000 hours/year. Obviously, this isn't everyone's situation, but it's possible. You know yourself better than I do, but I think you should at least keep an open mind about the possibilities in Biglaw.

For what it's worth, I would never ever take an in-house role. I'd rather leave law completely than be stuck in that hellhole.

This is helpful, thank you. And I'm glad you've had such a good experience. To clarify a bit, I'm definitely still keeping an open mind. The problem I see right now is that the workflow in biglaw just doesn't match how I like to work. For me, working 12 hours on one (or a few) thing(s), and getting fully focused and immersed in that, is way less exhausting than 6 hours of dozens of little tasks (responding to emails, phone calls, updating a checklist, etc.). It's not the raw hours so much as the constant focus-shifting and project management. From what I understand, this only gets worse the more senior you get in biglaw. Lit may be somewhat better in this regard, so I'm gonna try to get staffed on a couple of cases once my current deals close--though it may raise some eyebrows since I'm sure the firm has me unofficially pegged as a transactional person already. I haven't pinned down what I want to do after this, but leaning towards clerking for a year or two and then maybe exiting the law entirely.

Understandable - if it interests you, maybe look into specialists work. I'm not a specialist, so no direct experience here, but my understanding is that groups like environmental, real estate, tax, derivatives/financial institutions etc. have less secretarial and project management work and more "digging into the weeds" and focusing on discreet issues work.

CovidLurker wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:37 pm

CovidLurker wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:06 pm

As for practice areas to look into, it depends on your long term goals. Do you want to go in-house? I'd suggest M&A, since that probably gives you the widest range of exit options. Are you eyeing a government/PI job? Then maybe you should look into litigation. (I found doc review to be as mindless and even easier than diligence when it comes to grinding out hours). How about geography? If you want to get out of NY, I wouldn't recommend finance.

As for getting by - you can use the SKATE method. Stay under the radar, Keep calm and to yourself, Act busy, Try hard, Enjoy yourself. But, I really wouldn't recommend this.

I know this is absolute blasphemy on these forums, but I love my job in biglaw (totally unexpected!). Everyone I work with is incredibly smart, I have amazing flexibility (WFH, control over my hours, etc.) and I'm working right around 2000 hours/year. Obviously, this isn't everyone's situation, but it's possible. You know yourself better than I do, but I think you should at least keep an open mind about the possibilities in Biglaw.

For what it's worth, I would never ever take an in-house role. I'd rather leave law completely than be stuck in that hellhole.

This is helpful, thank you. And I'm glad you've had such a good experience. To clarify a bit, I'm definitely still keeping an open mind. The problem I see right now is that the workflow in biglaw just doesn't match how I like to work. For me, working 12 hours on one (or a few) thing(s), and getting fully focused and immersed in that, is way less exhausting than 6 hours of dozens of little tasks (responding to emails, phone calls, updating a checklist, etc.). It's not the raw hours so much as the constant focus-shifting and project management. From what I understand, this only gets worse the more senior you get in biglaw. Lit may be somewhat better in this regard, so I'm gonna try to get staffed on a couple of cases once my current deals close--though it may raise some eyebrows since I'm sure the firm has me unofficially pegged as a transactional person already. I haven't pinned down what I want to do after this, but leaning towards clerking for a year or two and then maybe exiting the law entirely.

Understandable - if it interests you, maybe look into specialists work. I'm not a specialist, so no direct experience here, but my understanding is that groups like environmental, real estate, tax, derivatives/financial institutions etc. have less secretarial and project management work and more "digging into the weeds" and focusing on discreet issues work.

Hadn't thought of that, but will look into what my firm has to offer—appreciate the help!

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:22 pm

CovidLurker wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:06 pm

As for practice areas to look into, it depends on your long term goals. Do you want to go in-house? I'd suggest M&A, since that probably gives you the widest range of exit options. Are you eyeing a government/PI job? Then maybe you should look into litigation. (I found doc review to be as mindless and even easier than diligence when it comes to grinding out hours). How about geography? If you want to get out of NY, I wouldn't recommend finance.

As for getting by - you can use the SKATE method. Stay under the radar, Keep calm and to yourself, Act busy, Try hard, Enjoy yourself. But, I really wouldn't recommend this.

I know this is absolute blasphemy on these forums, but I love my job in biglaw (totally unexpected!). Everyone I work with is incredibly smart, I have amazing flexibility (WFH, control over my hours, etc.) and I'm working right around 2000 hours/year. Obviously, this isn't everyone's situation, but it's possible. You know yourself better than I do, but I think you should at least keep an open mind about the possibilities in Biglaw.

For what it's worth, I would never ever take an in-house role. I'd rather leave law completely than be stuck in that hellhole.

I actually like my biglaw job too but its made 10x more bearable by WFH full time. Not sure how I'll feel if we get called back, which we have been told will happen in January.

Which market is calling you back in January?

Counterpoint to the last two posts: specialists are on a ton of matters at once, so there's a ton of juggling different deadlines/email streams/etc. Based on what you described at your ideal work style, that seems like it would be a nightmare for you.

CovidLurker wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:06 pm

For what it's worth, I would never ever take an in-house role. I'd rather leave law completely than be stuck in that hellhole.

Why do you call in-house a hellhole? (Genuine question.)

Lmao this is simple. If you literally just want to make it two years then bounce, coast baby coast.

Even strivers will get on horrible work in the first couple years so you’re not going to develop important skills in all likelihood. Most biglaw cases are boring and as a junior you’ll do very little to develop skills.

My best advice is try to find a partner you like and who likes you who can feed you some work. Also learn to say no.

nixy wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 7:10 pm

CovidLurker wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:06 pm

For what it's worth, I would never ever take an in-house role. I'd rather leave law completely than be stuck in that hellhole.

Why do you call in-house a hellhole? (Genuine question.)

Lol some people don’t like making six figs and having evenings and weekends to themselves.

nixy wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 7:10 pm

CovidLurker wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:06 pm

For what it's worth, I would never ever take an in-house role. I'd rather leave law completely than be stuck in that hellhole.

Why do you call in-house a hellhole? (Genuine question.)

Before law school I worked at a tech company, so this is just my impression of in-house legal work from there. I could be way off base as I've never been a lawyer in-house. But, here's my view:

1. Boring AF. Anything remotely interesting/complex gets outsourced to outside counsel. You've already chosen one of the most boring professions you can by becoming a lawyer. Are you sure you want to find the most boring work in the most boring possible profession and do that for 1/3 of your life?

2. You're a cost-center, not a producer. You're on the same level as HR, Accounting etc. I don't mean that as an insult, but just a fact. You don't bring in money, you don't improve products, you don't help sell. You are a necessary cost-center, but nonetheless most ppl see your cost before they think of your value add. This may not bother many people, but honestly, my ego is too big to be an ancillary cost-center.

3. You're the "no" guy. Everyone else is innovating and pushing to try new products, break into new markets etc. Your job is to often assess risk which means that a lot of telling people "no". Not fun.

4. You're the least talented person in the building (this is probably tech specific). There's literally geniuses running around building incredible things and they are passionate about their job. It's a daily reminder of how meaningless your existence truly is. This one wouldn't actually bother me so much because I've already accepted and come to terms with the fact that lawyers have extremely little value add.

Lestersandy wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 12, 2020 7:29 pm

Also learn to say no.

Rising 3rd year who is basically in your position, OP, and can't emphasize this enough. Most people don't know how to do it. Or they don't think they can, I don't know. I do it as often as I need to hit my target and not go very much over.