Partner at MidMarket Firm (50-100 Texas lawyers). AMA/Inquiries Forum

[DallasMidPartner]

Former DOJ, former Biglaw here. T10 JD. Partner at Midmarket firm in Texas. Happy to answer questions about breaking into a really nice spot. Will look at competitive resumes from 2-4 year lawyers with interest in mid-market Texas practice (DM).

[Anonymous User]

Thank you for doing this. I’m in the interview stage at a similar firm (probably a bit smaller - think 40-50 attorneys in non-major market) and it really seems like a nice sweet spot.

I have a question regarding partner salary. This firm is like 90% partners, 10% associates, and partners range between about 6 years of practice to 30+ years. What do you think the salary will be like at both the early and more experienced level of partnership? Obviously you don’t know for sure and firms are different, but perhaps you have some knowledge of what is standard. For what it’s worth, new associates make between $80-100k.

Thanks again!

[Anonymous User]

What's the most useful/marketable type of litigation experience one should try to get while in BigLaw to eventually end up in a midmarket texas shop?

[DallasMidPartner]

Thank you for doing this. I’m in the interview stage at a similar firm (probably a bit smaller - think 40-50 attorneys in non-major market) and it really seems like a nice sweet spot.

I have a question regarding partner salary. This firm is like 90% partners, 10% associates, and partners range between about 6 years of practice to 30+ years. What do you think the salary will be like at both the early and more experienced level of partnership? Obviously you don’t know for sure and firms are different, but perhaps you have some knowledge of what is standard. For what it’s worth, new associates make between $80-100k.

Thanks again!

We're in a major market so the scale is a bit different. Our firm is partner-heavy but not to the extent you're describing. So apply those variables as you see fit. But we pay Associates prevailing salary rates, though Associate bonuses are significantly lower than at many AMLAW firms. Experience is much better and faster though. For non-equity partners, I think there is a ton of variability at this sort of shop. Those non-equity partners who are productive in billables and originations do very well, upwards of $400k for very good years. Firm committee service/etc. has a small impact too. If you're not productive, you'll make much less though. That's at least how it is here. For non-equity, I don't think "experience" per se is going to result in higher salary--not without either a strong book or lots of paid billables. Obviously those are key factors in getting equity too.

[DallasMidPartner]

What's the most useful/marketable type of litigation experience one should try to get while in BigLaw to eventually end up in a midmarket texas shop?

White Collar/Regulatory is very valuable if you have any real experience with it. Especially federal of course.

A mix of a strong civil procedure background and some appellate experience would be a strong combination.

It really helps to know your way around a brief/case/etc. for real. If you've been buried in doc review or as the tenth player on a billion dollar case, it's hard to trust that you're going to be ready to jump in fast. For that reason, a non-Biglaw experience can be valuable if you leverage it to demonstrate actual capacity.
(USAO, military law, very small firm practice, state AG's office, etc.) This assumes your academic credentials are strong.

[legalnovice]

Would you call the Texas lit boutiques--Lynn Pinker, Beck Redden, Gibbs, Yetter, AZA, SKV, Reynolds Frizzell-- mid-market? What would be a better start for a lawyer just coming out of a clerkship -- heading to one of these firms or going to a biglaw/bigtex firm like V&E, BB, or maybe Jackson Walker?

[Anonymous User]

Would you call the Texas lit boutiques--Lynn Pinker, Beck Redden, Gibbs, Yetter, AZA, SKV, Reynolds Frizzell-- mid-market? What would be a better start for a lawyer just coming out of a clerkship -- heading to one of these firms or going to a biglaw/bigtex firm like V&E, BB, or maybe Jackson Walker?

Not OP, but a Texas litigator with familiarity with these firms. These boutiques are all pretty different and it also depends on the city.

Houston: Definitely go to a top boutique if you can, that's where all the best litigators go. What makes some of these boutiques so great is a combo of #1 early substantive experience and #2 realistic partnership prospects. Some only have #1 and not #2, though, so do your research.

Gibbs--super elite, competes with Susman for the same candidates. Known for good culture and good partnership prospects.
Yetter: a slightly weaker version of Gibbs, but still in the top tier for both quality of work and partnership prospects.
SKV: similar to Yetter.
Beck Redden: good partnership prospects, good culture. Does a lot more state court work and has an unusually strong focus on state appellate work.
Reynolds: a less prominent and less selcetive version of Yetter and SKV, but still got a mix of #1 and #2.
AZA: you may get good substantive experience but very highly leveraged, meaning partnership prospects aren't much better than BigLaw.

Dallas: Dallas isn't boutique-centric like Houston. Lynn is there (and you'll get substantive experience there), but it's more like an AZA or Quinn Emanuel in other cities. Long hours, weak partnership prospects.

Unlike in Houston, the top lit talent in Dallas tends to mostly go to Biglaw (or a semi-boutique like McKool). Gibson is the most selective, but McKool, Sidley, Winston, V&E are also in the top tier. The offices all have slightly different focuses, so you shouldn't just go by selectivity or general prestige. Sidley, for example, has an unusually strong investigations practice. Winston and McKool have particular strengths in IP, so on and so forth.

The main reason to go to a non-lit boutique regional like Jackson Walker is the culture and partnership prospects. The risk here is firm health, so make sure to do diligence to make sure that the firm that you are looking at is financially stable.

[Anonymous User]

Would you call the Texas lit boutiques--Lynn Pinker, Beck Redden, Gibbs, Yetter, AZA, SKV, Reynolds Frizzell-- mid-market? What would be a better start for a lawyer just coming out of a clerkship -- heading to one of these firms or going to a biglaw/bigtex firm like V&E, BB, or maybe Jackson Walker?

Not OP, but a Texas litigator with familiarity with these firms. These boutiques are all pretty different and it also depends on the city.

Houston: Definitely go to a top boutique if you can, that's where all the best litigators go. What makes some of these boutiques so great is a combo of #1 early substantive experience and #2 realistic partnership prospects. Some only have #1 and not #2, though, so do your research.

Gibbs--super elite, competes with Susman for the same candidates. Known for good culture and good partnership prospects.
Yetter: a slightly weaker version of Gibbs, but still in the top tier for both quality of work and partnership prospects.
SKV: similar to Yetter.
Beck Redden: good partnership prospects, good culture. Does a lot more state court work and has an unusually strong focus on state appellate work.
Reynolds: a less prominent and less selcetive version of Yetter and SKV, but still got a mix of #1 and #2.
AZA: you may get good substantive experience but very highly leveraged, meaning partnership prospects aren't much better than BigLaw.

Dallas: Dallas isn't boutique-centric like Houston. Lynn is there (and you'll get substantive experience there), but it's more like an AZA or Quinn Emanuel in other cities. Long hours, weak partnership prospects.

Unlike in Houston, the top lit talent in Dallas tends to mostly go to Biglaw (or a semi-boutique like McKool). Gibson is the most selective, but McKool, Sidley, Winston, V&E are also in the top tier. The offices all have slightly different focuses, so you shouldn't just go by selectivity or general prestige. Sidley, for example, has an unusually strong investigations practice. Winston and McKool have particular strengths in IP, so on and so forth.

The main reason to go to a non-lit boutique regional like Jackson Walker is the culture and partnership prospects. The risk here is firm health, so make sure to do diligence to make sure that the firm that you are looking at is financially stable.

Thanks for this very detailed and informative layout of the market!

This is the poster who asked the original q btw. I think I screwed up and chose to reply anonymously.

[DallasMidPartner]

Would you call the Texas lit boutiques--Lynn Pinker, Beck Redden, Gibbs, Yetter, AZA, SKV, Reynolds Frizzell-- mid-market? What would be a better start for a lawyer just coming out of a clerkship -- heading to one of these firms or going to a biglaw/bigtex firm like V&E, BB, or maybe Jackson Walker?

Not OP, but a Texas litigator with familiarity with these firms. These boutiques are all pretty different and it also depends on the city.

Houston: Definitely go to a top boutique if you can, that's where all the best litigators go. What makes some of these boutiques so great is a combo of #1 early substantive experience and #2 realistic partnership prospects. Some only have #1 and not #2, though, so do your research.

Gibbs--super elite, competes with Susman for the same candidates. Known for good culture and good partnership prospects.
Yetter: a slightly weaker version of Gibbs, but still in the top tier for both quality of work and partnership prospects.
SKV: similar to Yetter.
Beck Redden: good partnership prospects, good culture. Does a lot more state court work and has an unusually strong focus on state appellate work.
Reynolds: a less prominent and less selcetive version of Yetter and SKV, but still got a mix of #1 and #2.
AZA: you may get good substantive experience but very highly leveraged, meaning partnership prospects aren't much better than BigLaw.

Dallas: Dallas isn't boutique-centric like Houston. Lynn is there (and you'll get substantive experience there), but it's more like an AZA or Quinn Emanuel in other cities. Long hours, weak partnership prospects.

Unlike in Houston, the top lit talent in Dallas tends to mostly go to Biglaw (or a semi-boutique like McKool). Gibson is the most selective, but McKool, Sidley, Winston, V&E are also in the top tier. The offices all have slightly different focuses, so you shouldn't just go by selectivity or general prestige. Sidley, for example, has an unusually strong investigations practice. Winston and McKool have particular strengths in IP, so on and so forth.

The main reason to go to a non-lit boutique regional like Jackson Walker is the culture and partnership prospects. The risk here is firm health, so make sure to do diligence to make sure that the firm that you are looking at is financially stable.

I don’t disagree with any of this. I guess I’d add that if you’re heading to Houston to choose between Susman, Gibbs, and AZA, you don’t need my advice. Not to be glib, but long term what matters is how you develop your skills and eventually your clients. You can do that very well at any of those places, and at many other firms as well.

[Anonymous User]

If somebody already did a federal district court clerkship in Texas, and is interested in appellate work at one of these types of firms, would it be useful to clerk in a non-Fifth Circuit federal COA? What about the Texas Supreme Court? Or would you recommend just jumping straight into private practice?

[Anonymous User]

Hello! Thanks for doing this.

• Knowing what you know now, would you choose to start your career in a firm like your current midmarket firm? Why or why not?

• When you say associate experience is much better, do you think that is true at all levels of associate seniority?

• Overall, what have you found most rewarding about being a partner at a midmarket firm as opposed to larger firms?

Anon because I am also at the interview stage with a similar firm.

[Anonymous User]

If somebody already did a federal district court clerkship in Texas, and is interested in appellate work at one of these types of firms, would it be useful to clerk in a non-Fifth Circuit federal COA? What about the Texas Supreme Court? Or would you recommend just jumping straight into private practice?

Both are great. If you have the opportunity and can handle the short-term economics, definitely do the appellate clerkship. Wish I'd done it. Don't underestimate Texas Supreme Court clerkship if you're going to practice in Texas. It's a very valuable experience. If you're doing a non-Fifth Circuit COA, try to get licensed in a key state in that Circuit. Then at many mid-market firms, you're the person (or one of them) for anything that the firm gets in that state/circuit. I have a second license in another large state (roughly 10 million population), and it's brought me a ton of work the past few years just because there are few litigators at our firm who can automatically appear in all state and federal courts there.

[Anonymous User]

Hello! Thanks for doing this.

• Knowing what you know now, would you choose to start your career in a firm like your current midmarket firm? Why or why not?

• When you say associate experience is much better, do you think that is true at all levels of associate seniority?

• Overall, what have you found most rewarding about being a partner at a midmarket firm as opposed to larger firms?

Anon because I am also at the interview stage with a similar firm.

1. I like the experiences I had, they add depth and credibility. But DOJ does that as much as the former V40. As far as enjoyment, I'd just as soon have skipped Biglaw. But I suppose it is something that some larger clients appreciate hearing about my background, and I worked with some exceptional attorneys there and hopefully that rubbed off a bit.

2. Yes, I think so. Caveat for the points above in #1, which are countervailing factors.

3. I like being in control of my day and practice, knowing the people I work with, and being valued. I'm not the top guy at our firm (yet) but the managing partner and the chairman of my practice group are both good friends of mine. The firm has kicked unproductive partners to the curb, because it is a business, but the situation has to be pretty bad for that to happen. At the V40 I really was a cog and did not know the people who were making key decisions about my career.

[Anonymous User]

How small is too small for midmarket firms in your experience? I've been interviewing in a much smaller state at a ~30 atty firm and a 6-atty lit boutique. Both are the sorts of places that mostly have biglaw/USAO alums, federal clerks, etc. I'm pretty leery about ability to withstand shocks for a really small firm but you mentioned benefits of them so I'm curious for your opinion.

[Anonymous User]

How small is too small for midmarket firms in your experience? I've been interviewing in a much smaller state at a ~30 atty firm and a 6-atty lit boutique. Both are the sorts of places that mostly have biglaw/USAO alums, federal clerks, etc. I'm pretty leery about ability to withstand shocks for a really small firm but you mentioned benefits of them so I'm curious for your opinion.

I don’t think a 30-lawyer firm is that small, especially in a smaller market. Frankly a 30-lawyer firm in, say, Albuquerque, or even Charlotte or San Antonio, is pretty solid—there aren’t a ton of larger firms with more assets than that in that specific market, so you can have an outsized impact on the local bar, local business clients, etc. With that number a firm can be relatively full-service, at least (again) in smaller markets, and especially given modern discovery vendors, managed doc reviews, etc. A lot depends on quality of the people of course. But the number itself would not give me pause. You might want to examine recent representations, client list, etc., to get a sense of the prospects.

A six-lawyer firm is going to be highly dependent and centered around the personalities and skills of its main people. There’s probably no “HR” at a firm that size, and there will be two or three partners who have unilateral authority. I’ve gone against some very good small firms (3-6 lawyers) over the years, in civil rights litigation and business disputes. But If you’re the junior person at that shop, you a have to be very comfortable with the people and your role. I have several friends who tried it out—it worked out for some but not for others, for exactly that reason.

You’re right about the market dangers for smaller firms. They have to be on their toes, be financially responsible, etc. The margin for error for the firm is smaller. But the flip side for you, personally, is that at Biglaw firms, you are disposable. So perhaps your firm will do great, while you will be sent packing despite doing great work. I know several now-former Biglaw partners—very good lawyers—who made non-equity partner and were then kicked to the curb within a year or two, just because their mega-firms had sort-of lean years. Their sin was not developing a massive book of business within a year or two of partnership. And that is a very challenging task when you’re required to charge Biglaw rates that many smaller clients who might engage a 38-year-old partner will not pay.

[ElCuervo]

What's the most useful/marketable type of litigation experience one should try to get while in BigLaw to eventually end up in a midmarket texas shop?

White Collar/Regulatory is very valuable if you have any real experience with it. Especially federal of course.

A mix of a strong civil procedure background and some appellate experience would be a strong combination.

It really helps to know your way around a brief/case/etc. for real. If you've been buried in doc review or as the tenth player on a billion dollar case, it's hard to trust that you're going to be ready to jump in fast. For that reason, a non-Biglaw experience can be valuable if you leverage it to demonstrate actual capacity.
(USAO, military law, very small firm practice, state AG's office, etc.) This assumes your academic credentials are strong.

Could you shed a little light on the white-collar scene in Texas? In which of the major metro areas do you see a significant amount of white-collar/enforcement/investigations work? From your experience, which firms have a strong reputation for this work (in any of the cities)? I understand some of this may vary by the specific type of work--i.e., some firms may have a bustling investigations practice while others may be doing more lit. But I would be interested in whatever you can share. Thanks!

[Anonymous User]

Wahoowa! I just saw this up. Could I get your take on the best firms for corporate in Dallas?

[legalnovice]

This thread's been really informative. Appreciate all your answers. I have one more question: is it possible for an associate at a midlaw firm/lit boutique in Houston to lateral to one of the Texas legacy biglaw firms like V&E/BB or even out-of-state biglaw like K&E/Quinn/Gibson after a couple of years? And even if it were practically possible, would it be wise for an associate to do so, given that, as was intimated by the posts above, working for a lit boutique (at least in Houston) is already the way to go?

[ElCuervo]

What's the most useful/marketable type of litigation experience one should try to get while in BigLaw to eventually end up in a midmarket texas shop?

White Collar/Regulatory is very valuable if you have any real experience with it. Especially federal of course.

A mix of a strong civil procedure background and some appellate experience would be a strong combination.

It really helps to know your way around a brief/case/etc. for real. If you've been buried in doc review or as the tenth player on a billion dollar case, it's hard to trust that you're going to be ready to jump in fast. For that reason, a non-Biglaw experience can be valuable if you leverage it to demonstrate actual capacity.
(USAO, military law, very small firm practice, state AG's office, etc.) This assumes your academic credentials are strong.

Could you shed a little light on the white-collar scene in Texas? In which of the major metro areas do you see a significant amount of white-collar/enforcement/investigations work? From your experience, which firms have a strong reputation for this work (in any of the cities)? I understand some of this may vary by the specific type of work--i.e., some firms may have a bustling investigations practice while others may be doing more lit. But I would be interested in whatever you can share. Thanks!

Bump