Good Enough to Leave Big Law? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I am a second/third year transactional attorney at a big firm (Amlaw 50-100) in a medium to large market. Think Minneapolis, Denver or Seattle. I have a very strong connection and am very personally close with a potential client who currently uses an attorney from a two person shop for all of their deal work (about $1M in fees per year). I just received an offer to go join the two attorneys to work for the client plus the others they have. The offer was essentially name a price to come over for the first few years and then join the younger attorney as a partner when the older of the two retires in a couple of years. In theory, I will be the heir to at least a portion of the older attorney's work when he retires in a couple years and to the full book of business in 10-15yrs when the younger of the two retires. I expect the short term comp will be 150% of current pay and within a couple of years will be double my would be big law pay with significant upside if we are able to grow. I think downside risk is somewhat limited because of the stability and connection with the client I mentioned earlier. Interested to get everyones thoughts on pros and cons and whether they would go. Aware of the risk something happens with the major client or that I do not get along with the two attorneys but not overly concerned with either. What would you do, and what questions would you ask aside from comp structure? Thanks everyone.

Edit to add: I like my current firm, group and work and could see myself there long term.

[Neff]

I am a second/third year transactional attorney at a big firm (Amlaw 50-100) in a medium to large market. Think Minneapolis, Denver or Seattle. I have a very strong connection and am very personally close with a potential client who currently uses an attorney from a two person shop for all of their deal work (about $1M in fees per year). I just received an offer to go join the two attorneys to work for the client plus the others they have. The offer was essentially name a price to come over for the first few years and then join the younger attorney as a partner when the older of the two retires in a couple of years. In theory, I will be the heir to at least a portion of the older attorney's work when he retires in a couple years and to the full book of business in 10-15yrs when the younger of the two retires. I expect the short term comp will be 150% of current pay and within a couple of years will be double my would be big law pay with significant upside if we are able to grow. I think downside risk is somewhat limited because of the stability and connection with the client I mentioned earlier. Interested to get everyones thoughts on pros and cons and whether they would go. Aware of the risk something happens with the major client or that I do not get along with the two attorneys but not overly concerned with either. What would you do, and what questions would you ask aside from comp structure? Thanks everyone.

Edit to add: I like my current firm, group and work and could see myself there long term.

What type of "deal work"?

If it's M&A, then one data point from my experience is that solo/tiny firms are generally (with rare exception) bad at it, because you do need to leverage a lot of specialist support (and engaging other tax/employment/benefits people outside your firm is a real pain). Many small shops say they do M&A but they just do bottom tier tiny mom and pop deals and/or wing it (and a fourth year cannot possibly have the experience to run deals (1) independently, (2) competently, and (3) without uncomfortable amounts of stress).

If some kind of niche transactional work, I can see this working out.

[crazywafflez]

I think this is totally personal. I don't think the forum is gonna help you. I'd take the risk, but that is just me.