Page 1 of 2
Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 4:45 pm
by Anonymous User
Semi-recent lateral from a v100 to v20. Midlevel M&A associate.
Not sure if this is a result of small sample size of clients, but I have been shocked at the relative incompetence of the in-house corporate attorneys of the clients I have been servicing. It's simply astonishing to me that the e.g. "Senior Corporate and Securities Counsel" of a F500 would not know (or care to look up) the rules for what triggers filing an 8-K or understand the difference between Bylaws and an Operating Agreement. I have come away with the impression that such attorneys serve far more of a project manager role as opposed to actually practicing law, and it has soured me on the idea of leaving firm life for such a role.
Is this just me, or is it something other folks have encountered/are encountering as well?
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 5:02 pm
by Sackboy
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 4:45 pm
Semi-recent lateral from a v100 to v20. Midlevel M&A associate.
Not sure if this is a result of small sample size of clients, but I have been shocked at the relative incompetence of the in-house corporate attorneys of the clients I have been servicing. It's simply astonishing to me that the e.g. "Senior Corporate and Securities Counsel" of a F500 would not know (or care to look up) the rules for what triggers filing an 8-K or understand the difference between Bylaws and an Operating Agreement. I have come away with the impression that such attorneys serve far more of a project manager role as opposed to actually practicing law, and it has soured me on the idea of leaving firm life for such a role.
Is this just me, or is it something other folks have encountered/are encountering as well?
I haven't dealt with that level of incompetence, but you have it right that in-house counsel are first and foremost deal/lit/regulator project managers and secondarily lawyers.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 5:28 pm
by Anonymous User
This happens because (a) top law firms specialize all corporate associates almost immediately and (b) companies are hiring associates from these law firms to in house positions within 2-3 years of practice.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 10:47 am
by Anonymous User
Anon b/c my own company has considerable incompetent/barely competent in house attorneys. What makes it worse is that many of them have hugely inflated egos too.
I honestly dont know how a lot of things even get done. I know outside counsel (rightfully so) gets super frustrated with us all the time.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 11:11 am
by Anonymous User
I recently had a client who thought that a general authorization resolution at the end of a board consent gave the officers power to do whatever they wanted without any kind of formal consent from then on. From what I can tell based on a quick google search their lawyer is a daddy's money 30-something whose dad has names on buildings at a large university in a less populous state.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 11:44 am
by Anonymous User
You are not alone
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 12:37 pm
by Anonymous User
My impression is that in-house counsel has things they do well and useful information but that, in the context of a transaction, our goal is basically to keep them out of everything as much possible, particularly any drafting, because they would only screw stuff up.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 1:07 pm
by Hutz_and_Goodman
I handled a lawsuit against a very large and publicly traded corporation. The in house counsel told me upfront she didn’t have a lot of experience with litigation but she asked me “after we file the answer, what’s the next step—trial?” She was the person authorizing settlement authority so I had to educate her about all of the other steps involved (and the projected cost).
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 2:51 pm
by Anonymous User
Hutz_and_Goodman wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 1:07 pm
I handled a lawsuit against a very large and publicly traded corporation. The in house counsel told me upfront she didn’t have a lot of experience with litigation but she asked me “after we file the answer, what’s the next step—trial?” She was the person authorizing settlement authority so I had to educate her about all of the other steps involved (and the projected cost).
I have no issue with in-house counsel letting me know where they don't have experience and then staying out of the way. It's when they insist on "helping" on matters on which they have no business being a part of that drives me crazy.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 5:46 pm
by Anonymous User
I’ve definitely come across a number of in house folks that don’t seem to have a clue (on the corporate end), but I have also come across a number that are super impressive and well credentialed. In my experience, the more sophisticated the client the more sophisticated the in house team. Definitely something to consider when you jump if you care about further development.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2022 5:12 pm
by Anonymous User
I'm in-house at a large company and have noticed this same issue, too. For some things that some attorneys work on they are hands on and more knowledgeable, but a lot of the in-house attorneys are really managing a project at a high level and don't really seem to be doing a lot directly on substantive issues. I'm honestly not sure what my manager is even doing. It's kind of nice sometimes since it seems we barely do anything which was nice during the first part of the pandemic. I feel like I work maybe 3 hours a week of real work and I'm getting incredibly bored.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2022 5:34 pm
by Anonymous User
In house counsel at a sophisticated place (i.e. everyone went to a t-14 and worked at an vault 50 firm). Unlike law firms, legal acumen is not really rewarded. It’s more political. Bad lawyers can rise quickly because you are typically just working with people who don’t know anything about legal work and those are the people who talk about you and determine who is good and who is not. Your legal work will likely never be seen by another in-house lawyer. It’s very different.
Not knowing the difference between bylaws and operating agreements is outrageous if it’s a corporate lawyer. If they are an HR lawyer or commercial counsel or something, just a bit embarrassing.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2022 8:39 am
by Anonymous User
Hutz_and_Goodman wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 1:07 pm
I handled a lawsuit against a very large and publicly traded corporation. The in house counsel told me upfront she didn’t have a lot of experience with litigation but she asked me “after we file the answer, what’s the next step—trial?” She was the person authorizing settlement authority so I had to educate her about all of the other steps involved (and the projected cost).
I don’t see why this is embarrassing. Most lawyers in-house are corporate lawyers or commercial contracts lawyers as that is 80+% of the legal work needed in house. Most of them have never done any litigation or ever seen any trial. That’s why they hire you. The fact that someone needs your expertise is not a sign of their incompetence, it’s why they hired you. Part of your job is explaining how these things work and giving cost estimates.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2022 7:07 pm
by Anonymous User
This shouldn't be surprising. 99% of lawyers who are in house are those that couldn't get firm jobs in the first place or flamed out in big law. You shouldn't have high expectations. Also, these companies have entire legal departments, sometimes bigger than major firms, and still utilize outside counsel. Ask yourself why that might be.
Still, they're likely easier to deal with than the business teams.
Just grin, bear it, and take their money.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2022 9:32 pm
by Durant123
I’m guessing this is an attempt at trolling or a junior associate. In any event, and as a counterpoint, I’m currently in-house at a 200-300 employee company in a finance related role. Roughly 15 attorneys. Mostly T-14 former biglaw (at least 5 years). Routinely dealing with top shops such as Skadden, LW, etc. and see tons of trash work from overworked and under-slept associates. I can usually tell when a partner/senior associate hasn’t reviewed a document (which happens often).
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2022 10:58 am
by ajax
I've experienced the opposite. I'm on the in-house side, and many biglaw associates at or below my year level are incredibly incompetent. Absurd how high they are billed out.
Query why this has been the case for me? Small sample size? One reason may be that the most competent biglaw associates are crushed by biglaw partners since they can be relied upon, and such crushing forces them to leave firm life for more manageable in-house life.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2022 11:05 am
by Anonymous User
Durant123 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 9:32 pm
I’m guessing this is an attempt at trolling or a junior associate. In any event, and as a counterpoint, I’m currently in-house at a 200-300 employee company in a finance related role. Roughly 15 attorneys. Mostly T-14 former biglaw (at least 5 years). Routinely dealing with top shops such as Skadden, LW, etc. and see tons of trash work from overworked and under-slept associates. I can usually tell when a partner/senior associate hasn’t reviewed a document (which happens often).
You have 15 lawyers at a 200-300 employee company?! My 250 employee company has two.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2022 5:02 pm
by Durant123
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 11:05 am
Durant123 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 9:32 pm
I’m guessing this is an attempt at trolling or a junior associate. In any event, and as a counterpoint, I’m currently in-house at a 200-300 employee company in a finance related role. Roughly 15 attorneys. Mostly T-14 former biglaw (at least 5 years). Routinely dealing with top shops such as Skadden, LW, etc. and see tons of trash work from overworked and under-slept associates. I can usually tell when a partner/senior associate hasn’t reviewed a document (which happens often).
You have 15 lawyers at a 200-300 employee company?! My 250 employee company has two.
That seems absurdly low and likely results in overuse of outside counsel at significant cost. Maybe you are in a business/industry that really doesn’t require more attorneys than that. Can’t imagine what that business would be personally.
We have invested in our legal team and have several specialists (tax, real estate, permitting, specialized finance practices) and then a couple of general corporate. This is not the kind of business that can rely on outside counsel for all these functions without absurd bills.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2022 5:08 pm
by AntipodeanPhil
I had this issue recently. The general counsel for a smaller investment bank drafted a termination agreement for the investment bank's engagement letter. All three law firms involved with the deal agreed that it was ridiculous and off market. We pointed that out to the general counsel (in polite terms) and she refused to compromise or accept any comments. Even worse, instead of accepting any of our comments, she sent the letter back with unrelated comments of her own, which was bizarre given that she was commenting on her draft. Her complete refusal to compromise actually delayed the deal a day or so, which was particularly ridiculous given that the investment bankers had been pushing everyone else to close the deal ASAP up until that point.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2022 5:45 pm
by dabigchina
I mean, if they could do this shit themselves, they wouldn't be paying a first year $500/hr to do it.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2022 7:02 am
by Anonymous User
Durant123 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 5:02 pm
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 11:05 am
Durant123 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 9:32 pm
I’m guessing this is an attempt at trolling or a junior associate. In any event, and as a counterpoint, I’m currently in-house at a 200-300 employee company in a finance related role. Roughly 15 attorneys. Mostly T-14 former biglaw (at least 5 years). Routinely dealing with top shops such as Skadden, LW, etc. and see tons of trash work from overworked and under-slept associates. I can usually tell when a partner/senior associate hasn’t reviewed a document (which happens often).
You have 15 lawyers at a 200-300 employee company?! My 250 employee company has two.
That seems absurdly low and likely results in overuse of outside counsel at significant cost. Maybe you are in a business/industry that really doesn’t require more attorneys than that. Can’t imagine what that business would be personally.
We have invested in our legal team and have several specialists (tax, real estate, permitting, specialized finance practices) and then a couple of general corporate. This is not the kind of business that can rely on outside counsel for all these functions without absurd bills.
Pretty funny of you to say without having any idea what business I'm in. Our total outside counsel spend for everything (IP, employment, transactional, litigation, etc) is around what it would cost to put 1.5 more good lawyers on salary.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2022 9:42 am
by Anonymous User
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue Apr 19, 2022 7:02 am
Durant123 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 5:02 pm
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 11:05 am
Durant123 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 9:32 pm
I’m guessing this is an attempt at trolling or a junior associate. In any event, and as a counterpoint, I’m currently in-house at a 200-300 employee company in a finance related role. Roughly 15 attorneys. Mostly T-14 former biglaw (at least 5 years). Routinely dealing with top shops such as Skadden, LW, etc. and see tons of trash work from overworked and under-slept associates. I can usually tell when a partner/senior associate hasn’t reviewed a document (which happens often).
You have 15 lawyers at a 200-300 employee company?! My 250 employee company has two.
That seems absurdly low and likely results in overuse of outside counsel at significant cost. Maybe you are in a business/industry that really doesn’t require more attorneys than that. Can’t imagine what that business would be personally.
We have invested in our legal team and have several specialists (tax, real estate, permitting, specialized finance practices) and then a couple of general corporate. This is not the kind of business that can rely on outside counsel for all these functions without absurd bills.
Pretty funny of you to say without having any idea what business I'm in. Our total outside counsel spend for everything (IP, employment, transactional, litigation, etc) is around what it would cost to put 1.5 more good lawyers on salary.
I mean, that person did explicitly qualify their statement by saying they're not sure what business you're in...
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2022 10:29 am
by Durant123
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue Apr 19, 2022 9:42 am
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue Apr 19, 2022 7:02 am
Durant123 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 5:02 pm
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 11:05 am
Durant123 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 9:32 pm
I’m guessing this is an attempt at trolling or a junior associate. In any event, and as a counterpoint, I’m currently in-house at a 200-300 employee company in a finance related role. Roughly 15 attorneys. Mostly T-14 former biglaw (at least 5 years). Routinely dealing with top shops such as Skadden, LW, etc. and see tons of trash work from overworked and under-slept associates. I can usually tell when a partner/senior associate hasn’t reviewed a document (which happens often).
You have 15 lawyers at a 200-300 employee company?! My 250 employee company has two.
That seems absurdly low and likely results in overuse of outside counsel at significant cost. Maybe you are in a business/industry that really doesn’t require more attorneys than that. Can’t imagine what that business would be personally.
We have invested in our legal team and have several specialists (tax, real estate, permitting, specialized finance practices) and then a couple of general corporate. This is not the kind of business that can rely on outside counsel for all these functions without absurd bills.
Pretty funny of you to say without having any idea what business I'm in. Our total outside counsel spend for everything (IP, employment, transactional, litigation, etc) is around what it would cost to put 1.5 more good lawyers on salary.
I mean, that person did explicitly qualify their statement by saying they're not sure what business you're in...
Indeed.
Of course, if a business doesn’t have much IP, doesn’t carry out many transactions and doesn’t have any ongoing litigation, its outside legal spend may be low enough that it doesn’t justify having a larger in house legal department. Sounds like this business doesn’t have any need for legal specialists of any kind, and doesn’t do very much that would require legal assistance.
This thread is meant to be about the competency of in-house attorneys so maybe we bring it back to that?
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2022 1:07 pm
by 1styearlateral
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 7:07 pm
This shouldn't be surprising. 99% of lawyers who are in house are those that couldn't get firm jobs in the first place or flamed out in big law. You shouldn't have high expectations. Also, these companies have entire legal departments, sometimes bigger than major firms, and still utilize outside counsel. Ask yourself why that might be.
Still, they're likely easier to deal with than the business teams.
Just grin, bear it, and take their money.
Re: Experiences With Inept In-house Counsel
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2022 9:47 pm
by Anonymous User
1styearlateral wrote: ↑Tue Apr 19, 2022 1:07 pm
Anonymous User wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 7:07 pm
This shouldn't be surprising. 99% of lawyers who are in house are those that couldn't get firm jobs in the first place or flamed out in big law. You shouldn't have high expectations. Also, these companies have entire legal departments, sometimes bigger than major firms, and still utilize outside counsel. Ask yourself why that might be.
Still, they're likely easier to deal with than the business teams.
Just grin, bear it, and take their money.
These comments are so weird to me. Like do you expect that in-house counsel should have a full slate of people to do an M&A deal including Erisa experts, etc. or should the corporate lawyers know employment law or tax? Like how would they be able to run an M&A deal or deal with comments if they are only doing 2 a year and don’t have tons of precedent and resources to refer to.
Most people voluntarily go in-house from big law. They don’t flame out. The flame out comment is some bullshit that lifers and partners tell themselves, but it’s not accurate. Tons of great associates decide they’d rather see their kids than help the Uber rich get slightly more Uber rich.