Is the BigLaw experience ideal for an aspiring Solo Practitioner? Forum

[CPAlawHopefu]

I ultimately plan to open my own practice. Of course, this isn't something that will happen immediately after the law school. I plan to work for maybe 3-5 years at a firm (biglaw, medium, small, doesn't matter) for training purpose, and I'm going to take off own my own. I already have a CPA license, so I think a JD/CPA combination will make come quite useful.

My question is, if this is my plan, is there any significant benefit of getting "trained" at a Big Law vs small firms? I don't really give a shit about salary if I make 60k or 160k, but what I'm concerned about is the nature of the work involved at biglaw vs smaller firms, and which of two may give me a better training for solo practice. As far as the accounting industry goes, the big4 work environment is extremely compartmentalized, lots of red tapes, and slow progression, so the only real benefits are the slightly fatter paycheck and the exit opportunity. I think boutique firm is better for an aspiring solo practitioner due to a higher degree of autonomy.

Does this apply to BigLaws as well?

[totesTheGoat]

No. You're not going to get substantive work immediately out the gate in BigLaw, and will probably only start getting into it by the time you're thinking about starting your own practice. I think the best for you would be a midlaw firm that will give you good mentorship, but also get you into the bulk of the work before you're a 5th year.

[kaiser]

There are few avenues that would be less ideal than biglaw if your ultimate goal is to work as a sole practitioner (aside from giving you the financial flexibility to do so). Small firm will give you MUCH better training by way of immediate substantive experience, and engaging with all aspects of cases. I graduated law school 2 years ago, and of my friends who went to smaller firms, many have already taken depositions, appeared in court for hearings and arguments, drafted every kind of brief, met with and directly advised clients, etc. At the top big law firms, you are lucky if you do anything other than discovery crap your first 2 years.

[CPAlawHopefu]

Thanks for the answers.

Then would it be accurate to say that mid-size law firms (20-100 lawyers) generally do better in teaching the lawyering skills involved in the mix of litigational and transactional work in the short-term? If so, approximately how long would it take for a fresh grad in big law to get the same caliber of training as the ones at the smaller firms?

[nealric]

I ultimately plan to open my own practice. Of course, this isn't something that will happen immediately after the law school. I plan to work for maybe 3-5 years at a firm (biglaw, medium, small, doesn't matter) for training purpose, and I'm going to take off own my own. I already have a CPA license, so I think a JD/CPA combination will make come quite useful.

My question is, if this is my plan, is there any significant benefit of getting "trained" at a Big Law vs small firms? I don't really give a shit about salary if I make 60k or 160k, but what I'm concerned about is the nature of the work involved at biglaw vs smaller firms, and which of two may give me a better training for solo practice. As far as the accounting industry goes, the big4 work environment is extremely compartmentalized, lots of red tapes, and slow progression, so the only real benefits are the slightly fatter paycheck and the exit opportunity. I think boutique firm is better for an aspiring solo practitioner due to a higher degree of autonomy.

Does this apply to BigLaws as well?

Depends on your desired practice area. There are some specialties and sub specialties that you cannot get into without biglaw experience. Many corporate specialties are like that. You don't become and M&A lawyer starting out at a 3-lawyer firm. If you are planning on doing tax, I would absolutely advise you to go to Biglaw. A lot of the "no substantive experience as a junior associate" advice simply does not apply in tax. If you want good substantive experience, you need to be at biglaw or a respected tax boutique (which generally operate and pay like biglaw).

If you want to be a litigator, you may want a smaller firm. But I would say that you are probably better off as a cog in a machine working on high profile cases than handling cases by your self for a PI settlement mill. The former will provide a much better professional network, and the latter may not give you as much courtroom experience as you think. Having a spouse who is a biglaw litigator makes me think much of the conventional wisdom about biglaw not offering substantive experience is either wrong or out dated. Clients simply don't want to pay biglaw 1st years to do doc review any more. A lot of the true drudge work has been automated, and what's left often gets outsourced to temps. Biglaw 1st years are absolutely writing briefs from day one. That said, probably the best situation for a new litigator is a clerkship followed by a stint in a high-end boutique. These are rare and hard to get unless you went to Yale.

It's also worth pointing out that mid-size firms are responsible for very few new graduate jobs compared to small-law, government, and big law. Most of them prefer to hire experienced practitioners rather than train a total newbie.