New grad over 40 - BigLaw Forum

[Sum_Guy]

Just finished applying to law school, waiting to hear back, and now am getting a bit of cold feet over being too old.

I'll be starting law school in my early 40's. We'll see what law schools I get into, but I have 3.9x / 17-mid stats and a full career behind me so I expect to have T6 or at least T14 choices available.

I don't know what exactly I want to do with the JD once I have it -- that's what 3 years and classes and internships are for -- but I'd like to know that BigLaw would be reasonably probable if I do well in school.

I know the topic of prospects for old grads has come up before, but the latest thread I saw with decent activity was from 2012. Apologies if I missed something more recent.

[trebekismyhero]

It will definitely be harder for you being over 40, but I went to school and worked in big law with people that got were newly out of law school in their early 40s. I would definitely go to a t14, but maximize your scholarships and negotiations to make sure debt is low so that you don't have to rely on big law.

[sparty99]

It will definitely be harder for you being over 40, but I went to school and worked in big law with people that got were newly out of law school in their early 40s. I would definitely go to a t14, but maximize your scholarships and negotiations to make sure debt is low so that you don't have to rely on big law.

It could be a problem, but not necessarily. I would ask why are you going to law school now? It is very costly. Not sure if it is worth it regardless of age.

[ponderingmeerkat]

I strongly suspect you'll do great. I started law school at 35 and will be graduating at 38 this year. My OCI experience from a T14 school was a cakewalk with 16 total offers at firms in DC and NYC as well as secondary markets. Accepted a V5 NYC offer.

I found the interview process to be much less stressful than my law school cohorts, since many interviewers were my age (and in some instances younger). It was more natural to small talk, banter, and relate to someone with similar life experience. The whole interview process felt much less forced and contrived compared to my mid-20s counterparts. My distinct impression is firms see value in hiring someone who has their shit together and isn't socially awkward from a lack of real world exposure. Obviously, YMMV--so if you're an extreme introvert or struggle in social contexts, handicap accordingly. But, I've never once seen my late-30s/married-with-kids status mirrored back to me as anything but a positive.

Wish you the best!

[JHP]

I was not a law student entering at 40 like you, but I too would also wonder why you have decided to apply to law school if you're not sure you know what you want to do with it? While I don't think you need to have a specific goal, maybe something more specific than "I just want to try it out and figure it out while I'm there" is going to serve you better, not only for law school but also as an older student changing careers.

To some extent, I think if you're graduating in your mid-40's, there's a lot less room for you to "dick around," as they say, trying out different groups, different practices, different firms and/or companies, industries, etc. I think part of why you're having cold feet is that you don't really know where this is leading, and I don't think that's a good thing. Perhaps best to step back and reassess why you're pursuing this.

[Lesion of Doom]

I started at 40+ at a T1 in the South and managed my way to NYC biglaw. You can do it, but I would emphasize that you need to consider your options if biglaw doesn't work out. I was willing to roll the dice in part because I don't have kids. Six-figure student debt at middle age is daunting, regardless.

[notinbiglaw]

You'll be fine. Plenty of your peers will be almost as old or older. It's really not a huge issue unless you decide to make it a big one (like talking about family time non-stop.)

[FND]

You'll be fine. Plenty of your peers will be almost as old or older. It's really not a huge issue unless you decide to make it a big one (like talking about family time non-stop.)

"a handful of your peers", not plenty.

[Sum_Guy]

Thanks folks, your feeback is helpful. I'm okay if I'm going at it with a slight handicap, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't in "c'mon you're fooling yourself" territory.

And now let me push it a little bit. How unreasonable would it be to hope to hire in as something like a seasoned/lateral associate on a track to counsel/senior attorney (perhaps not partner) rather than a typical first-year associate, if I were to say I wanted to specialize in my current area of expertise*?
(*Current area is pension benefits/ERISA -- at risk of doxing myself, I've worked 20 years as an actuarial pension consultant, and have a lot familiarity with the code and regs as well as how to work with outside counsel, in that limited very slice of the law. Also have experience managing my book of client business and hunting new business.)

[Sum_Guy]

And to the folks wondering if I've thought through the law school decision sufficiently -- I appreciate your concern, but I'm good. I'm lucky enough that 20 years as a DINK has put me in a position of being able to handle any outcome comfortably.

So I'm in the position of truly having all my options open, and I'm not going to close any of them in advance. BigLaw seems the likeliest outcome, so I was hoping for some reassurance that it's really on the table, and I think I've gotten that here. But I could definitely see picking a cool clerkship or the ACLU or something like that if those are options, despite the limited payback on my investment.

[janereacher]

There were several of us who were over 35 in my 1L law school cohort (admittedly at a school that skewed older). I'm headed to Big law in a major market this summer. My OCI experience was that age is either a non-issue or will be to your benefit. All that matters is grades, your school, and (perhaps) ties. I do think that most people who go to law school at non-traditional ages have specific goals. I think it makes it easier to get through the grind.

[nixy]

At least in the market where I went to law school (not NYC/DC/LA), I think there are biglaw firms that skew toward hiring the shiny, new, malleable young grads. But the firms that don't (and there are plenty) will really not care and will see experience as a benefit. As long as you can demonstrate, to anyone who worries, that you're fine working with/taking orders from someone younger than you, no one will care. (Lots of people won't worry about this either, but it's a thing that comes up.)

I guess I'd also add (throwing out totally unsolicited advice) that I think one of the best things about going to back school as a non-trad is you have a much better sense of you, your strengths/weaknesses, and what you want out of a job/career. So I get that you're just concerned about not having any doors shut right now, but don't fall into the biglaw path just because you can and it's there.

[Anonymous User]

At least in the market where I went to law school (not NYC/DC/LA), I think there are biglaw firms that skew toward hiring the shiny, new, malleable young grads.

Agree with this. Some firms want your wisdom and experience. Some firms want a 26 year old desperate to succeed and who will do ANYTHING their boss asks and work all hours. Anecdotally, I've also found that age is a plus with men, and a detriment for women. YMMV.

[cavalier1138]

How unreasonable would it be to hope to hire in as something like a seasoned/lateral associate on a track to counsel/senior attorney (perhaps not partner) rather than a typical first-year associate, if I were to say I wanted to specialize in my current area of expertise*?
(*Current area is pension benefits/ERISA -- at risk of doxing myself, I've worked 20 years as an actuarial pension consultant, and have a lot familiarity with the code and regs as well as how to work with outside counsel, in that limited very slice of the law. Also have experience managing my book of client business and hunting new business.)

Extremely unreasonable. Your experience in the substantive field will be helpful in securing a job, but no one's going to hire you at a higher class level because of it.

Note: Moved this thread to the appropriate forum.

[nixy]

I agree with this ^ - I don’t think you’ll be able to “jump the queue” so to speak (just because lockstep is such a thing in biglaw firms). I do think that experience will help you a lot in getting a job, but you’ll have to start at the bottom like everyone else.

(A very small firm might be more flexible, but a very small firm isn’t likely to have an ERISA practice.)

[t-14orbust]

I hope you’re okay with taking orders from 27 year olds with limited managerial experience.

[Sum_Guy]

How unreasonable would it be to hope to hire in as something like a seasoned/lateral associate on a track to counsel/senior attorney (perhaps not partner) rather than a typical first-year associate, if I were to say I wanted to specialize in my current area of expertise*?
(*Current area is pension benefits/ERISA -- at risk of doxing myself, I've worked 20 years as an actuarial pension consultant, and have a lot familiarity with the code and regs as well as how to work with outside counsel, in that limited very slice of the law. Also have experience managing my book of client business and hunting new business.)

Extremely unreasonable. Your experience in the substantive field will be helpful in securing a job, but no one's going to hire you at a higher class level because of it.

Note: Moved this thread to the appropriate forum.

That's helpful, thanks.

[Sum_Guy]

At least in the market where I went to law school (not NYC/DC/LA), I think there are biglaw firms that skew toward hiring the shiny, new, malleable young grads. But the firms that don't (and there are plenty) will really not care and will see experience as a benefit. As long as you can demonstrate, to anyone who worries, that you're fine working with/taking orders from someone younger than you, no one will care. (Lots of people won't worry about this either, but it's a thing that comes up.)

I guess I'd also add (throwing out totally unsolicited advice) that I think one of the best things about going to back school as a non-trad is you have a much better sense of you, your strengths/weaknesses, and what you want out of a job/career. So I get that you're just concerned about not having any doors shut right now, but don't fall into the biglaw path just because you can and it's there.

Thanks, that's good advice. I'm doing this because I want to, and really do plan to keep my options open.

And yeah, it's shocking how much more self-possessed I am at this stage in my life than I was in my 20's -- it's not something one often has cause to notice, as change happens so gradually. But I remember even in my late 20's when all my friends were going to b-school, the idea of having to write essays about who you are and what you want out of life seemed like such painful, false bullshit. But at this point in my life, I actually enjoyed writing the personal statement. I don't really know what I want to _do_ with the degree, but I have a very clear sense of both who I am and who I want to _be_, if that makes sense.