First.

You smell.

Anyone who couldn't figure this stuff out on his or her own shouldn't be allowed within 50 paces of meaningful work. Except maybe #4, some people might think that dress to impress means dazzle them with opulence. But the rest is right up there with "don't bean the interviewer over the head with a frozen carp."

As someone who works at a medium firm I second the above and add that you may well be interviewed by associates who have barely passed the bar. The partners will actually take into consideration their opinions on whether or not you should be hired, especially about whether you fit in with the firm "culture" as mentioned above. Just FYI.

I disagree heartily with point #4. I'm at a small family law firm and the lawyers here are quite a bit more formal than at my large law firm as they meet with clients/go to court much more frequently. My advice would also be to go along with the (fallacious) philosophy that you'll work just as hard in small law as you did in biglaw. I found this not to be the case - I work far, far fewer hours at a small firm - but I wouldn't proceed with the interview as though I'm presuming fewer hours.

Also, it has not been my experience that those in my field ever pined for biglaw.

i think this is an awesome post. although it sounds like common sense, it is a good reminder to think about how you are perceived by others - especially when you are in a transition period.

You mean "from biglaw to toilet law."

Dazzle the small firm with your incredible skills!

"I can review documents like a pro!"

"I've watched two depositions!"

"I've seen somebody draft a Motion to Compel!"

Who says small law pays poorly? I'm at a small (20 attorney) firm in a low cost of living area and make $125k. I'm a 3rd year. Yeah, it's not a BigLaw salary, but it's not exactly peanuts either.

5, 3 here. I think point #4 was just saying that you shouldn't dress like you're a Hollywood star going to a premiere. Dress tastefully and appropriately, but don't wear anything that makes people think, geez, that must have cost an arm and a leg. Nothing that screams "I make more money than you!"

Good tips for government as well.

So small-law interviewers are complete dickheads?

WHO IS INTERVIEWING RIGHT NOW???

I got the memo (thanks for two years of derivatives work - you're fired) in DECEMBER, and I've been applying aggressively to every small and mid sized firm, company, craigslist post and unpaid intership I can find. I have not had an interview since January!

How about tipping us off to where it is you work and where is hiring??!

9--

In three years, that WILL be a BigLaw salary. Watch and see. :\

Repost (w/minor addition) that is appropriate for this thread.

These are my non-sequiturs of the day:

1) If you were recently terminated, take the severance pay with a smile. You are fortunate to get a severance as this was a rare benefit 40 years ago.

2) Sign the release and be realistic. You will unlikely prevail in any litigation taken against your former employer. Your employment was at will, meaning you can be terminated at our will. In this case, the bad economy is a just cause for workforce reduction, just in case you were wondering. For you third year law students, detrimental reliance only works for intellectually challenged plaintiffs. Again, in case you were curious.

3) Do not sue or bad mouth your former employer. If you do this, you will ruin your career forever. Years ago, an associate threatened to sue the firm when he was terminated for underperforming. He threatened to expose the skeletons of a particular partner. Within 15 minutes, I had contacted every legal recruiter in the tri-state area and told them not to assist the disgruntled associate in future placement. I warned each recruiter that if I found out the associate was placed at another firm with their assistance, we would no longer do business with them. Think about it. Most recruiters earn six figures with us during the year in placement commissions. Do you think they will forfeit that type of money to assist in placing a defective associate? Remember, you sue or badmouth and you will be blacklisted in the legal community.

4) Hang a shingle. Take the severance money and start your own practice (our release contains a covenant not to compete in Manhattan) in the outer boroughs or in Long Island. You may actually enjoy preparing wills and representing folks in traffic court. It is definitely less stressful.

5) If you lack the temerity to hang a shingle and happen to interview for a smaller firm, be very humble. No one wants you to repeat your lofty accomplishments on your resume. I seldom look at resumes. If you are before me, then I know the appropriate measures were taken to ensure that you possess the hard criteria to be interviewed. Be yourself. I once asked a candidate if he would cheat on his wife. His answer was very candid and I was impressed. He was hired. Do not try to be someone you are not. This becomes very transparent. As for grooming, have clean nails and hands. If you have sweaty palms, dry them off before you shake hands. Never wear a striped suit with a striped shirt or a tie with a striped pattern. Never wear black, pink or lime colored shirts.

6) Finally, live within your means. If you want to drive a Mercedes Benz, I recommend you purchase a Smartcar for $12,000.00. It is made by Mercedes Benz so you can still show off to stroke your ego. I hear there are places in Manhattan where you can rent a prestigious address. You can show your friends and family that you have an impressive Upper East Side mailing address and still live in Rego Park on the cheap.

You are welcome for the advice.

"In three years, that WILL be a BigLaw salary. Watch and see. :\"

14, I doubt it will drop that low, at least not in the high cost of living areas.

I'm just happy right now to have a steady job that pays over $100k.

If these condescending "tips" sound meaningful to you, you won't be getting a job at one of these firms, because they suggest that even the best mid-sized and boutique firms and attorneys have some sort of inferiority complex from thinking they might not be as good as BigLaw. I work at a well-regarded mid-sized firm, and frankly, our work product is just as good as BigLaw’s output, only much more efficient. All our name partners are Harvard and other top Ivy grads from big firms who formed this place because they knew they could undercut BigLaw and make a lot of money doing it in their own style. The firm is a lot more open-minded than big firms, and lifestyle is very important here, but I know I got this job because of my Harvard JD and my good references from my prior BigLaw firm. Even though we associates make less than at a large firm, we have much better hours and a lot more job security. And nobody here has the slightest inferiority complex.

Tip #5 is specific to the author's firm, and probably specific to just one specific anecdote. It has no place here in a general advice column.

To echo the thoughts of others, while "bling" may be particularly inappropriate when interviewing at a small firm from BigLaw, small firms are generally MUCH more formal than big firms. It's like how only solo practitioners use "Esq." after their name.

Biglaw attorneys are always called arrogant, but it doesn't seem like the small law attorneys are any better.

13: I'm going to my fourth interview with small-law today. Of course, I'm a litigator, and did not practice in an area of law that noone currently has any use for.

I would suggest that, if you are junior enough, you try to make a complete practice transition and start at ground level.

Or you can stay unemployed.....

if the author is representative of "small law" attorneys that I'll have to say that they are MORE condescending than most big law attorneys I've met.

sad.

This post is slightly offensive to those of us in small firms. It is true that I don't make a big firm salary, but I make enough to buy nice suits and, gasp, tasteful diamond studs. I also have that Ivy League background that you advise others to downplay.

My firm, like all firms, wants the best pedigreed lawyers it can get. If you went to Harvard, great! We're not offended by that fact: we'd love to have you and the connections you'll likely bring with you. If you own nice clothing and jewelry, wear them! I have conducted some interviews here, and (while this may make me shallow) I am more impressed by those who are opulently attired than by those who are not. We are litigators, and we needs to make as dazzling an impression as we can.

We are small, but we are southern (and thus very formal) and well educated. Our opponents are often BigLaw attorneys, and we do not consider ourselves (rightly or wrongly) to be inferior to them in any way.

That being said, fitting in is very important. We receive resumes from qualified people quite often, but, if we don't particularly like the person, then he or she will not last.

Anyway, send us your Chicago educated, your diamond clad, your highbrow accented, and your unemployed BigLaw masses...

Listen, the advise on how to interview at small firms is going to be useless for the vast majority of recent bigfirm layoff victims, most of whom (especially the junior associates) will never work in a law firm again. Helpful interview tips for most ex-biglaw associates consist of the following:

1. Demonstrate to the interviewer that you know how to operate both a fryer and a cash register.
2. State that you understand that you will be required to "clock out" for cigarette breaks.
3. Don't ask about health insurance, because there isn't any.
4. State that you have a valid driver's license for any delivery work that is required.
5. State that you are able to stand on your feet for long periods of time.
6. Mention that you know that it is expected to serve from the right, and that you are able to memorize the nightly lists of specials.
7. Ask how the the tips will be split among the staff.
8. Mention that you can work nights and weekends (that one is not much different than what is required for biglaw interviews)

Elie, your comment - "Keep in mind that right now, you're sitting across the table from attorneys who once did not get the job with BigLaw, probably because of you." - is simply ignorant. I am at BigLaw now, but I started out at a tiny firm. All of the partners had been at BigLaw and left to start their own firm. This is not an uncommon experience, and I've met many, many attorneys at small and medium shops with amazing credentials who clerked and did their time at BigLaw. Newsflash: BigLaw does not equal better or smarter lawyer. And although there are plenty of brilliant lawyers here, the lawyers at my prior firm were of the same quality. Shockingly ignorant statement.

I work at a boutique litigation firm. We make more than equivalent class years at every firm except Wachtell.

18, I think that point #5 can be generalized to mean "don't condescend." The fact that anyone - even a single person in a single anecdote - needs to be told that is crazy.

Then again, I know someone who made fun of the interviewer's name after my friend (who got him the interview) told him what it was. This was all at the workplace. He didn't know the interviewer was within earshot, and needless to say he didn't get the job. This was in IT, not law.

I guess it takes all kinds.

At least this shows that Partner Emeritus is a law student'junior attorney. No law firm would ever make anyone who has been terminated sign a non-compete that they cannot compete in Manhattan as an attorney. Obviously it is completely unenforceable. Also, as someone who works in a small firm, you have to be kidding to think that it is more formal than a large firm. OTOH, the pay sure is less.

Anyone who doesn't know point #2 deserves to starve.

The fact that this information is apparently needed by many in the biglaw field is not surprising and this piece of advice will not help anyone that didn't know this already.

"This post is slightly offensive to those of us in small firms. It is true that I don't make a big firm salary, but I make enough to buy nice suits and, gasp, tasteful diamond studs. I also have that Ivy League background that you advise others to downplay."

22 - Unemployed as we may be, we laugh when you put that weeklong HLS continuing education seminar on your CV and brag about your Ivy League background.

What idiot wrote this piece? Many small firms are full of people who left biglaw. The partners at many small law firms make as much if not more than their "biglaw" counterparts. Get a life. No fancy cufflinks.

15,

Its "lay a shingle" not "hang a shingle." They are on the roof, not the ceiling jack ass

"15,

Its "lay a shingle" not "hang a shingle." They are on the roof, not the ceiling jack ass"

Now that is funny 32! Google is your friend.

Where is Loyola 2L to guide us in these turbulent times?

32, you are an idiot. The correct phrase is in fact "hang a shingle." The phrase comes from the now discontinued historical practice of tradesmen advertising their services by taking a roofing shingle, painting a picture of the type of services they provided (e.g., a picture of a horseshoe for a farrier) and hang said shingle outside their place of business.

Know what you are talking about before you call someone a "jackass," jackass.

Not 15.

Humility is appropriate. It's not just a pose.

If you're coming from BigLaw (especially as a junior associate), with very rare exceptions, the person interviewing you at a small firm knows far more about the area(s) of that firm's practice than you do, and has done far more actual important work than you have. Doc review, cite-checking, and researching one facet of a huge summary judgment motion are all necessary tasks, but there's a lot more to the law than that. BigLaw didn't teach you the skills necessary to depose someone or first- or even second-chair a trial.

Your inexperience and ignorance aren't huge problems. Small firms hire inexperienced folks out of law schools all the time. You'll learn what you need to learn, probably faster than the associates from state and regional schools. But for now you're ignorant and inexperienced. Don't think that you're not.

Agreed. I am at a small firm in a major city in the southeast. It is a firm that has been around for quite some time, once was considered to be a large firm for this town, but the partnership elected not to expand rapidly, merge, or sell themselves to a national or growing regional firm during the boom over the past 20 years. Honestly, we don't care one bit about what firm anyone works at, and certainly don't see ourselves as being below any of the major firms in the region (and have put a few of them in their place over the years.) At the same time, we try to avoid going toe-to-toe on minor matters with the major banks who bury us with paper, mostly due to the annoyance factor.

We all (partners and associates) wear suits every day for the most part. Which is a lot more than can be said for the associates at the major firms around town who dress like slobs on a daily basis.

I agree with 17 and 22. My advice for those making the transition is to keep in mind that smaller or mid-sized firms are generally going to expect you to be capable of operating with a greater amount of autonomy than you likely exercised at a large firm. To this end, many smaller or mid-sized firms are going to be more interested in actual experience rather than school (within reason), GPA or class rank, especially if you've been out of law school for more than three years or so. For junior associates with little legal experience other than the standard big firm document review/due dilligence/research type things, maturity and prior "real world" experience, say in the military or in a post-college, pre-law school career, may trump law school or class rankings. In my experience, most smaller or mid-size firm lawyers, even those with "prestigious" educational backgrounds or big firm experience, are less concerned with your three years of law school than their big firm counterparts.

32- never go full retard

#8 - I laughed until I realized that's a pretty accurate depiction of my knowledge to date

- '07 biglaw

Over/under on people who only have doc-review experience realizing their law school pedigree wont get them a job after big-law layoffs? 9 months in mom's basement? 12?

Yeah...it's "hang a shingle" you former biglaw, cufflink wearing, disrespectful whiner! Maybe if you learned how to fit in, respect the elderly and dress appropriately you'd know these things.

Love,

Happy and secure mid-sized firm attorney.

(I can't get enough of these posts...they are hilarious).

Just throwin some support behind 27 (and being bitter that he beat me to the punch) that "Partner Emeritus" is most likely a 1L.

22 N.Y.C.R.R. § 1200.13(a) makes non-compete agreements involving lawyers (sans retirement) unenforceable

@25

Do you work at SG?

No. 22 to No. 33

I went to Georgetown undergrad (graduated magna cum laude) and Columbia law school. I have participated in no week-long continuing education courses of any variety.

We, of course, laugh at well credentialed people whose insecurity, nonetheless, drives them to make brash generalizations and attack people about whom they know nothing.

@44

No, but we have a similar approach and type of client, although with less contingency and plaintiff's work.

I agree wholeheartedly with 17 and would add only this; don't assume that trumpeting the insane hours you worked at BigLaw is going to impress people. I spent some time at a firm very much like the one 17 describes. Partners there took "lifestyle" very seriously. Of course they worked hard and of course there were periods of frantic activity, but they chose the firm over BigLaw partly because they did want to go home occasionally before their kids were in bed for the night. I only tried to make a "point" of some long hours once -- I got the clear message in response that a) it was NOT the firm culture to swing dicks about time spent tethered to one's desk and b) it actually sent the message that i might be doing work so efficiently (imagine that).

47 here--make not NOT so efficiently.

I am a fan of yours, Partner Emeritus, but 27 and 43 are right.

This is addressed to the posts that are trying to discredit me based on the unenforcebale covenant not to compete among lawyers. Do you minions realize that you have to prove your case in court? Don't bother trying to impress me with your knowledge of the law. Terminated associates rarely have the financial means or emotional will to litigate these issues in court. I addressed this concern in another post. The terminated associate has everything to lose and so little to gain in proving the covenant is unenforceable. Besides, do you really think a disgruntled associate can really compete with a high quality firm? What will the jury think? Or will the terminated associate have the funds to go to a jury trial? The case is rested.

I disbelieve almost all of that crap. First of all, I do not agree that people hiring attorneys for small firms have some huge complex about big firms. People will not "hate you" if you do X or Y, unless you are a dick about it.

Dressing nicely also does not work against you. People are either neutral about that; do not notice it at all; or are impressed by it. Dressing well is not a negative. They know that clients and judges, to the extent they notice, will like it.

This comment is addressed to post no. 49.

27 and 43 maybe right but as you very well know, sometimes being right does not mean you will prevail.

#7-- Haha, enjoy unemployment you fantastic comedian!

I work in a small firm now. I make way less than I did in biglaw, but then again I leave the office at 6pm and have dinner with my wife every night. I get to watch TV and read books.

I hope that you people putting down small firms have some substantive experience aside from doc review, because practice in a small firm actually requires you to be a lawyer (as opposed to an overpaid document monkey).

There are many different kinds of small and medium sized firms out there. Do your homework. Check your interviewers backgrounds before deciding how to present yourself at the interview(s)--I would be wary of any blanket advice on how shitty small/medium firms are. I work at a small 20-attorney lit boutique where attorneys have law degrees from schools like Yale, Columbia, NYU and Harvard. Excellence is valued here.

@46

That's really interesting. When I interviewed with SG during OCI, they told me that they, in fact, were the second highest-compensating firm to Wachtell (i.e. $160,000 + 20-60% of base as a bonus for first year associates). I won't ask you to list where you work, but thanks for the heads-up--I'll keep searching.

I do have a couple of questions, though:

-How many/what practice areas does your firm have?
-What are your hours like?
-What's the culture like?
-How long is your partnership track (SG told me that it would take 4 years, if not sooner, after I get done with my COA clerkship)?

Those speculating as to whether Partner Emeritus is a 1L are really missing the point of his schtick I think.

Wait, did 32 really say that? For reals? If I get fired, I'm going to "lay a shingle"....?

@55

I wasn't really taking SG into account, so our comp may in fact be equal to or slightly below theirs. For your questions:

1) We do civil/crim defense work, along with institutional plaintiffs' litigation and some internal investigations.
2) Hours vary, since it's litigation. Anywhere from 45-90 per week, with 50-55 probably being the average.
3) Culture is young and aggressive, and partner/associate relations are generally close. Lots of independent work, "go figure it out" kind of stuff.
4) There's no clear partnership track, although several people have been promoted internally after 4-5 years.

Basically, we're lean and avoid the types of wasted work that other firms do and can't be fully billed out.

"Partner Emeritus" @ 50 (aka law student):

1. It would be the FIRM's burden to prove up its nonexistent case that a statutorily unenforceable covenant should actually be enforced. The FIRM would have to bring suit. No one's going to waste his/her time filing a DJ action on this loser.

2. There would be minimal expense and obviously no "jury trial." This is a one-paragraph motion to dismiss.

This persona gets more and more annoying the more obvious it becomes that you are a (not very gifted) law student.

#9
Is your firm hiring? $125 looks really good after starting on unemployment.

Bite your tongues. I know you all want to show off how great you are with all your tips. Thing is, if someone needs these tips, they shouldn't be hired anyway. In biglaw or elsewhere. Why put these things out there so that these people can fake it through an interview and then act like the jackass they are once they get the job? Why tell every candidate "this is what I want to hear..." when the point of the interview is to see if they can do that on their own?

@56 - I get the point of the schtick; it's just not ammusing when it's blantantly unbelievable. Like 59 points out, the follow-up statement that this would even make make it to trial kills what was a very promising schtick.

-43

But what about the guy that said "lay a shingle"......?

Gentlemen at the legal preparatory academy with which I was once affiliated, in the course of their legal careers, found themselves on a variety of trajectories, such that certain of the gentlemen found themselves torn from the nuturing bosom of what is known in colloquial fashion as "Biglaw" and were cast out into the world at large, whereupon the gentlemen chose to affiliate themselves, in some instances, with mid-size and other firms of indeterminate size. The gentlemen already affiliated with these types of firms, in certain circumstances, determined to exact their vengeance on those gentlemen, who as a result of more recent events, have found themselves also to be expatriates from "Biglaw" and sought to obtain other legal employment. Accordingly, the latter gentlemen, upon interviewing with the former gentlemen, reamined in the search for gainful employment in such occurrences when they chose to don tasteful, yet expensive, accoutrements utilizing certain carbon-based faceted gemstones for such interviews. These events were commonplace, and passed virtually unnoticed.

I work at a small firm, and the idea that we're all still resentful of the people who scored Biglaw jobs is absurd. Everyone in my office (including me) came from Biglaw-- voluntarily, before the layoffs. That's more than this year's crop of laid off associates can say. If anything, we're skeptical that your layoff was not in some part performance-based. Especially if you're a litigator. Everyone knows big firms axe the shittiest performers first. And chances are I know someone at your old firm who can confirm that for me.

What we're really concerned about is lack of experience. The latest f'ing thing I need is some junior associate that has never drafted a discovery response or called a client by himself like a big boy. I'm sure he'll be really motivated now that he's not getting paid $160K+ for doc review and attending summer associate events.

We're also concerned about fit. In a small office, personality is magnified by about a squillion. So try to act normal. It helps.

I work at a small firm, and the idea that we're all still resentful of the people who scored Biglaw jobs is absurd. Everyone in my office (including me) came from Biglaw-- voluntarily, before the layoffs. That's more than this year's crop of laid off associates can say. If anything, we're skeptical that your layoff was not in some part performance-based. Especially if you're a litigator. Everyone knows big firms axe the shittiest performers first. And chances are I know someone at your old firm who can confirm that for me.

What we're really concerned about is lack of experience. The latest f'ing thing I need is some junior associate that has never drafted a discovery response or called a client by himself like a big boy. I'm sure he'll be really motivated now that he's not getting paid $160K+ for doc review and attending summer associate events.

We're also concerned about fit. In a small office, personality is magnified by about a squillion. So try to act normal. It helps.

As a 7th year who laid off at Christmas, I've come to have my eyes opened on the subject of small to mid size firm experience. I applied to the Attorney General's office, thinking I was a lock after 7 years of experience at very high-end Biglaw firms with experience specifically in the required practice area. I was informed that I came in 2nd in the interview process. They were giving the job to someone who started in Biglaw and then worked at a small firm. Why? Because it's been their experience that Biglaw doesn't train litigators to do real work, and small firms do -- you take hundreds of depositions, get tons of court experience and run all your own cases, which is what you do at the AG. It was very eye-opening for me.

I just started work at a mid-size local firm. My salary has been literally cut in half. But I'm running all my own cases and getting the experience I lacked before. And when things pick up, I hope to be able to tranisition to a firm that pays more and will value the experience I'm getting here. It was hard to swallow the change in prestige and salary (mostly salary, actually) but I consider myself lucky to have gotten a job within 2 months, and I figure it wil be easier to get a new job if I'm employed and keeping my skill set up than it would be if I sat at home on unemployment for 6 months or more. Anyway, that's what I hope....

@58

Thanks for the information; that's really helpful. I'm hoping to circumvent the BigLaw experience and start out/stick with a boutique lit firm.

Partner Emeritus:

I am troubled by your statements in this and other threads that the legal community can and does "blacklist" people who sue law firms. Maybe in the case you refer to above it was a situation of trying to retaliate for an act of malice or blackmail (although even if you were the victim of malice or blackmail, I don't think that was an appropriate response). But is this how the legal community responds to anyone who has been wronged by a law firm? And, moving to a slightly different factual scenario, what does it say about a client's ability to redress an act of legal malpractice?

Does this really go on?

midlaw attorney here: this is a stupid article. i am also a voluntary, VOLUNTARY, biglaw to midlaw person (about 4 years ago). I dont hold any resentment for my biglaw brethren. we all have jobs to do. who cares. i welcome them. and newsflash, the ratio of a-holes to non-a-holes is the same for small and large law firms.

I actually went in the opposite direction from a mid-size firm to Big Law. Honestly, I'd have to say the attorneys I worked with at the mid-size firm were much better than the some of the ones I've worked with here in Big Law. They seem to pay more attention to details and ran a more organized and orderly transaction from beginning to end. Just my experience.

I would like to issue an apology for the ruminations on this internet weblog of a Mr. Chester Shackleford, perhaps better known to you as "Partner Emeritus". While the Firm, as an acknowledgment of Mr. Shackleford's past contributions to the Firm (from September 1947 to March 1979), permits him periodic access to the Firm's common areas, he holds no official title with the Firm and is not permitted to make representations to the contrary. On behalf of the Firm, I wish to offer my sincere gratitude for your kindness and generousity in providing Mr. Shackleford with a warm and nurturing environment. He will not trouble you again.

Oh boy, did we just kill Partner Emeritus?

Partner Emeritus:

BOOM!!!

Hehe, just checking.

Do law firms really blacklist throughout in the legal community people who have the temerity to sue an attorney? What if the person has been injured or had his rights infringed?

It's like the bar is some club or mob and attorneys are above the law.

Why the hell would we hire an ex-Biglaw associate who sued his/her firm? Assuming we could get away with not doing so? I practice employment defense, and there is most certainly a litigious type. Lots of people have shitty experiences at work, only a few sue. They tend to be narcissistic, malingering whiners. I'm sure no one here fits that category.

The key is to settle at the demand letter stage (if you've got the facts-- say, pornographic emails from the assignment partner). No one has to know. And hell, if your facts are good enough, maybe you never have to work again!

Good luck getting a job when the only experience we have is document review.

I like how nobody on here arguing with Partner Emeritus about the enforceability of non-compete agreements for lawyers bothered to mention that it is in fact a disciplinary violation, subjecting _both_ parties to sanctions, to enter into such an agreement, and that a firm which made it standard practice to force departing attorneys to sign one would likely see the partners involved sanctioned.

For the record, I agree that Partner Emeritus is probably a not very talented 1L or 2L at St. John's.

8 and 24 are right on point. I went from small to big to medium. Medium sized firms (or small for that matter) are not populated with lawyers angry or jealous about not being at a big firm. Quite the contrary. I think Nos. 8 and 77 are on to something -- the main reason we may not hire a young associate (under 5 years) from a big firm is that they cant really do much on their own other than review documents.

8 and 24 are right on point. I went from small to big to medium. Medium sized firms (or small for that matter) are not populated with lawyers angry or jealous about not being at a big firm. Quite the contrary. I think Nos. 8 and 77 are on to something -- the main reason we may not hire a young associate (under 5 years) from a big firm is that they cant really do much on their own other than review documents.

8 and 24 are right on point. I went from small to big to medium. Medium sized firms (or small for that matter) are not populated with lawyers angry or jealous about not being at a big firm. Quite the contrary. I think Nos. 8 and 77 are on to something -- the main reason we may not hire a young associate (under 5 years) from a big firm is that they cant really do much on their own other than review documents.

The people who are trying to argue over points of law with Partner Emeritus are the ones who are "not very talented". They're missing the larger point of what his posts mean.

How are the following terms defined:

BigLaw
Medium Law
Small Law

These tips are nonsense.

First: I left OMM to go to a small firm--7 people. Every last person in this firm went to a top law school, and all worked at big firms early in their career. The implication that small firms are staffed with people who couldn't cut it in big firms is absolute bullshit. We routinely face big firms in court and we kick their asses. We don't over-write our briefs, but we certainly are quicker on our feet and better in oral argument.

The same with the "dress appropriately" bullshit. And the nonsense about money. Yeah, the partners here make less than a biglaw partner, but not by much, and I didn't take a huge pay cut.

And what do we all get in return for a bit less money? We're in court all the time. We all leave work before 6. I've never worked a weekend, in a year and a half. I've taken depos, argued tons of motions, deal with clients and opposing counsel far senior to me. I wear jeans to work. Partners care what I think.

But this article, which reeks of condescension towards small firms, is bullshit.

This comment is addressed to post no. 82.

Bravo and well done! Finally, a person who "gets" it. While these other simpletons obfuscate over the meaning of my message, they instead focus on speculating on my identity and disproving me on stated law. I never claimed the clause was enforceable. Yet, it is a low blow to include on a release and you would be surprised how many people sign off on it. Post 59, why would my firm sue a defective associate in enforcing this clause? Do you really think my firm would feel threatened by the competition of a defective associate? If it comforts your small minds and egos to believe I am a law student, so be it. I find it rather amusing that these folks believe a law student has the time to engage in these posts in the face of a dire economy. Perhaps that is why their employment prospects dwindle with each day that passes. If you read between the lines of what I am saying, perhaps you would get the message. 82 gives hope that there is still some hope in this profession.

A senior partner once paid me 3 grand to lay a shingle while he pleasured himself sitting on a stack of severance checks.

This article makes quite a few negative generalizations about "small law." First, many successful small firm partners started their practice after working "big law" and made the choice to go out on their own. Shocking, I know, but some people enjoy independence, entrepreneurship, and actually getting to argue something in court before becoming old and crusty. As someone who voluntarily went Big to Small to Solo, I'll tell you there's nothing like making your own hours and keeping all the profits! And if you interview with me, I could care less if you're wearing a Rolex or you're dressed in designer digs. Chances are I'll be dressed in whatever I feel like because, after all, it's my business. There will be inherent similarities, but the biggest obstacles for some big law associates will be a lack of essential customer service skills and trial experience. That's what you should worry about, suckers.

No, from toilet law to the real world.

81 is completely right. We need a new junior associate (I'm the most junior, a 5th year), and we're sort of thinking to not get some biglaw junior because we need someone we can give things that don't involve handholding and ten levels of review.

84

54 is right - do your homework on the firm. Is it a top-notch small firm, with highly qualified and/or experienced attorneys? Or is is a second-rate place hoping to recruit above itself due to the current crisis? What are their practice areas, and how well-regarded are they in those areas? What is the culture (and the dress code)? If you know these up front (as best you can), then you can present yourself more effectively.

Call me JAFNEP. I'm a partner is a smaller firm. We have not laid people off. We're hiring.

Many of my partners come from BigLaw, as do many of our associates. Others came up in SmallLaw, some came from government. I did something poorly-paid and save-the-worldish before I came here.

I don't resent your BigLaw pay, though I won't match it. I do not assume, though, that I know much about your experience from the name of your firm. Tell me what you've actually done, and what you know how to do. I've seen people from BigLaw wash out because they could research well but could not write persuasively; because they could research and write but could not persuade a judge; because they could not run a team; because they could not work with other firms. Some people can examine a witness and some cannot. Some people can manage and some cannot. Tell me what you can do for me.

Tell me why you're out of work. I've picked up BigLaw castoffs who have been absolute stars. I'm willing to believe that BigLaw makes serious mistakes in its talent selection -- but not always, so you'll have to convince me.

For reasons having to do with my practice area, enthusiasm and work ethic count for a lot. We don't have face-time; the matters dictate the workload. Lots of places say nobody will look askance if you cut out at 4:00 for a ballgame and nobody will call you in on a weekend to sit around and look busy. Here, it's true. When the work has to get out, there will be allnighters. There will also be downtime. The latter is great, but when the former comes around, I have to know that I can count on you to stay focused and pleasant at 11:00pm after 30 straight hours of work and with the brief due in 59 minutes.

So that's my advice.

First to say Partner Emeritus is typing the posts that are supporting his ridiculous claims. Jury trials regarding Non-Competes for "professionals." Wow.

I agree with 91 100%. Your pedigree is meaningless. BIGLAW guys tell themselves otherwise, but it's all false. You're either a good lawyer or you're not. You can either bring something to the table to the firm or you can't.

Where's your firm, 91? sounds like a good place to work.

Maybe now the elitism and snobbery in the legal profession will finally end?

94 = TTT

8:53, I'm in NYC, in Midtown. My firm has a couple of major practice areas, and mine is kind of a specialty practice that is doing fine right now. It's a wonderful place to work.

15 - not compete clauses violate the model rules - dumb 1L