Every now and then, we like to highlight super-crappy especially unappealing job opportunities. See, e.g., this one (perfect for those of you who think sleep is overrated).

A reader at the University of Texas Law School recently sent a great job posting our way. A teaser:

Where to begin? First, what the heck is "Associate Attorney II"? Second, workday commences at 8 AM, and work week is 50-60 hours, Monday through Friday (not including possible weekend and holiday work). Third, anyone who cannot sit for two hours, or requires use of any ADA accommodations, need not apply. Fourth, everything is at the partners' discretion. Oh, and just in case you thought otherwise, "[t]his description is for recruitment purposes, only, and does not constitute a contract."

We noticed a few other less-than-appealing aspects of the job:

1. Pay is $4K a month. (This is a lawyer's job, right? At a law firm?)

2. The job requires a current Texas driver's license and "the ability to drive long distances unaccompanied during daylight and nighttime hours."

3. One of the practice areas is "water / wastewater / solid waste" law.

4. The job requires the ability to "carry[] loads of up to 35 pounds (such as books, binders, and files)." (To repeat: this is a lawyer's job, right?)

5. Yes, there are bonuses -- for associates who "produc[e] stellar work product and exceed[] billable hour goals," and "at the discretion of the partners."

Well, at least they're honest. No pretending to match the Cravath bonus scale, while in reality giving market-level bonuses to only a handful of associates.

Read the full job listing, after the jump.

This site tends to focus on large law firms when it comes to compensation coverage. There are several reasons for this. First, Biglaw shops tend to be more public about how they pay their people. Second, there's a larger audience for information about their pay scales. Third, even when firms don't make salary and bonus information publicly available, it's easier to get information out of a firm with several hundred lawyers -- there are more potential tipsters, and the risk of a leaker being discovered is much lower.

But many of you are curious about what pay is like at smaller shops. Here's a representative request from one reader:

How about getting the scoop on bonuses as smaller firms? My particular interest is in white-collar boutiques -- e.g., Morvillo, Lankler, Stillman, Zuckerman Spaeder, etc.

There's no info online, and those firms tend to be pretty quiet about how much they pay. This should be right up your alley.

So here's an open thread -- although we're not sure how successful it will be. As our tipster notes, smaller firms tend to be tight-lipped about compensation matters.

If you have information to share on the bonuses doled out by smaller firms, including but not limited to white-collar criminal defense shops and litigation boutiques, please share in the comments. It would be optimal if you could identify the firm by name; but if you can't, please provide as much information as possible (e.g., "a 25-lawyer, white-collar criminal defense firm in New York"). Thanks.

We resume our series of open threads about the lateral hiring process. After those bonus checks clear, associates clear out their desks. So 'tis the season to be talking about lateral moves.

Our prior posts addressed the why, when, and how of lateral moves. Now we get to what you really want to discuss: How much?

One tipster writes:

As someone thinking about feeling out the lateral market, I'd love to know: What sort of signing bonuses are firms giving out these days? What's the best way to negotiate one (other than using a headhunter)?

And from a different correspondent, who also has lateral money on the mind:

What firms offer signing bonuses for laterals, if any? Do they pro-rate bonuses for the following year, or do you basically give up a bonus cycle when you move from firm to firm?

Please discuss these topics in the comments. Information based on personal experience, as opposed to speculation and conjecture, is especially welcome. Thanks.

Earlier: Lateral Move Open Thread: When and Why?
Lateral Move Open Thread: This Is How You Do It

We continue our series of open threads on the lateral hiring process. Yesterday's post, which addressed the "why" and "when" of making a lateral move, generated almost 200 comments.

Here are the questions for today's open thread, concerning the "how" of the lateral process:

1. What are the benefits of headhunters / recruiters versus personal referrals versus blind emails / cover letters?

2. What is the lateral interview process like (as opposed to law school interviews)?

If you have information or opinions to contribute on these subjects, please share them in the comments. Thanks.

Earlier: Lateral Move Open Thread: When and Why?

Over the past few months, we've received several requests for a series of open threads on lateral moves -- i.e., how to move from one law firm to another (as opposed to moves from Biglaw to government, academia, or public interest).

We've decided to launch a series of open threads devoted to this subject, similar to our Fall Recruiting Open Threads, in which people can trade information and gossip about the lateral move process. From a tipster:

Please please please do a thread or series of threads on how to make a lateral move. With bonuses being paid, or coming soon, it seems like it might be lateral season, and there are a lot of people thinking of jumping ship. The market is shaky, which makes the decision more complicated than in the past.

There was a (very) little bit of useful information in the Headhunter from Hell thread, but it mostly got buried by people trashing the person who emailed you the story. You could break it down into a series of posts (like with Biglaw Perk Watch).

We like the idea of dragging things out over a series of posts (especially since we seem to be in a slow news period right now). Our correspondent helpfully laid out a series of possible topics related to lateral movement. We'll devote this thread to two of them, saving the rest for posterity:

1. When is the right time to move?

2. What are good reasons to move -- i.e., how do you avoid the "same s***, different office" problem?

If you have thoughts on these subjects, please share them in the comments. Thanks.

Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's time as a summer associate may come back to haunt her. And not because she stripped down to her undies and took a swan dive into the Hudson.

Rather, it's because she worked for a bunch of Commies. From a piece by Josh Gerstein in the New York Sun:

In a life marked largely by political caution, one entry on Senator Clinton's résumé stands out: her clerkship in 1971 at one of America's most radical law firms, Treuhaft, Walker and Burnstein.

One partner at the firm, Doris Walker, was a Communist Party member at the time. Another partner, Robert Treuhaft, had left the party in 1958, several years after being called before the House Un-American Activities Committee and labeled as one of America's most "dangerously subversive" lawyers. The Oakland-based firm was renowned for taking clients others rejected as too controversial, including Communists, draft resisters, and members of the African-American militant group known as the Black Panthers.

To this day, Mrs. Clinton's decision to work at the unabashedly left-wing firm is surprising, even shocking, to some of her former colleagues there and to those supporting her bid for the presidency. To the former first lady's enemies and political opponents, her summer at the Treuhaft firm is yet another indication that radical ideology lurks beneath the patina of moderation she has adopted in public life.

Senator Clinton tends to be tight-lipped about Treuhaft. In her memoir, Living History, she gives her summer stint rather cursory treatment:

I told Bill about my summer plans to clerk at Treuhaft, Walker and Burnstein, a small law firm in Oakland, California and he announced that he would like to go with me. I spent most of my time working for Mal Burnstein researching, writing legal motions and briefs for a child custody case.

Why doesn't Hillary make more of her time at this ultra-liberal law firm, and embrace her past as a radical leftist? Might the Daily Kos krowd warm up to her, if they knew about her time as a fellow traveler?

Hillary Clinton's Radical Summer: A Season of Love and Leftists [New York Sun]

Here's an interesting (and potentially lucrative) Biglaw benefit, which was recently brought to our attention:

How about a Biglaw perk watch thread on associate client fees? For example, at Kramer Levin, if an associate brings a new client to the firm, he or she gets 7 percent of all fees collected from that client.

The rule applies even if the associate isn't involved in the matter. So, for example, a litigator who brings in a corporate client would still get the percentage.

We have heard of such arrangements, although we think they tend to be more common among midsize and smaller firms, as opposed to the biggest of Biglaw shops. But even if you don't share in the fees, it obviously helps your partnership chances if you have the power to bring in a major client (e.g., because your mom is the CEO or GC of a Fortune 500 company).

If you have thoughts or information to share, please do so in the comments. Thanks.

Is there such a thing as a "lifestyle" law firm? We've previously expressed skepticism: "[I]n every law school class, some people believe in kinder, gentler law firms. And lavender unicorns."

Interestingly enough, we've been hearing that this recruiting season, New York's top Biglaw shops aren't placing much emphasis on "lifestyle." While firms continue to talk about "collegiality" and say things like "there are no screamers here," recruits report being told, even at the kinder / gentler firms, "You WILL work hard here." Perhaps certain firms don't want to get criticized for pulling the old bait-and-switch: brag about the "lifestyle" to 2Ls, show them a great time as summer associates, and then sling them over a barrel and have your way with them, once they show up full time.

But that's at the largest law firms, in major markets like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles. Could smaller firms, especially in other markets, offer more options?

More discussion, built around the case study of a 10-lawyer boutique in Atlanta, after the jump.

In the latest issue of the Legal Times, Nathan Carlile has a somewhat salacious story about Beveridge & Diamond. Perhaps you haven't heard of this D.C.-based environmental law boutique -- which might be mistaken for a livestock brokerage, thanks to the sheep photos on their website. But a livestock brokerage probably has fewer hijinks:

[A] sordid story... has ensnared partners at 95-lawyer Beveridge & Diamond in allegations that include adultery and forgery. The dispute stems from a bitter divorce battle between firm partner John Guttmann and his wife, Nancy Lasater, a nonpracticing attorney who was previously co-chairwoman of the Law Practice Management Section of the D.C. Bar and a solo practitioner who often represented firms on ethics issues.

Some highlights and commentary, after the jump.

Andrew Bruck takes a question at Wednesday's press conference.

Every now and then, we leave our apartment. We did so on Wednesday, to attend the press conference of Law Students Building a Better Legal Profession, where the organization unveiled its law firm diversity rankings (accessible here; Los Angles Times article here).

It was quite informative. For those of you who might be interested -- and we're guessing there are a number of you, judging from the robust commentary on our earlier post -- read more, after the jump.

Of course it does. Check out this post, with a handy chart, over at Empirical Legal Studies.

Here's an excerpt from Professor Bill Henderson's excellent analysis:

The median salary spread for a 1st year associate at a 2 -25 lawyer firm versus a 500+ firm is $77,000. When the reference group is a 51-100 lawyer law firm versus 500+, the differential is still a substantial $55,000 per year. Cumulatively, for all eight years of the associate track, the spread amounts to $631,000 for 2-25 vs. 500+ lawyer firms and $524,000 for 51-100 vs. 500+.

In other words, the bimodal distribution discussed in an earlier post appears to hold fairly steady during the first several years of a young associate's career. In fact, most 8th year associates at firms smaller than 250 lawyers are making less than a 1st year associate at a 500+ lawyer firm.

This is just the start of a much more detailed post, in which Professor Henderson compares working hours and quality of life at big firms versus small firms. Check out the whole thing over here.

Pay and Workweek Differentials by Law Firm Size [Empirical Legal Studies]

This email exchange is rapidly making the rounds. It doesn't rise to the level of Dianna Abdala, but it's not bad -- and perfectly suitable for a slow Friday afternoon.

The tipster who sent it to us introduced it as follows:

This is pretty funny. It goes to show you that tier four students are just as entitled and obnoxious as their tier one counterparts!

Here's the first email, from a student at Wayne State University Law School (who shall remain nameless; please keep him that way):

From: [redacted]
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 9:05 AM
To: [Partner at four-person law firm]
Subject: Interview?

Sir, let me begin by noting that I understand your time is very valuable
and I anticipate that your work day is very hectic. However, my time is
valuable to me and sitting at the interview location waiting for you has
resulted in a fantastic waste of a potentially productive Friday
morning.

I was very interested in your firm. I believe that there are many ways
of becoming a good lawyer, and felt that employment at your firm would
be one of them. Though I find myself being pushed in the direction of
the large firms as a result of my grades, I had high hopes that getting
involved in a smaller and yet equally productive camp would be the best
fit for me. Sadly, it seems that I will not find out if my suspicions
were correct.

I realize I am just an naive law student in your eyes but I assure you
sir that a day will come when I command a level of respect that would
make [sic] idea of standing me up unimaginable. As I was your first interview
this morning I feel that a phone call was in order from your end. Good
luck with the rest of your interviews.

Sincerely,
[redacted]

Right now you might be thinking, "Good for you, Wayne State Guy! Just because you go to a Tier Four doesn't mean you can be jerked around."

But the truth turns out to be more complex. Read the partner's response, after the jump.

As we previously mentioned, this week is Non-Top-Tier Law School Week at ATL. Even our open threads on job hunting will reflect this theme.

One graduate of a non-elite law school sent us this suggested topic:

Lots of non-top tier law students end up working for insurance companies.

The dumb ones end up doing insurance defense (hired by insurance company to defend slip and fall, med mal, etc). The smart ones do insurance coverage (represent the insurance company which denied coverage).

How about postings where we can compare salary info? Salary info at these firms is much more guarded. I have no idea what anyone else makes.

I'll get the ball rolling from the insurance coverage perspective. When I started as a first year at one NYC insurance coverage firm, I was making $75,000 with no bonus (and a billable hours minimum of 1900).

Now, I am a fifth year doing insurance coverage at a different firm in NYC, my salary is $128,000, and our firm offers a $7,500 bonus to associates deemed the cream of the crop at year end. Name partners are rumored to make a boat load of cash, but other partners are rumored to be nothing more than senior associates. Our minimum billables are 2100.

More discussion, after the jump.

Never heard of Duval & Stachenfeld? Well, that's about to change, thanks to the firm's innovative approach to associate compensation, which is getting some media mentions. From an article by Kellie Schmitt in The Recorder:

The 50-lawyer firm, based in New York but with a small L.A. office, starts first-year associates at $60,000 -- or $100,000 below the starting salary at many Am Law 100 firms.

Mid-year and senior associates, however, are promised the same total pay -- or more -- that they'd earn at Latham & Watkins or Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.

For third-years on up, the firm says it checks what top New York firms like Cravath, Swaine & Moore are paying in base salary and bonuses, and matches that. Last year, the firm added a $10,000 sweetener.

So what exactly is the point of this unusual system?

More discussion, after the jump.

Sometimes it seems like we talk about the same handful of general practice Biglaw shops again and again. So let's mix things up a bit. Here's a suggestion from a loyal reader:

I'm in the field of patent law. It might be interesting to post a Fall Recruiting Thread that discusses both patent boutiques (Finnegan Henderson, Fizpatrick Cella, Kenyon & Kenyon) and general practice firms with a strong IP practice (Kirkland, Irell, MoFo, Jones Day, Ropes & Gray).

Yes, it might. So here's that post -- an open thread in which people can talk about firms that specialize in or excel at intellectual property law.

(Last month we had a post dedicated to discussion of compensation issues at IP firms. But this open thread is intended to be broader, to go beyond pay to discuss quality of life, strong practice areas, type of work, etc. Enjoy.)

Earlier: Nationwide Pay Raise Watch: IP Firms

In case you missed this story from last week, here's a recap. Earlier this month, a plaintiffs' lawyer in Montana by the name of William Managhan sent out the following email, to the entire Montana Trial Lawyers Association:

From: William L. Managhan
To: Montana Trial Lawyers
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 6:32 PM
Subject: [mtla_members_all] Firm Name Change

Managhan & Kortum-Managhan Law Firm will no longer be known as such. The name is returning to Managhan Law Firm as Santana Kortum-Managhan is leaving the firm. Turns out that she was having sex with Tim McKeon of Anaconda while attending MMLP hearings in Helena.

Call me silly but I no longer fill [sic] comfortable with her as my law partner or wife. Some will think this is an inappropriate announcement, but considering the small legal community in our state, I might as well preempt the roomer mill [sic]. Please address communication to William L. Managhan through Managhan Law Firm.

More discussion, including accounts of our telephone conversations with Bobbi Bonnington and Tim of Anaconda, after the jump.

A fantastic and hilarious email, announcing a name change for a Montana law firm, has been making the rounds. We'd like to reprint it here, but we'll refrain for now. Instead, read the email and commentary on it here and here.

We have no reason to question the authenticity of the email (which apparently went out to the entire membership of the Montana Trial Lawyers Association). But we haven't verified it definitively either. And we'd like to give William Managhan and Santana Kortum-Managhan the chance to comment, given the salacious nature of the material. How do they fill about all the roomers?

Accordingly, we have phone calls and emails in to the Managhan Law Firm (whose typo-laden website still identifies it as the "Managhan & Kortum-Managhan Law Firm"). We will let you know if and when we hear back from them.

Update (7 PM): We have been communicating with Bobbi Bonnington via email. We hope to have more information for you soon.

A comedic tidbit...courtesy of Montana [The Amateur Law Professor]
Firm Name Change [The Legal Scoop]

The New York Times is a world-renowned news publication. It is exceedingly prestigious. Coverage in its pages is highly coveted.

But the Gray Lady may be a bit easy. Why else would she go down on Gallion & Spielvogel, our favorite pair of S&C refugees turned eminently pedigreed barristers?

From this morning's NYT:

Steven Spielvogel, a lanky 40-year-old lawyer who, with his angular looks and jet black hair, resembles Ric Ocasek of the 1980s band the Cars, has been on something of a tour of his own.

He has been promoting a network that connects small law firms around the country and the world. The idea is to give the better small law firms a way to compete with the big national and global firms.

Since starting the International Network of Boutique Law Firms, in 2004, Mr. Spielvogel has been knocking on doors and setting up lunches to persuade the lawyers at small firms with prestigious résumés to start a local chapter.

The rest of the puff piece proceeds to fellate Steve Spielvogel and the INBLF in print. It's accompanied by an awesome pic of Spielvogel, striking a pose in Rockefeller Center (and looking like Luke Wilson, to his credit).

But why isn't Spielvogel in a tuxedo? And where's his partner in crime, Edward R. Gallion?

More mockery news analysis, after the jump.

If you graduated from law school before or during the tech boom of the late 1990's, you may recall how an elite boutique named Gunderson Dettmer led the charge on associate pay raises. As noted here:

In 1999, a Silicon Valley firm named Gunderson Dettmer Stough Villeneuve Franklin & Hachigian, shook the legal community by offering new associates a starting salary of $125,000 with a guaranteed bonus of $20,000. This represented a 25 percent increase in the average base salary and even more for the total compensation package. Other firms in major cities around the country were forced to follow Gunderson’s lead and annual salaries increased by about 30 percent between 1999 and 2000. New associates reaped the benefits.

The firm is considerably bigger today. And it didn't lead this latest round of pay raises; Orrick deserves credit for that.

But Gunderson Dettmer is definitely keeping up. Moreover, as a source at the firm notes, "Thankfully it appears that we didn't take the underhanded bonus-cutting route that Wilson Sonsini and Heller Ehrman did."

Check out the memo, after the jump.

Here's a recent message from a Chicago-based reader:

I've got a suggestion for a post. How about one on the Chicago market?

NYC, done. L.A. is pretty much set. DC looks like it's headed to 160.

But what about Chicago? I think a post along the lines of whether Chicago is going to take a back seat as a lower tier legal market, or match the LA/DC markets, would generate a lot of interest/traffic/comments.

Ok, just my two cents. The stuff on the compensation has been great! Keep up the good work.

We agree with this commenter. There's no longer much excitement to covering Los Angeles, which is "pretty much set," and Washington, DC, which will surely settle at $160K (even if some firms drag their feet about it, to save themselves a few weeks' worth of higher salaries).

But "flyover country" -- basically, Chicago and Texas (which we'll cover in a subsequent post) -- is a big question mark. Will these markets match the big money of the East Coast, and retain their status as major legal markets? Or will they fade into regional obscurity, unable to draw the same legal talent as their more flush coastal counterparts?

The big Chicago shops haven't budged on associate salaries in their home offices. But one Windy City boutique, Much Shelist, isn't going down without a fight. Last week they raised all of their offices -- including their home office, in Chicago -- to the $160K scale. The memo appears after the jump.

UPDATE/CORRECTION: The purported Much Shelist memo that appears after the jump is a FAKE.