law school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to go against the grain on this thread and say prestige is for the birds. I know DCUM is obsessed with it but you can have a completely lucrative career having gone to a public law school. The vast majority of lawyers in this country are not employed at big law and did not attend a top 10 law school.

In fact, most of the attys that I know who started up their own firms and now make $$$ went to public, no name schools. DCUM is a weird place for advice because it slants in one direction only - private, prestigious, big law, money, did I say prestige? In truth, there a multitude of avenues for success.

I went to a public, not highly ranked school. I started up my own practice because I wanted more freedom to raise my kids. I don't make big law money but at $400-500K, I'm doing just fine in a dual income home.

There are lots of ways to make a living in law, OP, more than gov't and big law. Chances are when your DC gets to law school interests will change.

This is really good. Is that your net? What practice area? Are you a solo? Any employees or associates? Any office overhead? ~~Another Lawyer

The range is gross. At October, my YTD gross is about $420K. I expect to hit about $455/470 by end of this year (gross) with $425-ish net. I'm 100% virtual so my overhead is about $30K per year. It's very low so I keep roughly 90% of what I bring in. This does not include my taxes (obv) just office expenses (e.g., virtual lease, softwares, supplies, some 1099 work, cc fees). I have one contractor who works on an as needed basis but otherwise I'm a true solo. I don't have the bandwidth for a full office with employees due to kids/family, though have been approached by other firms re: mergers. I'm just not interested. I'm in employment based immigration and have been doing this over a decade. Year 1, I made $20K so it was a steady climb.

PP here -- this is impressive. What kind of marketing did you do to make the steady climb? I would love to do this but don't think I currently have the portable book to make it more profitable than what I'm doing now, unless perhaps I took on my own contract work. What % do you pay your contractor? Sorry to derail the thread, but it does show OP that there is more than Big Law and Gov Law.

I pay the contractor a flat fee per project. She has given me a fee schedule per case. Because of the type of work we do, it's usually flat fee. However, I don't send out work that often - maybe a few a year. I don't do any marketing now. It's all client referral. The first few years, I tried marketing via online sources that yielded little. The key to solo practice is sticking in the game because it takes a while for the referral pipeline to build up. Salaries were Y1 $20K (but I started mid-year); Y2 $65K; Y3 $80; Y5 $111 Y6$132....Y10 $320K....Y12 $425(est). There are big bumps in some years because I gained large corp clients in some years, or COVID. I'm anticipating that I will level off, or have to hire someone bc I'm at max of what solo can handle.

And yes, there's so much more to law than just the govt & big law discussion. 80% of the attys that I know do something similar to what I'm doing. Maybe it's because I didn't start out in DC metro. Anyway, solo, small to mid size firms should not be overlooked. I have been at home virtually working for past 10 years. I've raised my kids and controlled my own time. I don't think that I'm missed out too much career ways because law is so flexible. Just something to think about, OP.

So you opened a solo practice straight out of law school? No prior legal experience? Did you have loans? What year was this?

No, I worked for a firm where I gained experience in my field of expertise for about 2 years. I did not start my firm with a book of business, though, as I'd left to have a baby. Yes, I had loans - about $80K. It was 2011. In the first few years, I had to do contract work on the side to supplement income until I got to a level where my practice was making enough to support me.

Ok. So your anecdote is completely dependent on law grads finding an entry level position to learn the trade. Pretty much no one opens a solo practice straight out of law school. The risk of a lower tier school is never finding that entry level job.

That is complete nonsense. Lower tier grads find jobs all the time. And that is my point. The posters on here just assume that the ONLY jobs are the prestigious law firms in downtown DC when, in fact, the vast majority of law firms in this country are small-mid sized firms. I worked at one of those. My first job was a small firm with 4 employees. The problem is that people on here thumb their noses at small firms as if that experience is neither good enough or helpful to the resume which could not be further from the truth.

And no one said opening a solo practice is dependent on getting a firm job first. I know plenty of attys who went solo straight out of school. There are a number of different paths. You just have to be entrepreneurial enough to find them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to go against the grain on this thread and say prestige is for the birds. I know DCUM is obsessed with it but you can have a completely lucrative career having gone to a public law school. The vast majority of lawyers in this country are not employed at big law and did not attend a top 10 law school.

In fact, most of the attys that I know who started up their own firms and now make $$$ went to public, no name schools. DCUM is a weird place for advice because it slants in one direction only - private, prestigious, big law, money, did I say prestige? In truth, there a multitude of avenues for success.

I went to a public, not highly ranked school. I started up my own practice because I wanted more freedom to raise my kids. I don't make big law money but at $400-500K, I'm doing just fine in a dual income home.

There are lots of ways to make a living in law, OP, more than gov't and big law. Chances are when your DC gets to law school interests will change.

This is really good. Is that your net? What practice area? Are you a solo? Any employees or associates? Any office overhead? ~~Another Lawyer

The range is gross. At October, my YTD gross is about $420K. I expect to hit about $455/470 by end of this year (gross) with $425-ish net. I'm 100% virtual so my overhead is about $30K per year. It's very low so I keep roughly 90% of what I bring in. This does not include my taxes (obv) just office expenses (e.g., virtual lease, softwares, supplies, some 1099 work, cc fees). I have one contractor who works on an as needed basis but otherwise I'm a true solo. I don't have the bandwidth for a full office with employees due to kids/family, though have been approached by other firms re: mergers. I'm just not interested. I'm in employment based immigration and have been doing this over a decade. Year 1, I made $20K so it was a steady climb.

PP here -- this is impressive. What kind of marketing did you do to make the steady climb? I would love to do this but don't think I currently have the portable book to make it more profitable than what I'm doing now, unless perhaps I took on my own contract work. What % do you pay your contractor? Sorry to derail the thread, but it does show OP that there is more than Big Law and Gov Law.

I pay the contractor a flat fee per project. She has given me a fee schedule per case. Because of the type of work we do, it's usually flat fee. However, I don't send out work that often - maybe a few a year. I don't do any marketing now. It's all client referral. The first few years, I tried marketing via online sources that yielded little. The key to solo practice is sticking in the game because it takes a while for the referral pipeline to build up. Salaries were Y1 $20K (but I started mid-year); Y2 $65K; Y3 $80; Y5 $111 Y6$132....Y10 $320K....Y12 $425(est). There are big bumps in some years because I gained large corp clients in some years, or COVID. I'm anticipating that I will level off, or have to hire someone bc I'm at max of what solo can handle.

And yes, there's so much more to law than just the govt & big law discussion. 80% of the attys that I know do something similar to what I'm doing. Maybe it's because I didn't start out in DC metro. Anyway, solo, small to mid size firms should not be overlooked. I have been at home virtually working for past 10 years. I've raised my kids and controlled my own time. I don't think that I'm missed out too much career ways because law is so flexible. Just something to think about, OP.

So you opened a solo practice straight out of law school? No prior legal experience? Did you have loans? What year was this?

No, I worked for a firm where I gained experience in my field of expertise for about 2 years. I did not start my firm with a book of business, though, as I'd left to have a baby. Yes, I had loans - about $80K. It was 2011. In the first few years, I had to do contract work on the side to supplement income until I got to a level where my practice was making enough to support me.

Ok. So your anecdote is completely dependent on law grads finding an entry level position to learn the trade. Pretty much no one opens a solo practice straight out of law school. The risk of a lower tier school is never finding that entry level job.

That is complete nonsense. Lower tier grads find jobs all the time. And that is my point. The posters on here just assume that the ONLY jobs are the prestigious law firms in downtown DC when, in fact, the vast majority of law firms in this country are small-mid sized firms. I worked at one of those. My first job was a small firm with 4 employees. The problem is that people on here thumb their noses at small firms as if that experience is neither good enough or helpful to the resume which could not be further from the truth.

And no one said opening a solo practice is dependent on getting a firm job first. I know plenty of attys who went solo straight out of school. There are a number of different paths. You just have to be entrepreneurial enough to find them.

Lots may find jobs. Lots also don't. That's what the data says. Lots of grads from lower tier schools with big loans and no job.

[Anonymous]

I'm not a lawyer and no have no idea if my college freshman will want to become a lawyer, but isn't this similar to what any graduate can expect when seeking a job? Some will immediately become gainfully employed, while it may take longer for others. Those who graduate from elite schools may have their first choice of jobs, while those who graduates from a school ranked 500 may take longer to find their place.

Either way, the likelihood is that no recent graduate, and I'd include those from undergrad and graduate schools, is going to remain in their first job for a long time. More likely, they'll bounce around from job to job during their 20s until they find something that sticks for them. So, why does it matter so much where you go to school unless you're aiming for a very niche career path like Wall Street, Big Law, etc.

I just think our kids should go to schools that won't put them or us in debt, where they can mature and START to figure out who and what they want to become in life. I just feel like DCUM especially makes this more complicated than it needs to be because there is so much focus on brand names.

Again, not a lawyer so what do I know.

[Anonymous]

I am lawyer-adjacent (work in policy) and sometimes wish I'd gone to law school, but the fact is, the stress of school and that first soul-crushing associate job would never be worth it to me at this point in my life. And, most importantly, the debt.

Many lawyers in my family and my dating history and none of them are happy people. (Some of my coworkers and friends are, but it took them years to get to in-house type roles that have good w/l balance. They paid their soul-crushing dues.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a lawyer and no have no idea if my college freshman will want to become a lawyer, but isn't this similar to what any graduate can expect when seeking a job? Some will immediately become gainfully employed, while it may take longer for others. Those who graduate from elite schools may have their first choice of jobs, while those who graduates from a school ranked 500 may take longer to find their place.

Either way, the likelihood is that no recent graduate, and I'd include those from undergrad and graduate schools, is going to remain in their first job for a long time. More likely, they'll bounce around from job to job during their 20s until they find something that sticks for them. So, why does it matter so much where you go to school unless you're aiming for a very niche career path like Wall Street, Big Law, etc.

I just think our kids should go to schools that won't put them or us in debt, where they can mature and START to figure out who and what they want to become in life. I just feel like DCUM especially makes this more complicated than it needs to be because there is so much focus on brand names.

Again, not a lawyer so what do I know.

Google bimodal lawyer salaries to see why that’s not entirely accurate. Law is unusually feast and famine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a lawyer and no have no idea if my college freshman will want to become a lawyer, but isn't this similar to what any graduate can expect when seeking a job? Some will immediately become gainfully employed, while it may take longer for others. Those who graduate from elite schools may have their first choice of jobs, while those who graduates from a school ranked 500 may take longer to find their place.

Either way, the likelihood is that no recent graduate, and I'd include those from undergrad and graduate schools, is going to remain in their first job for a long time. More likely, they'll bounce around from job to job during their 20s until they find something that sticks for them. So, why does it matter so much where you go to school unless you're aiming for a very niche career path like Wall Street, Big Law, etc.

I just think our kids should go to schools that won't put them or us in debt, where they can mature and START to figure out who and what they want to become in life. I just feel like DCUM especially makes this more complicated than it needs to be because there is so much focus on brand names.

Again, not a lawyer so what do I know.

Google bimodal lawyer salaries to see why that’s not entirely accurate. Law is unusually feast and famine.

Add to this that law can shut you out of other jobs as well. The real issue is that law schools will pump out another crop of law students before the recent graduates all secured jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a lawyer and no have no idea if my college freshman will want to become a lawyer, but isn't this similar to what any graduate can expect when seeking a job? Some will immediately become gainfully employed, while it may take longer for others. Those who graduate from elite schools may have their first choice of jobs, while those who graduates from a school ranked 500 may take longer to find their place.

Either way, the likelihood is that no recent graduate, and I'd include those from undergrad and graduate schools, is going to remain in their first job for a long time. More likely, they'll bounce around from job to job during their 20s until they find something that sticks for them. So, why does it matter so much where you go to school unless you're aiming for a very niche career path like Wall Street, Big Law, etc.

I just think our kids should go to schools that won't put them or us in debt, where they can mature and START to figure out who and what they want to become in life. I just feel like DCUM especially makes this more complicated than it needs to be because there is so much focus on brand names.

Again, not a lawyer so what do I know.

Google bimodal lawyer salaries to see why that’s not entirely accurate. Law is unusually feast and famine.

Add to this that law can shut you out of other jobs as well. The real issue is that law schools will pump out another crop of law students before the recent graduates all secured jobs.

Employers that hire entry level attorneys only hire the current (or upcoming) graduating class. They won't hire the dregs of the prior class. So if you don't get an offer as you are graduating or shortly after, you likely will never get a job as a lawyer. You end up shut out of entry level employment with a JD that hurts you in applying for non-lawyer jobs. It's not really an option to bounce around for a few years before finding a career like it is after a BA or BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to go against the grain on this thread and say prestige is for the birds. I know DCUM is obsessed with it but you can have a completely lucrative career having gone to a public law school. The vast majority of lawyers in this country are not employed at big law and did not attend a top 10 law school.

In fact, most of the attys that I know who started up their own firms and now make $$$ went to public, no name schools. DCUM is a weird place for advice because it slants in one direction only - private, prestigious, big law, money, did I say prestige? In truth, there a multitude of avenues for success.

I went to a public, not highly ranked school. I started up my own practice because I wanted more freedom to raise my kids. I don't make big law money but at $400-500K, I'm doing just fine in a dual income home.

There are lots of ways to make a living in law, OP, more than gov't and big law. Chances are when your DC gets to law school interests will change.

This is really good. Is that your net? What practice area? Are you a solo? Any employees or associates? Any office overhead? ~~Another Lawyer

The range is gross. At October, my YTD gross is about $420K. I expect to hit about $455/470 by end of this year (gross) with $425-ish net. I'm 100% virtual so my overhead is about $30K per year. It's very low so I keep roughly 90% of what I bring in. This does not include my taxes (obv) just office expenses (e.g., virtual lease, softwares, supplies, some 1099 work, cc fees). I have one contractor who works on an as needed basis but otherwise I'm a true solo. I don't have the bandwidth for a full office with employees due to kids/family, though have been approached by other firms re: mergers. I'm just not interested. I'm in employment based immigration and have been doing this over a decade. Year 1, I made $20K so it was a steady climb.

PP here -- this is impressive. What kind of marketing did you do to make the steady climb? I would love to do this but don't think I currently have the portable book to make it more profitable than what I'm doing now, unless perhaps I took on my own contract work. What % do you pay your contractor? Sorry to derail the thread, but it does show OP that there is more than Big Law and Gov Law.

I pay the contractor a flat fee per project. She has given me a fee schedule per case. Because of the type of work we do, it's usually flat fee. However, I don't send out work that often - maybe a few a year. I don't do any marketing now. It's all client referral. The first few years, I tried marketing via online sources that yielded little. The key to solo practice is sticking in the game because it takes a while for the referral pipeline to build up. Salaries were Y1 $20K (but I started mid-year); Y2 $65K; Y3 $80; Y5 $111 Y6$132....Y10 $320K....Y12 $425(est). There are big bumps in some years because I gained large corp clients in some years, or COVID. I'm anticipating that I will level off, or have to hire someone bc I'm at max of what solo can handle.

And yes, there's so much more to law than just the govt & big law discussion. 80% of the attys that I know do something similar to what I'm doing. Maybe it's because I didn't start out in DC metro. Anyway, solo, small to mid size firms should not be overlooked. I have been at home virtually working for past 10 years. I've raised my kids and controlled my own time. I don't think that I'm missed out too much career ways because law is so flexible. Just something to think about, OP.

So you opened a solo practice straight out of law school? No prior legal experience? Did you have loans? What year was this?

No, I worked for a firm where I gained experience in my field of expertise for about 2 years. I did not start my firm with a book of business, though, as I'd left to have a baby. Yes, I had loans - about $80K. It was 2011. In the first few years, I had to do contract work on the side to supplement income until I got to a level where my practice was making enough to support me.

Ok. So your anecdote is completely dependent on law grads finding an entry level position to learn the trade. Pretty much no one opens a solo practice straight out of law school. The risk of a lower tier school is never finding that entry level job.

That is complete nonsense. Lower tier grads find jobs all the time. And that is my point. The posters on here just assume that the ONLY jobs are the prestigious law firms in downtown DC when, in fact, the vast majority of law firms in this country are small-mid sized firms. I worked at one of those. My first job was a small firm with 4 employees. The problem is that people on here thumb their noses at small firms as if that experience is neither good enough or helpful to the resume which could not be further from the truth.

And no one said opening a solo practice is dependent on getting a firm job first. I know plenty of attys who went solo straight out of school. There are a number of different paths. You just have to be entrepreneurial enough to find them.

Lots may find jobs. Lots also don't. That's what the data says. Lots of grads from lower tier schools with big loans and no job.

What schools are we talking with the phrase "lower tier"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to go against the grain on this thread and say prestige is for the birds. I know DCUM is obsessed with it but you can have a completely lucrative career having gone to a public law school. The vast majority of lawyers in this country are not employed at big law and did not attend a top 10 law school.

In fact, most of the attys that I know who started up their own firms and now make $$$ went to public, no name schools. DCUM is a weird place for advice because it slants in one direction only - private, prestigious, big law, money, did I say prestige? In truth, there a multitude of avenues for success.

I went to a public, not highly ranked school. I started up my own practice because I wanted more freedom to raise my kids. I don't make big law money but at $400-500K, I'm doing just fine in a dual income home.

There are lots of ways to make a living in law, OP, more than gov't and big law. Chances are when your DC gets to law school interests will change.

This is really good. Is that your net? What practice area? Are you a solo? Any employees or associates? Any office overhead? ~~Another Lawyer

The range is gross. At October, my YTD gross is about $420K. I expect to hit about $455/470 by end of this year (gross) with $425-ish net. I'm 100% virtual so my overhead is about $30K per year. It's very low so I keep roughly 90% of what I bring in. This does not include my taxes (obv) just office expenses (e.g., virtual lease, softwares, supplies, some 1099 work, cc fees). I have one contractor who works on an as needed basis but otherwise I'm a true solo. I don't have the bandwidth for a full office with employees due to kids/family, though have been approached by other firms re: mergers. I'm just not interested. I'm in employment based immigration and have been doing this over a decade. Year 1, I made $20K so it was a steady climb.

PP here -- this is impressive. What kind of marketing did you do to make the steady climb? I would love to do this but don't think I currently have the portable book to make it more profitable than what I'm doing now, unless perhaps I took on my own contract work. What % do you pay your contractor? Sorry to derail the thread, but it does show OP that there is more than Big Law and Gov Law.

I pay the contractor a flat fee per project. She has given me a fee schedule per case. Because of the type of work we do, it's usually flat fee. However, I don't send out work that often - maybe a few a year. I don't do any marketing now. It's all client referral. The first few years, I tried marketing via online sources that yielded little. The key to solo practice is sticking in the game because it takes a while for the referral pipeline to build up. Salaries were Y1 $20K (but I started mid-year); Y2 $65K; Y3 $80; Y5 $111 Y6$132....Y10 $320K....Y12 $425(est). There are big bumps in some years because I gained large corp clients in some years, or COVID. I'm anticipating that I will level off, or have to hire someone bc I'm at max of what solo can handle.

And yes, there's so much more to law than just the govt & big law discussion. 80% of the attys that I know do something similar to what I'm doing. Maybe it's because I didn't start out in DC metro. Anyway, solo, small to mid size firms should not be overlooked. I have been at home virtually working for past 10 years. I've raised my kids and controlled my own time. I don't think that I'm missed out too much career ways because law is so flexible. Just something to think about, OP.

So you opened a solo practice straight out of law school? No prior legal experience? Did you have loans? What year was this?

No, I worked for a firm where I gained experience in my field of expertise for about 2 years. I did not start my firm with a book of business, though, as I'd left to have a baby. Yes, I had loans - about $80K. It was 2011. In the first few years, I had to do contract work on the side to supplement income until I got to a level where my practice was making enough to support me.

Ok. So your anecdote is completely dependent on law grads finding an entry level position to learn the trade. Pretty much no one opens a solo practice straight out of law school. The risk of a lower tier school is never finding that entry level job.

That is complete nonsense. Lower tier grads find jobs all the time. And that is my point. The posters on here just assume that the ONLY jobs are the prestigious law firms in downtown DC when, in fact, the vast majority of law firms in this country are small-mid sized firms. I worked at one of those. My first job was a small firm with 4 employees. The problem is that people on here thumb their noses at small firms as if that experience is neither good enough or helpful to the resume which could not be further from the truth.

And no one said opening a solo practice is dependent on getting a firm job first. I know plenty of attys who went solo straight out of school. There are a number of different paths. You just have to be entrepreneurial enough to find them.

Lots may find jobs. Lots also don't. That's what the data says. Lots of grads from lower tier schools with big loans and no job.

What schools are we talking with the phrase "lower tier"?

It depends on the state of the economy. GW has both been a solid bet and a risky bet over the course of my legal career.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Attend top 10 or don't attend.

Top 10 isn't really a thing. T14 is the typical measure and, frankly, 15 to 20 also have great results (UCLA, WUStL, BU, UT Austin, Vandy and USC Gould).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a lawyer and no have no idea if my college freshman will want to become a lawyer, but isn't this similar to what any graduate can expect when seeking a job? Some will immediately become gainfully employed, while it may take longer for others. Those who graduate from elite schools may have their first choice of jobs, while those who graduates from a school ranked 500 may take longer to find their place.

Either way, the likelihood is that no recent graduate, and I'd include those from undergrad and graduate schools, is going to remain in their first job for a long time. More likely, they'll bounce around from job to job during their 20s until they find something that sticks for them. So, why does it matter so much where you go to school unless you're aiming for a very niche career path like Wall Street, Big Law, etc.

I just think our kids should go to schools that won't put them or us in debt, where they can mature and START to figure out who and what they want to become in life. I just feel like DCUM especially makes this more complicated than it needs to be because there is so much focus on brand names.

Again, not a lawyer so what do I know.

Google bimodal lawyer salaries to see why that’s not entirely accurate. Law is unusually feast and famine.

Add to this that law can shut you out of other jobs as well. The real issue is that law schools will pump out another crop of law students before the recent graduates all secured jobs.

Employers that hire entry level attorneys only hire the current (or upcoming) graduating class. They won't hire the dregs of the prior class. So if you don't get an offer as you are graduating or shortly after, you likely will never get a job as a lawyer. You end up shut out of entry level employment with a JD that hurts you in applying for non-lawyer jobs. It's not really an option to bounce around for a few years before finding a career like it is after a BA or BS.

Non-lawyer here and sorry if I'm derailing the discussion, but I always thought that having a law degree gives you more options than an MBA or other Masters degree, for example. With a JD, you could become a lawyer but if that doesn't work out for whatever reason, your JD is still valuable in non-lawyer careers, whereas an MBA or other Masters can never be a lawyer. I understand a Masters is usually a 2-year commitment whereas a JD is 3-years, so more time and money, but if you set aside the time and money factor, is it still bad to get a JD if you don't end up becoming a lawyer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to go against the grain on this thread and say prestige is for the birds. I know DCUM is obsessed with it but you can have a completely lucrative career having gone to a public law school. The vast majority of lawyers in this country are not employed at big law and did not attend a top 10 law school.

In fact, most of the attys that I know who started up their own firms and now make $$$ went to public, no name schools. DCUM is a weird place for advice because it slants in one direction only - private, prestigious, big law, money, did I say prestige? In truth, there a multitude of avenues for success.

I went to a public, not highly ranked school. I started up my own practice because I wanted more freedom to raise my kids. I don't make big law money but at $400-500K, I'm doing just fine in a dual income home.

There are lots of ways to make a living in law, OP, more than gov't and big law. Chances are when your DC gets to law school interests will change.

This is really good. Is that your net? What practice area? Are you a solo? Any employees or associates? Any office overhead? ~~Another Lawyer

The range is gross. At October, my YTD gross is about $420K. I expect to hit about $455/470 by end of this year (gross) with $425-ish net. I'm 100% virtual so my overhead is about $30K per year. It's very low so I keep roughly 90% of what I bring in. This does not include my taxes (obv) just office expenses (e.g., virtual lease, softwares, supplies, some 1099 work, cc fees). I have one contractor who works on an as needed basis but otherwise I'm a true solo. I don't have the bandwidth for a full office with employees due to kids/family, though have been approached by other firms re: mergers. I'm just not interested. I'm in employment based immigration and have been doing this over a decade. Year 1, I made $20K so it was a steady climb.

PP here -- this is impressive. What kind of marketing did you do to make the steady climb? I would love to do this but don't think I currently have the portable book to make it more profitable than what I'm doing now, unless perhaps I took on my own contract work. What % do you pay your contractor? Sorry to derail the thread, but it does show OP that there is more than Big Law and Gov Law.

I pay the contractor a flat fee per project. She has given me a fee schedule per case. Because of the type of work we do, it's usually flat fee. However, I don't send out work that often - maybe a few a year. I don't do any marketing now. It's all client referral. The first few years, I tried marketing via online sources that yielded little. The key to solo practice is sticking in the game because it takes a while for the referral pipeline to build up. Salaries were Y1 $20K (but I started mid-year); Y2 $65K; Y3 $80; Y5 $111 Y6$132....Y10 $320K....Y12 $425(est). There are big bumps in some years because I gained large corp clients in some years, or COVID. I'm anticipating that I will level off, or have to hire someone bc I'm at max of what solo can handle.

And yes, there's so much more to law than just the govt & big law discussion. 80% of the attys that I know do something similar to what I'm doing. Maybe it's because I didn't start out in DC metro. Anyway, solo, small to mid size firms should not be overlooked. I have been at home virtually working for past 10 years. I've raised my kids and controlled my own time. I don't think that I'm missed out too much career ways because law is so flexible. Just something to think about, OP.

So you opened a solo practice straight out of law school? No prior legal experience? Did you have loans? What year was this?

No, I worked for a firm where I gained experience in my field of expertise for about 2 years. I did not start my firm with a book of business, though, as I'd left to have a baby. Yes, I had loans - about $80K. It was 2011. In the first few years, I had to do contract work on the side to supplement income until I got to a level where my practice was making enough to support me.

Ok. So your anecdote is completely dependent on law grads finding an entry level position to learn the trade. Pretty much no one opens a solo practice straight out of law school. The risk of a lower tier school is never finding that entry level job.

That is complete nonsense. Lower tier grads find jobs all the time. And that is my point. The posters on here just assume that the ONLY jobs are the prestigious law firms in downtown DC when, in fact, the vast majority of law firms in this country are small-mid sized firms. I worked at one of those. My first job was a small firm with 4 employees. The problem is that people on here thumb their noses at small firms as if that experience is neither good enough or helpful to the resume which could not be further from the truth.

And no one said opening a solo practice is dependent on getting a firm job first. I know plenty of attys who went solo straight out of school. There are a number of different paths. You just have to be entrepreneurial enough to find them.

Lots may find jobs. Lots also don't. That's what the data says. Lots of grads from lower tier schools with big loans and no job.

Which is why - upthread - I said to go to a cheap, public law school. Rankings are unimportant just be able to pay for it. And btw, there are lots of unemployed people from expensive grad schools - not just lawyers - so this advise could go to any graduate student, whether they're seeking a JD from an expensive school or a potential MFA from Wesleyan.

There are so many posters on DCUM who tell you all the things that you can't do. I'm offering OP an example of what you can if you're willing to work for it. You can go to a no-name, poorly ranked school and still make a decent living. It is all what you make out of it. If I had listened to DCUM 10 years ago, I'd still be sitting as an employee at a job I hated being miserable. Thank god there was no DCUM for me back then

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to go against the grain on this thread and say prestige is for the birds. I know DCUM is obsessed with it but you can have a completely lucrative career having gone to a public law school. The vast majority of lawyers in this country are not employed at big law and did not attend a top 10 law school.

In fact, most of the attys that I know who started up their own firms and now make $$$ went to public, no name schools. DCUM is a weird place for advice because it slants in one direction only - private, prestigious, big law, money, did I say prestige? In truth, there a multitude of avenues for success.

I went to a public, not highly ranked school. I started up my own practice because I wanted more freedom to raise my kids. I don't make big law money but at $400-500K, I'm doing just fine in a dual income home.

There are lots of ways to make a living in law, OP, more than gov't and big law. Chances are when your DC gets to law school interests will change.

This is really good. Is that your net? What practice area? Are you a solo? Any employees or associates? Any office overhead? ~~Another Lawyer

The range is gross. At October, my YTD gross is about $420K. I expect to hit about $455/470 by end of this year (gross) with $425-ish net. I'm 100% virtual so my overhead is about $30K per year. It's very low so I keep roughly 90% of what I bring in. This does not include my taxes (obv) just office expenses (e.g., virtual lease, softwares, supplies, some 1099 work, cc fees). I have one contractor who works on an as needed basis but otherwise I'm a true solo. I don't have the bandwidth for a full office with employees due to kids/family, though have been approached by other firms re: mergers. I'm just not interested. I'm in employment based immigration and have been doing this over a decade. Year 1, I made $20K so it was a steady climb.

PP here -- this is impressive. What kind of marketing did you do to make the steady climb? I would love to do this but don't think I currently have the portable book to make it more profitable than what I'm doing now, unless perhaps I took on my own contract work. What % do you pay your contractor? Sorry to derail the thread, but it does show OP that there is more than Big Law and Gov Law.

I pay the contractor a flat fee per project. She has given me a fee schedule per case. Because of the type of work we do, it's usually flat fee. However, I don't send out work that often - maybe a few a year. I don't do any marketing now. It's all client referral. The first few years, I tried marketing via online sources that yielded little. The key to solo practice is sticking in the game because it takes a while for the referral pipeline to build up. Salaries were Y1 $20K (but I started mid-year); Y2 $65K; Y3 $80; Y5 $111 Y6$132....Y10 $320K....Y12 $425(est). There are big bumps in some years because I gained large corp clients in some years, or COVID. I'm anticipating that I will level off, or have to hire someone bc I'm at max of what solo can handle.

And yes, there's so much more to law than just the govt & big law discussion. 80% of the attys that I know do something similar to what I'm doing. Maybe it's because I didn't start out in DC metro. Anyway, solo, small to mid size firms should not be overlooked. I have been at home virtually working for past 10 years. I've raised my kids and controlled my own time. I don't think that I'm missed out too much career ways because law is so flexible. Just something to think about, OP.

So you opened a solo practice straight out of law school? No prior legal experience? Did you have loans? What year was this?

No, I worked for a firm where I gained experience in my field of expertise for about 2 years. I did not start my firm with a book of business, though, as I'd left to have a baby. Yes, I had loans - about $80K. It was 2011. In the first few years, I had to do contract work on the side to supplement income until I got to a level where my practice was making enough to support me.

Ok. So your anecdote is completely dependent on law grads finding an entry level position to learn the trade. Pretty much no one opens a solo practice straight out of law school. The risk of a lower tier school is never finding that entry level job.

That is complete nonsense. Lower tier grads find jobs all the time. And that is my point. The posters on here just assume that the ONLY jobs are the prestigious law firms in downtown DC when, in fact, the vast majority of law firms in this country are small-mid sized firms. I worked at one of those. My first job was a small firm with 4 employees. The problem is that people on here thumb their noses at small firms as if that experience is neither good enough or helpful to the resume which could not be further from the truth.

And no one said opening a solo practice is dependent on getting a firm job first. I know plenty of attys who went solo straight out of school. There are a number of different paths. You just have to be entrepreneurial enough to find them.

Lots may find jobs. Lots also don't. That's what the data says. Lots of grads from lower tier schools with big loans and no job.

Which is why - upthread - I said to go to a cheap, public law school. Rankings are unimportant just be able to pay for it. And btw, there are lots of unemployed people from expensive grad schools - not just lawyers - so this advise could go to any graduate student, whether they're seeking a JD from an expensive school or a potential MFA from Wesleyan.

There are so many posters on DCUM who tell you all the things that you can't do. I'm offering OP an example of what you can if you're willing to work for it. You can go to a no-name, poorly ranked school and still make a decent living. It is all what you make out of it. If I had listened to DCUM 10 years ago, I'd still be sitting as an employee at a job I hated being miserable. Thank god there was no DCUM for me back then

Copying and pasting all your comments for next time I need to explain survivor bias to someone.

[Anonymous]

I am a UCLA law grad from 30 years ago. It was top 14 then, it is apparently number 15 now. I paid peanuts for that degree and it was completely worth it. But tuition is significant now, even instate.

A legal education is incredibly useful and I wish it were an undergraduate option here the way it is in other countries. As a long time very senior fed I have found the biggest law school snobs in the federal government to be in general counsel offices, and sometimes in the offices of agency heads.

Most of the truly stellar attorneys I have worked with (and I have been lucky enough to have worked with a who’s who of lawyers in my niche area) are from top law schools, with a few notable exceptions who worked extremely hard and were very self motivated post law school. Some subject areas have specialty schools outside the top 30 even and students that do well in those a programs can do very well in those areas.

I cannot agree more that minimizing debt is key and the ranking of the program meaning so much more than undergrad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a lawyer and no have no idea if my college freshman will want to become a lawyer, but isn't this similar to what any graduate can expect when seeking a job? Some will immediately become gainfully employed, while it may take longer for others. Those who graduate from elite schools may have their first choice of jobs, while those who graduates from a school ranked 500 may take longer to find their place.

Either way, the likelihood is that no recent graduate, and I'd include those from undergrad and graduate schools, is going to remain in their first job for a long time. More likely, they'll bounce around from job to job during their 20s until they find something that sticks for them. So, why does it matter so much where you go to school unless you're aiming for a very niche career path like Wall Street, Big Law, etc.

I just think our kids should go to schools that won't put them or us in debt, where they can mature and START to figure out who and what they want to become in life. I just feel like DCUM especially makes this more complicated than it needs to be because there is so much focus on brand names.

Again, not a lawyer so what do I know.

Google bimodal lawyer salaries to see why that’s not entirely accurate. Law is unusually feast and famine.

Add to this that law can shut you out of other jobs as well. The real issue is that law schools will pump out another crop of law students before the recent graduates all secured jobs.

Employers that hire entry level attorneys only hire the current (or upcoming) graduating class. They won't hire the dregs of the prior class. So if you don't get an offer as you are graduating or shortly after, you likely will never get a job as a lawyer. You end up shut out of entry level employment with a JD that hurts you in applying for non-lawyer jobs. It's not really an option to bounce around for a few years before finding a career like it is after a BA or BS.

Non-lawyer here and sorry if I'm derailing the discussion, but I always thought that having a law degree gives you more options than an MBA or other Masters degree, for example. With a JD, you could become a lawyer but if that doesn't work out for whatever reason, your JD is still valuable in non-lawyer careers, whereas an MBA or other Masters can never be a lawyer. I understand a Masters is usually a 2-year commitment whereas a JD is 3-years, so more time and money, but if you set aside the time and money factor, is it still bad to get a JD if you don't end up becoming a lawyer?

This is mostly a fiction for grads right out of law school. There are some JD optional jobs, but there are also lots of time people consider a JD to be over qualified or who just flat out don't want to work with a lawyer. Law school teaches you to be a lawyer. It doesn't teach you to do non-lawyer things.

(This is not the same a transitioning to a non-lawyer role after years of practicing and you have substantive knowledge of a field or industry to help with the transition.)