Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 17:41     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Fraternizing. Sorry.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 17:07     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Anonymous wrote:My general view has always been -- if you want to stay in law, you should make moves early as it can take time to get into the govt, small firms etc and you don't want a resume gap as lawyers are very unforgiving about that. But if you want to leave law, collect your paycheck as long as you can. If you want to start a business, go into real estate, teaching etc - you're an industry switcher anyway and no one is going to care if you left biglaw 6 months earlier or later or had a gap. However that 6 months of senior associate pay, if saved, can give you a lot of options.


There's a lot of fraternerizing in big law with almost brainwashing like stigma related to being laid off. Like its worse than death. Laid off associates are literally like untouchables. Noone wants to look at them, let alone interview them. That said, I was terrified of being laid off, but after it happened, life went on. The other 99.9999% of the universe could care less. I switched careers, went into a medical supplies business, and am making much more then I thought possible. Folks, it's good to be the boss.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 17:05     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Anonymous wrote:It's pretty obnoxious to criticize OP for what s/he didn't know about the legal market 10 years ago. That was before Howrey, Dewey, the scam blogs, etc. and the industry was damn good at hiding its myriad weaknesses.


15:53 here,

I disagree that its obnoxious, and it wasn't intended to be, in any case.

A good many people in the legal profession saw the structural weaknesses prior to 2003 (10 yrs. ago) and were appropriately wary.

I don't say that one should have a crystal ball, or that one is an idiot for not seeing what was going to happen. But I and others including friends in both large and smaller firms (including owners of smaller firms that refused the temptation to buy into the BigLaw mirage by merging when they were serially courted) could see what was happening.

We aren't geniuses and we didn't know when or how it would play out but it was not a completely hidden thing, we were talking about the massive overleveraging of firms in the mid-1990s.

I have great sympathy for all who are going through this. It's wrenching. It's not fair. And it can be very arbitrary and painful.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 17:03     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's pretty obnoxious to criticize OP for what s/he didn't know about the legal market 10 years ago. That was before Howrey, Dewey, the scam blogs, etc. and the industry was damn good at hiding its myriad weaknesses.


Whatever...just saying the chronology was a bit off or maybe she was still idealistic. She was the one who specifically painted a different picture of BigLaw 10 years ago than what those of us there at the time recall first-hand.


Op here - ok I accept I was naive. I'm not saving I shouldn't have seen signs but what I knew as a first yr 10 yrs ago is not what a 10th wouldn't have known back then; it's not like first yr biglaw associates are close enough to the process to know anything, that's even true of my junior associates now.


Class of 2003 was able to get summer associate positions fairly easily at to schools. Class of 2004 was screwed, 05 through 07 were ok, then train wreck of recession happened
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 17:02     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's pretty obnoxious to criticize OP for what s/he didn't know about the legal market 10 years ago. That was before Howrey, Dewey, the scam blogs, etc. and the industry was damn good at hiding its myriad weaknesses.


Whatever...just saying the chronology was a bit off or maybe she was still idealistic. She was the one who specifically painted a different picture of BigLaw 10 years ago than what those of us there at the time recall first-hand.


Op here - ok I accept I was naive. I'm not saving I shouldn't have seen signs but what I knew as a first yr 10 yrs ago is not what a 10th wouldn't have known back then; it's not like first yr biglaw associates are close enough to the process to know anything, that's even true of my junior associates now.


Who isn't naive at 22/23/24 when applying for and starting graduate school? Sure, people on the inside might have known, but they certainly weren't volunteering that information when I summered in '05. I don't think you can blame yourself too much, OP. There was virtually no way of knowing that the bottom was about to fall out.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 17:01     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
My general view has always been -- if you want to stay in law, you should make moves early as it can take time to get into the govt, small firms etc and you don't want a resume gap as lawyers are very unforgiving about that. But if you want to leave law, collect your paycheck as long as you can. If you want to start a business, go into real estate, teaching etc - you're an industry switcher anyway and no one is going to care if you left biglaw 6 months earlier or later or had a gap. However that 6 months of senior associate pay, if saved, can give you a lot of options.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 16:54     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Anonymous wrote:As an MBA - not a JD - and thus totally uninformed on big law .... Why is the model broken? What is the model?

Intellectual curiousity, of anyone cares to elaborate.


Many things but from an associate perspective - it is an up or out model which I know can be true in IB as well, however there is a lot of denial or stigma about it. In IB there is no shame in being laid off, in biglaw if you don't make partner, all the other firms act like you're an untouchable moron bc you didn't make partner instead of admitting that an HLS grad who lasted 10 yrs probably isn't an idiot and maybe their last firms economics and politics prevented partnership.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 16:50     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's pretty obnoxious to criticize OP for what s/he didn't know about the legal market 10 years ago. That was before Howrey, Dewey, the scam blogs, etc. and the industry was damn good at hiding its myriad weaknesses.


Whatever...just saying the chronology was a bit off or maybe she was still idealistic. She was the one who specifically painted a different picture of BigLaw 10 years ago than what those of us there at the time recall first-hand.


Op here - ok I accept I was naive. I'm not saving I shouldn't have seen signs but what I knew as a first yr 10 yrs ago is not what a 10th wouldn't have known back then; it's not like first yr biglaw associates are close enough to the process to know anything, that's even true of my junior associates now.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 16:48     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
As an MBA - not a JD - and thus totally uninformed on big law .... Why is the model broken? What is the model?

Intellectual curiousity, of anyone cares to elaborate.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 16:47     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Op here - ok so I misread the signs 10 yrs ago, can't change the past. I did get in before Dewey, Howrey, above the law etc. I knew what I knew at the age of 24 and I realize it was a bad decision, but I was at a firm that was making 5 partners a yr in my dept - if you we're hard working, well liked, made it through the grind for 8-10 yrs and had any kind of rabbi, you made partner. And last yr was the first time they pushed out young partners in my dept for not having business. So I am positive I misread it, but I can't fix that now. As for getting a govt law job - I don't see it happening. I have applied to all kinds of agencies through lots of contacts, I get through many rounds of interviews and then don't seal the deal - but I've gotten calls telling me how impressed they were. I think it's just about the sheer number of well credentialed people out there.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 16:45     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Anonymous wrote:It's pretty obnoxious to criticize OP for what s/he didn't know about the legal market 10 years ago. That was before Howrey, Dewey, the scam blogs, etc. and the industry was damn good at hiding its myriad weaknesses.


Whatever...just saying the chronology was a bit off or maybe she was still idealistic. She was the one who specifically painted a different picture of BigLaw 10 years ago than what those of us there at the time recall first-hand.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 16:38     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
It's pretty obnoxious to criticize OP for what s/he didn't know about the legal market 10 years ago. That was before Howrey, Dewey, the scam blogs, etc. and the industry was damn good at hiding its myriad weaknesses.
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 16:17     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
It's been rough since the dot com crash in the early 2000s. Was a bit better in 2005, 2006, then got even worse than before
Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 15:53     Subject: Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP here -- sounds like a lot of us got in at the same time. Law was a stable profession about 10 yrs ago -- you could go to a top 10 school then a big firm and if you worked hard you could make partner; maybe you wouldn't make it in 7 yrs but most firms would keep you around and make you partner in 9-10 yrs. Now at my firm and many others -- they are barely wanting to hold on to existing partners, let alone make others.

I do worry about jumping into another field (something business related) and being bad at it, but I also worry about going to another firm (if I can even get in which I haven't been able to in the last 8 months as such a senior assoc). You go to a new firm that's hopefully not "up or out," that firm doesn't make you partner for any reason or no reason at all -- then you're searching a few yrs from now for your next gig. I have seen people who are at 16th yr associate level who have had this happen at 2-3 firms and they have NO clue that they'll do, aside from hanging out a shingle and hoping for the best. I just see this future in law where you could end up hopping job to job forever -- am I being overly pessimistic or do others see this too?

So I'm wondering if it's better to take the money and employment hit now to figure something else out while I'm "young" enough or whether it's better to collect as long as I possibly can knowing I may be closing some doors.

I would regret not practicing, but I do have some other skills and interests (dating back to undergrad - so it'll be hard to leverage them but if I cant do it now, I certainly won't be able to 5 yrs from now).


Big Law was not the way you described 10 years ago. Maybe 30 years ago. I'm thinking you didn't want to see the business for what it is, which is a poorly managed profession that can be lucrative if you not only are smart, but also lucky enough to find a good mentor and a hot, sustainable practice area.

I'm about burned out with the profession, or more precisely with the personalities of some of my colleagues, but at least I had good timing and will be able to leave law in a few years with enough money saved to pursue other interests or retire young. I would feel sorry for the next generation of lawyers, but for the fact that their own generational personality traits often magnify the pressures facing the profession.

If I were you, I would try to find a Government job where you can become a recognized subject-matter expert and gain more visibility than you might get in the bowels of Big Law, or change professions. Hopping from firm to firm as a senior associate or counsel, unless you are more or less guaranteed partnership in 1-2 years, strikes me as the worst form of purgatory imaginable.


Agree w/ this ... if you (OP) think it wasn't this way 10 yrs. ago you significantly misread the signs.

It wasn't this way 33 yrs. ago when I got out of law school, but it has been for more than 10-15 yrs., increasingly so.

It IS a broken business model, OP is right there. I don't claim to be prescient, but I thought I saw the direction things were headed long ago and after 7 yrs. of nonprofit and private firm (medium sized) work I went into the federal govt. In 26 yrs. there worked up to 20+ yrs. as a manager (Division Director and Associate Office Director) and retired in April (early outs offered due to dire budget situation and outlook). I am very lucky to be able to get out early and manage it financially. I'll do some volunteer mediation (one of my certifications) and some consulting (just a little) in one of my areas of experience/expertise, but I think my active practice days are behind me and I'm not too unhappy about that given where things have gone.

Govt. practice has gotten worse and also will in the next 10 yrs. due to budget pressures, but it is probably still a better balance of interesting work and lack of absurd BigLaw pressures. You just have to live within your means to do it. A GS-15 non supervisory attorney position will be harder to get but if you are a "national expert" in a given area it will increase your chances (may be necessary).

Anonymous
Post 08/25/2013 15:16     Subject: Re:Any biglaw litigators just leave law altogether?
Anonymous wrote:I'm in a similar position. I have no clue what I'm going to do. I'm thinking about teaching high school. College would be more my speed but I have no idea if I could get a college job.






Not without a D.Phil. J.D.s don't count in that world (college teaching, not secondary).