One of my law school classmates transitioned from Biglaw to a law school professor position (at a pretty decent law school), but he published like mad the entire time he was in Biglaw. Granted, I don't know if anyone ever read or benefitted from any of his brilliant law review articles.

OOTH, my DH (also a lawyer) wrote a law review article that is very practical and helpful to practioners, and has tens of thousands of downloads and abstract views on SSRN. (He's also a grad of a top 5 college and law school, with an appellate clerkship.) But it's his only published article and therefore he would have no shot at legal academia.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try a business school. They all hire law profs and care more about practical experience than law schools.

Their publication requirements are higher than law schools’ and often require peer review. tenure rates at b schools
are much lower.

NP. But there are good, non-tenure-track jobs for lawyers as business school professors.

Anonymous wrote:Try a business school. They all hire law profs and care more about practical experience than law schools.

Their publication requirements are higher than law schools’ and often require peer review. tenure rates at b schools
are much lower.

Try a business school. They all hire law profs and care more about practical experience than law schools.

Anonymous wrote:The hard truth is that Biglaw is overrun with senior associates from top 3 law schools and appellate clerkships but no publications. There's no room in law school teaching for them. You NEED to publish. Without that, you don't have a prayer.

Agreed. Your pedigree matters, but you have to prove you can think like an academic. The proof is publishing. It’s really no different than any other field.

The hard truth is that Biglaw is overrun with senior associates from top 3 law schools and appellate clerkships but no publications. There's no room in law school teaching for them. You NEED to publish. Without that, you don't have a prayer.

You need to be able to prepare students not only for what current issues are -- but also to give them a degree that's not going to expire in 5 years if the law changes. So they need to be able to think in very broad terms about what the issues are and how to apply them in a rapidly changing field using the same principles. An academic has likely thought about these types of issues in a way that someone who is just practicing law may not have.

Anonymous wrote:I think the bread and butter of law professors is to publish, attend panels, be a thinking, and it's not all about teaching; so be ready for that. Most of the professors that made the jump from Biglaw to academia had a niche area to start with, e.g., native Indian law, international financial institutions, environmental law. What credential in term of niche do you have to speak of? I guess you need to identify that first, then pick a school that's looking for that niche.

Was going to say the same thing. We're always looking for people who know the cutting edge stuff about intellectual property as it relates to internet, social media, etc. That would be the sort of niche you might develop through your work in practice, but then you would also have to be writing and thinking and engaging with the academic debates in the field.

Anonymous wrote:You have to have publications in main law reviews and top recommendations. It's not something you get just by being smart and having some prestigious stuff on your resume.

The people I know who transitioned from practice to teaching got fellowships at law schools to produce articles, got jobs as legal writing teachers, or clinical jobs.

+1

I've known a few people who made the move from practicing law to teaching. Many teach legal writing or run clinics, which is great if that's something you're interested in. Otherwise, they wrote a bunch of scholarly articles while practicing, and worked to become a recognized authority in some specific area of the law (conferences, articles, commissions, committees, etc.).

I think it used to be more common. I took several classes from former practitioners -- partners in law firms, or people who had been GC for a federal agency, etc. But they were older, and in the past couple of decades, things have changed.

Anonymous wrote:You have far too much practical legal experience to be taken seriously by legal academia. At best, you could teach some niche seminars that a few students care about.

This is not true for all law schools. For the top law schools, it is accurate. They aren't looking for people with tons of practical experience. Instead, they want someone who has a Phd, has been a fellow somewhere prestigious (Climenko -- Harvard; Bigelow -- Chicago, etc), and has a good number of publications in top journals already. For lower-ranked law schools, practical experience is not a drawback. However, they still expect you to have top credentials (often including a Phd) and publications.

I don't know about others responding here, but I'm actually a law professor and I made the transition from big law. The key is that I managed to publish while working at a law firm and I had a somewhat niche area. I also always knew I wanted to be an academic, so I had been laying the groundwork w/ clerkships, etc. I also had some connections in academia, which helped.

This is not a "back up" career for people who get burned out from big law. If you're serious about this, you need to commit to writing an article now. If you can't do that, move on....

I think the bread and butter of law professors is to publish, attend panels, be a thinking, and it's not all about teaching; so be ready for that. Most of the professors that made the jump from Biglaw to academia had a niche area to start with, e.g., native Indian law, international financial institutions, environmental law. What credential in term of niche do you have to speak of? I guess you need to identify that first, then pick a school that's looking for that niche.

You have far too much practical legal experience to be taken seriously by legal academia. At best, you could teach some niche seminars that a few students care about.

Do you have geographic flexibility? Too much competition in the DC area.

Anonymous wrote:My close friend did it. He did have a PhD already but much worse credentials. Bang out a couple of publications and see where it takes you.

the PhD is a big deal in law school hiring these days.

Anonymous wrote:My friend was lead prosecutor on an incredibly high-profile trial that earned him tons of glowing media coverage. He applied for law professor jobs and was roundly rejected because he didn't have enough publications about esoteric crap.

right because the JOB of being a tenure track law professor is to think and write about the law. Having a few news clips has no relevance. Maybe if he had gone for a fellowship to be a clinical instructor, his trial experience would have counted.