Tips When Hiring Nonlocal Lawyers
We’ve gotten pretty good at figuring out who is willing to pull the trigger on such a major life change. That assessment is just as important as matching credentials and culture fit. I painfully recall losing a client 15 years ago (FifthThird Bank) when one of our recruits got cold feet about moving to Cincinnati, after he had accepted the position.
July 15, 2019 at 12:05 PM
4 minute read
Our firm gets a number of search assignments that involve geographic relocation, often to small markets with one major Fortune 500 employer. Think of places such a Midland, Michigan and Bentonville, Arkansas.
We’ve gotten pretty good at figuring out who is willing to pull the trigger on such a major life change. That assessment is just as important as matching credentials and culture fit. I painfully recall losing a client 15 years ago (FifthThird Bank) when one of our recruits got cold feet about moving to Cincinnati, after he had accepted the position.
I learned from the loss and have developed a sixth sense for identifying cold feet much earlier in the interview process. The reality of moving is quite different from the thought of relocating for an exciting job.
Here are my five top tips for assessing how “movable” a candidate really is:
- Don’t assume that a single person is more likely than a married candidate to relocate, especially to a smaller market. The opposite is more often true. Singles have to face the reality check of restarting a personal life. A happily married candidate has a cheerleader and support system in place.
- Related to number one, of course: Spouse support is everything. An early warning sign of a doomed process is when a candidate wants to learn more about your opportunity before discussing it at home. It’s a sure sign that the candidate will need to lobby his or her spouse to support a move, and that rarely leads to a good outcome.
- Older kids are problematic. Even more than a reluctant spouse, teenage children have tremendous influence in this process. Almost without exception, our successful relocations have involved candidates with younger kids, no kids or kids who are out of high school.
- Look for clues on the resume. Anyone who already has worked in multiple locations, lived overseas or even attended school far from home is usually the best candidate for relocation.
- Desperate is a misconception and should be avoided anyway. Many employers assume that an unemployed attorney will relocate. It’s a bad assumption, and this is also the most common cold feet scenario. Currently employed candidates tend to do a better job of thinking through the location before investing time and effort in an interview process. Conversely, unemployed candidates seize interview opportunities first, always showing great enthusiasm early. The relocation reality check tends to hit them later in the process. Even unemployed professionals rarely move if they are struggling to come to terms with it.
My main piece of advice is to talk about relocation at every step in the interview process. Force candidates to talk about the pros and cons of the move for them. Ask if they have discussed the potential move with family and friends. Get them talking about it early and often.
For inside counsel who are reading this column from the employee/candidate perspective, I don’t have advice to offer so much as I have a request. On behalf of recruiters and employers everywhere, I plead with you to please think through any relocation scenario before throwing your hat into the ring for an opening. If you are married, discuss it with your spouse now, not later. You will save all of us, most importantly yourself, from a making a poor investment of time and emotional energy.
Mike Evers recruits attorneys for corporate legal departments throughout the United States. Visit www.everslegal.com. His firm also offers experienced in-house counsel to companies on an adjunct basis.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAI Disclosures Under the Spotlight: SEC Expectations for Year-End Filings
5 minute readA Blueprint for Targeted Enhancements to Corporate Compliance Programs
7 minute readThree Legal Technology Trends That Can Maximize Legal Team Efficiency and Productivity
Trending Stories
- 1Learning From Experience: The Best and Worst of Years Past
- 2Treasury GC Returns to Davis Polk to Co-Chair White-Collar Defense and Investigations Practice
- 3Decision of the Day: JFK to Paris Stowaway's Bail Revocation Explained
- 4Doug Emhoff, Husband of Former VP Harris, Lands at Willkie
- 5LexisNexis Announces Public Availability of Personalized AI Assistant Protégé
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250