Making a Lateral Move
One dangerous pitfall that attorneys must avoid is being pigeon-holed into a practice area that is not what they want in the long run. Most law firms will not hire attorneys for practice areas in which they have no experience.
September 25, 2019 at 01:15 PM
6 minute read
Many factors determine an attorney's future: choice of law schools, GPA, school activities, writing skills, practice skills, experience, certain non-law experience, firm reputation, firm size, business development, personal and business connections, personality and geographical flexibility.
|Education
Law students, in some cases, do not fully realize the importance of their grades and their school's reputation. Most large law firms seek attorneys who have graduated in the top 20 percent of their class at a top-10 law school such as Yale, Columbia or Harvard, or those who have graduated in the top 5 percent of their class at a top-30 law school.
Occasionally they will consider candidates from second-tier schools such as Temple University, Hofstra or Villanova, but, again, the grades must be stellar magna cum laude, summa cum laude, etc. Participating in Law Review is valuable. Firms do consider that in evaluating candidates. Attorneys having acquired an advanced degree such as an L.L.M., M.B.A. or a technical degree also have an advantage over other candidates.
It may seem unfair that so much emphasis is placed on grades, even years later, but law firms and corporations are up against stiff competition and thus seek only those they consider are the best.
Those who have not gone to top-ranked schools or who have not put out their best effort in school will find themselves faced with lower-paying job offers at small firms or in government.
Geography plays a big part in the search process. Those who do not restrict their search geographically will realize far more possibilities. Geography is also a factor because certain areas simply have far more positions available.
One geographic area may have more positions open in certain practice areas than others. For example, Palo Alto, California, has far more intellectual property positions than Omaha, Nebraska. There are more securities litigation positions in New York than in St. Louis.
|Experience
For lawyers already practicing, where they have practiced is a critical factor. Reputation and firm size are important. Major law firms seek those who have worked in a major firm environment; corporations prefer those who have worked in a corporate environment.
It is wise to understand that needs vary from firm to firm depending on practice area, firm strategy, clients, growth rate and timing. One dangerous pitfall that attorneys must avoid is being pigeon-holed into a practice area that is not what they want in the long run. Most law firms will not hire attorneys for practice areas in which they have no experience.
Recently, a commercial litigation attorney called me in frustration because he could not find a position doing transactional work. This was hardly surprising.
I also received a call recently from a new graduate who said he would take any kind of a permanent position, but desperate job seeking can most certainly lead to disaster. I told him he would be better served to take a contract position doing work he really wants to do. Such a position could lead to a permanent position. Even a contract position, in any practice area while continuing his job search, would be better than settling for a permanent position in an unrelated area.
|Business Development
Business development is a critical issue for those passing their fifth year. The associate who isn't up for a partnership should know that without special expertise or exceptional work performance he or she won't be attractive to other firms unless they have developed $750,000 to $1 million in a book of business. Most major law firms who need experienced associates with two to five years' experience rarely hire those beyond that range without a book of business.
Aside from being an attorney headhunter, I am also a client development consultant. I can speak with authority that associates and others need to understand that developing clients or strong business relations does not usually require years of experience. Business development should start as soon as you are employed or even before that.
For those who think they can easily find positions in corporations or who have decided they will never work at another law firm, think again. There are infinitely more attorney positions at law firms than in corporations.
There are many ways to develop business. Each person has to pursue clients in whatever way works for them. For example there is public speaking, newsletters, golf outings, participation in business or civic organizations, corporate board memberships, media interviews, telemarketing, advertising, websites, and inter or intra-law firm referrals. A lawyer must be consistent, driven, a good communicator and a good listener. Most importantly, he or she cannot let excuses get in the way. Excuses or so-called "good reasons" can kill-off possibilities.
|Resources
There are numerous advantages to using legal headhunters in your search. Some have national and international contacts. Many give useful advice. Also, best of all, they work hard on your behalf at no cost. Generally speaking, it's the firm that pays the placement fee.
Graduates should take note, though, that major law firms use search firms the most but rarely use them to find new graduates. The firms recruit new graduates directly from their own programs and advertising.
For law students who do not expect to be recruited upon graduation, establishing contacts with key people at various firms is the way to secure a position. It's never too early to start networking.
It does require research, forethought, finesse and a winning strategy. Simply calling a busy partner to seek a job will not work.
Many career difficulties can be avoided, but it requires facing the practical realities of the legal profession today and taking appropriate and timely action.
Arnold Keiser is a client development consultant with Search International in Marlton, New Jersey.
|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
© 2024 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 All$113K Sanction Award to Law Firm at Stake: NJ Supreme Court Will Consider 'Unsettled Law' Frivolous Litigation Question
4 minute readWhich Outside Law Firms Are Irreplaceable, and Which Should Have Gotten the Ax Years Ago?
4 minute readLargest Law Firms: New Jersey and Firmwide Attorney Count
Trending Stories
- 1UN Treaty Enacting Cybercrime Standards Likely to Face Headwinds in US, Other Countries
- 2Clark Hill Acquires L&E Boutique in Mexico City, Adding 5 Lawyers
- 36th Circuit Judges Spar Over Constitutionality of Ohio’s Ballot Initiative Procedures
- 4On The Move: Polsinelli Adds Health Care Litigator in Nashville, Ex-SEC Enforcer Joins BCLP in Atlanta
- 5After Mysterious Parting With Last GC, Photronics Fills Vacancy
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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