I just got my wisdom teeth out, was still in lots of pain, popping vicodin, but like a neurotic pussy, I came to work anyway. My plan was to check in, clean up a few loose ends, then get the hell out of there and go to bed. Until Paul M., the world’s lamest partner, walked into my office and “asked” me to go to the printer and review a document. I quickly explained my medical plight, but he didn’t give a shit. “If you’re in that much pain, why aren’t you in bed?” So I popped a few more vicodin and went to the goddamn printer to proof the stupid S-3. I was there until 4 a.m. The next day, instead of giving me a thank you, he said I missed two major typos and “need to commit myself to the firm or get the hell out.”
Report your tales of Associate Abuse. Email them to info@bitterlawyer.com.
QA partner invited me to dinner party this Saturday night. Didn’t say much else, like who else is coming, what the dress code is, etc. Should I wear a sport jacket? Bring a gift? P.S. I’m a 28-year-old man and live in L.A.
ADon’t do brain surgery here, buddy. Wear what you’d wear to dinner at AOC on a third date with a cute chick. Done. As for a gift? Yeah, sure. No upside in showing up empty-handed, right? But keep it simple. Like a nice, moderately expensive bottle of Cabernet. Or some fancy cupcakes. But don’t go overboard. Spend about $50. And do not bring scented candles or patchouli.
I’m sorry, but I can’t take it anymore. This is the fifth time in three weeks I’ve received (and—yes, fine, I’ll admit it, deleted without opening) the “Urgent Pro Bono Staffing: Please read!” email from Mr. Of Counsel, who is tasked with harassing everyone in the firm about taking on pro bono work. Call me heartless, call me a horrible person, an obnoxious, selfish little snot, but I’ll go ahead and say it: I hate pro bono.
I just can’t understand why BigLaw associates are constantly guilt-tripped into not only having to care about this nonprofit, Skid Row crap, but also having to spend time working on it, for no credit. No other professionals are strong-armed into doing random work for people who can’t pay out of some outdated sense of noblesse oblige, so why are lawyers? Because we get paid pretty well? Please. Know any i-bankers who’ve clocked a few hundred pro bono hours selling bonds for asylum refugees recently? What about your friendly neighborhood hedge fund manager, cosmetic surgeon, or real-estate developer? Keep Reading ⇒
As a law student who interned for ten months only to find out that I suck at it in one ten minute conversation with the supervisor, I have some thoughts on lawyers and apologies. So, the following will be a primer for any attorney who is attempting to mend fences. I’ll write the treatise later.
1) Stick a pin in your fat little ego and deflate it a little. A prick for a prick.
2) Don’t try to lawyer me into believing you are right. It won’t happen. However, you may succeed in making me mad enough to divulge the details of the entire story, AND YOUR FULL NAME on every blawg in existence.
3) Use your persuasive skills to persuade me that you feel something other than contempt for me. Use your intellect to create a performance that would convince a reasonable man (or woman) that you actually care, that you have a heart, and that you are really, truly, sorry for what you have done.
4) Your knee-jerk reaction is self-defense. Quit it. You were wrong. It is time to plea bargain. Throw yourself on the mercy of the court. Some of us still think and feel like real human beings, not like lawyers. It just might work.
I know the initial answer will be “whatever you want” or “whatever you’re good at” or “whatever your personality traits fit, etc.” But overall, what’s better for a person’s career/career options, big firm transactional or big firm litigation? And what type of transactional, etc. is better to go into? Thank you.
Great question. And my answer is definitely not “whatever you want” or “whatever you’re good at.” The choice between litigation and transactional comes down to this: Do you want to be a lawyer for the rest of your life? If you don’t, I’d definitely suggest focusing on corporate (non-litigation) work. If you do, and you don’t like business or enjoy reading the Wall Street Journal, you should become a litigator. Sounds simplistic, I know. But I promise you this: If you don’t like reading the Journal, you’re definitely not going to like drafting a proxy statement.
In my opinion, the major advantage of corporate law versus litigation is that it’s much easier to transition out of law into business since the skill set you develop is more readily transferable to non-legal, business jobs, such as investment banking, private equity, and real estate development. As far as what type of transactional work you should focus on… That’s up to you. It also depends on the size of the firm where you work. At the big firms, there tends to be several distinct departments (e.g., Mergers & Acquisitions, Corporate Finance and Financial Institutions), while at the mid-size and smaller firms, things are far less structured and specialized.
But if you don’t have a so-called business mind and you actually want to be a a real lawyer, you should definitely become a litigator. It’s where the rubber meets the road in the legal world. It’s real law. Research, writing, motions, and every once in a while, an actual jury trial. Plus, it’s recession-proof. While corporate work slows down in an economic downturn, litigation doesn’t. People sue each other in good times and bad. Fact. You might be writing and researching your ass off, but at least you won’t have to worry about getting laid off.
Hope that helps.
Got a question for Ex-Bitter? Email it to info@bitterlawyer.com.
QI’ve heard the only journal experience in law school that has any resume value is Law Review. Is this true? Do firms really care either way or does it just depend on who’s interviewing you?
AFirst off, this conversation is only relevant for those students looking to land jobs at swanky, big city law firms. Everyone else, stop reading now. Because it’s irrelevant and incredibly annoying. But for those of you looking to land prestige jobs, here you go…
The simple truth is: Law Review is the “Harvard” of legal journals. No doubt. It’s the one thing that guarantees a law student multiple interviews and immediate respect. I wish it weren’t so, but it is. Law firms covet students on Law Review. Fact. And for good reason too. First off, it’s not easy to get admitted. Second, once you’re admitted, you have to work your ass off to stay a member. Law firms know this—and love this. It proves that you have a high tolerance for pain and are willing to sacrifice any semblance of a social life in pursuit of a higher calling. Kind of sad, if you think about it, but it’s true.
So what if you don’t “make Law Review?” Should you still join some random, junior varsity journal? Answer: Hell yeah! It might not guarantee you a job at Cravath, but it’s definitely a “significant positive” on your resume. It shows that you’re willing to work harder than the average student, and that you’re probably a better researcher and writer than him, too. So do yourself a favor and stop trying to convince yourself that joining the International Law Journal would be a waste of time—because it wouldn’t. Truth is, it would actually help your chances of landing a good job. By a lot. Especially if you don’t go to a top-ten school. So either make Law Review or join a journal as fast as you can. If you want to get a “fancy” job anyway.
Got a question for Ex-Bitter? Email it to info@bitterlawyer.com.
QI’m working with an asshole senior associate who I think just gave me a shitty review—which I didn’t deserve. I promise. This guy is on all kinds of anti-depressants and other medication. I think he is manic-depressive or something. He sees a shrink three times a week. But he’s very secretive about this. Don’t think the firm knows. Should I bring this up at my review?
AKeep your mouth shut and accept the bad evaluation. Selling out the “asshole senior associate” will make you look like a whiny punk. If he’s as crazy as you suggest, the partners already know this. Trust me. Take it on the chin and move on and try not to work for this person again. And don’t worry about the shitty review. Assuming it’s your only one, you’ll be fine. The firm won’t even blink.
The only thing more pathetic than kissing ass is trying to kiss ass and not succeeding.
A few years ago, I bumped into my boss at a popular LA restaurant. We said our hellos, slapped each others’ backs, then retreated to opposite sides of the bar. Worried my latest script was sub-par, or possibly just looking to kiss some Hollywood ass, I told the barkeep to send a round of drinks to Head Writer and his party of four. On me, of course. Well, the drinks were delivered, but the bartender never told the target of my obsequiousness where they came from. A few moments later, I overheard my boss thanking the sycophantic owner-greeter for the free drinks. The owner, of course, cracked a wide smile, uttered a few words in Italian, kissed the boss’s wife on both cheeks, then walked away. And that was that. What could I do? Interrupt the owner and say, “Wait, wait, I bought the drinks. Cost me 45 bucks too. I can even show you the receipt if you want.”
Bottom line is: When something like this happens, you’re screwed. You just have to shut up, accept defeat and move on. But it’s not that easy. There’s something maddening about the inherent unfairness of someone else getting credit—and accepting credit—for your generosity. It’s even more complicated when your generosity isn’t really generosity at all, but a thinly-veiled attempt at self-promotion. Which is why I thought it would be a perfect no-win situation for a politically unsavvy dude like Nick Conley to navigate. Or attempt to navigate anyway.
I’m traveling on a cross-country flight with my supervising partner tomorrow, and we’re sitting next to each other on the plane. I already tried to change the seat, but the flight’s booked. I have a few work things I could do on the plane, but they can also wait until later. Truth is, I was totally stoked to watch about ten episodes of The Office. But I can’t with a partner next to me, watching my every move. Do I have to do some stupid, unnecessary work just to keep up appearances (for which I won’t even get extra billables, since we’re already billing for the flight…) or is it OK if I just watch some DVDs, read a magazine, or God forbid, go to sleep?
I feel your pain. No easy answer here. For what it’s worth, here’s what I’d do: After the obligatory early-flight exchange of platitudes, I’d do a little work. Like thirty minutes’ worth, then hit the magazines. I wouldn’t recommend watching DVDs on your laptop, though—don’t really know why, I just wouldn’t. I could see Partner Dude getting annoyed by this—for no legitimate reason, of course, but I could still imagine him being annoyed that you’re actually having fun. Laughing and joy are not typically part of the legal experience. Especially the legal-airplane experience. Sad, but true. For some idiotic reason, business travel is extremely serious to most partners. So instead of watching The Office, read a few magazines. But don’t smile. Or giggle. I’d also stay away from the US Weekly, Star Magazine stuff too. Too easy for Partner Dude to make negative assumptions. Go with Time, Fortune, if you’re feeling daring, Vanity Fair. If you want to impress, bust out the New Yorker.
Have a great trip!
Got a question for Ex-Bitter? Email it to info@bitterlawyer.com.
QJust had my review. I’m a second year associate at a Big New York Firm. Partner told me I was “performing adequately.” Also told me, I need to “think more robustly and apply more common sense and diligence to the task at hand.” Translation please?
AYou will be fired in exactly six months. No doubt. In fact, there’s a 50% chance the letter’s already been written. They’re just laying a record to avoid potential litigation. From this day forward, spend every minute of every day looking for a new job.
Hal: I came across this website after querying Google as to why my girlfriend, a new lawyer, had such a bitter tasting crotch. I never got... May 19, 10:44 AM
Carney: Was it really necessary to denigrate "that's what she said" jokes in order to make this point? May 19, 9:57 AM
