Nelson Mullins — tell me what you know! Forum

[Anonymous User]

Overall culture? Upward mobility? Weekend work? I’m considering an offer but don’t want to start my career off on the wrong foot when I know I’m looking for somewhere humane (for biglaw). It's an AmLaw 100 firm but I can't find much information. Oh and I’m doing litigation.

[Anonymous User]

I believe the hour requirement is 1900 so that is pretty decent, but it isn't worth it if you comparing Nelson Mullins vs. a more traditional V100 where the hour requirement might be 2000 but you get an actually good bonus. Nelson will not pay very big bonuses from what I hear (like 5-10k). Most offices are in smaller, secondary markets, though (except for ATL & Boston I guess since they just opened there), so may be the market rate.

I don't have much info other than that. I would think you would want to go to their HQ in Columbia, SC over any of their somewhat smaller satellite offices, but they did just expand in FL with a merger.

[Anonymous User]

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=235142

This discussion looks pretty relevant to your question.

[Anonymous User]

Firm has a good reputation and should be in the AmLaw top 70 next year with its merger with Broad and Cassell. Firm is humane but you will work. Good people generally and the firm will keep you moving forward as long as you meet your goals. 1900 is the billable goal but 2100 is the overall hour requirement which includes 50 required pro bono hours. Yearly requirements are actually based on collections goals, so if you bill 8-9 hours a day and your clients don't pay, you're out of luck for those hours. If you don't meet your collections goals, you don't get a bonus, or they adjust accordingly. Firm generally pays under market but that's because its offices are mostly in smaller cities with cheaper cost of living.

[gregfootball2001]

Yearly requirements are actually based on collections goals, so if you bill 8-9 hours a day and your clients don't pay, you're out of luck for those hours. If you don't meet your collections goals, you don't get a bonus, or they adjust accordingly.

What? An associate doesn't get credit for hours if the partner that assigned the work doesn't get their client to pay? That's crazy.

[Anonymous User]

Can confirm this. Friend of mine is at Nelson Mullins and he is only credited for hours if the client pays. That aside, he seems to like it.

[Anonymous User]

The Firm informs associates that collections are key. If you bill only 1800 hours but still meet your collections goal, you will get a bonus. The above is misleading. You still get credited the hours towards your 1900 hours goal even if your time is written off or not billed. My understanding is that having time written off as a younger associate is not a foreign concept in big law.

[Anonymous User]

If you are diverse, it probably wouldn't be my first choice based on conversations I've had.

I'm also not aware of any other ATL firms that focus on collections with respect to associate hours, but I'm happy to be proven wrong on that point.

[gregfootball2001]

The above is misleading. You still get credited the hours towards your 1900 hours goal even if your time is written off or not billed. My understanding is that having time written off as a younger associate is not a foreign concept in big law.

They seem to be saying that if you bill 2000 hours, but the money for only 1500 of those hours are collected, your bonus (or lack thereof) is based on the 1500 hour "collected" number, not the 2000 hour "billed" number. So it has nothing to do with time being written off or not billed, but that your collections (over which you have no control) govern your bonus. This seems extremely strange to me. However, I'm not at that firm, so if this is incorrect, please do explain.

[Anonymous User]

The above is misleading. You still get credited the hours towards your 1900 hours goal even if your time is written off or not billed. My understanding is that having time written off as a younger associate is not a foreign concept in big law.

They seem to be saying that if you bill 2000 hours, but the money for only 1500 of those hours are collected, your bonus (or lack thereof) is based on the 1500 hour "collected" number, not the 2000 hour "billed" number. So it has nothing to do with time being written off or not billed, but that your collections (over which you have no control) govern your bonus. This seems extremely strange to me. However, I'm not at that firm, so if this is incorrect, please do explain.

I worked there and it has nothing to do with hours. Your target is money. Generally, that can be linked to hours, but not always. It depends what you are working on and how much you can bill for it. For example, someone (corporate) who can bill more for their time is going to work less hours than someone (lit) who can bill less. On top of that, if the client doesn't pay, you don't get credit. Simple as that. It may seem unfair (I dont like it, hence, I'm no longer working there) but they are paying you to make them money, not to log hours.

[Anonymous User]

Not great, reputation-wise, in the two secondary markets in which I have experience (and have had cases with their lawyers in both). They have a bad reputation for diversity and workload. Especially since the common theme seems to be 2000-2100, and under market pay, that is a pretty bad formula in my opinion. Especially in places like Boston, New York, Atlanta, and Charlotte where firms will pay $160-190 and NMRS is closer to $120-130. Had a friend that summered there for one half of her 2L summer and she said it was a nightmare.