How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law? Forum

A forum for applicants and admitted students to ask law students and graduates about law school and the practice of law.
nixy

Gold
Posts: 4446
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:58 am

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by nixy » Fri Dec 28, 2018 9:07 pm

jackdanielsga wrote:Michael Phelps didn't become the world's best swimmer just because he had a brilliant attitude worked hard on it. He had the right support, the right coach, AND the right body.
It's a good thing biglaw doesn't require a 7-foot wingspan, then.

(It's just a job. Sure, a particularly demanding and often miserable one. But there are plenty of older people who can get by on all-nighters or little sleep for periods of time, and plenty of younger people who can't. It's much more a function of personal inclination than age.)

User avatar
RedGiant

Moderator
Posts: 466
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:30 am

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by RedGiant » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:15 am

I was 37 when I graduated.

I was a senior corporate paralegal for 10 years at several V5/V30 firms prior to law school, with an Ivy-League MBA too. I worked in NY, London and Silicon Valley for these firms.

I found that certain firms were very much NOT interested in someone my age, despite me having a ridic resume. There are certain firms that definitely want to mold younger folks. Separately, some firms cannot fathom why someone would want to be a paralegal so long. Why? Because I got to work on my firm's best deals, because I was very well regarded. Certain firms do like folks with more life experience/prior work experience, and it's been handy.

I have been in biglaw for three years, and was recently seconded by my firm to a client, for which my prior experience has come in very handy. I have more deal experience than any comparable third year could possibly ever have, and I am really adept at a lot of the issues that tech companies face, having worked in Silicon Valley for so long.

I don't regret going to school later. Biglaw is not fun at any age, but if you have a "roll your sleeves up" attitude, all goes fine.

User avatar
RedGiant

Moderator
Posts: 466
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:30 am

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by RedGiant » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:23 am

Npret wrote:
Redamon1 wrote:
Veil of Ignorance wrote:
Redamon1 wrote:
r6_philly wrote:I was the the fastest at a lot of the work. I also had a lot of insights that my younger peers wouldn’t necessarily have - those come from years of working in any field.

I think it’s an advantage being older, as long as you are not expecting to be treated as you were at your former position. Most people with over 10 years of WE are supervisory, and it is a little weird to start off at the entry level.
Big Law is especially hierarchical. They think and organize work in CLASSES for crying out loud. You join as a "first year," and that year sticks to you until you leave the firm (even if you've been there 10+ years) or make partner. You can be above your peers in efficiency or quality; you can be a better writer; you can have more experience in the subject matter; you can have done all the leg work in the case. Usually, IT DOESN'T MATTER. You're still categorized based on your year/seniority. That seniority determines how much you are paid, the quality of the work you get, who has to stay late to meet that deadline, who has the last word in the case (on anything from strategy to a line edit), who gets acknowledged in front of the client, who gets invited to meetings, whose name appears on the filing (and in what order) etc. And folks up the chain kind of enjoy doing to the juniors what they once hated putting up with. It gets old real fast, especially if pre-law you worked somewhere less hierarchical and, as a supervisor back in the day, you avoided this type of BS.
This is a perfect summation of biglaw. This is why it’s important to show you can deal with the situation of having to do scut work for people almost half your age who have a couple of years experience. Many of them will have never even had a job before but went K-JD. No matter how hard you work, you aren’t breaking lock step.
I think this is only true to an extent. I was a second year, staffed as a midlevel, definitely given assignments which were way more plumb than many my year, and regularly put in front of clients because I had the persona to be "in the room" in meetings that most second years wouldn't be dragged to. Yes, I still got paid the same as my class year, but...it also was recognized very early at my firm that I was "above my class year" and I was given responsibility commensurate with my experience. And yes, there were plenty of other times that I was given shit due diligence or told to do something unglamorous like run disclosure schedules or whatnot. You take the good with the bad. And when it came time to choose someone for a secondment, the firm and the clients chose me, because my deal sheet was very good (for my level). Yes, it's certainl hierarchical in terms of pay and class year and bonuses, but the real value in any job is what you bring to the table. What can you do? What skills do you have? Focus on all of the soft skills you have as an "older" student and you will shine. There's gravitas and smoothness and work-savvy that even the smartest, top-of-the-class kid won't have, that you will have, if you're older and have been in the workforce longer.

Npret

Gold
Posts: 1986
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by Npret » Sat Dec 29, 2018 9:53 am

^^^by talking about secondment - are you at a UK firm? Just asking because that doesn’t apply in the US and people may be wondering.

I still stand by my advice that if you don’t seem willing to work for much younger and less experienced people, you won’t get the job. No one wants to hire someone who will be unhappy from day one.

Npret

Gold
Posts: 1986
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by Npret » Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:13 am

NegligenceCupcakes wrote:These comments make me think of an old person asking if others think they have a chance to make it as an A-list movie star despite the fact they are old, not good looking and have a crapppy personality. Seriously - anyone can be anything they want if they go about it the right way. There are lots of old A-list stars including new ones who act for the first time who have wrinkles and might be fat and all. It really does come down to attitude and how you approach it and have a desire to change and adapt.

If you wanted to be an A-list star and say you're afraid if you don't get enough sleep one day you won't be able to remember your lines for 3 days, I honestly don't know which studio would risk hiring you then seeing that go down. Maybe settle as a c-star or else make sure you got o bed at 8pm every night :wink:

I'm an old law student (probably older than you) but I have no worries who will hire me. I got this.

This is my first post by the way, I just registered yesterday.
Welcome. I’m curious what you want from law? What type of job and area of practice?

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


nixy

Gold
Posts: 4446
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:58 am

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by nixy » Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:25 am

Npret wrote:^^^by talking about secondment - are you at a UK firm? Just asking because that doesn’t apply in the US and people may be wondering.

I still stand by my advice that if you don’t seem willing to work for much younger and less experienced people, you won’t get the job. No one wants to hire someone who will be unhappy from day one.
I know 2 people in the US who got seconded to clients from biglaw, actually.

Npret

Gold
Posts: 1986
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by Npret » Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:29 am

nixy wrote:
Npret wrote:^^^by talking about secondment - are you at a UK firm? Just asking because that doesn’t apply in the US and people may be wondering.

I still stand by my advice that if you don’t seem willing to work for much younger and less experienced people, you won’t get the job. No one wants to hire someone who will be unhappy from day one.
I know 2 people in the US who got seconded to clients from biglaw, actually.
Maybe I just don’t know what “seconded” means? I thought it was a formal program and a part of required training. If it just means attorneys who go to the clients office to work for a long period, then I too know one or two people who have done this.

nixy

Gold
Posts: 4446
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:58 am

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by nixy » Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:49 am

Npret wrote:
nixy wrote:
Npret wrote:^^^by talking about secondment - are you at a UK firm? Just asking because that doesn’t apply in the US and people may be wondering.

I still stand by my advice that if you don’t seem willing to work for much younger and less experienced people, you won’t get the job. No one wants to hire someone who will be unhappy from day one.
I know 2 people in the US who got seconded to clients from biglaw, actually.
Maybe I just don’t know what “seconded” means? I thought it was a formal program and a part of required training. If it just means attorneys who go to the clients office to work for a long period, then I too know one or two people who have done this.
I'm definitely not an expert on what it means, but I know one definitely did the latter and her office called it a secondment.

r6_philly

Diamond
Posts: 10751
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by r6_philly » Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:37 am

Npret wrote:^^^by talking about secondment - are you at a UK firm? Just asking because that doesn’t apply in the US and people may be wondering.

I still stand by my advice that if you don’t seem willing to work for much younger and less experienced people, you won’t get the job. No one wants to hire someone who will be unhappy from day one.
US firms also offer secondment opportunities. It happens quite frequently at my old firm.

^^^ sorry didn't read above. It just means placement at a client temporarily.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


r6_philly

Diamond
Posts: 10751
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by r6_philly » Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:44 am

RedGiant wrote:
Npret wrote:
Redamon1 wrote:
Veil of Ignorance wrote:
Redamon1 wrote:
r6_philly wrote:I was the the fastest at a lot of the work. I also had a lot of insights that my younger peers wouldn’t necessarily have - those come from years of working in any field.

I think it’s an advantage being older, as long as you are not expecting to be treated as you were at your former position. Most people with over 10 years of WE are supervisory, and it is a little weird to start off at the entry level.
Big Law is especially hierarchical. They think and organize work in CLASSES for crying out loud. You join as a "first year," and that year sticks to you until you leave the firm (even if you've been there 10+ years) or make partner. You can be above your peers in efficiency or quality; you can be a better writer; you can have more experience in the subject matter; you can have done all the leg work in the case. Usually, IT DOESN'T MATTER. You're still categorized based on your year/seniority. That seniority determines how much you are paid, the quality of the work you get, who has to stay late to meet that deadline, who has the last word in the case (on anything from strategy to a line edit), who gets acknowledged in front of the client, who gets invited to meetings, whose name appears on the filing (and in what order) etc. And folks up the chain kind of enjoy doing to the juniors what they once hated putting up with. It gets old real fast, especially if pre-law you worked somewhere less hierarchical and, as a supervisor back in the day, you avoided this type of BS.
This is a perfect summation of biglaw. This is why it’s important to show you can deal with the situation of having to do scut work for people almost half your age who have a couple of years experience. Many of them will have never even had a job before but went K-JD. No matter how hard you work, you aren’t breaking lock step.
I think this is only true to an extent. I was a second year, staffed as a midlevel, definitely given assignments which were way more plumb than many my year, and regularly put in front of clients because I had the persona to be "in the room" in meetings that most second years wouldn't be dragged to. Yes, I still got paid the same as my class year, but...it also was recognized very early at my firm that I was "above my class year" and I was given responsibility commensurate with my experience. And yes, there were plenty of other times that I was given shit due diligence or told to do something unglamorous like run disclosure schedules or whatnot. You take the good with the bad. And when it came time to choose someone for a secondment, the firm and the clients chose me, because my deal sheet was very good (for my level). Yes, it's certainl hierarchical in terms of pay and class year and bonuses, but the real value in any job is what you bring to the table. What can you do? What skills do you have? Focus on all of the soft skills you have as an "older" student and you will shine. There's gravitas and smoothness and work-savvy that even the smartest, top-of-the-class kid won't have, that you will have, if you're older and have been in the workforce longer.
It may differ depending on the partner staffing a matter and the firm culture. But I clarify that one is always allowed (or even encouraged) to bring extra to the table, but it is certainly not appreciated by everyone, especially some associates in a class "above" you. I got the most pushback from midlevel to senior associates who didn't think I "paid the dues" yet. There aren't necessarily any real repercussions, but one can certainly feel how some other associates feel. That's what I meant by "weird." Ultimately it is your choice to either respect the class year hierarchy or not, and to what extend. But since biglaw future path is as opaque as it is, it is difficult for junior associates to know whether it is risky to stick your neck out.

Npret

Gold
Posts: 1986
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by Npret » Sun Dec 30, 2018 8:04 am

The few people from my firm over the years who worked at a client’s office were associates that people liked, but were not in contention for partner. Spending time away from the firm was not necessarily beneficial to their long term future at the firm. Still, it definitely put them in position to move on.

For some reason I thought secondment meant part of a training program designed with the idea you return to the firm more experienced and prepared to stay at the firm. No idea why I thought that- probably old British tv shows.

r6_philly

Diamond
Posts: 10751
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by r6_philly » Sun Dec 30, 2018 10:52 am

NegligenceCupcakes wrote:These comments make me think of an old person asking if others think they have a chance to make it as an A-list movie star despite the fact they are old, not good looking and have a crapppy personality. Seriously - anyone can be anything they want if they go about it the right way. There are lots of old A-list stars including new ones who act for the first time who have wrinkles and might be fat and all. It really does come down to attitude and how you approach it and have a desire to change and adapt.

If you wanted to be an A-list star and say you're afraid if you don't get enough sleep one day you won't be able to remember your lines for 3 days, I honestly don't know which studio would risk hiring you then seeing that go down. Maybe settle as a c-star or else make sure you got o bed at 8pm every night :wink:

I'm an old law student (probably older than you) but I have no worries who will hire me. I got this.

This is my first post by the way, I just registered yesterday.
There is a fine difference between fully committed to try to achieve something and objectively understanding one faces longer odds. To use your example, Hollywood may have a few example of older actors breaking into the industry, but it also have many more examples of fully committed aspiring actors, of all ages, spent their whole careers waiting tables in between casting calls.

I have always aspired to do the best, in everything I do. But I have always recognized the long odds and know that I couldn't do everything I wanted (I have done some amazing things, mind you, but those are not everything and not the most I wanted).

Older students should have enough life experience to know that you can't be anything you want, but you can be something you want, you just have to figure out what that is how you go about it.

User avatar
RedGiant

Moderator
Posts: 466
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:30 am

Re: How old were the oldest law school grads who were successful in biglaw or near-big-law?

Post by RedGiant » Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:17 am

Npret wrote:The few people from my firm over the years who worked at a client’s office were associates that people liked, but were not in contention for partner. Spending time away from the firm was not necessarily beneficial to their long term future at the firm. Still, it definitely put them in position to move on.

For some reason I thought secondment meant part of a training program designed with the idea you return to the firm more experienced and prepared to stay at the firm. No idea why I thought that- probably old British tv shows.
I'll go out on a limb and say I'm probably not partner-track...yet...since I am just a third year. My firm's partner track is very long and they make non-equity partners first, so it's not a great place to be a senior associate anyway.

I am on secondment and should return to my firm, but I may not. The company I'm at is doing very well (will certainly IPO or exit in the next year) and that'd be a fun experience to be a part of.

I do think that TLS is a bit myopic about FIRM LIFE FOR EVER. I mean, I'm getting paid the same as at a firm, my hours are better, the people are more interesting, and I get a seat at the table in a way that I absolutely would not at a law firm for many years. Is there a giant pot of gold at the end of in-house tech life? Probably not. But do I get to do interesting work, get paid well and get my life back? Yeah. I've worked at several of the most prestigious firms in the world--news flash--they suck the life out of you! I'm happy now and it's nice. Have to decide if I am going back in the next 2 months or so.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Post Reply

Return to “Ask a Law Student / Graduate”