Litigation groups at BigLaw firms do not typically hire nearly as many lateral associates as transactional groups. However, as of the posting of this article, there are nearly 1,000 open litigation associate positions at AmLaw 200 firms (according to Firm Prospects). Like openings in other practices, these positions are more varied and flexible than associate openings at BigLaw firms have ever been in the past.
But if you're a litigation associate at a BigLaw firm, how do you decide whether a lateral move is right?
Here are some reasons to consider laterally as a litigation associate:
To sharpen your litigation practice focus. In my experience, this is probably the most popular reason for litigation associates to make a move. Most BigLaw firms start their litigation associates as "generalists" in their disputes or litigation groups. As time goes on, some firms retain this generalist approach while others have their litigation associates specialize in certain areas like white collar defense, employment or commercial litigation. If you are at a firm that takes a long-term generalist approach, it may make sense to move to one where you can specialize. This will be a particularly helpful move for certain types of in-house or government opportunities that you may consider later in your career.
To get more trial experience. For many BigLaw litigation associates, much of their time is not spent in or near a courtroom of any kind. Instead, the focus is on the discovery process, pleadings and working towards a settlement to avoid trial. Therefore, if you want to be the type of litigator where you advocate for clients in the courtroom and make oral arguments, a lateral move might make a lot of sense. Litigation boutiques in particular can offer this type of experience for litigation associates and many boutiques like to hire attorneys who are trained at the large BigLaw firms.
To shift your practice beyond traditional litigation. There are many firm opportunities out there right now that appreciate the experience that litigation associates bring to the table, but they offer a type of practice that is different from traditional litigation. Examples include restructuring openings for bankruptcy litigators; technology transactions roles for IP litigators; securities regulatory openings for white collar litigators; and data privacy and crypto regulatory associate positions for tech industry litigators. These types of opportunities may or may not exist at your current firm.
To strengthen your candidacy for competitive government positions. A lot of litigators at BigLaw firms look ahead to opportunities at government employers like the USDOJ and state attorney general offices. Major government prosecution offices like to hire from BigLaw firms because of the level of training and experience that BigLaw associates receive. However, given the level of interest in these openings, these employers can also be very picky about who they hire for their openings. (Their retention rates are quite high.) Therefore, a lateral move to a firm with a stronger reputation or deeper connections to certain government offices may make a lot of sense.
To increase your chances for partnership. Take a look at your BigLaw firm's recent partnership class announcement. What percentage of the new partners are litigators? Is it much less than the percentage of litigators at the firm as a whole? It is very hard to make partner at a BigLaw firm. But it can be especially hard for litigators. The receivables at many BigLaw firms lean heavily towards the transactional practice, and this trend is accelerating. As a result, in order to be in the best position possible to make partner as a litigator, a lateral move may be necessary to a firm with a larger and/or stronger litigation practice.
To get more flexibility in terms of where and when you are working. Litigation groups have not been as flexible in terms of remote work and hybrid work setups as other practice groups. Particularly if the practice is courtroom-facing, it can be difficult for partners in the group to make a good business cases to allow their associates to be remote. However, during the pandemic, this started to change. For litigation groups that do not involve much (or any) trial work, a remote or hybrid arrangement is very possible. You just have to be at the right firm in the right group with the right opportunity for it to be possible.
To change the types of people with whom you work with and for. BigLaw litigation practice groups have very distinct personalities firm-to-firm (and sometimes within a firm). When a case is active, the demands are high. Different partners and attorneys react in different ways to the high-pressure nature of an active case. If you feel as though you are not meshing with the attorneys in your current litigation practice, a lateral move may make sense.
To relocate. A final common reason to make a lateral move is to relocate. Even if your firm has an office in your new destination, will that office be right for your litigation practice? Maybe the firm will allow you to relocate even if there are no litigators in the new office, but maybe you would rather work with your team in person and on the ground. That means that you should make a lateral move. For example, maybe you started at your firm's DC office and they are willing to let you relocate to Boston to be closer to family. But the Boston office of this particular firm does not have any litigators. If you are shifting your career in the long-term to Boston, it probably makes sense to move to a firm that has litigators in Boston.
