lawpartner,

Although I don't disagree with many of your points, I find it interesting that as a partner who probably bills $450/hour you would waste your time posting on this board.

Come on Coco. I do have a life outside a law firm. And life is not all about billing.. .I have been thinking about going into the academics and have been exploring various options...came across this site and found it interesting... reading some of the posts, i felt that a few words of caution might help someone....just my two cents worth. That's all.

you guys got into HLS? Nice!

Karamazov, yours was the funniest post I have read in a long time!!
One really wonders about
1) Maturity level of some of these folks
2) Selection process of school(s) that is admitting these people with these maturity levels (I went to HLS myself for my JD, but did not know the LLM selection is so poor)
3) That baseless statements like "Being 'experienced' is something you would have to justfify rather than be arrogant about"
4) The idiotic unabashed self promotion "I mentioned my credentials whenever someone asked me to do so..as impressive they may be blah blah blah...."

Folks, as a practising lawyer and a partner in NY law firm employing 251 lawyers, I would like to say a few things...
1) learn to practice humility before you learn to practice law!!
2) Good experience always always always counts....and so does good attitude.

Good luck and cheers!!!

Like gar33, I'm not using an LLM as a means to get a job in USA. I already have a job with an international law firm (2400 employees) and they, and not my parents, are coughing up for my LLM. I still stand by my assertion that practically everyone hired by London law frims will be in their early/mid 20's. I wasn't ever speaking about USA and I'm glad we now have an expert to clear up the sitation over there.
Coco's cool now, after I got over the initial shock of the 22 year old comment!
From a UK perspective its just not common to take a break mid career to do an LLM (Unlike business, where many people will go off and do an MBA). The almost universal practise is Bachelor's Degree, Maters (not necessary but if you want to do it for your personal satisfaction, no harm) then get on and practise, often at the same firm/chambers for one's carreer. Am I right gar33?

Like gar33, I'm not using an LLM as a means to get a job in USA. I already have a job with an international law firm (2400 employees) and they, and not my parents, are coughing up for my LLM. I still stand by my assertion that practically everyone hired by London law frims will be in their early/mid 20's. I wasn't ever speaking about USA and I'm glad we now have an expert to clear up the sitation over there.
Coco's cool now, after I got over the initial shock of the 22 year old comment!
From a UK perspective its just not common to take a break mid career to do an LLM (Unlike business, where many people will go off and do an MBA). The almost universal practise is Bachelor's Degree, Maters (not necessary but if you want to do it for your personal satisfaction, no harm) then get on and practise, often at the same firm/chambers for one's carreer. Am I right gar33?

I guess Norway isn't part of Europe then ;) Because this does not hold true at all. I hope it to be true though, because I will get my LLM right after I get my degree, I have only internships and some legal aid experience, so I guess I am one of those lucky wanted ones (and with a scholarship as well .. might be faith) ;) ... not that I really plan to secure a job in the US.

Also in the Netherlands, people move into law firms straight after law school. So I agree with gar33 and sachin.
What is bothering me however is that many people here suggest that LL.M. students actually have pursued some inferior education. Actually, most of us are JD's in our own country. I pursued the best education my country had to offer me. And don't need Harvard's LL.M. in order to get a job. But I thought it might be good to pursue one for my personal development.
But the picture that is painted by some people here is that we are a bunch of underqualified laywers that are trying to get hold of all the American jobs in a country in which we don't belong. I don't hope that all Harvard's JD students will be so shortsighted in their prejudices on international students.
I can see that an American law firm is more interested in people who pursued a full US law degree. But the throwing resumes in the trash can argument is actually sort of insulting. Moreover, by my knowledge the costs of pursuing a law degree for American students are much higher than for many international students. Tuition rates in general are much lower in most countries. Seven years of education at 40k a year, who is paying for that? Also, I think that actually most of the international students are on some sort of scholarship. Harvard awards financial aid to many of its LL.Ms and many of us, especially the Europeans, can get scholarships in their own countries.

In short, some mutual understanding would be rather beneficial to this conversation. Most of the LL.M. students on this board are attempting to grasp the US legal system. Insights offered by US lawyers could be valuable for us. But I would like to invite the US lawyers lawpartner in particular- to attempt to be a bit less ignorant on the subject they are speaking about.

We want to believe, of course, that "lawpartner" is in fact a law partner...

Hi all,

First off I'd like to reiterate that I don't think someone in their 30's (or 40's) in disadvantaged. Firms and academic institutions are interested in life expereince and diversity.

Secondly, my comments about 22 years olds was not meant to be a slap in the face. I was simply stating that the LLM is quite different from the JD, as no American would ever be accepted to law school at such a young age. By all means there are 22 year olds who rightly deserve to be admitted, so please don't misunderstand my comments. It's just kind of frustrating for some Americans who have top grades and loads of experience who are turned down because the LLM is geared towards international interests. Then again, I guess Americans would not need to pursue an LLM if they had a JD to begin with. The LLM is a terrific experience for international students at any age, especially those who want to go back to their host countries to pursue teaching and research positions.

Hi all,

First off I'd like to reiterate that I don't think someone in their 30's (or 40's) in disadvantaged. Firms and academic institutions are interested in life expereince and diversity.

Secondly, my comments about 22 years olds was not meant to be a slap in the face. I was simply stating that the LLM is quite different from the JD, as no American would ever be accepted to law school at such a young age. By all means there are 22 year olds who rightly deserve to be admitted, so please don't misunderstand my comments. It's just kind of frustrating for some Americans who have top grades and loads of experience who are turned down because the LLM is geared towards international interests. Then again, I guess Americans would not need to pursue an LLM if they had a JD to begin with. The LLM is a terrific experience for international students at any age, especially those who want to go back to their host countries to pursue teaching and research positions.

(Reply cut and pasted from another thread)

Guys, Sorry I got some folks all worked up!! Though I must admit some of your posts were quite humurous..lol The post was about HLS LLM and JOBS and just wanted to give a perspective from the other side of the fence before you are down US$ 50-80k and one year later find out the truth.... If the post is about alternate plans, by all means go for it. Do an LLM just bcos u want to do it. You only live once so live it your way. Why not. I wish you the very best. I like Hannenyh's attitude - do the LLM dance if that is what you want to do and enjoy it while it lasts.

Hey guys, there seems to be an awful lot of misunderstanding floating around here and I think it has to do with the different structure of the professions in England and America. In England and Ireland, students do law as an undergraduate degree. Most graduates would be between 20 and 23. If you want to practice, you then have to be admitted onto a professional practice course. Before they will accept you, you must be taken on as an apprentice by a lawfirm. In England, you spend one year on the LPC and then 2 years in an apprenticeship training to become a solicitor. After this is finished you are admitted and qualified. I think this is where the confusion is setting in.
When Sachin was referring to law firms preferring to "hire" younger people over here, she was (I think) referring to law firms accepting people for training contracts. These people are eventually kept on as full time solicitors, but only after they are qualified. Therefore, what she said is absolutely correct about them preferring younger applicants (23-25/28), because they are being taken on as trainees. Of course, if you were already qualified and looking for an actual job, then being more experienced is obviously essential, but I think this is where people are getting confused.
It is also the case that in England and Ireland, education and LL.M's are exceptionally important in securing training contracts, because at that stage you have nothing else to bargain with. In order to be competitive you must attend either a big name undergraduate law course, or a prestigious LL.M. This is really the only time doing an LL.M is useful, which is why most of us are in our early 20's when we come over from England or Ireland. While it is slightly different for the Bar (litigators), you start out by applying for pupillage (training contract), so the same comments apply.

In America, there is no professional training requirement. You get your law degree, pass an exam and poof you're a lawyer vying for a job in a law firm. In that sense I can see why having lots of business and professional experience would be exceptionally important for firms who are looking to hire candidates. They have no formal professional training, but at least if they have experience in the business world they know they will be able to handle themselves. This is also why it is unrealistic for people from Ireland and England to go over and do an LLM and get a job with a firm. Unless you have gone through the professional training in England or Ireland, you will be at a distinct disadvantage to qualified people who have also done the LL.M and are looking for a job.
The main difference is that jobs in America are not intended for training, unlike England and Ireland.
In some weird way, everyone was right on this board, its just people from different countries were not able to appreciate it. I hope this makes sense and that it will prevent further nastiness. I have found this board to be really helpful and I wouldn't like to see it degenerate into a "I'm so much better than you" type thing. Talk soon.

Irishguy23, I thank you for your wise post!

Thank you Irishguy ! Good post.

I would not be able to and should not comment on a system outside of US as I have no direct experience. My comments are strictly limited to the US market only. Furthermore, they should be regarded as an opinion of one person only. Take it or leave it type.

However, all I would say is for someone who might have a different opinion about the US market, it would not hurt to do some serious research before he takes the plunge. And if the research reveals opinion different from the one I expressed, all the better because who wouldnt want to see bright and hardworking people get what they deserve?

Well, lawpartner sure opened a can of worms! But I'm glad to finally understand why some European applicants are so young, where people normally enter law school at 21 in my country (required four years of college education, followed by four years of law school).

Lawpartner, what would you advise people who were told to consider working even for one or two years in the United States to gain experience in specialized commercial fields? I'm personally interested in Securities Law, which is an infant field of law in my country at present. Also, what would you say about LLMs who sit for the New York Bar?

Hi Josepidal,

I did not mean to .. lol. All I wanted to do was to post a warning sign.. and I am glad I did.. I have received 6 PMs so far asking me about is it really worth doing an LLM? Some of them were thinking of taking up heavy debt burden to pay for it
I will quickly repeat .
1) If doing an LLM is your goal, go for it. There are people who have dome LLMs and then have returned to their countries to take up prestigious assignments.
2) If getting a US job is your goal, JD is a better alternative than LLM.
3) If your goal is combination of the above two i.e. doing an LLM and getting a US job, do a lot of research before you take the plunge. No point in getting disappointed after spending $60-80K.

US experience is a definite plus. US LLM and some internship experience in US will open up a lot of doors for you in various places. If you can manage a US job with it, nothing like that but even if you cannot, the firm you interned with might have offices in places like Brussels, London, Singapore etc. who would be willing to pay top money to get you on board. I would definitely advise working in US for a year or two. So please dont confuse the issue I will clarify again --- Doing an LLM with the sole intention of getting a US job can lead to disappointments. Doing an LLM, by itself, is a great thing, if its not going to put you in a deep financial hole. If you can manage someone else to pay for it, nothing like it. Go for it. And then get as much experience you can get. These two things will open up a lot of doors for you, definitely on the other side of the Atlantic, if not on this side.. and if you do manage one on this side of the Atlantic, nothing like it

I am all for it. Passing NY bar is not easy and anyone who does it deserves praise. I also know, in a lot of places (for example our Singapore office), passing NY bar will increase your marketability a lot. So good luck on that too.

Sorry Josepidal,
My previous answer was jumbled up by the text editor. So before some paralegal starts correcting my spellings and grammar, here is a query by query answer...

Well, lawpartner sure opened a can of worms!

Lawpartner, what would you advise people who were told to consider working even for one or two years in the United States to gain experience in specialized commercial fields?

Also, what would you say about LLMs who sit for the New York Bar?

Haha! Thanks for the well-formatted and prompt response!

Would you have specific advice regarding getting a short-term US job for experience, considering you warn LLMs against disappointment? Also, how should you pace things for the New York Bar if you want to take it in, say, July 2007?