We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Lean In refers to a prominent feminist philosophy and a global movement centered on the 2013 book Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead by former Meta COO Sheryl Sandberg.
The core idea encourages women to assert themselves in their professional lives to achieve leadership roles, rather than unintentionally holding themselves back due to internal barriers or societal expectations.
Lean In from the inside
Wynn-Williams, who worked at Meta from 2011 to 2017, shares several incidents that she claims expose a disconnect between Sandberg's public persona and her private behavior:
"Come to Bed" Incident: Wynn-Williams alleges that during a 2016 flight on a private jet, Sandberg invited her to share the only bed on the plane, an offer Wynn-Williams found highly inappropriate and refused.
Hostile Work Culture: The author claims staffers were intentionally given excessive workloads to ensure no one had "spare time". She recounts responding to work emails while in labour and being harassed for updates during a recovery from a life-threatening childbirth complication.
Critique of "Lean In": Wynn-Williams argues the philosophy was used to push women toward "soul-depleting workaholism" rather than true empowerment. She describes Sandberg's brand as a "shtick" designed to demand obedience from subordinates.
- electricity fluctuating every few minutes, making it impossible to charge devices
- water supply keeps fluctuating.
- roofs collapsing, destroying metal railings, etc. with minimal engagement by admin (except a letter claiming they have an "impeccable record" in maintaining safety, ignoring multiple other collapses)
- no support or attendance condonation for mooting
- campus events shut up by 9 pm mandatorily, irrespective of event, date, or circumstance
- faculty quality, the hallmark of NLSIU, has degraded due to the batch expansion, meaning you have [unrelated courses – redacted because the faculty is nice, but just not suited to this] forced to teach [redacted, unrelated courses].
- 30+ rooms in the men's hostel alone facing faulty fans, with worse situations faced by the women's hostels
There is so much more. A university is primarily meant to fulfill educational purposes, but a lot of people join university in the hopes of aggrandising via networking, making connections with peers, all of which is unnecessarily difficult in the face of unprecedented batch expansions that dilute the quality of learning and living in a residential space, etc.
For the "best" law school in the country, this is rather sad. Hoping to see some engagement, at least, as someone who genuinely holds this place in high stead and cherishes it.
-Drafting and all happens at all levels and even team heads give their say in the final draft more often than not (micromanagement level differs). It is NOT a one-day job unless its an urgent application. In a sane disputes team (there are less than you'd like to think), the work goes upto a Partner who reverts to the counsel/client firm and back, if necessary, for further revisions. Basic memo work is handled by juniors.
-In smaller firms, associates may get more court exposure and directly participate in briefing unlike T1s who take senior counsels just to mention or adjourn.
-Partners in these firms usually have less experience than a fresher at an advocate's chamber. If you dream of building face value as an arguing counsel, Disputes firms are definitely not it (with a few exceptions who actually became senior counsels themsleves lol). A lot of partners/senior partners CANNOT argue or are NOT CONFIDENT in arguing. (FYI, if you are a law student sneering at this, you'll realize how difficult it actually is to make relevant submissions before a High Court Bench.)
-In Bombay, some old-school firms tend to send freshers for administrative/compliance work before the Prothonotary (OS Registrar).
-Urgent tasks land on your plate all the time, especially when arbitration matters come up.
-For a lot of budding litigators, the answer for your last question is a resounding 'NO'. Most disputes work is clerical at junior levels and becomes briefing/solicitor work at senior levels. If you don't mind being a briefing counsel as part of your career trajectory, then disputes is good because you get paid better than litigation at the start. Cannot say the same for litigators with 5+ years of experience who usually start outearning their corporate peers by then. This curve, however, is very steep. Not every litigator can survive the court experience. Many prefer stability (LOL) compared to the complete uncertainty of litigation.
Either way — this one's for the students lurking here who have romanticised the idea of a Tier 1 disputes team. We see the LinkedIn posts about the big wins, the Supreme Court appearances, the landmark judgments. But no one talks about what Tuesday at 11pm actually looks like.
So — disputes lawyers at T1 (CAM, SAM, AZB, Trilegal, KCO, NDA, whoever) — please indulge us this weekend. Genuinely curious:
On any given day:
- How many matters are you actively juggling? Is it 3 or is it 13?
- What does the task list actually look like — research notes, written submissions, plaints, replies, vakalatnamas, cause list tracking, client calls, all of it at once?
- Is drafting a whole plaint or a writ petition a one-person, one-day job? Or does it go through 5 people over 3 weeks?
- Who does what — what does an A0/A1 handle vs what actually goes to the SA or partner?
- Is court attendance a regular thing or mostly for seniors?
- How many "urgent" tasks land on your plate after 7pm?
Also — is disputes at T1 actually what students imagine it to be? Or is it mostly document review, research memos, and chasing advocates on record?
Drop your honest take. No names needed — that's what this forum is for. You'd genuinely be doing a service to every law student who's building their entire career plan around "I want to do disputes at a T1."
I hope you guys realise making teenagers think that they're very accepted in your particular group is..... Fundamentally analogous to not very good things, very different from career advice
I don't wanna join my nlu but I've got this curiosity for why people feel such a bad need to express that their top nlu is really acceptable, is it insecurity? Even after making it into a top Indian law university?
https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/477937-which-nlus-have-sirmaam-culture#comment-479870
You should look into this one, to analyse this person's words-
They downplay the sir/mam culture by saying "it's just words and nothing else"
Keeps saying "it's chill" with no substance
Blames the students for being cautious, like that's just literally being prudent? Says it's a problem-- well what's your solution then?
People should forget the evidence and trust u blindly?
Refers to themselves as "all u need"
In the end equates their drug culture to being "symmetrical" this person isn't making a case for the culture/wellbeing, but that of how their nlu is 'acceptable' in comparison
I'm pretty sure this is textbook narcissistic manipulation
Oh you must be a debate and logic enthusiast, isn't it?
This is the real face of TMC supporters. Rank opportunists who will jump ship and go saffron if it suits them. Already, their influencers online are shifting loyalties. Just wait and see: all their supporters at NUJS will do the same and hang on to their seats in the governing bodies.
So should I drop out of it or like, no?
I can't help but feel that there was a certain dissatisfaction in at least one of these cases. When you favour certain mediocre people and make them de facto rulers of Jindal, but overlook the deserving ones, at some point the deserving ones will snap. Especially when they are even paid less. Supporters of the VC will say that they are leaving to head law schools and would have left anyway. I don't think so, because these are lower tier law schools. Given a choice between being a player in the Indian cricket team and the captain of a Ranji team, which would you prefer? The answer is the former, but perhaps not if you are perpetually made the 12th man in the Indian team and the Indian team management keeps selecting underperformers instead of you.
I'm from a tier 1 nlu, I've got good extra curriculars, stellar recommendations, and will be working in a sector that's fairly interesting and not very main stream. Oxbridge was never in the consideration (I know my place before any of you try to remind me of it) until one of my professors recommended that I try, and now I cannot get it out of my head.
And a few people from my college have gotten into great unis which largely focus on good grades, without really having great grades, and that's given me a new found motivation
On POCSO, unfortunately the law provides a bar to talk about it. So, to answer your question, yes, there is a factor where the accused is pretty much forced to sit back and not say a word (unless it’s in court). Actually, come to think of it, the same bar applies to the mother, who has conveniently chosen to disregard it. (Remember: this bar is there to protect the child!)
The grade depends on how much it has affected the firm. Consenting is all irrelevant. Who is teaching you this lot this crap?
I cant believe the mods basically censored what is reported on bar and bench. The people who will care are the team members reporting to him.
As a woman its disgusting the level to which indian law firms have accepted such poor conduct and judgement from its leaders whether women or men.
Worst - Tagore
Does anyone have updates on offer letter?
A1 - 23
A2 - 29
A3 - 34
SAs are north of 40.
I’d especially appreciate insights on how to approach and stand out while handling assignments such as lender consent DDs, approvals DDs, property DDs, standard certificates and similar transactional workstreams. I’m less concerned about the black-letter law aspect and more interested in understanding the practical side, how to structure work product well, spot issues effectively, communicate findings commercially, and become someone seniors can genuinely rely on during a live transaction.
Would really value any advice, habits, checklists, or practical tips from people who’ve worked in capital markets or transactional teams
There is a danger that an inquiry, if at all, will get saffron/Pinkwashed.