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?
Don't worry too much about it, in a year or so it all evens out - think about the brand name first
M&A | Mumbai
If yes, then the culture out there is not conducive. Leave that place.
There are lots of other opportunities for you. A2 hiring is going on currently all over the place. Find them and move out.
How long after going independent did you get your first brief?
Even 70 years into practice will not be enough to learn all court crafts. When you go independent, you are basically someone who has been given a driver's license and trusted enough by their parents to drive. You may/may not know how to navigate the roads and drive properly. You become better with age, like wine. But you'll learn the basic court crafts, allowing you to be independent (and in the more real sense, you don't need your senior to get clients {and not money, since client/work gets you money}, and hence, you get the confidence that you can go independent)
Is there a way I can move to a decent firm or chamber for litigation without significantly discounting my experience?
Also, is it true that the best time to switch from in-house to a firm is around 3–4 PQE? Should I wait until then?
Obviously, dirtying a shared place is not cool, but placing all the weed smokers in a single bucket, and categorising them as "degenerate junkies" speaks volumes about you.
So many of my friends (Me included) have smoked a lot of pot in our personal space, and are doing fairly well for ourselves (Hell, I feel half the people in my floor (Tier 1 Law Firm) smoke/smoked weed in their life. )
At the end of the day, it's a personal choice. You do you. Not that it matters, since your placements should be effortless considering you're competing with "degenerate junkies"
I doubt any of these successful managing partners or senior lawyers were people who woke up to their bongs and spent the rest of the day lazing around and continuing to smoke.
Isn't anything now that he isn't.
Reimbursement of food is quite subjective, i would say. If the client is stingy, your partner would not allow reimbursements.
Regards,
A guy who rejected the top 3.
GSN:“Lordship, as we all know, the pioneer of our Constitution is Dr. B. R. Ambedkar…”
Before he can move further, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta (TM) cuts in—correcting not the argument, but the very name.
TM:“OR It is Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayan..”
To this, GSN—never one to miss an opportunity for wit—shoots back with a grin:
GSN:“Or perhaps… Mr. Rahul Gandhi?”
For a moment, the entire courtroom freezes. A pin-drop silence. Judges exchange glances. The gallery shifts in unease. The remark lands like a thunderclap—bold, cheeky, and completely unexpected in a case of such national importance.
Now, the real question is—does making such a daring quip in the middle of a high-profile constitutional battle not affect the mood, gravity, or even perception of the proceedings? Or is this just GSN’s trademark flair, pushing the boundaries of courtroom rhetoric?
And let’s not forget the subtext—there seems to be an undercurrent, a silent duel, between GSN and TM. After all, Tushar Mehta rarely interrupts anyone—but the moment GSN takes the podium, the correction comes. Coincidence? Or a subtle power play?
Does anyone here have inside scoop on this courtroom drama?
What about the more elite sections in other colleges? We saw some of it in Kolkata, when the girl student was raped in a medical colllege, but they were peaceful candlelight protests.
Nikhil is a young partner and has much to learn but on balance, is a good leader. He will go places (now watch some cuckoo kid rip apart this line because they don't understand the meaning)!