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?
A field that integrates Technology, Law, and Medicine. Other than NFSU, no one could have done this.
They can either be completely in approval of it or threatening to bring it within their purview and management
Nothing in between
Next, paid leave? Sir/Ma'am, in litigation, people are their own bosses. We don't work for someone. Its a profession, not a job that you clerks are making it one.
Next, what is performance in courtroom? Are you hearing yourself? You clerks don't contribute anything to law. Your work is clerical. Get out of that delusion.
Now, at any HC, even an average 15-20 year's experienced lawyer would be outearning their corp law counterparts. That argument has been made before with proof, no point showcasing it again to someone who cannot read.
1. Sort of work you corporate lawyers do
2. If litigation is better than corp law, why am I dragging corp law down
3. The earning aspect
4. Taking examples of only the top 1% of the 1%.
First, its sad that corporate lawyers are called lawyers, or even considered as so. Sure, you have gotten a law degree, so you are a lawyer. In fact, a CA who has a law degree would also be a lawyer. So would an engineer/IAS who has a law degeee.
Now, to answer your points:
1. Drafting is mostly a litigation centric-solicitor work. Falls under the domain of litigation. The rest of the works you mentioned, what you call strategising and whatever misnomers you used, its still clerical. Being a lawyer, you're sitting at a desk and doing nothing. Just bs work. That's all bs. You have no contribution to law. Just pure contribution to society.
3. On earnings, no doubt, for the first 10-15 years, someone in litigation will earn much lesser than their law firm counterpart. True. But after that, the graph of your income in litigation grows like anything. That does not happen in law firms. Further, all the money you make are for yourself. Not a firm or whatever where you don't even have a name. Tell me, for any firm that would be hiring in 100s a year, as we have seen before (i don't remember which firms it were), how many of those associates will make it big? Will make partner? Maybe 1 or 2. Or 10 max. Not all? Where will they go? Also, yes, firms brief seniors. If firms were so good, why would they not argue themselves? A few rare exceptions do exist, but why engage a senior otherwise? Lmao. Its not hating on law firms, its just pointing out truth.
2. Why bringing down corp law? Well, its facts. Not bringing something down. If you love to sit on a desk and do clerical work for 18 hours a day and make partner at top tier place with no name of yours on the wall? Who's stopping you. Go ahead. Not everyone has common sense.
4. A law firm, even a tier 4, if such a category exists, would have offices at places which have a HC? Compare the earnings of any litigation lawyer of 15-20 years experience and someone in a firm with the same. The litigation guy would be earning the same if not more. Guess what? In 5-10 years thereafter, the litigation lawyer would be outearning the law firm counterpart by a huge margin, maybe double or triple. That's how it is.
I have no issues w a first year associate outearning me, they can't, cuz i earn practically nothing. I won't make in 5-10 years what they're making today. But i'll be happy knowing that i haven't traded my soul for some bs clerical work at a place where i can be fired and have no independence, and will be a nobody. I'm also happy that i'll outearn that associate in 20 years, and that associate will come with briefs to me.
Corporate lawyers do earn, on average, more. Agreed. That's because there are so less corp lawyers, mainly concentrated in cities. This comparision also includes district and lower court lawyers who earn less. But why would anyone educated in a good place go there? We're talking at atleast the HC level. There, at your 40s, andfor sure in and after your 50s, corp lawyers earn peanuts compared to litigation lawyers.
Once you step in court you may feel that you will win and argue good matter but in initial years you will just come to the point that a small panel may be given, you will take small clients so that you keep food on the table
Thank you.
With all of my heart.
All that you've said, about earnings, work conditions, survival, growth, and all that lies in between, in litigation or corp, NEEDED to be said out loud.
I am a litigator. Per my peers and seniors, not a bad one, in fact, I have earned a few verbal accolades from judges and seniors on a few ocassions. I, however, am a litigator. Not by choice or anything like that; I am bereft of the liberty/ privilege to join corp, being a regular university law college graduate.
I am, like so many of my peers, too junior to matter on most days. Even to the judges/ seniors who might have said a few good words about those like me, just a few serial numbers ago. (Yes, that is a bit weird of a unit for time, but eh, not all of us measure time in billable hours.) Yes, undoubtedly this phase also exists in a corporate lawyer's initial years, I guess, but the amount credited to your bank account is worth it. I sincerely so hope.
Like a good chunk of the population, I am not a person high on lofty ideals. I work to earn a living for myself.
However, as you rightly pointed out, it is more often than not, only nepo babies who whimper on and on about the supposed 'clerical' corporate work. No, not all of them, before anyone says so. A good deal of them are mindful of their privilege, and do put in the hardwork. These aren't mutually exclusive components.
For those belonging to my category (working for livelihood, no real attachment), we begrudgingly stagger along in these dismal conditions. Again, we are unhappy because the fuel which keeps the truly dedicated, or talented folks running, whether it be the fact that they have that optimistic approach, or if it is the sense of the deep responsibility in realising that we litigators are the only ones between the client and an unfavourable outcome- a sense of justice or whatever, is lacking in us. May be, it was all burnt down, depleted, or what nots.
This pitting of professionals in a gladiator-esque fashion has to stop. Let people live with their choices (or the absence thereof) in peace.
Coming back to the original question on this thread, all I can say is, my friend, you can choose to step back, retire once having made enough money. If you as a person, love life and believe it has something to offer to you, please consider squeezing out time to take care of your health and well-being.
Godspeed✌️
Step 2: join your t1 upon graduation regardless.
Step 3: let life happen to you.
Now I don't know what to do. Seems foolish to leave a PPO from a tier one firm. Neither can I actually try working with him, because...you know..PPO and what not.
My parents will be able to support me, I have my own place near the guy's practice. I need some guidance.
Bottom line: NLUs only prosper with strict and rigorous academic standards.
- Merit based appointment of the next VC. A well-qualified NLU alum like Sudhir needed.
- Appointment of eminent legal luminaries of national stature in the governing bodies (as used to happen in the Menon/Chimni/Singh years) instead of third-rate Trinamool Congress lackeys
Without these two reforms, the protests will be meaningless.
OP - see how your partner and team reacts to it, if its not a good reaction just let it be. If they are kind enough to let you go the just respect your internship commitments enough to duly complete your assignments and pending work before you go. Best of Luck! Just don't hide it from your Partner and team cause if they later find out it will not be worth it.
and if you are 3rd year or above (which ofc you are) do not mention to people at tier 1 that you are doing a national moot. It shows either a hobby endeavor or inability to secure a better moot.
Since you're a law student and not a CA, I would suggest that you don't start at a Big 4 firm, where they are likely to put a bunch of compliance work on you, depending on the team. Look for firms that specialise in indirect tax laws for internships and for starting off your career. This will allow you to get some good training in the first couple of years. You can think of progressing to bigger firms after that, and they will be eager to hire you due to your speciality. That will also help with pay progression, so don't worry too much about that (unless you have major financial difficulties, in which case, you may have to consider your options).
I'm not sure where you'll get to practise in IDT, IBC and securities laws, but you may find litigation lawyers who do this kind of work and make your mark there.
As for the resume part, you can add a few certificate courses, webinars, etc. on tax laws, and any tax internship experience will be helpful. (Please make sure to enjoy law school as long as you are there, though, because work will be extremely challenging after you get out!)
It's a very competitive field, tbh. Especially because, except for firms specialising in tax, bigger firms have smaller tax teams. But if you do enjoy the work and put in the week to get good at it, you can excel. Please keep in mind, though, that I've seen a lot of people joining tax teams just to realise it's not for them (especially because it's a pretty niche area), and that might happen for you too. And that's okay too. The important thing is to figure out what you like and what you're good at, and go after it. :)
P.S. A lot of firms have offices in Bangalore, and I know a bunch of tax lawyers working out of these offices. Your locale doesn't have to change for you to be able to choose your fav area of law.
Most preferred - M block, GK-2 & C block, EOK
The faculty continues to be great.
As far as the VC is concerned, he is not involved in the day to day administration of the college, he does not know about what his students are doing and how they are learning/living etc. He is told about this from the administration who honestly are small people high on whatever little power they have been given.
1. Have you ever been taught to read? If you were self-taught, my sympathies.
(a) Look at the language: is it saying he "should leave the country", or anything like that? Of course not! It's just saying that his coming back and doing what he has done was pointless. It hasn't even properly satisfied the ideals he himself says he had.
(b) Not all educators of his kind of background are deserving of this hostile reception. Take Sudhir Krishnaswamy (the NLS VC), for example - a Rhodes Scholar (Oxford BCL) and an Oxford DPhil. Other than trolls, can you see anyone saying that his choice not to work overseas didn't make a difference?? Do you know why that is? That's because where Raj is superficial and engages in box-ticking exercises, Krishnaswamy actually isn't a hipocrit and tells (and does) it like it is. Raj was the moderator for a conference of sorts of NLU VCs during the COVID pandemic. He asked a question about how to deal with issues of internet access being a barrier to learning for law students during the pandemic. Big gesture, the hugely rich elite guy giving a nod to the existence of the great unwashed. At least Krishnaswamy had the grace to admit that the demographic of students NLSIU at that time was dealing with wasn't the sort for whom such a problem arose. He said, very clearly, that if it arose and should NLSIU need to fund it, they'd fund it.
2. The point of LI is that people exchange ideas. Therefore, calling me an "idiot nobody" helps nobody, least of all yourself. Remember my mentioning of how you missed the point entirely? What if I were to call you an "idiot nobody?".
3. Finally, your "successful educationist" point. If he were to have been so successful, then why isn't Jindal a choice for a wider range of people, even among the elite? Note my point about academically strong students from privileged backgrounds still wishing for abroad for their undergrad degrees. Why is that the case? Why is Jindal the choice, largely, after all worthwhile options have failed? And why is it that I have personally observed students from such backgrounds with academic promise getting out of Jindal to go abroad (i.e., not graduating and going for an LLM but leaving the undergraduate law programme, successfully applying for admission to a UK or Australian law degree and going to do that instead)? Of all things, you, as a pro-Raj person, should feel deeply ashamed that students from rich backgrounds with anything more than half a brain prefer overseas options over his uni.
4. Raj is a public figure and an occupational hazard of this status is that his life choices, his motives and his actions are the subject of greater scrutiny and greater public comment. Where I grant you are right is that the moderators' application of this principle has been patchy, at best. The law firm partners and advocates are also public figures (in that they have an overarching duty to maintain public confidence in the justice system). Therefore, suppressing most criticism of them isn't right.
I'm getting it because i have lots of PDF to read and I don't wanna carry books everywhere. I'll be reading, highlighing and mostly using notion and youtube
which one of them should i go with ?
The work environment in my team is okay to fine, but the upper management got their set of idiosyncrasies, which is why no associate wants to stay in the long run. Of course, pay is another issue.
30 after that