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?
What the hell. I don't think anyone will make me partner even at PQE 15.
I'd any day ppprefereumanities people over science people as M&A lawyers. Science stream peeps have a very narrow perspective i feel. They have in my experience consistently lacked foresight and range in terms of approaching a problem legally and in terms of business.
And an overwhelming majority of partners in T1 firms are science stream people.
Waging a full-scale war against a nuclear power is ridiculous.
Also, not doing ANYTHING substantial about the terrorist attacks is dumb as hell.
The correct response should be special operations and targeted strikes against the terrorists. However, rational response to any political predicament is such a rarity nowadays, especially among Gen-Z kids who view the world in a black and white manner.
I do not blame them for feeling this way. However, I do believe generalising experience in one law firm for the entire law firms market is not a holistic approach.
They are juggling between taking a break to decide whether they are suited for law AND pursuing job in a different law firm.
I am sure a lot of people have gone through this. Could someone shed some light on: 1. How they should go about this?; 2. What are other fields they could consider barring litigation, in house counsel, academics & public policy?
The first person to target Vikram Misri and his daughter is Chandan Kumar Singh @TheSquind
. Soon after he tweeted this, his troll army started sharing details of his daughter's insta account, linkedin details, contact details. Etc.
This is not the first time he did this. He is a repeat offender. He has doxxed several young women in the past.
https://x.com/zoo_bear/status/1921614534453690396
Yes, she was involved with human rights centres at ▮▮▮ as an ▮▮▮, but literally every student does that and it helps during LLM applications (▮▮▮ in her case). Lots of RW people themselves intern with human rights and legal aid centres!
Probably not very bad
Can someone also throw some light on how the first month as an A0 going to be? What kind of tasks would we be allotted? So far I've been told it's being an intern but with way more added responsibilities and expectations.
Serious answers only, preferably from experienced seniors. Constructive replies would surely mean a lot to me <3
Not a single Notice or communication regarding the reason for delay. Complete lack of any accountability. Even the Registry, the first point of contact is clueless
the consortium should review its sop and improve, just stop this yearly rotating circus
I sit on the same floor as one of their WCC teams in a Tier 1. Let me be honest—zero legal acumen.
All they do is review emails for red flags, draft template whistleblower policies, and pretend they’re conducting investigations while barely understanding the difference between fraud and non-compliance.
It's just Ctrl+F for "gift" or "cash" and a boilerplate ABAC chapter that could’ve been written by ChatGPT too. They'll never touch a clause. They don’t litigate. They can’t interpret a contract. But they'll flood you with 67-slide decks filled with integrity frameworks, risk matrices, and buzzwords like tone from the top.
My condolences to those stuck in this practice area
Either they have been going to salons and beauty clinics, or it’s photoshop gone wild! So what’s the deal?
Can anyone help with names of few non toxic tier 1 partners in real estate.
https://sundayguardianlive.com/opinion/indian-higher-education-has-a-woke-jihadi-academic-complex#google_vignette