The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
ITT: Examples of BIGLAW Beta Gotcha!
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 7th, 2013 11:24 PM Author: dark slimy dingle berry Subject: Beta Gotcha! In response to today's Biglaw thread, ITT we discuss every partner's favorite game:
Partner sends group of associates a draft of a brief that he claims is in "near final" form and asks them to "glance" over it to make sure there are no major problems. Associates respond with "looks good" and maybe a few small typos (abbreviate case names, un-italicize commas, etc.).
Somehow partner comes to realize that one of the case citations misconstrues the case, and sends the group an email about how he is "troubled by the fact that no one managed to catch this very fundamental error. In the future, please be more careful." |
 |
Date: July 8th, 2013 10:25 AM Author: narrow-minded wrinkle Hah, a sr assoc did that to me once when i was more jr, too.
I'm sure he got busted on it and this was his cover ass. I bet there was a BCC to a partner with the original "just glance it over" email chain part removed. |
|
Date: July 6th, 2020 11:46 AM Author: cobalt indian lodge prole (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#40555125) |
Date: July 7th, 2013 11:26 PM Author: Outnumbered sienna forum Or : huge email on obscure point of law, partner asks you to check all cases and then rapes u for not being able to shepardize from memory (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23565582) |
|
Date: July 7th, 2013 11:49 PM Author: dark slimy dingle berry Yeah, sounds like this one:
At partner's request, you create extensive list of all cases you can find on a given topic by his one-hour deadline. Partner asks if you have "exhausted your search" for this topic. You say yes, desperate to move on to the 10,000 other things on your to-do list. Partner responds by asking, "Are you sure? I think there is a case on this in X circuit. It just came up in a case I worked on." |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 12:03 AM Author: Poppy stead black woman (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23565891) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 12:04 AM Author: Cowardly swollen set trump supporter why would you say yes without disclaiming the fact that you really mean no? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23565901) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 12:06 AM Author: aggressive pistol I've gotten quite good at rarely giving firm answers to anything. I think I would have told the dude that I looked pretty exhaustively and more hours would probably turn up more stuff but this is what I could find. CYA always. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23565920) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:43 PM Author: frisky brass step-uncle's house partner tbf, some partners are no-bullshit and hate this hedging / cya shit. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23572653) |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 3:54 PM Author: doobsian alpha This. Partner I used to work for would probably say: "So, that's a no! Got it." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32845237) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 3:19 AM Author: dark slimy dingle berry yeah, the answer is probably more like "i think so" or "i'm pretty sure i have the major cases."
but if he knows there's a case that exists that is not in your list, why the fuck wouldn't he tell you about it? and does it really matter that there is a district of montana case that mentions this topic when there are two directly on-point d.c. circuit cases?! wtf is the point of collecting them all? |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:04 AM Author: Wild glassy toaster depressive If you manage to catch them all the judge may grant you the illusive and powerful Mew 2. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23567433) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 10:10 AM Author: jet base (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574305) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 10:25 AM Author: crimson native (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574413) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 6:57 PM Author: razzle area mental disorder (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25663734) |
|
Date: June 25th, 2017 8:47 PM Author: spectacular range (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#33639942) |
|
Date: March 18th, 2017 6:08 PM Author: 180 gold cruise ship why not just say that that's the best you could do in the hour he gave you? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32861127) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 12:02 AM Author: aggressive pistol *sends email outlining 450 changes he would like to document*
*could have just made the changes in 1/3rd the time* |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 12:11 AM Author: Contagious lilac police squad meetinghouse That's not a gotcha. That's called "churn[ing] that bill, baby!" And/or "training" and "mentoring" since "the best way to learn this stuff is to input the changes yourself." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23565955) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 12:32 AM Author: alcoholic weed whacker brunch lol'd at :the best way to learn this stuff is to input the changes yourself (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23566078) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 3:27 AM Author: cerise floppy locus dysfunction cr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23566843) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 4:32 AM Author: Razzle-dazzle Shivering Menage also LOLed (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23573953) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 6:40 PM Author: excitant fiercely-loyal twinkling uncleanness principal's office (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25663659) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 10:39 AM Author: razzle area mental disorder So basically it's when a Higher-Up bitches at you over something stupid that they could've caught themselves? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23567318) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 10:59 AM Author: Self-centered station It's when a partner probably already knows what the "problem" is, passive aggressively tests you on it, and then immediately calls GOTCHA ASS NIGGA when you fail (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23567411) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:01 AM Author: Up-to-no-good exciting church Exactly. My gf has started doing this in normal conversation. Prob gonna snap and punch her in the face. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23567420) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:36 PM Author: dark slimy dingle berry This.
An alternate version is limiting your assignment to certain things, and then getting pissed when you didn't do something outside the limitations that he created. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:23 PM Author: Crystalline office "We're trying to keep the bill down, so let's just focus on X for now and not spend too much time."
(three days later)
"How did you not realize we also had to address Y? This is sloppy and incomplete work. I expect a better product ready for me to review by 9:00 am."
(three weeks later)
"Can you resend that doc? I'm ready to review now."
*kills self* |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 3:58 PM Author: doobsian alpha Oh, hai me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32845265) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:17 PM Author: Obsidian Site Skinny Woman Or it's when a superior tells you to do something, you do it, only the thing they told you to do was not what their superior or client wanted and so they say you should have done X when they told you to do Y. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25662468) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:00 AM Author: French background story chad Beta Gotcha is a good name for this. Of course it's not just work stuff, it's any casual conversation as well.
- Always looking for some smarmy point to make, ideally one that finds some tiny flaw in a word that the other person uttered. As soon as the point is made, become visibly overwhelmed with smug self-satisfaction and make an exit if possible.
- Come into an interaction with a prepared quip like "well double check everything, given your track record on this project!" This remark in your pocket is like a raging boner (clitoral erection if female) and uttering it is an exciting orgasmic release. |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:38 PM Author: dark slimy dingle berry yeah, don't know where the poster in the other thread got it from, but it is amazing.
"well double check everything, given your track record on this project!"
i lol'd. |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 10:06 AM Author: Self-absorbed free-loading lay sneaky criminal Subject: So fucking many... - Nasty senior associate bitch with "mentoring" responsibilities during corporate leadership event. Question: "So you have talked a lot today about motivating junior employees and letting them understand the impact of their work. Could you talk instead about letting them know you don't like them or their work." Admittedly, one partner made a visible fucking gasp.
- Same person also marshaled several secretaries to give unsolicited reviews to people through the formal partnership feedback process, which repeated the same stock criticisms over and over again (the fucking admins were dumb enough to cut and paste her suggestions).
- Finding "errors" in work that are material disagreements of fact within the firm and that may demonstrate little to no knowledge of what the fuck your subordinates do day-to-day, and then seeking a "definitive" answer from some alpha as fuck associate with zero relationship to the question at hand to avoid discussing the matter like an adult.
- Partners insinuating their vacations to St. Lucia etc. are really business in order to make associates feel they are always working, when in reality the business consisted of one round of golf with another partner for leisure.
- Demanding the details of your national holiday / long weekend activities when no one at the firm worked. Proceeds to mention you take a lot of vacation if you say you spent like a night in the Hamptons with your parents (reality: took two real days off in my first two years). |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 4:04 PM Author: doobsian alpha - Nasty senior associate bitch with "mentoring" responsibilities during corporate leadership event. Question: "So you have talked a lot today about motivating junior employees and letting them understand the impact of their work. Could you talk instead about letting them know you don't like them or their work." Admittedly, one partner made a visible fucking gasp.
LOL. Expound, brother. |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:04 AM Author: Self-centered station My favorite...
Partner: Send me just a very brief memo/rough draft on X and we'll see if we want to look into this further. Don't spend too much on it.
Me: *Slaps something together in a few hours.*
Partner comes into office 2 hrs later, shuts door, red ink ALL over my memo: This kind of thing really fucking pisses me off. It's like you didn't even read your own work. There are typos and awkward sentences. And it's not very extensive, either. Please do an extensive re-write of this. |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:39 PM Author: Slate Pit Pervert lololol 180
or the recent variation I encountered:
"Draw up X. Just copy and paste from Y. No changes. It's the same thing."
The next morning:
"What the fuck is this. I can't tell any difference between X and Y. Where is your creativity? Where is the nuance?" |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:40 PM Author: dark slimy dingle berry surely every associate must have some version of this story. this is classic BIGLAW mindfucking. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23572616) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:42 PM Author: Shaky avocado ticket booth i hate beta gotcha as much as the next guy but tbf this is a rookie mistake. learn to fight the urge to send something and get it off your plate as soon as it feels "done." spend the extra 10-15 min necessary to carefully proof your own work and tweak your sentences and paragraphs until they're coherent. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23572647) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:47 PM Author: frisky brass step-uncle's house partner (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23572703) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:47 PM Author: cerise floppy locus dysfunction (biglaw partner) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23572708) |
|
Date: August 22nd, 2020 1:59 PM Author: cobalt indian lodge prole (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#40794809) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:48 PM Author: Obsidian Site Skinny Woman Yeah, "don't spend much time on this" =/= "turn in crappy work". (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23572715) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 11:48 AM Author: Self-centered station This is absurd. If you know something is just being used internally to determine if you want to look into something further (at which time you would presumably do a more polished version), and you are specifically told that it should just be a rough draft, then it shouldn't fucking matter if there's a typo or two. This is what is so dumb about bigfaglaw. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574966) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:53 PM Author: dark slimy dingle berry i fell for this as a summer associate--i was told to only spend an hour on an assignment, and turn in whatever i could get done within that hour. i did a memo that described the best cases and cited to some others, but it still had some of the weird westlaw formatting and shit (this was before next).
a kind-hearted third year reviewed my memo before it went to the partner and clued me in to this schtick. his advice was basically, "no matter what anyone tells you, do NOT turn in a rough draft, ever." |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 8:32 AM Author: arrogant puce rehab keepsake machete yeah that third year is spot-on. polish the fuck out of that thing and then when you send it say "here's a preliminary rough draft, still a long way to go," etc. classic lowering of expectations (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581494) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 7:22 AM Author: Translucent Hairraiser Whorehouse Genital Piercing The way to do this is to print it out and go through it carefully. The different medium helps you catch mistakes. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581441) |
|
Date: August 22nd, 2020 1:58 PM Author: cobalt indian lodge prole (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#40794807) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:41 PM Author: Slate Pit Pervert *sends partner draft of a document 2-3 weeks before due date*
*gives partner frequent email and in-person reminders to review the document*
*partner emails at 3 PM on the day the document is due: "I see a typo." It is a 60 page document. There is no further guidance given. Nothing shows up on spellcheck, grammar check, and proofreads by 2 other associates*
*it is a single semicolon that he believes COULD have been a comma, found after 2 hours and 13 emails back and forth* |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 1:25 AM Author: French background story chad haha (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23573405) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 2:12 AM Author: diverse apoplectic idiot Don't forget the part where he bills 15 hours for reviewing it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23573656) |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 4:09 PM Author: anal lascivious mood (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32845320) |
|
Date: June 25th, 2017 8:43 PM Author: talented business firm (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#33639917) |
|
Date: June 2nd, 2014 2:05 PM Author: ivory faggot firefighter is this the personality type that manages to thrive in biglaw? thank the lord i did not pursue this path (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25673607) |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 4:53 PM Author: doobsian alpha There are plenty of these types in Biglaw. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32845605) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:46 PM Author: Obsidian Site Skinny Woman The one that drives me bonkers is when I come to a point where I can do X or Y and both seem pretty good. I think really hard about it and I research the upsides and downsides to both and the I make a decision and choose one way that I think best fits our situation. I literally agonize over what's best.
Then I give to the partner and he's like, "Why would you do X when Y is clearly the right answer. You need to THINK about these things before you do them."
|
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:48 PM Author: frisky brass step-uncle's house partner that's actually somewhat useful training if done right and he's decent about it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23572725) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:50 PM Author: Obsidian Site Skinny Woman Yeah, but X or Y is only clearly right when he gives you the piece of information he learned on the client call that she never told you. And if you'd known it you would have definitely done X. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23572740) |
|
Date: July 8th, 2013 11:49 PM Author: dark slimy dingle berry this is even worse when you send an email analyzing each option and the partner doesn't respond (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23572729) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2017 7:31 AM Author: Hyperactive Buff Antidepressant Drug Circlehead I figured the partner wants to feel involved. Whenever I came to a 50/50 judgement call, I would always do the opposite of what I thought was the right thing. 90% of the time the partner would change it to what I wanted. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#33651430) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 1:37 AM Author: Coiffed Turquoise Persian Not the same thing, but this one always bugs me.
*Weekend email, I'm away from computer.* *Partner or sr assoc emails about a conference call - "Send an outlook invite as soon as possible."
WTF, you are in Outlook sending the email, why the fuck can you not just take the 30 seconds and send out the invite? Should I also wash your hands for you when you use the bathroom? Can I expect an email asking me to open your door when it's time for you to get lunch? |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 1:43 AM Author: aquamarine irradiated boistinker LOL, do you put "send outlook invite" on your time sheet? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23573490) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 9:43 AM Author: jet base Correspond and confer with [name(s)] re upcoming [subject] meeting and related logistics (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574226) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 1:44 AM Author: Maniacal Ceo National couldnt they just be emailing from the bb and doing something else? this is typical low man on the totem pole shit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23573498) |
|
Date: June 2nd, 2014 3:14 PM Author: exhilarant headpube an email "send out an email invite" grinds my gears (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25673992) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 1:45 AM Author: electric pozpig One time one of our clients called me (low level associate) freaking out about something and wanting a conference call with partner asap. Apparently partner wasn't answering his calls or emails. I tried him several different ways, by text, email, phone, etc. Nothing. Finally he shows up 2 hours later and I ask where he was. He tells me he was having a "long lunch" with some hot young girl he's seeing. I then tell him what's up with the client.
He gets on the phone and it goes like this:
Partner: Hey, Client, sorry about the delay getting back to you
Client: Where the hell were you all day?
Partner: I'm sorry, i told [Dginobili Unchained] I was at a charity event earlier, but he must have forgot to tell you that. [complete horseshit btw]
me: X_X |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 7:36 AM Author: Obsidian Site Skinny Woman 180 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574096) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 9:41 AM Author: pearly supple space therapy Meh. That's not too bad. He didn't throw you under the bus by saying you failed to try to find him, which would have really pissed the client off. He confirmed that you correctly concluded that he was unavailable, but forgot the reason why.
Would have been better if he had just said he had an emergency client meeting that came up at the last second. |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 11:52 AM Author: Self-centered station What? He did throw him under the bus. He just implied that he's too incompetent to remember why he was gone. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574988) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 9:42 AM Author: sinister hot hell international law enforcement agency eh, this isn't that bad. this shit happens in any job.
in shitlaw this happens between a judgge, the "associate" and the "partner" |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 10:08 AM Author: Fighting Public Bath Jew these aren't that bad. unless the partner is a complete sociopath (though since this is biglaw he probably is) he'll feel he sorta owes you one. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574285) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 12:40 PM Author: Geriatric sandwich Seems like a smirk and *high five* would be the appropriate response (depending, of course, on how young and fresh and tight... Wait, I forgot (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23575269) |
|
Date: May 30th, 2014 11:57 PM Author: Slap-happy quadroon stage Obv. a Jew (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25660317) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 5:03 AM Author: Arousing slippery home Lol at shittigators (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23573999) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 8:40 PM Author: Arousing slippery home (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23578566) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 9:21 AM Author: Fuchsia federal place of business It drives me up the wall when you ask a partner a general timeframe to turn something around and they reply with something like "oh no rush at all, I don't want to ruin your weekend or anything. I'm not some Monster!" Partner chuckles and tells you midday Monday is fine, even though its Friday afternoon and he just gave you 20 hours worth of shit to do.
I have one partner who can't figure out how attachments work. He sent me something to change, no document attached. I email him back saying its not attached and instead of just attaching it he send me and email saying it must be something with my computer, call it support. 30 min later partner emails you again, with the doc attached this time, and then says "we are already behind the ball here so I'm going to need this back in [some unreasonable timeframe]. "
|
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 9:22 AM Author: Obsidian Site Skinny Woman Fucking 180. Did you call support? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574182) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 9:38 AM Author: Fuchsia federal place of business Yea. Idk what else to do, I emailed him back asking him just to attach it, but after 15 min he had not emailed me back so I had to do it to cover my ass. It guy thought I was dumb as fuck too. He sits down for 2 minutes and then partner send email with attachment. Kinda pisses me off even thinking about it still
I should also note he has done this multiple times. After the first time though I was like fuck it, if there isn't an attachment I let him know and do other work. One day I know he will do this, never attach the docs, and them flip shit when I haven't done it. When it does I'm going to punch him in his fucking face and go home and have a beer. |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 11:54 AM Author: Self-centered station Lol at how biglaw turns people into such betas. The proper response should have just been "IT'S NOT A PROBLEM WITH IT. IT'S A PROBLEM WITH YOU NOT ATTACHING THE FUCKING DOCUMENT." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23575003) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 1:05 PM Author: Fuchsia federal place of business Bro I'm a second year, I can't get fired. I have loans to pay and I've literally worked my life to get here. Either I leave on my own terms or I punch this guy in the face and go out with dignity. Not gonna get dinged for sending dumb emails (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23575409) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 7:27 AM Author: Translucent Hairraiser Whorehouse Genital Piercing This shithead partner sent me an email saying that I forgot to log out of a document. It was Sunday and I had left my house ten minutes ago. So I drive home. Open my laptop. Log into Citrix. Look at the document. Stupid ape has it open. Send polite email saying hey it should be fine now! Get back in car, pissed off as fuck. Speed. Get pulled over. Give cop attitude because I'm pissed. Get four citations. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581443) |
|
Date: July 16th, 2013 4:25 PM Author: Trip toilet seat cumskin can't believe a biglaw partner wouldn't know how to attach a doc to an email, even if he's age 70+. that's stuff people with 85 IQs can do. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23658427) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 9:39 AM Author: pearly supple space therapy Nearly 6 yrs into BIGLAW, and none of these horror stories has ever happened to me. Only had like one incident in my career when I feel like I got treated really unfairly, and it wasn't as bad as most this stuff. Am I lucky? Or are you all too risk averse to stand up for yourselves to even the slightest degree? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574217) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 9:41 AM Author: Obsidian Site Skinny Woman (Power of Positive thought guy) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574219) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 9:43 AM Author: Slate Pit Pervert protip: you were actually stealthed 4 years ago (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574225) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 9:44 AM Author: pearly supple space therapy protip: the protip meme kind of sucks (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23574229) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 5:33 PM Author: magical pocket flask (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25663320) |
|
Date: July 9th, 2013 11:56 AM Author: Self-centered station 1) u sure u are in biglaw? 2) u def are not in NYC. 3) there's a few good dood partners so if you have managed to do work for a limited # of people i guess it's possible. or maybe you just happen to work at an ultra chill office w/ a good managing partner who sets the right tone. but in my experience the majority of biglaw partners do beta gotcha shit all the time. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23575020) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 1:54 AM Author: Beady-eyed sickened sex offender Not sure if this qualifies but I've been told to draft a document using X form agreement (something around 50 pages). I show my redline with my changes. Partner goes into the agreement and I get chewed the fuck out for typos which have been embedded on the form for years, apparently I am responsible to catch them. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23580969) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 2:10 AM Author: Maniacal Ceo National sucks but ultimately that's fair. should catch typos (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23580997) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 4:39 AM Author: pontificating orchestra pit (biglawyer aspie) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581382) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 4:45 AM Author: Maniacal Ceo National not gonna lie, ive been doing this for far too long im probably compromised (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581387) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 9:23 AM Author: Beady-eyed sickened sex offender So I am supposed to read through the entire 50 page document for typos despite only modifying a select few portions of sections? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581602) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 9:25 AM Author: pearly supple space therapy I probably would have done the same thing as you under the circumstances (because I'm lazy, and suck at proof reading), but it isn't crazy that a partner would expect you to actually read the document you gave him, even if you didn't write most of it.
|
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:16 PM Author: Crystalline office Honestly, I do just to avoid the type of shit you described.
I just finished getting yelled at for copying and pasting some summaries into another summary. Counsel told me to do so. Partner yelled at me for doing so.
LOVE THIS JOB LOVE IT |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 7:24 AM Author: Translucent Hairraiser Whorehouse Genital Piercing That's fair. What's fucked up is when they give you shit for clunky form language. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581442) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 9:26 AM Author: Beady-eyed sickened sex offender Yea that's what I'm saying, I got chewed out for portions of the form that did not need modification. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581608) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 9:28 AM Author: pearly supple space therapy In the future, you can avoid this problem by remembering in any situation where you are told to use a prior document for form to ask the partner if he wants you to spend the time (and client's money) reviewing the form document for typos, or if you can just assume it's clean given that it's been used before. If he says you can trust the doc, he won't pwn you later. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581614) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 9:32 AM Author: Beady-eyed sickened sex offender I still think its bizarre. This is in the specific area of leasing to give context where clients are EXTREMELY sensitive to the bill. We use the same lease form for hundreds of leases for the client and modify specific sections requested to be modified by the client. I don't think it would be fair for me to read over the form which has been used hundreds of times each time I use it, this would basically quadruple my billable hours. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581625) |
|
Date: July 10th, 2013 9:37 AM Author: pearly supple space therapy Well, lesson learned. As I said above, had you asked, he would have told you not to proof it, and you wouldn't have gotten yelled at. Just remember that you should always be thinking about covering your ass. Especially now that you've learned this partner may not be the most reasonable dood. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#23581635) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:07 PM Author: jade cracking clown sorry buddy, but this just shows you don't understand the type of product being produced in biglaw. you use something as a template but turn w/e it is into gold, no matter what, no matter how many billables. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25662959) |
|
Date: May 30th, 2014 10:13 PM Author: khaki point coldplay fan (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25659708) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 12:02 AM Author: Concupiscible spot degenerate A partner came by and asked me if we got discovery responses on a case that was already very contentious. I said no. He told me to write a fuck you letter to the other side to get them off their asses. I did--started with "I'm very disappointed" like I was their fucking dad, threatened to seek sanctions based on their continued bad faith, etc. Within 5 minutes of sending the e-mail, opposing party forwards me an e-mail he had sent the partner a week earlier attaching the discovery responses, along with an e-mail thread where the partner agreed to accept service of them by e-mail. He copies the partner. The partner comes by, and gives me shit for writing a contentious e-mail. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25660337) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 12:05 AM Author: Slap-happy quadroon stage jfc. all partners are pathological sociopaths (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25660356) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 6:31 PM Author: Brilliant lodge milk ugh (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25663620) |
|
Date: June 2nd, 2014 2:12 PM Author: Kink-friendly hospital macaca But you know and the partner knows that the partner fucked up. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25673649) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 12:19 AM Author: Concupiscible spot degenerate Not gotcha, but infuriating. One junior partner at our firm always has tight deadlines on his projects. "Need this tomorrow" type shit. All the time, it means people work all weekend or work on holidays.
Invariably, the dude will come up to you 3 weeks after you sent him the completed work on the "I need this tomorrow" assignment, and he'll ask if you've finished it yet. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 12:41 AM Author: alcoholic weed whacker brunch junior partners are the fucking worst. they just finished their hazing and now theyre ready to dish it out. more senior partners often develop a little empathy and chill out once they realize none of this shit matters at all (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25660478) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:14 PM Author: Crystalline office I HATE that shit. a senior associate I work with loves to give you a major markup at like 10:00 pm and ask for it the next morning. Then like a week later (after you stayed up until 2:00 am working on his shit) he'll email and say "can you resend? I found some time to review".
I've totally checked out of my job in part because of shit like this. Fuck it. |
|
Date: June 27th, 2017 8:43 AM Author: Crystalline office (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#33651582) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:12 PM Author: Crystalline office I left at 8:30 pm once after hearing nothing from the deal team for a few hours. Wasn't supposed to close that week - we had about two weeks until closing. Nothing frantic that day. Just a normal day at the office.
The senior associate (crazy person trying to make partner) called me 5 or 6 times that night after I left to ASK ME IF I HAD MADE ONE CHANGE. Senior could have just opened the document on the system to check. But no. Senior called 5-6 times instead.
Senior never left a voicemail because that would have meant i would receive an email telling me about the voicemail and I would have figured out senior was looking for me. Senior never sent an email for the same reason. Just called, let it ring, then hung up. 5 or 6 times.
Then the next day senior sent me an email, copying the partner, saying "I called you [x] times last night. Were you still in the office with [other team member] and I?"
Lol. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:16 PM Author: medicated sadistic theatre LOL, shrews (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25662727) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:41 PM Author: glittery theater round eye Nice catch (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25663112) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 6:35 PM Author: dark slimy dingle berry this is seriously fucked. i don't even see what the upside is for the senior -- wouldn't the partner rather just have an answer than another problem on his plate? the best associates make LESS work for the partner, not more.
don't know how you avoided the obvious response (assuming you did) of writing the following with the partner CC'ed: "i had left the office by that time, but was available remotely all evening. had you sent an email or left a vm, i could have easily told you that yes, i did make the change you were inquiring about." |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 2:33 PM Author: Magenta Institution I don't understand how you would've got an email but didn't see 5 or 6 missed calls? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25667955) |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 3:13 PM Author: dark slimy dingle berry On the off chance the above comment was written by someone who retired in 1989:
BIGLAW firms universally have something known as "remote access." This allows one to access both emails and voicemails via devices known as "smartphones," or on mobile computers known as "laptops." When a caller does not leave a voicemail, no call will be registered "remotely." |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 9:29 PM Author: Slate Pit Pervert why did the dumbass call your office phone and not your mobile? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25669922) |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 11:24 PM Author: copper soul-stirring house windowlicker No wonder many of you get pwned at work. That associate didnt give 2 sh**ts about whether you made the change or not. He/she was angry that you werent at your desk like you were supposed to be at 9 pm, like the other sucker associates. You were caught leaving "early" so associate decided to make everyone else aware of your "error".
Much of these biglaw "gotcha" mindfu**ks are there to drive home only 1 fact: they are paying you $160K not to produce Einstein quality work, but just to be AVAILABLE 24/7 to any client or partner's whim. |
|
Date: June 2nd, 2014 1:56 PM Author: Magenta Institution ya titcq. I assumed she was calling his mobile (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25673550) |
|
Date: June 2nd, 2014 2:53 PM Author: Dashing library A lot of the examples itt aren't really beta gotcha, just frustrating bullshit that goes along with biglaw. But this is the best fucking example in the thread. If she calls and you're there, you make the change, and maybe your email gets forwarded to the partner with her comments and the header shows you were working at 11 pm. If she calls and you're not there, GOTCHA. And don't think the other associate wasn't in on it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25673845) |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 5:25 PM Author: doobsian alpha Gawd. As In-house counsel, I really wish I could tell who are the chill, cool attys so that I could praise them and just make life miserable for the assholes. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32845875) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:06 PM Author: jade cracking clown (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25662952) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:22 PM Author: Stubborn Hilarious Patrolman Stag Film Partner asks me to file a motion in an area I'm totally unfamiliar with, and I let him know that fact. He says they are desperate and also need it ASAP, and I can just rely on two samples that he sends me. He also tells me that to keep costs down I can't do any research, and that the cases in the samples should be fine.
He calls me multiple times that day checking up on my progress. I heavily rely on the two samples, never directly copying but following the format, rewording things and relying on the same case law (which I do look at to make sure it's not obviously bad/unhelpful).
Turn it in early the next morning. I get a call and get yelled at for not doing research, because the cases cited in the brief I sent were not directly on-point or otherwise "not good enough." He says that I relied too much on the samples and that I was "basically plagiarizing" and he'd be ashamed if the motion got highlighted by the ALR or something, asking me how it would look for the firm. (WTF?) Someone else was tasked with redrafting the "urgent" motion, and that associate asked me for the samples sent by the partner!
Weeks later, on a separate matter and in a meeting in front of other associates, I got chewed out for this event. It was bizarre but I just stared and pretended I was just a character in a really boring movie. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:23 PM Author: alcoholic weed whacker brunch this is how you do biglaw. braise and criticism are very random. just slide and let do (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25663033) |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 11:28 PM Author: copper soul-stirring house windowlicker Your mistake was to rely on this poor advice of "just use the template and do minimal research". That is always code for "let me tell you what NOT to do so you can get screwed later".
Your job was to say "ok" then research the heck out of that area as much as you could using Google or free legal research sources, or CLE (doesnt your firm subscribe to free online CLE??!). Then spend 5 hours carefully crafting an analytical memo that went beyond what was asked for in your assignment.
Thats why they are paying you the big bucks. *smh* |
|
Date: June 2nd, 2014 2:42 PM Author: Dashing library Yeah, that's fucked and all, but here's a tip: if you're still getting a good portion of your hours from that partner, look elsewhere. Whether he was right or wrong, fucking up something so badly he had to reassign it will never be forgotten. You used up all the slack he was willing to cut you, and every nitpicky unavoidable mistake you make from here on will be further confirmation of your incompetence to him. Get on some other partner's list now, before his assessment becomes your reputation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25673793) |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 1:53 PM Author: Disturbing adventurous masturbator azn I work with a partner on a memo that takes about three days to research and write. He calls me to say it is great, he has no changes, and I did an excellent job. He's not in my practice group and I don't normally work with him, and I am pleasantly surprised by the experience. I don't work with him again because I'm tied up on other projects.
Six months later, I have my annual review. Everything is going fine, until they get to this partner's evaluation. Says that I clearly don't meet the firm's standards, and gives a bunch of specific examples of projects that I never worked on. He clearly had confused me with another associate. I email and call him to clarify, and he never gets back to me. So I have this terrible evaluation in my file, and he can't bother to admit that he screwed up. |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 9:31 PM Author: Slate Pit Pervert i would call him again and threaten a libel suit
you know theres no case. he clearly wont |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 11:32 PM Author: copper soul-stirring house windowlicker Did you cc: HR on this email? A bad performance evaluation should never be finalized or consented by you if its based on wrong information.
You need to address this in an email/memo to the partner and send a copy to HR or Managing Partner so that you have a CYA doc if next year that partner tries to use this review as an excuse to fire you. This is how they start weeding out associates partners dont like. |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 2:11 PM Author: Bull Headed Bateful Legal Warrant midlevel shrew - gives me assignment friday night - she felt bad about it, it was unavoidable. she told me to find all communications b/t counsel and client regarding two memos. i ask, "what about the 3rd memo." she says - don't worry about that, we'll treat it as a separate project.
yesterday - knock out the assignment, make clear i'm only doing it for the two memos, ie, "i found 20 docs for memo 1 and 25 for memo 2."
today - did you do it for the 3rd memo?
i respond - no, you told me that was a separate project.
she - sends super bitchy email that makes zero sense about how the interaction was.
|
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 2:59 PM Author: Bull Headed Bateful Legal Warrant UPDATE:
we don't even have the emails from the time frame she wanted me to look at.
WHAT A STUPID SHREW.
i am discount double-checking around my apartment right now. |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 9:20 PM Author: navy stimulating parlor I wouldn't poast real time work complaints. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#25669858) |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 6:14 PM Author: Slate Pit Pervert I read this as "medieval shrew"
LO, HAST THOU READETH THE LETTERS? |
|
Date: June 2nd, 2014 2:39 PM Author: bronze garrison ratface At my old firm:
Partner: *calls me* CCSpecial. I am sending you a director questionnaire (about 30 pages, with 15 or so just full of dense paragraphs). I just need you to swap names. Makes sure there are no dangling headers, etc.
Me: Ok. Got it.
Partner: Let me be clear. Don't spend too much time on this.
Me: Ok. Cool. *Does as instructed. Annihilates orphans and widows. Swaps names. Confirms company name from secretary of state website, etc.*
Partner: *reviews the document* *Calls me to his office.*
CCSpecial. Now, I know I said don't spend too much time on this and simply swap names, but you should have caught these mistakes. Why are we citing regulations of the australian securities and investments commission and FSA? This is stuff you should have caught.
Me: I thought it was good. This is the same document you used previously with X client and Y client? And with the same client, just different prospective directors.
Partner: Other people's mistakes don't excuse your mistakes. This is ridiculous. Now, review the document again.
Edit: I guess it really isn't a gotcha. Just a pain in the ass moment. |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 3:44 PM Author: Haunting twinkling center main people (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32845177) |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 4:11 PM Author: Dull scourge upon the earth den when i was a first year i got stuck on a deal working for this little south african midget 3rd year. He would hand write his markups and make me turn his changes, and when the counsel would review and be like 'wtf did you put this in there?', he would then, in front of the counsel, accuse me of "going rogue" and putting in my own comments. It got to the point where I had to go into meetings armed with his handwritten markups in order to defend myself, so I guess I was the one doing the gotcha. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32845329) |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 4:58 PM Author: rebellious smoky french chef messiness appreciated twist ending (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32845630) |
|
Date: March 16th, 2017 6:17 PM Author: overrated generalized bond university BIGLAW is a PYRAMID SCHEME for a fucking reason. You make hours? You get 4-5 years. Enough to pay off loans and make a little $. Then you leave. Or, if you "win" you get to stay. LOL.
The entire point is to CYA. Partners are sociopaths. Everyone is CYAing. You would/will/do, too. You fuck over the young. Boomers ruined it all. |
|
Date: March 18th, 2017 5:59 PM Author: cobalt indian lodge prole (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32861069) |
|
Date: March 19th, 2017 1:52 PM Author: doobsian alpha JFC. U still in biglaw? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32866348) |
|
Date: June 25th, 2017 8:31 PM Author: cobalt indian lodge prole (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#33639846) |
|
Date: March 18th, 2017 6:07 PM Author: cobalt indian lodge prole (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32861120) |
|
Date: March 18th, 2017 6:13 PM Author: cobalt indian lodge prole (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32861151) |
|
Date: March 19th, 2017 1:54 PM Author: Milky stirring dilemma Un-italicizing a comma is flame right? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#32866371) |
|
Date: June 27th, 2017 7:38 AM Author: Chest-beating Lettuce No. It happens in litigation because case names are supposed to be italicizes and end with a non-italicizee comma. And can't just find and replace because commas before the last one are supposed to be italicized. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2303101&forum_id=2#33651444) |