Thoughts on an Experienced Corporate Lawyer's Resume

These are my thoughts on how a corporate lawyer, with law firm experience, should describe and categorize that experience.

The objective here is to put the space on the first page to the best possible use, to edit out what doesn’t add to the reader’s understanding of your current abilities.

At the mid-level, it’s fine to have the traditional resume which has narrative beneath each job entry, listed in reverse chronological order. 

What you want to list in the narrative are the subject matter of your practice—ex., M&A, Bank Finance, etc.—the elements that you have negotiated, researched and/or drafted; what place you were on the totem pole,  (ex, member of a team or only associate on 250M stock purchase?); and the industries/business sectors from which the parties to these deals have originated.   Reference to kinds of legal regimes is a good idea.  Ex, the word compliance is more forceful if you refer to the statute or kinds of rules which are relevant.  You should list the types of deals or documents that you have drafted and negotiated. 

Recurring activities belong in the narrative. Single transactions belong on the Representative Transactions List. Ex, drafting periodic reports under the 1934 Securities Exchange Act is in the narrative. A singular transaction which might have entailed 1934 Act elements, goes in the Representative Transactions List.

In terms of that list, if the person reading the resume knows your practice, be judicious in the amount of detail you use in describing the kinds of documents you have negotiated or drafted.  If you drafted and negotiated a particular kind of deal, which, by definition, includes a long list of major and minor documents, list the major documents only.

Ex: Negotiated and drafted asset purchase agreement and all ancillary documents including x, y and z significant documents.

Put your earlier experience into context.  If today you negotiated and drafted the principal documents for a particular kind of deal, at some earlier juncture you likely put together exhibits or did other lower level stuff on a the same kind of deal.  You don’t add to the reader’s information about your skills in including that earlier detail. Accordingly, you might, let’s say as a fifth year transactional lawyer, find yourself not providing a great deal of detail on the narrative from a transactional job in the same practice area which you might have held for only two years immediately following law school.  In that case, the narrative for the earlier position should indicate the kinds of clients for which you did work, by business sector and size, and the kinds of deals but might not talk about your actions/activities.

You can add something about the size of teams you might have managed and whether you mentored or trained junior associates.  If clients are comfortable contacting you directly, that is worth mentioning.

On a separate Sheet, entitled Representative Transactions, list the representative deals themselves should be in the deal sheet which follows.    

If you are more senior, it is fine to adopt a functional resume, where there is a summary narrative for all of your transactional experience, followed by a list of dates, titles and places of employment.  Your detail on your representative transactions would follow on a subsequent page.  The idea here is that the reader should not have to look in too many places to determine your core competencies.

An experienced litigator's resume

How should a litigator’s job entries evolve as he/she get more experienced? This week, I will discuss my thoughts on what the experienced law-firm focused litigator’s resume should look like.

I am going to assume, for the sake of this entry, that the candidate is seven years out of law school, in the New York market, at the senior associate/counsel level. As you get more experienced and get more job entries, a prospective employer has to look in more than one place to determine core competencies. Does someone really care, at, let’s say eight years out of law school, that you conducted depositions two jobs back? No, they care that you have conducted them at all.

 And why should a prospective employer have to comb through three job entries to determine whether or not an applicant has this experience?

Assuming that each job is with a similar enterprise and the subject matter is the same, I advocate using a functional resume format—where there is a summary up front detailing substantive subject matter experience (ex, antitrust, white collar, product liability) and technical skills, and in brief terms, significant actions which indicate level of experience.

What are significant actions? First or second chairing a case, selecting a jury, conducting depositions/examining/cross examining witness(es), selecting experts, negotiating settlements, arguing an appeal are all examples.

You should list the actions which indicate your highest level of experience with that piece of a trial or action. In other words, if you have conducted depositions, the prospective employer will figure that you previously engaged in preparation for depositions.

Also indicate your level of management experience. What kinds of actions have you supervised? How many and what kinds of people (i.e., paralegals, attorneys, etc)? Regularly or in case-specific situations? Have you mentored or trained junior associates?

Have you participated in client development efforts? Were you part of marketing efforts which successfully landed a client or new matter?

Following this summary, you list your jobs in descending chronological order, identifying the name of the firm, location, your title, and the applicable dates for each job.  If the firm is no longer in business or is not a widely known name, a phrase which helps the reader is a good thing.  Ex. Firm currently known as______, real estate litigation boutique dissolved______, etc.

If you moved from one firm to another with a partner, note that.

Refrain from putting other detail under job entries for this format.  Remember that the idea is that the employer have to look in as few places as possible to figure out what you have done and can do.

If you are or more years out and/or a partner, your education should follow your experience.

Law school entries should always indicate academic honors and journal membership. You must always indicate year of law school graduation because it has direct bearing on the context for your experience. Unless you have reason to want to signal a particular affiliation which you think would be looked upon favorably by the interviewer, drop reference to membership in student organizations.

Undergrad entries shouldn’t list more than educational institution, degree, major, year of graduation, and any academic honors. No one cares that you were dorm counselor, or were member of a student group of one kind or another.  An exception is for membership in long standing fraternities, sororities or similar organizations. It is not a bad thing for an interviewer to see that you share an affiliation of this sort.

After a section for professional affiliations and activities (more on that in subsequent blog entries), you should have a significant matter list. (see last week’s entry). At this level of experience, you can just identify the parties (as much as you can to preserve client confidentiality) without detailing what you did on each case.  .

Deal Sheets and Representative Matter Lists--What,Why, When do You Use Them?

For transactional lawyers, what is a Deal Sheet, how and when do you use it? For litigators, what is a Representative/Significant Matter List, how and when do you use it?

If you read last week’s blog, I advocate that each job entry have three parts—broad competency, description of skills you learned and examples of significant matters in which you learned those foregoing skills.  Deal Lists and Representative Matter lists are that last item broken out on its own, usually beginning on a second page.

Why do it?

There is something that I was always taught was the New York Times way of writing—You put a summary up front and then as the article (and resume) goes on, you move to greater levels of detail permitting the reader (prospective employer) to drill down as they want on subsequent pages.  For transactional lawyers, employers generally expressly require deal lists after a year or two of transactional practice experience.

When should you start breaking out your significant matters/deals?

For transactional lawyers, really, the earlier in your career you start put together a deal sheet, the better.

The easiest answer to that question is, for litigators, when your resume threatens to go on to a second page, as part of a broader reorganization of your resume, and/or when you have had more than one job.  

I would also add that, the more jobs you have had, the more places a prospective employer has to look to see what, in fact, you have done.  Why make a prospective employer have to work that hard to answer that question? Instead, a deal list gives the bottom line on the first page, under the job entry and employers who want detail can drill down to subsequent pages. 

Litigation Representative Matters

You can structure this lists in different ways.  When you’ve had more than one litigation job, you can break your representative matters down by law firm.  You can also just list them by subject matter either in general or within each law firm heading.

Identifying matters: In all non-public matters, be mindful of client confidentiality.  Detail shows that you are engaged more deeply in your practice and are, by naming names, making yourself more accountable. The more flavor and detail you can give for a matter, the better.  

 “Defended, in the SDNY, bulge bracket financial institution in $5M shareholders derivative class action alleging insider trading.

Senior litigators can stop here.  The list should look like what you might see on a partner’s law firm website entry.  N.B. If you first chaired a trial, you might want to pull that away from a Representative Matter List entry and put it under the entry for the particular job because it is that important.

Mid-level and junior lawyers should indicate what they actually did for each matter they list.  Ex:

"Drafted prevailing motion to dismiss, interviewed expert witness, supervised and directed 5 person document review team”

Without that level of detail, I know what your firm did and what your practice group did but I don’t know what you did.   

If your work has been filed as a matter of public record, there is no reason not to name the parties. If the case was reported case, give the cite.

Deal Sheets

Deal sheets list the major, singular transactions on which you have worked.  Don’t list matters of a day-to-day recurring nature.  Things like securities compliance, general corporate governance, drafting of employment agreements.  Those should be listed in the particular job entry on that first page.

You can organize your deals based upon where you worked when you engaged in them and/or subject matter—ex M&A, Finance, Real Estate Finance.

In the case of transactional practice, size does matter. Give an indication of size by virtue of dollar size or, in the case of leases, square feet of premises.  The general idea is that the bigger the numbers, the more complex the deal.  In a deal sheet, you should err on the side of providing as much information as possible concerning the parties, industries, kind of transaction,

Senior transactional lawyers can stop here. There is no need to indicate agreements you have drafted or negotiated.  That level of experience is presumed.  As a model, think of the kind of bare bones list that you might see in a partner’s law firm web bio.  That is your goal.

Mid level and junior lawyers need to state what you did on that matter. Detail promotes accountability and demonstrates that you are more deeply engaged in your practice. You give as much detail as possible about individual deals without compromising client confidentiality with respect to matters which are non-public..  Ex:

Represented X Corp S.A. in the $200B acquisition of Eureka Freight Management Group, the freight forwarding division of Eureka (a world leader in freight forwarding).  Coordinated due diligence and drafted diligence report for the U.S. division; revised stock purchase agreement.

If the deal is non-public, give as much detail as you can, ex,

Represented multi-national household cleaning products manufacturer in the $8M asset purchase of  an EU wallpaper manufacturer.  Conducted due diligence. Drafted asset purchase agreement, directed local counsel.

Job Entries for Junior and Mid-Level Candidates

Candidates need to be accountable for their post-law school years, where they have practiced, what they have done and demonstrate that they are engaged in their practice 

List your legal employment in descending chronological order.

For each entry, identify the name of the firm, the location where you worked, your title and dates of employment. 

Name of the firm.  You should use the legal name of the firm.  There has been a fair amount of musical chairs over the past bunch of years, with firms changing name/structure/going out of business.  If the firm has changed structure during your period of employment or thereafter, help the reader along with clarifying phrases, i.e.

John Doe LLP (currently Harry Doe Partners) or (dissolved, 2008) , etc.

 If you changed employer on account of a firm merger or practice group move, indicate it like this

John Doe LLP, New York, NY, Associate (2009-current)

Lion Cougar & Sons LLP, New York, NY (2008-2009)(firm merged with John Doe) or (moved with practice group to John Doe)

Avoid unnecessary duplication.  Real estate on that first resume page is precious.  If your practice remained the same, there is no reason not to combine the narratives for two successive firms:

                JOHN DOE LLP, New York, NY, Associate (2009-current)

                LION COUGAR & SONS LLP, New York, NY, Associate (2008-2009)(firm merged with John Doe)

                [shared  description]

Description of the firm: If you are looking in a different legal market or the entry is for a firm which is not well known, help the reader with a phrase which gives your experience context, i.e.

                JOHN DOE LLP, New York, NY, Associate (2009-current)

Regional ten attorney boutique specializing in employment litigation.

Parts of a Strong Job Entry

1.       Description of what subject matter areas/ practice specialties characterizing YOUR experience

Ex:

                “subject matter experience in antitrust, white collar crime and

Employment law.”

                “Experience in M&A, structured finance and general corporate governance.”

2.       Description of what skills you learned.  Litigators describe skills (I have a litigation checklist which helps refresh recollections as to the parts of a matter on which a candidate may have worked) Litigators might say what kinds of motions they drafted/argued; what they did in discovery, trial prep, etc.  Transactional lawyers describe the kinds of deals/documents they have helped structure, negotiate, and document. 

3.       Examples of significant matters in which you learned the skills stated above.

Transactions should be described in terms of $ size and also with a notation of what YOU did on the deal.

Litigators should identify whether they represented defendant or plaintiff, and the rough  subject matter of the suit—ex,  Defended bulge bracket financial institution against allegations of tortuous interference by registered representative (drafted answer, helped prepare expert witness for trial)

If it is a public deal or a case where the pleadings and filings are a matter of public record, there is no reason not to give the names of the parties.  Otherwise, describing the parties with as much detail as you can without compromising client confidentiality is key.


Next week what to do when your resume goes over onto two pages.