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.  .