<p>I would like to respond to you, lskinner, by describing a few of the tasks that I did when I was a junior associate in a big law firm, rather than by resopnding point by point to your questions.</p>
<p>On my second day of work ever at my big law firm (yes, that's approximately six weeks after I took the bar exam and before I knew whether I passed), I was pulled out of the law firm's orientation program and sent to San Francisco where a partner and I met with our clients and then with their proposed business partner to hammer out the main points of a proposed joint venture. Though I was honestly (and reasonably, I think) a bit shellshocked into silence by the experience, the partner sought out my opinions and actively engaged me in the discussions. I was then involved with a senior associate at the firm in drafting all of the primary deal documents, and was included in all client meetings and conference calls. Talk about getting thrown in the deep end! It was fantastic. Did I do some more mundane tasks during my first year, too? Of course I did. It's all part of the learning that one has to do -- you know, you have to crawl before you can walk. I also worked on periodic filings with the SEC (10-Q's, 8-K's, etc.), I drafted memoranda on various grey areas in the law or on new regulations affecting one or more clients, I attended formal training sessions at the firm and departmental lunches, I reviewed auditor's comfort letters and drafted opinion letters, I drafted and reviewed closing documents, etc. All were valuable learning experiences, and I felt that those learning experiences were exactly the reason why I went to work at a big law firm. </p>
<p>As a rising second year associate (meaning that the new crop of first year associates had just arrived from graduating law school and taking the bar exam, for those of you who may not know) and during my second year, I was given the lead resopnsibility (with a partner reviewing my work and answering my questions) for an MTN (medium term note) takedown, filing with the SEC a universal shelf registration statement and prospectus and registering with the SEC an offering of debentures to be issued by a sovereign (which was a seasoned issuer). I also worked on numerous complex and headline making acquisitions where more senior attorneys guided the way (thankfully!) and I drafted, negotiated, attended client meetings and learned. </p>
<p>By my third year, I was running some smaller acquisitions on my own, while still working on some more high profile and complex transactions with one or two more senior attorneys on the deal team. My deals were always very leanly staffed and I was reponsible for, among other things, drafting, meeting/speaking with clients on my own and in meetings, speaking with regulatory authorities (such as the FTC, DOJ, NYSE, NASDAQ and SEC) and generally, doing whatever needed to be done.</p>
<p>I was not an extraordinary associate (though I think that I was darn good), nor was I alone in doing such resopnsible work early on . . . far from it, in fact. My firm had too much work and not enough time to handle things any other way. If an associate failed to prove themselves on one or more matters, yes, then that associate probably found themselves later on with less responsibility or less interesting deals to work on. However, as I was often told, "the competent get punished", and I worked a tremendous number of hours doing all of this work (and, admittedly, more than once at 4 a.m. after pulling an all-nighter or two during the prior week, I cursed the level of responsibilty I had). </p>
<p>Now, lskinner did mention one thing that I thought was particularly interesting regarding making important decisions (not suggesting things -- actually having authority to make decisions). The thing is that most decisions regarding strategy and substantive matters are for the client to make. It was my job, and the job of the other attorneys in my firm, to run through the list of options and the risks associated with each of those options with our clients, but it was typically up to our clients to make those calls. Did I misunderstand your meaning, lskinner? </p>
<p>I was also asked whether a reasonably intelligent attorney with 5 years of experience is competent to handle responsible tasks, and I think that that answer depends on the attorney him or herself. It depends upon the experience that attorney has had, and the level of responsibility and, even more importantly, initiative that attorney has taken on in those prior tasks. It depends on the personality of that attorney. It also depends, as has been mentioned earlier on this thread, on the demands of the client. As has also been mentioned, it is not enough to simply be competent to handle a task. Most attorneys at big law firms are probably intelligent enough to handle most tasks at hand. The real question, I believe, is whether an attorney is capable of mastering a task and achieving the best possible outcome for his or her client.</p>