This post aims to collect some empirical evidence regarding how lawyers (probably from biglaw) make the switch to PE.
If you have an ex lawyer at your fund, what was his/her path? Also, if willing, what is the AUM/strategy of the fund?
Suggested structure and example:
1) Undergrad
2)?????
3) Law School
4) Etc.
5) PE
Example:
1) Undergrad
2) Law School
3) Biglaw M&A
4) IBD Associate/VP
5) PE (Associate/VP/etc.)
| +77 | Ex Apollo Associate Q&A (But I Actually Answer) | 119 | 37m | |
| +61 | Q&A - Anything about PE / MBA / Life | 64 | 1h | |
| +45 | How to Model SaaS Projections for Interviews | 49 | 1d | |
| +37 | [Technical doubt]: Cash sweep and mandatory amortization | 10 | 7s | |
| +23 | European Megafunds (based on PEI 2023) | 17 | 2d | |
| +22 | Partners Group Long Term | 8 | 1d | |
| +22 | Is internal reporting at most funds really so Excel & PPT heavy still? | 8 | 12h | |
| +18 | Advent NYC Culture/WLB - 2024 update | 9 | 4h | |
| +18 | How is your life in PE? | 12 | 4h | |
| +18 | How much thematic work / industry research do you guys do? | 1 | 6h |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
Also interested in this.
Are you guys asking from the POV of someone considering law school to get into finance?
In general, not a path I'd recommend (assuming you are early enough in your career and have the choice) if your end goal is buyside. Like why take a circuitous route when there's a much more direct one available?
@CHItizen - No, the goal of the thread is simply to collect data concerning former lawyers working on deal teams at PE funds (e.g. how did they get to PE, what route did they take, etc.). While it will provide useful information for lawyers hoping to enter PE, the thread isn't intended to promote law school as a route to PE.
Am curious if anyone has done it within the last 10 years or so. There were a decent number of founders including Rubenstein and Rice, who were BigLaw lawyers. But times seem to have changed since then in terms of recruiting.
One of our co-heads of PE is an ex attorney. Distressed / value hedge fund / private equity fund at a megafund.
Also, at a more junior level, worked with an IB analyst in my restructuring group when I was a banker, and he is now at a buy side shop. The past I have seen most is restructuring because the law degree really helps in understanding the in- and out- of court restructuring processes. Even if you weren't a restructuring attorney, just having the ability to read legal docs and the framework to approach it helps immensely understanding the legal side of a transaction (PoRs, APAs, credit docs, legal motions, etc). First time I had to pull and summarize legal filings from PACER I was like WTF! - this is the most antiquated, confusing, and inefficient platform ever!! The attorney was ahead of the game in that regard. But also have to adapt your approach away from a legal perspective and focus on the financial (I.e, use your legal expertise as a tool to enhance your understanding of what drives value from a financial perspective)
Most likely would have to go sell side (IBD) for a couple years, than jump to PE.
Thanks for the insight @WSO1212 , including the above, and comments on restructuring as a useful specialty. Would you mind elaborating on the path of the ex-attorney co-head? For example, did he/she practice in biglaw --> IB --> PE, or was it another path?
Also, could you expand on the above? For example, have you seen ex-lawyers take this path? Does the fact that biglaw lawyers enter IBD as associates change the calculation of PE exit options? Where in the PE hierarchy would someone who went biglaw-->IBD-->PE land (e.g. associate or VP)? What size AUM fund would be amenable to such a background?
Also, I feel like attorneys are generally better writers than your average finance guy, and effective written communication is important on both the buy and sell side. Again, will have to change from writing like an attorney to more of an investment "style", but I think lawyers' ability with words is an advantage.
Really interested in this too, would appreciate insights!
Not me personally, but one of my former co-workers followed this path:
1) Undergrad 2) Construction Management 3) Law School 4) Practiced for a few years 5) B-School (H/S/W) 6) IB Associate for ~2 years 7) REPE
Definitely a longer path but his law expertise was very valuable both as an IB associate and at his new firm where he is their 1-man diligence team on potential investments (multifamily housing, primarily).
Pros: Awesome at writing Cons: Get caught in the weeds, have zero modeling ability, and typically lack finance knowledge.
Unusual. Lawyers are not commonly in PE (right out of law school/a firm) from what I've seen, unless it involves distressed or restructuring skillsets. You would have to compete with analysts who have worked on the deals that you haven't.
Hiring a lawyer with no banking experience doesn't really make sense.
Thanks for the comments everyone.
@LSOMonkey - that is a very useful data point and a helpful structure. If you're willing, would you mind sharing the level at which the REPE individual entered?
Thus far, it seems that M&A, restructuring, and real estate specialties are the most common origins. Moreover, and as expected, IB appears to be a prerequisite before the transfer.
Any other data points of ex-lawyers at PE funds?
I believe he joined as an Associate but was promoted to VP about 1 year later. Hope that helps.
I know someone who took the path of senior partner at top M&A law firm -> COO of distressed PE firm. Another guy I know did associate at top M&A law firm -> boutique IM shop -> a pretty strong distressed debt shop where he worked his way up to MD
I don't see it too often. I'm 40 and I see guys who are >10 years older than me who made the switch from law to PE a long time ago but they did it when the business was very different and not as institutional and structured as it is today. Outside of restructuring (and general counsel), the legal knowledge you need as a PE professional is learned over a few years and you're going to use lawyers to paper over all of the intricate legal details so you'd rather have financial/deal minded people on the PE deal team than someone with an intricate knowledge of the law. You're paying attorneys anyway according to your fund docs to cya.
I've seen a few more senior rainmaker lawyers move to the buyside in recent years but they had incredible rolodex's and could be deal guys right away.
I wouldn't go to law school hoping to jump to the finance side (buy or sell side) because nearly every near partner or partner level lawyer I know would love to be their clients so there must be tough competition to make the jump. @"SSits" was a lawyer who made the jump so maybe he can chime in.
Thanks for keeping the conversation going everyone - very insightful.
@Dingdong08 - thanks, your seasoned advice on the matter is definitely appreciated. It certainly seems that it was easier to switch from M&A law to PE during the nascent of the industry (it's easy to rattle off big names here). The usefulness of this survey is partly for those who find themselves in the position of wanting to break into PE from biglaw, but fully acknowledges the difficulty of the path.
Clearly more legal knowledge is not necessarily better. But if a junior M&A lawyer learned those legal skills in a compressed fashion vs. the PE professional, and then switched to IBD, wouldn't this then create an attractive PE candidate?
Perhaps part of the value add of lawyers could be the higher number of deals worked on by a M&A lawyer (given that they become involved later in the process). Clearly valuation skills are lacking, and must be made up in some way (e.g. IBD). Alternatively, at more senior levels, the "rolodex" and process knowledge appears sufficient (rather than the modeling, for example). However, this discussion tends to beg the question: What is the level at which lawyers enter?
The later the entry, the less focus there is on building out financial models (instead, there is just the need to interpret them). Thus, the more senior the position, the more deal execution skills seem to matter (a M&A lawyer's relative strength), and the less modeling/accounting skills are used (stereotypically the lawyer's weakness, and the M&A analyst's strength). Coupled with enough knowledge of valuation/strategy fundamentals/etc., which could be learned as an IBD associate, it would seemingly appear as if the ex-lawyer is an attractive PE employee.
(I feel like Giorgio Tsoukalos) "Could it be" that the skills learned as an M&A lawyer (and a subsequent stint as an IBD associate) prepare one for VP+ roles in the same way that the IBD analyst stint prepares one for the PE associate stint, but not necessarily the VP+ stint?
Would really appreciate hearing why I am wrong from anyone. Also, any other anecdotes are still appreciated.
P.S. Any biglaw-->corporate development-->PE stories out there? I know of some who have switched to corp. dev. from big law, but not the last jump. If you couple this advice with harvardgrad08's comments re: the feasibility of CD-->PE at many levels (see question #52 and #92), it seems like a possible route.
http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/harvardgrad08s-the-other-road-qa-…
Seems like you're asking if it makes a difference being more senior as a lawyer switching in?
If that is the case, no, it doesn't make a difference. As an entry level to a PE shop, you compete with top entry level bankers. At a senior level, you compete with top senior bankers. Not to be negative, but its a bit hard to compare a senior lawyer to a senior banker at any of the investment banks with a track record of executing a ton of high-profile deals.
The argument can be made that a senior legal professional does work on deals, but they do not involve the technical skills or industry knowledge that banking still requires. Senior bankers know the "ins and outs" of their industry, which lawyers do too, however lawyers do not have an industry that involves banking coverage. In fact, I would go as far to say that your skills get much more specific the more senior you get, pushing you a bit further away from the PE track.
Take for example a senior Lev Fin banker vs partner at a leading law firm. What are the 2 roles and how are they different? Well the banker can assess profitability, risk, client relationships, how the debt will sell, suggestions for operational improvements, etc. Basically, they can talk the language. Lawyers have a great skillset too. Lawyers review items such as the credit agreements, go through due diligence, etc. You get the point. The skillsets are just different even though they do have great skillsets. Senior lawyers would not have the same deal-making skills and industry knowledge required, although they do have deal-making skills and industry knowledge (just not for banking).
I know you probably want to enter as a lawyer, but it is important to be realistic to yourself and realize that being a lawyer, on junior or senior levels, is not an ideal or common track to enter PE. Entering that way with no prior banking experience is very rare at best. You can go on LinkedIn to see what the senior banker's history has been at the funds you view.
Out of curiousity, is this consideration of PE more for the money or actual interest in PE? Maybe you would want to consider distressed investing if it is more for money considering that top lawyers have a great chance of being a fund member in addition to bankers.
http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=1202674179440/Kirkland-Loses-One-PE-Pa…
RX attorneys (or lev fin attorney, whatever they are called) can make the switch to distressed shops that have a culture of hiring attorneys.
Pure play PE is gonna be very unlikely because even an M&A attorney has little value add to evaluating finances, strategy, industry, etc. building models, writing investment memos, managing a deal, etc.
I know someone that was JD -> law -> MBA to IB who then could in theory make the jump to PE but that has little to do with the JD and everything to do with the MBA/IB.
Likely the only pure play PE guys are very senior, as stated above, that are brining rolodexes.
So basically, to answer the question to break into finance as an attorney the best route is RX and then to go distressed.
I come from a non-target (but still first world) country with a different approach to education, so my path may not be easily followed by 'mercans.
1) 5 year undergrad double degree - law and accounting, 2 internships with a Big 4 accountant (there were still Big 6 in those days) 2) Grad role in big law, starting in tax, then going into M&A/ECM, total 6 years in big law, got to senior associate 4) Seconded to investment bank as in-house legal in Hong Kong IBD, made that a permanent role, did IBD in house legal for 3 years, largely focused on execution work for merchant banking deals 5) After 3 years, was asked to move into the merchant banking/PE team doing deals across Asia; did that for 6 years 6) Moved to NYC to do middle office work, largely working with our IBD
Along the way, I picked up some creds which made the transition easier - A banker-style grad dip in applied finance and investment (while in Big Law) - Passed exams and got admitted as a solicitor in HK after moving there (was already admitted in my home country) - CFA (Level 1 & 2 while in house, Level 3 when a banker) - M.Fin (started after a year as a banker)
Jesus....do you have one of those cards with an onslaught of abbreviations?
No. My card just has my name and title, no wanker list of qualifications.
skating on ice uphill...
skating on ice uphill...
Reviving this thread as someone who just made the jump, and hopefully as an example to others who are trying to do the same.
1) T-25 public university, double majored in accounting and finance 2) T-25 law school 3) 3rd year transactional associate at MM law firm 4) PE associate at a MM buyout shop
Break into PE from Law (Originally Posted: 11/21/2014)
I just wanted to get some feedback either from transactional lawyers (e.g. working in M&A, PE, Securities, etc.) who have broken in to PE or from PE guys that have brought lawyers in. How difficult is it? What matters/what are PE firms looking for? Is re-branding with a business related graduate degree necessary? If so, what type of degree would be best, given a bachelor's in finance...MS in Accounting? MBA? Etc.
I'm not sure if I want to end up in PE, but just want to gather some more info on what this type of career move would look like.
Thanks in advance.
You will need to lateral into IB first. So 2-3 years in law, then lateral over to IB as an Associate (will probably lose a little seniority). Do 2-3 years in IB and then try to jump to PE. That said, the IB post MBA to PE jump is not easy.
Close to 0% chance of Law --> PE.
Unless you have a close relationship with someone at a fund, it'll be difficult. Most funds are fairly structured and they already have a bias against anyone who's not an MBB consultant or an IBD analyst.
Unless you have a close relationship with someone at a fund, it'll be difficult. Most funds are fairly structured and they already have a bias against anyone who's not an MBB consultant or an IBD analyst.
Breaking into PE from Law (Originally Posted: 08/04/2011)
Hello,
Let's just say I'm getting to know Ibanks, PE firms, etc. extremely late in my schooling. Thus, all of my education is from regional schools that are not targeted. My undergrad major was finance where my cumulative gpa was 3.749 and my finance major gpa was 3.9+. I did a joint JD/MBA, but I transferred after I graduated with my MBA to a higher ranking law school. My MBA gpa was 3.5+ and my law school gpa at my old school was 3.2+ and then when I went to my new law school my gpa reset and it currently is at 3.6+. Most of my internships during the summers have been in a legal capacity. In law school I have focused on corporate law and really became interested in private equity law from a private equity class where we worked on preferred stock agreements. This summer I am working for regional broker/dealer in California where I got exposure to a small I bank and a small PE firm , but I graduate this December from law school.
What do you think is the best avenue to break into private equity with this background?
Should I go to a botique I bank? ( as an analyst or associate)
Should I go direct to PE firms?
Should I get a job with a law firm dealing with M&A then transfer over?
Thanks for any help.
Hi, you're in way over my head, but hopefully this will be helpful to you if you haven't already seen it.
http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/faq-how-do-finance-professionals-see-my-…
might have to go to a bank first. pe firms want people with modeling/transaction experience. not sure how feasible it is for a law school student to directly to PE
Yea, talking with various people I think that maybe trying to be an associate for a BB or botique dealing with M&A would be the way to go after to a self-study finance modeling course. Or just go to an M&A law firm get a couple of years experience and try to break into BB or PE.
From what I see in the middle-market, the transition from law-->PE occurs most often at senior levels. For example, someone will join a PE firm as General Counsel (and Partner), and then lateral over to another fund as a Partner on the investment team.
Tax Law to Private Equity (Originally Posted: 12/07/2007)
One of the other threads on this site got me thinking. How easy is it for one to go from tax law to private equity / VC? For background, I'm a JD/MBA grad with two years at a top law firm practicing primarily M&A deal tax - essentially structuring deals all day.
I have met a number of tax attorneys at seminars, etc who have transitioned to banks but have never spoken with them at length about making the switch.
In general it is extremely difficult even for bankers to get hired by PEs because the process is so selective. And PEs theoretically draw most of their candidates from the banker pool.
I've heard of/met a few Partner-level people who have switched into PE from Corporate Law... but relatively few who have gone into PE directly from a law background. And Tax Law is less common for switching in than Corporate is.
I'm sure it's possible (I do know of a few Associates who started out in law and switched to PE) and it sounds like you have some good background. At the very least you could try contacting some PE recruiters and see what they have to say.
Would it be easier to first go to a VC fund or bank?
Banks simply hire a lot more people than PEs/VCs do, so it's almost always easier to get in. I've heard of plenty of lawyers switching over to banking but know of no attorneys who went directly into VC from a law background. I'm sure they're out there but banking is an easier path.
One famous lawyer/entrepreneur/VC I know of, Randy Komisar (http://www.kpcb.com/team/komisar), is now a VC at Kleiner Perkins and he started out as an IP lawyer. However he also did a bunch of operational stuff and held C-level executive roles in between.. not a very typical career path but that's another possibility.
Law --> PE (Originally Posted: 05/21/2011)
I have a quick question for the experts here. I'm an attorney, I work as a litigator in Los Angeles and I'm considering other career options. Is it possible to move from a legal position into PE without an MBA? My JD is from Columbia.
I have seen JDs on the bio pages of top PE firms, but they were either corporate law partners or went into finance right out of their JD programs.
I mean, I don't want to say anything is impossible, but it is a difficult/uncertain path. Keep in mind I have no personal experience, I am just going by what I have seen doing my own research.
Litigation is a stretch, especially if it is not in an applicable area. If you are ok with staying in law, maybe becoming a counsel for a PE firm would be possible.
I had a feeling litigation would be a stretch. Problem is when I came out all the corporate law jobs went away, pretty much had to do litigation. Once you start out one way it's hard to switch.
Why are you looking to quit law?
You could maybe get in touch with someone at a PE firm who has a JD and have a talk with him. Columbia being what it is I'm sure some of their alums who went into Finance got into PE
Jumping to IBD will be hard enough. PE will be almost impossible.
Quite the opposite you idiot, what possible use for a lawyer would investment banking have? None. In PE at least lawyers are used all the time, every megafund has plenty of lawyers who are MD's and top partners, they are required to constantly make sure everything is kosher during the bidding process and once you actually buy the company. But the problem is litigation isn't particularly coherent towards M&A, so no idea how you can spin yourself (the op).
I appreciate all of the responses. I think my best hope is to find a way to transfer into M&A, and then eventually make my way to PE.
As far as why I want to quit law, I could write about it all day, but in short I feel like more of an economic drag than an economic enhancement as a litigator.
Yeah try to get into M&A law first, from there it will be a more tenable jump over. I like your reasoning about why you want to switch, most of my big law friends feel the same sense of bleakness about the work they do. good luck to you.
Before you ask this question, you should be asking yourself what, if any, skills and experience do you gain as a litigator that would make you valuable to a private equity firm.
From Law to PE (Originally Posted: 01/30/2007)
Hi, I've been practicing patent law for 6 years and want to get in to PE. I've read a bunch of posts here and everyone seems to be in agreement that PE firms hire post MBAs that already have banking experience.
So if I were to get an MBA from a top 5 school and then work 1.5 years in ibanking would I have a realistic shot at getting in to PE?
i know some bb banks will hire people will corporate law backgrounds as 2nd/3rd year analysts (one of my interviewers was in such a position). so maybe the MBA isn't neccesary just yet
Know a few corporate lawyers who entered as first year associates after 4-6yrs of practicing.
If you get that MBA, banking is a not prereq for PE.
What kind of patent work do you do? e.g. if you do tech and telecom patent law, then there are some PE and VC shops that would consider ex-patent attorneys. In which case you could forego the MBA and 1.5 yrs in IB entirely. Many PE and VC shops make investments in companies that have significant value tied to future IP. Perhaps a patent attorney who understands how to sift through these types of opportunities could be the "edge" that a PE shop looks for in identifying investment opportunities.
Having said that, before you start studying for the GMAT and prepare to dish out a heap load of additional grad school debt, test the waters first. Send out some resumes to a few boutiques and get your feet wet with some interviews. The feedback you'll receive about how you're perceived as a candidate will help you with your decision. If the feedback indicates you should proceed with the MBA, then do it.
Excepturi velit sint et. Quo nesciunt qui tempore consequuntur aut est. Recusandae in quisquam ut eveniet eaque.
Quis et vel voluptatibus repellendus omnis aut omnis. Doloribus repellat sint ratione. Non laboriosam ipsum esse sed in recusandae quia.
Aspernatur quasi voluptas aut et incidunt sit. Omnis cumque dolores est. Ut molestias sit est voluptas.
Accusantium assumenda labore voluptates tempore voluptatem est delectus. Qui et vitae ipsam est occaecati beatae. Animi ut atque et quod. Quis eum illo enim quia facere animi. Sed sit quas laudantium quod debitis suscipit repellendus. Aliquid id ullam inventore pariatur omnis.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Est non tempora nostrum expedita nesciunt laboriosam. Non omnis sed ab doloribus tenetur. Aut et cumque iusto impedit debitis labore. Vel qui a dignissimos enim.
Asperiores minima earum fuga asperiores est quibusdam unde. Eligendi velit labore eius dolorem qui. Temporibus quo ea assumenda placeat earum voluptatum qui. Eum quidem veritatis qui et eveniet repudiandae qui temporibus.