Recently we sat down with Ella Epstein to talk about her experience interviewing with boutique and Biglaw firms, and what attracted her to Elsberg Baker & Maruri. “I was reminded of the reason I wanted to go to a boutique in the first place, which was guaranteed experience,” she said. “At a boutique firm there are more opportunities, and that is definitely the case here.” Hear more from Ella below:
Why did you choose a boutique firm over BigLaw?
I heard from several firms that they would give me substantive opportunities from the get-go, which is what most law students want to hear. But it was only at a boutique where I felt that promise was credible, because there are only so many people, and there is a lot of work to go around.
I remember in some interviews with larger firms, I spoke to 5th, 6th, and 7th years who said, “I'm going to take my first deposition,” or, “I’m going to attend my first trial.” At EBM, associates can expect to do those things at the very beginning of their careers. Every junior associate here has already been to trial or arbitration. We have opportunities for juniors to ramp up to that level of experience. It's a much faster, much steeper learning curve, where you can really start to get substance under your belt early on.
You don't get to go to trial very often at a big firm, because that's just not their bread and butter or their business model. Many of those big firms are driven by their corporate practices, not their trial or litigation expertise, so their clients aren’t necessarily coming to them looking for litigators. It's just a different model. A boutique trial firm, where the selling point for clients is our expertise in the courtroom, is inherently going to lead to more litigation experience.
What drew you to Elsberg Baker & Maruri?
I was at another boutique firm when I had the opportunity to join EBM. I was presented with the same set of questions I faced when I initially decided to take the boutique route. I was reminded of the reason I wanted to go to a smaller firm in the first place, which was guaranteed experience. Within my first three months here I went to my first arbitration, a week-long arbitration in New York. That was very fun. I got to participate in witness preps, including expert preps. Getting onboarded onto a new case a month before trial was quite rigorous.
What really drew me to EBM, though, was the people. I worked with Mike Duke, Vivek Tata and David Elsberg at my previous firm, and I was very sad to see them go. David has been a mentor to me since I was a summer associate. I was on a different trial team with Mike and Vivek, and I learned so much from both of them. They're both very dedicated to teaching and training juniors. Vivek in particular gave me wonderful writing advice, and they both gave a master class in handling witnesses at trial. They're such good people and good lawyers that when I got the opportunity to rejoin them at EBM, it would have been stupid of me not to say yes. And when I arrived, I found the rest of the team to be just fantastic – the partners are all not only brilliant, but warm, welcoming, and dedicated to getting junior associates top-notch experience from the get-go. The associates, too, are remarkably creative and bright and so inspiring to work with.
What's a typical day at EBM? How does it differ from other experiences?
The only thing that holds constant is the higher level of work juniors get to do. There's more transparency, too, I’ve found. It's in part a product of the firm’s size and in part of its culture. I can walk down the hall or message someone to ask what’s coming down the pike on any given case and why certain things are happening – I don’t just get a list of tasks with no explanation of why they need to happen.
Here, everyone is at the table. Everyone is managing a little bit of the case. We all pitch in to keep the ball rolling on things.
As for a typical day, there's no typical day. There is truly everything from meeting with clients, dealing with opposing counsel, researching legal issues, or preparing for a closing argument. It varies day by day.
What do you think is the biggest misconception about working at a boutique firm versus a larger, older firm?
I would say, many law students or younger lawyers don’t understand the elite quality and reputations of litigation boutiques in the legal market. I think that’s because most law students’ first interactions are with large, BigLaw firms. But there are many prominent litigation boutiques that are very well-regarded in the industry and give their associates unparalleled experience.
I think about the way my resume is going to look after a single year. I've drafted a complaint, I've drafted a motion to dismiss, I've been in multiple witness prep sessions, I've second chaired a bunch of witnesses at trial and arbitration, I regularly go to client meetings. These experiences are not at all guaranteed for first-years at bigger firms – I think they’re quite rare, actually. And I'm not doing them on no-name cases. These are cases that have high dollar value outcomes.
Anything else you would like to add?
The firm has encouraged me to pursue my interest in the law outside of pure legal practice. Specifically, I was given the chance to give a talk at a torts class at my alma mater. David Elsberg showed up and listened to the whole thing and was very encouraging. I took time at work to prep for it and it was not an issue. The fact that my speaking engagement garnered attention here was really nice. I didn't expect that.
I’ve also been able to bounce around potential paper topics with Vivek, who gave me great feedback. I have an academic interest in the law in addition to the purely professional. That's encouraged here, which I've really enjoyed.
