Geriatric Punk said:
Ok, so what is the "top rung?"
I've always heard in-house is great work if you can get it because of the balance of pay and stress level.
Personally, I feel like it would a combination of the following:
1. Being a solo, or at least partner (freedom);
2. Having steady work (financial stability);
3. Enjoying the city where you work; and,
4. Suited for your personality (dislike confrontation, then something other than litigation, etc).
I think you're pretty close to right. It's all about balancing what you're good at with what makes you happy.
I spent a lot of time searching. Worked for a few mid-sized firms early in my career and didn't really like it.
Opened a solo practice which I enjoyed, but I hated the city where I was located and although I did ok financially, it wasn't at a level I was happy with.
Got a great in-house gig at a large O&G services company. The legal department was ~15 lawyers. I really enjoyed it, but the "balanced hours" is generally a myth. I still worked a ton of hours and traveled a lot. Pay was good.
Then I became General Counsel of a smaller family owned company in a small town. I loved the small town aspect, the company, the owners, and the job, but I was a legal department of one. TONS of hours. Pay was ok, but in my opinion not commensurate with the hours and responsibility.
Last year I left and opened another solo practice. Still in the same small town. Still GC for that company, just externally. My practice has grown to almost more than I can handle. I still work more hours than I would like, but otherwise I think I've finally found my balance. Financially it's much better with potential for much more. I love the town. I pick my work/clients. Even though I'm in a small town I limit my work to my preferred three practice areas. I own my office, and have complete freedom to do what I want
By the way, if any of you other lawyers are still reading and want a small town job, PM me. I need to hire another lawyer.