You thought you would have two interviews, and instead you are seated in a meeting room with a file, a computer and an instruction: “You have an hour and a half to write a memo to the partner.” More and more firms add a written test to their recruitment process, for internships as for associate positions. It does not check what you know, but what you can do with a file under time pressure.
This article explains why firms use these case studies, which formats come up most often, how to read the brief and organise your time, how to write for a partner who will read quickly, then how to defend your work during the debrief.
Why some firms add a case study
A CV and an interview say a lot about a candidate, but not everything. In particular, they do not show how the candidate writes when alone with a file and a deadline. Yet that is most of an associate’s work in the early years.
The case study lets the firm check four things:
- legal characterisation: does the candidate identify the real questions raised by the file?
- method: can they prioritise, separate the essential from the incidental, flag what should be checked?
- drafting: is their text clear, structured and usable by the partner or the client?
- time management: do they hand in a complete answer on time, even if imperfect?
For the candidate, it is also an opportunity: an average academic record can be offset by an outstanding paper. The article preparing for an associate interview at a law firm places the test within the overall process.
The most common formats
The memo to the partner
The most frequent. You are given a file (client emails, a contract, case-law extracts, sometimes irrelevant documents) and asked for an internal memo: analysis of the situation, answers to the questions, recommendations.
The client opinion
Close to the memo, but addressed to the client. The tone changes: less jargon, a more operational answer, concrete recommendations and a reminder of the risks.
Contract analysis or review
Common in advisory work. You are given a draft contract (share purchase, distribution, services, lease) and asked to identify the clauses that are problematic for your client and suggest changes, sometimes in tracked changes.
The pleading
Rarer, mainly in litigation: drafting part of written submissions, a formal notice or an application from a file.
Translation or summary in English
In international firms, part of the test may be in English: summarising a contract in English, replying to an email from a foreign client.
The remote test
Some firms send the file by email with a deadline of a few hours or a day. The format allows more time, but the expected quality is higher. Follow the instructions on permitted tools: some firms specify what is allowed, and cheating on this point shows up in the debrief.
| Format | What is mainly assessed | |---|---| | Memo to the partner | characterisation, ranking of issues, rigour | | Client opinion | clarity, operational sense, tone | | Contract review | careful reading, defending the client’s interests | | Pleading | procedural technique, argument | | Exercise in English | working language, precision |
Reading the brief and organising your time
Most candidates lose marks before writing a line, by reading too fast or writing too soon.
Read the instructions twice
Who is the recipient? What form is expected (memo, email, table)? What length? Which precise questions are asked? A ten-page memo when a twenty-line email was expected is a mistake of direction, not of law.
Sort the documents
Test files often contain useless documents or red herrings. Read everything quickly once, then sort: essential documents, useful documents, documents to set aside.
Allocate your time
For a ninety-minute test, a reasonable split:
- twenty minutes to read and analyse the file;
- fifteen minutes to build the outline and the short answer;
- forty-five minutes to write;
- ten minutes to proofread, correct and check that every question has an answer.
Always keep time for proofreading. A complete paper with two typos is worth more than a brilliant paper that stops halfway.
A reading example
Imagine a file: a distributor client of the firm receives from its supplier, with whom it has worked for eight years, a termination letter with two months’ notice. The client asks whether it can obtain compensation. A good reading immediately spots the question of abrupt termination of an established commercial relationship (article L. 442-1, II of the French Commercial Code), the length of notice in light of the duration of the relationship and economic dependence, the recoverable loss and the competent court, which is a specialised one in this area. It also notes what to ask the client: turnover achieved with the supplier, existence of a written contract, notice clauses, previous exchanges.
Writing for a busy partner
The partner reading your paper will read it the way they read their associates’ work: quickly, looking for the answer first.
Start with the answer
The first part of the memo must answer the questions in a few lines. The rest develops them. An effective structure:
- Short answer: three to five lines answering the questions asked.
- Relevant facts: only those that matter for the analysis.
- Analysis: one sub-section per question, with the rule, its application to the case and the conclusion.
- Recommendations: what the client should do, in what order.
- Points to check: missing information and risks.
Write short and precise
Short sentences, explicit headings, one idea per paragraph. Cite the relevant texts and case law, without piling up references. Avoid the tone of an academic essay: you are not asked to explore every theory, but to advise.
- Before: “It would doubtless be appropriate to ask whether the termination might possibly be characterised as abrupt.”
- After: “The termination is probably abrupt: two months’ notice appears insufficient for an eight-year relationship.”
Flag uncertainties
A good associate says what they do not know: “To be checked: whether the supplier’s general terms contain a notice clause.” It is a sign of rigour, not weakness.
Take care of form
Spelling, numbering, consistent party names, a readable layout. In a profession of writing, form is judged as much as substance.
The article which skills to highlight on a lawyer’s CV points out that drafting is the most expected skill: the case study is the moment to prove it.
The debrief: defending your paper orally
Most firms hold a discussion after the test, sometimes immediately, sometimes at a second interview.
Be ready to summarise your answer in two minutes, as you would in front of a client.
Acknowledge your mistakes if they are pointed out. Explain how you would have avoided them with more time or information. Defending an obvious mistake is the worst strategy.
Defend your choices when they are reasoned. If you set aside a line of analysis, say why.
Show curiosity: ask how the firm would have handled the file, and what matters most to them in this type of memo.
The debrief is often more decisive than the paper itself: it shows how you react to criticism, which will be your daily life as an associate.
Preparing for the test in advance
A few days are enough to prepare usefully:
- reread memos and opinions you wrote during internships, and identify your recurring weaknesses;
- practise under time pressure on a file in the firm’s area of law;
- revise the basics of that area and the applicable procedure;
- prepare a template memo structure, which you will adapt on the day.
Finally, your CV must be consistent with what you will show in the test: the documents you claim to be able to draft will be judged on the evidence. The pre-filled litigation lawyer CV and the pre-filled business lawyer CV show how to describe these skills precisely, and the article CV for a first associate position how to present them on leaving law school. To update yours before the process, the AvocatCV builder takes care of presentation and produces a PDF readable by the screening tools some firms use before interviews.
Frequently asked questions
Do you have access to codes and the internet during the test?
It depends on the firm: some provide codes and access to databases, others do not. The instructions say so; if they do not, ask before starting.
What if you run out of time?
Write the short answer and the full outline, then develop the main points. A structured but incomplete paper is worth more than a detailed analysis of a single question.
Is the case study eliminatory?
It can be if the paper is very weak, but it is most often one element among others. A good debrief can make up for an average paper.
Do interns also sit case studies?
Yes, increasingly, in a shorter form: a piece of research to present, a memo of a few paragraphs, the analysis of a clause. The article internship interviews at law firms gives examples.