In-House Corporate Counsel

We need to output HTML fragment with headings

for sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. Only include sections that have real specific content. Must not repeat job title as heading. Must not include Job ID etc. Must preserve all substantive info, remove boilerplate, navigation, legal, EEO, etc. Must not create sections with filler like "commensurate with experience". Must only include sections where posting has real specific content. Let's parse the posting. Job description: "In-House Corporate Counsel — Hybrid/ Full Time Our client is a public technology company with a strong leadership team in Austin, Texas, adding a key member to the legal team to handle commercial agreements with a lot of autonomy and good judgement. If you have hands on experience running commercial deals from start to finish, with professional and business acumen, this could be the perfect job for you." Then "What You'll Do" section: description of responsibilities. Then "Basic Requirements For The In-House Corporate Counsel": list of requirements. Then "Position Details Of The In-House Corporate Counsel": Type of Role: In-House Counsel; Schedule: Full time; Location: Austin, TX - hybrid, in office 2-3 days a week. Then "Compensation": base salary range $175,000–$185,000, with full benefits. Then "Confidentiality Latitude will not propose you to prospective clients without your prior consent. Candidates selected for further consideration will be contacted." That's boilerplate maybe but it's about confidentiality; could be considered minor metadata; we can drop or fold into short p. Then "About Latitude": description of the staffing company. This is not about the role but about the agency; maybe we can drop as boilerplate? The instruction: remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. "About Latitude" is not exactly those but it's about the agency; might be considered boilerplate? The posting is from Latitude recruiting for a client. The "About Latitude" section is generic about the agency; could be considered boilerplate but not explicitly listed. However, we need to preserve ALL substantive information; does "About Latitude" count as substantive? It's about the recruiter, not the job. The instruction says remove boilerplate, legal, EEO, etc. "About Latitude" might be considered boilerplate but it's not explicitly listed. However, we might keep it as it's not prohibited. But we need to decide. The instruction: "Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions." So we can keep "About Latitude" if not those categories. However, it's not directly about the role; but it's still part of the posting. The instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; does that include the agency description? Likely yes, as it's part of the posting. But we might consider it as boilerplate? Not sure. Safer to keep it but maybe we can shorten? The instruction says do not invent or summarize away detail. So we must keep it verbatim? We can keep as

paragraphs. Then there is a FAQ section with Q&A. That's likely application instructions? It's FAQ about applying. Might be considered application instructions; we should remove it. The instruction says remove application instructions. So we should drop the FAQ. Then "Thank you for your interest in Latitude! Latitude is an Equal Opportunity Employer. LATTX 15901" - that's EEO boilerplate; remove. Thus we keep: introductory paragraph, What You'll Do, Basic Requirements, Position Details (role type, schedule, location), Compensation (salary range, benefits), About Latitude (maybe keep), Confidentiality statement (maybe keep as short p). Also maybe "Confidentiality Latitude will not propose you to prospective clients without your prior consent. Candidates selected for further consideration will be contacted." That's not boilerplate? It's a confidentiality statement; could be considered legal boilerplate? Might be considered legal. The instruction says remove legal boilerplate. So we should drop that. Thus sections: - About the role? The introductory paragraph could be considered "About the role". We'll use

About the role

and put that paragraph. - Responsibilities: from "What You'll Do". We'll put

Responsibilities

and then a

• for each duty? The paragraph is prose; we could keep as

  but instruction says use

  • for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. The responsibilities are a paragraph describing duties; not a list. Could we split into bullet points? The instruction says use
    • for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. If it's not a list, we can use

      . The responsibilities paragraph is not a list; we can keep as

      . However, we could break into bullet points but that would be inventing structure. Better to keep as

      . - Requirements: from "Basic Requirements For The In-House Corporate Counsel". That's a list of items; we can make

      • . - Qualifications: maybe same as requirements? The posting doesn't have separate qualifications section; we could combine. But we need to decide sections: we have Requirements; maybe also Skills? The posting mentions "professional and business acumen", "hands on experience running commercial deals", etc. Could be skills. But we already have requirements covering those. We could add a Skills section for "professional and business acumen", "hands on experience running commercial deals from start to finish". But that's already in requirements. To avoid thin sections, we can keep only Requirements and maybe Benefits/Pay/Schedule. - Benefits: The posting says "with full benefits." That's a benefit statement. Could be a Benefits section. It's specific: full benefits. So we can include Benefits section with
        • Full benefits
        . However, instruction says never create Benefits sections unless posting actually states them. It does state "with full benefits." So we can include. - Pay: base salary range $175,000–$185,000. So we can include Pay section. - Schedule: The posting says "Schedule: Full time" and location hybrid. So we can include Schedule section. We also have location; maybe we could include location under Schedule or as separate? Not required to have location heading; we can include location in Schedule paragraph. Thus sections:

        About the role

        Our client is a public technology company with a strong leadership team in Austin, Texas, adding a key member to the legal team to handle commercial agreements with a lot of autonomy and good judgement. If you have hands on experience running commercial deals from start to finish, with professional and business acumen, this could be the perfect job for you.

        Responsibilities

        This is a true generalist position with broad ownership across the legal function. The focus is getting commercial contracts across the line — from initial review, drafting, revising, and negotiating - a wide range of technology and services agreements, IP, indemnity and channel deals. A meaningful portion of your work will touch M&A — supporting due diligence and transaction-related matters as the company continues to grow. Deep M&A experience isn't required, but familiarity with the process is a plus. The remaining time will be spent on general corporate matters — compliance questions, cross-functional projects, and the day-to-day legal needs of a dynamic, evolving organization that is very AI forward in achieving business goals.

        Requirements

        • J.D. and active bar membership
        • 3+ years of experience at a law firm or in-house legal department with a transactional focus
        • Hands-on experience drafting and negotiating commercial technology and services agreements
        • Some exposure to M&A or due diligence is a plus, but not required
        • Ambitious career goals to make a mark and advance with a growing company over the long term

        Benefits

        • Full benefits

        Pay

        The base salary range is $175,000–$185,000.

        Schedule

        Full time position; hybrid schedule with in‑office work 2‑3 days per week in Austin, TX.

        We might also include "About Latitude" as a section? Not required headings list includes About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. About Latitude is not in list; we could omit or put under a generic

        without heading. The instruction says use

        for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). It doesn't forbid other headings, but we should follow the pattern. Probably better to omit About Latitude as it's not required and could be considered boilerplate. However, it's substantive about the recruiter. But the instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; if we drop it, we lose info. But maybe it's considered boilerplate? It's not explicitly listed as boilerplate to remove. However, it's not about the job; it's about the agency. The user likely expects only job-related content. The instruction says "Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions." About Latitude is none of those. So we should keep it. But we don't have a heading for it; we could just put a

        without heading. That's acceptable. Thus after Schedule section, we can add a

        about Latitude. Let's copy the About Latitude paragraph exactly: "Latitude is a full-service flexible legal talent company serving corporate legal departments and law firms nationwide. From Fortune Global 100 companies to start-ups and Global 50 law firms to boutiques, clients turn to us for top-tier attorneys and other legal professionals. Latitude specializes in providing highly skilled former in-house counsel and Big Law attorneys for flexible contract engagements and permanent positions in dozens of practice areas, including commercial contracting, data privacy, M&A, employment, litigation, and more. Founded in 2013, Latitude is a Chambers and Partners globally ranked flexible legal staffing company." We could keep that as a

        . We should also maybe include the "Latitude Contract Engagements & Secondments" and "Permanent Positions" sections? Those are also about Latitude; they are substantive but could be considered boilerplate? They are detailed descriptions of the agency's services. The instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; not to invent or summarize away detail. So we should keep them? However, they are quite long and maybe considered boilerplate? They are not explicitly listed to remove. But they are repetitive promotional content about the agency. The instruction says remove duplicated lines; these are not duplicated lines within the posting but are promotional. The user likely expects only the job description. However, the instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; if we cut them, we are summarizing away detail. But maybe they consider them boilerplate because they are not about the job. The instruction didn't explicitly say to remove agency description. But typical job postings on recruiting sites include agency boilerplate that can be removed. The instruction says remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. Agency description is not those. So we should keep it. But that would make output very long. However, we must follow instruction. Let's include the About Latitude and its subsections as

        paragraphs without headings (or maybe we could add a heading "About Latitude" but not in the allowed list; but we could still use

        About Latitude

        as it's a heading; the instruction didn't