I see. So in practice, if my superior is conducting a matter and I strongly disagree with how the matter is being conducted (of course I would be able to back this up with good reasons in this hypothetical) I should make that clear to my superior, preferably in writing? Can I just refuse to work on a file then, if something like this happens and my superior goes 'I have way more experience than you and you're being dramatic/wrong'?

Do junior lawyers often disagree with their bosses in reality? Doesn't the power imbalance at play here mean that few people would be courageous enough to do so? Disagreeing with someone who may have a say over your prospects of promotion seems unwise. I suppose in reality people just leave the firm if they really don't like the culture there? Or is it the case that by the time you are actually counsel on a matter you have quite a few years of experience and the partners would actually be inclined to listen to you?

if one is going to be a junior assoc in a big firm (or any firm really), how does 'choosing your boss carefully' even work? surely no one will listen to you when you say sth like 'I've heard very good things about Boss B and would like the opportunity to work under B', aren't you just expected to do the work you are assigned?

-
The lawyers here are from reputable firms tho so it's quite surprising sth like this even happened. Hopefully it's an anomaly