1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
doyleoil
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:59 pm

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby doyleoil » Fri Jun 18, 2010 4:40 pm

mallard wrote:That's true, but it's worst in New York and at these firms. Seriously, while it's really bad anywhere, most people I've talked to say that the difference between tending to leave work at 10PM and at midnight is enormous.


Hey, as long as they have a nap room, I say let's go until 2 or 3.




(I'm sure they're right, though, just to be clear.)

Anonymous User
Posts: 273386
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Jun 18, 2010 4:42 pm

OP here. Thanks for the responses thus far.

A further question. Boies has a number of quite small offices, like Oakland and Orlando. Does anyone know what that does to the nature of the summer program? I'd imagine they take few (if any) folks each year.

They're most definitely "workhorse" firms, but from what I've been told by folks at each they're no worse than many of the prestigious transactional/corporate firms in their hour expectations (whether official or unofficial). I've heard non-NYC/DC offices are a bit better, and I'd prefer the Bay Area over anywhere else.

User avatar
mallard
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:45 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby mallard » Fri Jun 18, 2010 4:44 pm

Anonymous User wrote:OP here. Thanks for the responses thus far.

A further question. Boies has a number of quite small offices, like Oakland and Orlando. Does anyone know what that does to the nature of the summer program? I'd imagine they take few (if any) folks each year.

They're most definitely "workhorse" firms, but from what I've been told by folks at each they're no worse than many of the prestigious transactional/corporate firms in their hour expectations (whether official or unofficial). I've heard non-NYC/DC offices are a bit better, and I'd prefer the Bay Area over anywhere else.


They're worse. Read Vault or AboveTheLaw on this. I'm pretty sure I'm backed up by most of what's out there.

A lot of firms with smaller offices only send associates there after they've proven themselves at a main office. Just look at the list of attorneys there and see if there's anybody young (2009 grads, for example).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273386
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Jun 18, 2010 4:46 pm

mallard wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:OP here. Thanks for the responses thus far.

A further question. Boies has a number of quite small offices, like Oakland and Orlando. Does anyone know what that does to the nature of the summer program? I'd imagine they take few (if any) folks each year.

They're most definitely "workhorse" firms, but from what I've been told by folks at each they're no worse than many of the prestigious transactional/corporate firms in their hour expectations (whether official or unofficial). I've heard non-NYC/DC offices are a bit better, and I'd prefer the Bay Area over anywhere else.


They're worse. Read Vault or AboveTheLaw on this. I'm pretty sure I'm backed up by most of what's out there.

A lot of firms with smaller offices only send associates there after they've proven themselves at a main office. Just look at the list of attorneys there and see if there's anybody young (2009 grads, for example).


OP again. That's really helpful, thank you (and not necessarily what I would've expected).

When I said "non-NYC and DC" I mostly meant SF, Chicago or LA; not Boies' Armonk office. :D

User avatar
mallard
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:45 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby mallard » Fri Jun 18, 2010 4:47 pm

Yeah, I meant more like the Oakland and Orlando offices.

User avatar
vamedic03
Posts: 1579
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:50 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby vamedic03 » Fri Jun 18, 2010 5:21 pm

thesealocust wrote:UVA pre-screens, and let me tell you - it sounds great in the abstract, but once some people get dozens of interviews and some people get a single digit number, there's an understandable push back.

The ideal is an INFORMED lottery system, but it's kind of impossible to inform all of the students sufficiently. Plus things are shifting too quickly these days for even the person with all the data in the world to provide sufficient information.


I'm sorry, but, I think UVA's system is the best of the T-14. Its utterly BS to NOT have preselects. It just wastes the students and the firm's time to interview someone who doesn't meet their GPA requirements. How is it in the firm's interest or the student's interest to interview someone who doesn't have a chance in hell of getting a job with them?

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8447
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby thesealocust » Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:18 pm

edit: n/m
Last edited by thesealocust on Mon Dec 20, 2010 7:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Cavalier
Posts: 1994
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby Cavalier » Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:34 pm

thesealocust wrote:UVA pre-screens, and let me tell you - it sounds great in the abstract, but once some people get dozens of interviews and some people get a single digit number, there's an understandable push back.

The ideal is an INFORMED lottery system, but it's kind of impossible to inform all of the students sufficiently. Plus things are shifting too quickly these days for even the person with all the data in the world to provide sufficient information.

You're an idiot who probably got terrible grades and is now whining about the prospect of getting only lottery interviews. Have fun being an RA 2L summer.

User avatar
vamedic03
Posts: 1579
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:50 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby vamedic03 » Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:39 pm

thesealocust wrote:The ideal is an INFORMED lottery system, but it's kind of impossible to inform all of the students sufficiently.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273386
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jun 19, 2010 12:59 am

dbt wrote:I'll echo that Boies and Quinn NY had relatively brutal offer rates (75%). Definitely something to keep in mind.

Quinn NY was 100%. Quinn LA was the brutal one. NALP form was firmwide.

User avatar
dbt
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 11:46 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby dbt » Sat Jun 19, 2010 1:03 am

Anonymous User wrote:
dbt wrote:I'll echo that Boies and Quinn NY had relatively brutal offer rates (75%). Definitely something to keep in mind.

Quinn NY was 100%. Quinn LA was the brutal one. NALP form was firmwide.


Oh whoa you're right. It's 34/41 for every office on NALP. Well that's awesome news. I will move Quinn NY up then. Thanks.

User avatar
RVP11
Posts: 2774
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby RVP11 » Sat Jun 19, 2010 1:08 am

vamedic03 wrote:
thesealocust wrote:UVA pre-screens, and let me tell you - it sounds great in the abstract, but once some people get dozens of interviews and some people get a single digit number, there's an understandable push back.

The ideal is an INFORMED lottery system, but it's kind of impossible to inform all of the students sufficiently. Plus things are shifting too quickly these days for even the person with all the data in the world to provide sufficient information.


I'm sorry, but, I think UVA's system is the best of the T-14. Its utterly BS to NOT have preselects. It just wastes the students and the firm's time to interview someone who doesn't meet their GPA requirements. How is it in the firm's interest or the student's interest to interview someone who doesn't have a chance in hell of getting a job with them?


Agreed. I like UVA's system. If anything, it would be better if they ditched the lottery completely and just did 80% prescreen and then a "Top 10" rather than merely a "Top 5."

The one problem with prescreening (Law Review folks getting an absurd # of interviews, taking them away from people who'd actually want those firms) is easily solved by setting a lower maximum for interviews.....like 25 instead of 35. No one needs or deserves more than 25 OGI interviews. If you are socially awkward enough or just so bad in interviews that you would go 0 for 25 despite your great grades, you probably aren't being helped much by the 10 extra interviews.

User avatar
Hiei
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:37 pm

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby Hiei » Sat Jun 19, 2010 1:12 am

For the schools that do straight lottery do you just make a list of preferences where you are given priority for the firms you place higher up in your list? How does the school guarantee that a student gets to interview with their top choices in a straight lottery? Doesn't this also mean that a student with top grades could theoretically get shut out of interviews with a top firm while a student with poor grades get's that interview spot (effectively keeping the student with good grades from getting an offer at a firm where they had a shot)?

markymark
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:54 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby markymark » Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:20 am

dbt wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
dbt wrote:I'll echo that Boies and Quinn NY had relatively brutal offer rates (75%). Definitely something to keep in mind.

Quinn NY was 100%. Quinn LA was the brutal one. NALP form was firmwide.


Oh whoa you're right. It's 34/41 for every office on NALP. Well that's awesome news. I will move Quinn NY up then. Thanks.



These kind of mistakes on NALP are driving me nuts.

User avatar
dbt
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 11:46 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby dbt » Sat Jun 19, 2010 12:27 pm

markymark wrote:
dbt wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
dbt wrote:I'll echo that Boies and Quinn NY had relatively brutal offer rates (75%). Definitely something to keep in mind.

Quinn NY was 100%. Quinn LA was the brutal one. NALP form was firmwide.


Oh whoa you're right. It's 34/41 for every office on NALP. Well that's awesome news. I will move Quinn NY up then. Thanks.



These kind of mistakes on NALP are driving me nuts.


I realized the same mistake has been made wrt Boies (or at least on my part, as it says "all offices"). So if anyone knows the offer rate for the NY and DC offices respectively, or how to get it, I'd appreciate it!

User avatar
clintonius
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:50 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby clintonius » Sat Jun 19, 2010 1:15 pm

markymark wrote:
dbt wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
dbt wrote:I'll echo that Boies and Quinn NY had relatively brutal offer rates (75%). Definitely something to keep in mind.
Quinn NY was 100%. Quinn LA was the brutal one. NALP form was firmwide.
Oh whoa you're right. It's 34/41 for every office on NALP. Well that's awesome news. I will move Quinn NY up then. Thanks.
These kind of mistakes on NALP are driving me nuts.

I'm not sure you can call it a mistake when it tells you that it's a multi-office form. I would be interested Boies's offer rate by office, though.

User avatar
dbt
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 11:46 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby dbt » Sat Jun 19, 2010 1:24 pm

Quinn does not tell you that it's multi-office data. Each office says 34/41. Most firms, when they are referring to multi-office data, have a single multi-office form while Quinn does not. Just an inference.

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8447
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby thesealocust » Sat Jun 19, 2010 1:29 pm

edit: n/m
Last edited by thesealocust on Mon Dec 20, 2010 7:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273386
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:05 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Boies DC pursued me pretty aggressively. They sent some very bright, friendly people out for interviews and, if I recall correctly, did some legwork to contact top people from the class who were considering DC but who did not have screening interviews. T11-14, top 1% at the time, good resume/pre-LS WE. I don't think one needs anything close to those numbers to get an offer from them, though. If I had to guess, top half at HYS is probably enough to have them give you a serious look (assuming strong resume & interviewing skills), though you'd probably need more like top third to be comfortable about it.



I'm sorry but I'm confused about the bolded--could you clarify? Do you feel comfortable sharing why you turned (I assume) Boies down?

To answer the question abouve re: the bolded part, the firm's OCI interviewer called or e-mailed or just spoke to some of the top people in the class who she had heard were interested in DC or who had bid on Boies but didn't get the interview--for instance because it was a person's low priority bid. Some firms have "hospitality rooms" at OCI, or at least used to pre-ITE, in which you could talk informally with attorneys, pick up tschotskes with firm logos on them (e.g., WilkieFarr highlighter pens; Skadden staplers; etc.), and every year a few people pick up extra-OCI interviews via those interactions. In my case, I got an e-mail from her aking me if I wanted to stop by during a break to chat about the firm & do an interview even though I didn't have one through the formal lottery (they were soemthing like my 48th bid, and with a relatively small # of slots it made sense that I didn't get it). As to how she found out who was at the top of the class/interested in DC, I don't know. I do recall that lots of the interviewers had lunch with the career office people each day, and that discussion about particular candidates was apparently pretty common at these lunches.



As for why I turned Boies down, it was actually a really easy call. I wanted to do a type of work they don't really have much of a presence in. They were forthright about this and we went our separate ways. Seems like a great firm if you're into lit and have the fortitude to deal with fairly severe hours, however.

User avatar
clintonius
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:50 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby clintonius » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:07 pm

dbt wrote:Quinn does not tell you that it's multi-office data. Each office says 34/41. Most firms, when they are referring to multi-office data, have a single multi-office form while Quinn does not. Just an inference.

Ah, true that they uploaded the same form for each office, which is unusual. I got my statement from this section:
--ImageRemoved--

User avatar
dbt
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 11:46 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby dbt » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:45 pm

clintonius wrote:
dbt wrote:Quinn does not tell you that it's multi-office data. Each office says 34/41. Most firms, when they are referring to multi-office data, have a single multi-office form while Quinn does not. Just an inference.

Ah, true that they uploaded the same form for each office, which is unusual. I got my statement from this section:
--ImageRemoved--


Oh nice. I thought the only way to tell was if it said "multi-office" on the link where you get the office names.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273386
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:33 pm

IMO ITE, the hours should not be a big consideration. ITE, I don't think you can "cruise along" at 1900 billables and be confident you aren't gonna get canned. If a firm works you hard and you're billing, say 2400, at least you know they aren't gonna axe ya. At least you're not stressed about getting lathamed. I'm also starting to get the impression that certain firms might let you just bill the majority of the time you're there while others might have pointless meetings at random times, which I'm not sure are billable for associates. Obviously the partners are profiting from them.

Also, you hear just random info about hours. Like I heard about one of the V10 "nice" firms (probably obvious who it is from that description) working people like fucking crazy. Then I heard about someone at of the V10 "sweatshop" firms getting out of work earlier than my friend who's an SA. This crap is unpredictable and there aren't really good surveys on this (the Avery "study" has a laughable response rate). Even if you had some #'s like median billables, is that really that helpful? No one bills 1500 hours by choice.

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby NYAssociate » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:45 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

smashedpumpkins
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:04 pm

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby smashedpumpkins » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:49 pm

NYAssociate wrote:I don't know why OP isn't considering places like Paul Weiss and Kirkland (Chicago or NY). Both offer excellent litigation practices and don't screw over their associates as much as Quinn and Boies. Both have other strong practices, such that they can diversify against risk. Both will probably work you just as hard, but that's to be expected. If I was thinking lit (and I am. That's the field I want to go into), Boies and Quinn wouldn't be on my radar.

Boies is particularly shitty. Aside from no-offering a bunch of their summers, future at the firm is limited. The partner-track is two-tiered, and non-shares are rarely promoted to share partnership.

Regarding Quinn, I think it's a great firm, but it's litigation presence in NY is not that strong. I'd go to Quinn's CA offices, which are undoubtedly the crown jewel of the firm.

Regarding NY in general, I think one should be very careful looking at offices of non-NYC based firms. Many of those offices opened up and expanded during a time of economic boom, whose practices rested on the realities of that market. Sadly, since that market has shattered, much of their business has dried up (see: Latham & Watkins, and countless other non-NYC firms). Look at Chambers's litigation rankings for NYC to see which firms are the best. Try to understand more about the office: How much power does it have in the overall firm? How quickly has it expanded? How many lawyers does it have? Are its local practices diversified against risk? Would it still provide good exit options? etc.



W/R/T Boies Schiller, I also wonder what happens when David Boies retires. The firm was built up relatively quickly and it was my impression that clients all want the celebrity of David Boies rather than the firm as a whole.

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: 1L performance for bigger litigation firms: Boies/Quinn/etc.

Postby NYAssociate » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:54 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.