Susman v. W&C

(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.

Susman or Williams and Connolly

Susman
23
43%
Williams and Connolly
30
57%
 
Total votes: 53

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:03 pm

Susman or W&C for the summer? Cannot split for personal reasons. Don't have strong geographic preferences. Want your opinions on the better firm in terms of experience, exit opportunities, etc.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:13 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Susman or W&C for the summer? Cannot split for personal reasons. Don't have strong geographic preferences. Want your opinions on the better firm in terms of experience, exit opportunities, etc.


For exit opportunities, W&C.

For a career, Susman.

I'd pick Susman, but that's because I know I want to be trial lawyer and would make a career and ideally retire at a firm like that.

Mind if I ask when you got your Susman offer? Houston?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:16 pm

I would take W&C over Susman any day. The former provides the career and the exit opportunities. To people gushing about Susman: You do realize Susman himself is spearheading the legal effort against BP, right? You know much doc review that'll involve?????

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:17 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I would take W&C over Susman any day. The former provides the career and the exit opportunities. To people gushing about Susman: You do realize Susman himself is spearheading the legal effort against BP, right? You know much doc review that'll involve?????


Do you know how much payoff it'll involve? Anyone who starts now will be partner by the time it finishes. Make a crapload.

User avatar
BruceWayne
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby BruceWayne » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:19 pm

Good Lord what an awesome choice to have. Mind if I ask school/grades combo? Something to keep in mind is that you can possibly lateral from W&C to Susman later on--you can not do the reverse.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:22 pm

Do you know how much payoff it'll involve? Anyone who starts now will be partner by the time it finishes. Make a crapload.


I'm sorry, I thought people were praising Susman because of the substantive experience one can find only at a boutique. If you want money and don't care what you're doing, might as well work at WLRK amirite?

User avatar
Objection
Posts: 1272
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:48 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Objection » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:24 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Do you know how much payoff it'll involve? Anyone who starts now will be partner by the time it finishes. Make a crapload.


I'm sorry, I thought people were praising Susman because of the substantive experience one can find only at a boutique. If you want money and don't care what you're doing, might as well work at WLRK amirite?


You make as much, if not more, at Susman than WLRK, and you also have a much higher ceiling because of the contingency plaintiff cases.

The person who brought in the Novell case against Microsoft a few years back took home $35 million.

And while it will involve a lot of a doc review, you'll also still be doing a higher proportion of substantive work than you would on most cases at most other firms.

User avatar
BruceWayne
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby BruceWayne » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Do you know how much payoff it'll involve? Anyone who starts now will be partner by the time it finishes. Make a crapload.


I'm sorry, I thought people were praising Susman because of the substantive experience one can find only at a boutique. If you want money and don't care what you're doing, might as well work at WLRK amirite?


No, you will most likely make more at Susman than at Wachtell (Susman has some insane bonuses, usually the best in the business. Also keep in mind that Wachtell does not pay that 100 percent bonus that everyone goes on about very frequently. I believe it hasn't offered it since 07 or so) , especially considering you are working in a market with a MUCH lower cost of living and no state income tax.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:26 pm

Objection wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Do you know how much payoff it'll involve? Anyone who starts now will be partner by the time it finishes. Make a crapload.


I'm sorry, I thought people were praising Susman because of the substantive experience one can find only at a boutique. If you want money and don't care what you're doing, might as well work at WLRK amirite?


You make as much as, if not more, at Susman than WLRK, and you also have a much higher ceiling.

The person who brought in the Novell case against Microsoft a few years back took home $35 million.

And while it will involve a lot of a doc review, you'll also still be doing a higher proportion of substantive work than you would on most cases at most other firms.


a) The BP payoff, plaintiff's side, won't be that huge, so it doesn't matter.

b) Don't give me that bullshit that you'll be doing a higher proportion of substantive work. The BP case is the epitome of doc review for any litigation associate involved, boutique or not. If you're staffed on the case, you won't be seeing a courtroom anytime soon, at least compared to your buddies at Joe Biglaw firm.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:27 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Objection wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Do you know how much payoff it'll involve? Anyone who starts now will be partner by the time it finishes. Make a crapload.


I'm sorry, I thought people were praising Susman because of the substantive experience one can find only at a boutique. If you want money and don't care what you're doing, might as well work at WLRK amirite?


You make as much as, if not more, at Susman than WLRK, and you also have a much higher ceiling.

The person who brought in the Novell case against Microsoft a few years back took home $35 million.

And while it will involve a lot of a doc review, you'll also still be doing a higher proportion of substantive work than you would on most cases at most other firms.


a) The BP payoff, plaintiff's side, won't be that huge, so it doesn't matter.

b) Don't give me that bullshit that you'll be doing a higher proportion of substantive work. The BP case is the epitome of doc review for any litigation associate involved, boutique or not. If you're staffed on the case, you won't be seeing a courtroom anytime soon, at least compared to your buddies at Joe Biglaw firm.


Because you only do one case at a time. PS why so anonymous?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:29 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Because you only do one case at a time. PS why so anonymous?


That's a valid point, but a case as enormous as BP will swallow up any boutique. Lord knows it's consuming big law firms working on the defense.

Re anonymity: I suppose you can ask yourself the same thing.

User avatar
Objection
Posts: 1272
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:48 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Objection » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:30 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Because you only do one case at a time. PS why so anonymous?


That's a valid point, but a case as enormous as BP will swallow up any boutique. Lord knows it's consuming firms working on the defense.

Re anonymity: I suppose you can ask yourself the same thing.


I'd be shocked if SG had more than 6 attorneys on the BP lit, and probably only a couple associates. They can't afford to put half their firm on it.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:33 pm

I'd be shocked if SG had more than 6 attorneys on the BP lit, and probably only a couple associates. They can't afford to put half their firm on it.


Why would you be shocked? Do you work at the firm? Are you involved with BP? If so to either of those questions, then I'll shut up.

But if not, I stick by my point. BP will consume Susman for the reason everyone has been discussing in this thread: Money.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:34 pm

Steve Susman himself is leading a class-action lawsuit against BP.

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... es-bp.html

User avatar
Objection
Posts: 1272
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:48 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Objection » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:38 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
I'd be shocked if SG had more than 6 attorneys on the BP lit, and probably only a couple associates. They can't afford to put half their firm on it.


Why would you be shocked? Do you work at the firm? Are you involved with BP? If so to either of those questions, then I'll shut up.

But if not, I stick by my point. BP will consume Susman for the reason everyone has been discussing in this thread: Money.


No, I don't, but I've spoken at length with quite a few of their associates and partners, as they've been my dream job since the beginning of law school. Unfortunately, looks like it won't happen :cry:

Anyway...

This HUGE Paul Allen case (where Paul Allen is suing every major tech company in existence) has 3 attorneys.

SG is smart enough to know not to neglect other business to put half their firm on the BP litigation. They've done amazingly well without BP, and they'd be dumb to suddenly shift most of their resources to one case.

Furthermore, I'm not 100% sure that SG as a whole is that involved in the litigation, since it has been consolidated in NOLA. Susman may be, but Susman gets involved in a lot that the whole firm isn't deeply involved in.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:40 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Objection wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Do you know how much payoff it'll involve? Anyone who starts now will be partner by the time it finishes. Make a crapload.


I'm sorry, I thought people were praising Susman because of the substantive experience one can find only at a boutique. If you want money and don't care what you're doing, might as well work at WLRK amirite?


You make as much as, if not more, at Susman than WLRK, and you also have a much higher ceiling.

The person who brought in the Novell case against Microsoft a few years back took home $35 million.

And while it will involve a lot of a doc review, you'll also still be doing a higher proportion of substantive work than you would on most cases at most other firms.


a) The BP payoff, plaintiff's side, won't be that huge, so it doesn't matter.

b) Don't give me that bullshit that you'll be doing a higher proportion of substantive work. The BP case is the epitome of doc review for any litigation associate involved, boutique or not. If you're staffed on the case, you won't be seeing a courtroom anytime soon, at least compared to your buddies at Joe Biglaw firm.


Ever occur to you that Susman outsources doc review?

User avatar
BruceWayne
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby BruceWayne » Wed Sep 29, 2010 9:16 pm

a) The BP payoff, plaintiff's side, won't be that huge, so it doesn't matter.

b) Don't give me that bullshit that you'll be doing a higher proportion of substantive work. The BP case is the epitome of doc review for any litigation associate involved, boutique or not. If you're staffed on the case, you won't be seeing a courtroom anytime soon, at least compared to your buddies at Joe Biglaw firm.[/quote]

Ever occur to you that Susman outsources doc review?[/quote]

Yeah, I don't think he's familiar with just how different a firm like Susman is than the typical "V10" firm glorified on TLS.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 9:21 pm

BruceWayne wrote:
a) The BP payoff, plaintiff's side, won't be that huge, so it doesn't matter.

b) Don't give me that bullshit that you'll be doing a higher proportion of substantive work. The BP case is the epitome of doc review for any litigation associate involved, boutique or not. If you're staffed on the case, you won't be seeing a courtroom anytime soon, at least compared to your buddies at Joe Biglaw firm.


Ever occur to you that Susman outsources doc review?


Yeah, I don't think he's familiar with just how different a firm like Susman is than the typical "V10" firm glorified on TLS.



I've had callbacks at 4 boutiques and 4 V15s.

I can't even begin to tell you how much more I like even my least favorite boutique than my favorite V15.

Unfortunately, it looks as if I'm striking out at the boutiques (rejected from Beck, Redden; waiting on Susman although since they met today and at least two people here have received offers, it's looking unlikely; Gibbs & Bruns which, due to their tiny size, I'm not optimistic about; and one too small to tell because it would out me that may not even have a summer program). If it's any indication, I am more depressed about this fact than I would have been had I been rejected from all of my top law school choices. In fact, it probably ranks in the top 5 of my most disappointing life moments.

Granted, it's totally about personality, but I'm someone who'd rather get thrown into the fire, despite how scared I am, and force myself to learn and get comfortable with it, than sit on the sideline for five years.

I'm not a religious man, but I won't deny having prayed several times to get at least ONE of these lit boutiques.

If anyone has ANY suggestions for similar boutiques with summer programs, please email me at ocardowin@gmail.com (I don't want to hijack the thread).

Since I'm in debt, it needs to pay close to market. I know of Keker, Susman, Gibbs, Beck.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 11:22 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
BruceWayne wrote:
a) The BP payoff, plaintiff's side, won't be that huge, so it doesn't matter.

b) Don't give me that bullshit that you'll be doing a higher proportion of substantive work. The BP case is the epitome of doc review for any litigation associate involved, boutique or not. If you're staffed on the case, you won't be seeing a courtroom anytime soon, at least compared to your buddies at Joe Biglaw firm.


Ever occur to you that Susman outsources doc review?


Yeah, I don't think he's familiar with just how different a firm like Susman is than the typical "V10" firm glorified on TLS.



I've had callbacks at 4 boutiques and 4 V15s.

I can't even begin to tell you how much more I like even my least favorite boutique than my favorite V15.

Unfortunately, it looks as if I'm striking out at the boutiques (rejected from Beck, Redden; waiting on Susman although since they met today and at least two people here have received offers, it's looking unlikely; Gibbs & Bruns which, due to their tiny size, I'm not optimistic about; and one too small to tell because it would out me that may not even have a summer program). If it's any indication, I am more depressed about this fact than I would have been had I been rejected from all of my top law school choices. In fact, it probably ranks in the top 5 of my most disappointing life moments.

Granted, it's totally about personality, but I'm someone who'd rather get thrown into the fire, despite how scared I am, and force myself to learn and get comfortable with it, than sit on the sideline for five years.

I'm not a religious man, but I won't deny having prayed several times to get at least ONE of these lit boutiques.

If anyone has ANY suggestions for similar boutiques with summer programs, please email me at ocardowin@gmail.com (I don't want to hijack the thread).

Since I'm in debt, it needs to pay close to market. I know of Keker, Susman, Gibbs, Beck.


OK, this is clearly bullshit. There's no way you interviewed at Beck. Beck doesn't even have a summer program (except very, very rarely where they will take a recent grad in the summer prior to a clerkship).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 11:28 pm

I think the former poster meant Beck, Redden, and not Bartlit Beck... in case that helps.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 11:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
OK, this is clearly bullshit. There's no way you interviewed at Beck. Beck doesn't even have a summer program (except very, very rarely where they will take a recent grad in the summer prior to a clerkship).


Beck, Redden; not Bartlit, Beck.

User avatar
Veyron
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:50 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Veyron » Wed Sep 29, 2010 11:29 pm

Susman = THE...BEST...LIT... FIRM...IN... THE...WORLD. Do you want to do lit because if you do, OMG. How is this even a choice. Susman is prob the most elite you can possibly work for. dot finish I would kill, kill to be in your shoes.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 11:29 pm

edited for irrelevance
Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed Sep 29, 2010 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 11:30 pm

Veyron wrote:Susman = THE...BEST...LIT... FIRM...IN... THE...WORLD. Do you want to do lit because if you do, OMG. How is this even a choice. Susman is prob the most elite you can possibly work for. dot finish I would kill, kill to be in your shoes.


No, you see, you need to tell the OP to reject his Susman offer so maybe they'll give it to me.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273443
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Susman v. W&C

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 29, 2010 11:31 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
OK, this is clearly bullshit. There's no way you interviewed at Beck. Beck doesn't even have a summer program (except very, very rarely where they will take a recent grad in the summer prior to a clerkship).


Beck, Redden; not Bartlit, Beck.


Oh, okay. Nevermind then.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.