Anonymous User wrote:Anyone has baker hostetler offer?
Offers are out.
Anonymous User wrote:any movement on either AGG or SGR? had phone screener with former and cb with latter, both over a week ago and total radio silence.
Anonymous User wrote:Is this salary figure accurate? I though the market salary is 145,000.
http://www.dailyreportonline.com/id=120 ... -Recession
Anonymous User wrote:I just noticed that Troutman is not on NALP. Are there any other Atlanta firms that I should definitely be aware of and are not on NALP before I mass-mail on Dec. 1?
Anonymous User wrote:
Sorry, left out two important letters.
Starting *IP* salaries.
fats provolone wrote:i don't think k&s IP is 160, unless that changed recently
Code: Select all
Lock-step? 1st Year IP Min. Hours
Alston & Bird Yes, 160 1900
Kilpatrick Townsend Merit? 160 1900
Finnegan Yes, 160 1920+80 pro bono
Fish & Richardson Yes, 160 1900
DLA Piper 160
Dow Lohnes Yes 160
Ballard Spahr Combination lock-step/merit 150 1900
Jones Day No 150 2000 (2013 avg 2259)
Paul Hastings Yes 150 2000
Sutherland 1st, 2nd yr, then merit 145 + 15 deferred 1950+450 firm develop
Baker Hoestetler No? 140 1950
Hunton & Williams Combination145
AGG Combination, range 135 1800
Troutman Sanders Merit 135 (IP?)
Merchant & Gould Combination 125
Smith Gambrell Combination 125 (IP?)
Anonymous User wrote:can anybody comment on the culture of King & Spalding v. Alston & Bird? Or the perception of their predominate practice groups, compensation, etc... How are both perceived in Atlanta? How are they both perceived in NYC?
Omerta wrote:Anonymous User wrote:can anybody comment on the culture of King & Spalding v. Alston & Bird? Or the perception of their predominate practice groups, compensation, etc... How are both perceived in Atlanta? How are they both perceived in NYC?
No real differences on a firm-wide basis; you're splitting hairs. People say that K&S is more intense hours-wise and more formal, but I really don't think there's a difference in practice. The associates I know at both firms are billing a lot, and their QOL depends on which partners they work for, not whether they're at A&B or K&S. Both firms have practice groups that are known to be very hard on associates, but it's more of a practice group thing. For example, I have a friend at A&B. He really enjoys working there, but other associates in the same group and same sub-specialty are super miserable because they work for an insane partner. (Moral of this story: do your diligence on who you're going to work for).
Both firms have roughly equivalent perceptions among lawyers and non-lawyers are well-regarded in ATL. Can't say anything about NY impressions. My personal impression is that I wasn't very impressed with their work product (I'm a clerk). It wasn't horrible, but I wouldn't pay the rates they charge if that's what I got.
As for practice groups, they're generally highly-regarded and differentiated only in terms of who their client base is. For example, K&S does more debtor-side bankruptcy work while A&B does more creditor-side stuff. K&S has a phenomenal products liability group, but A&B is much better for privacy and data breach litigation. K&S probably wins on leveraged finance, and A&B has a slightly stronger M&A team. I think trying to compare them for "quality" is a waste of time; it's more about sub-specialties that I doubt someone could make a meaningful/informed decision unless you are really into a specific field of law.
As for compensation, they both start at ATL market. I believe A&B has more salary compression as you advance but don't have firsthand knowledge.
The online users are hidden on this forum.