Top Law Schools

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:If you do IP litigation at Quinn or any other firm, are you too specialized to really exit into another practice later?

I am not in practice or anything, but from what I understand it is a relatively special circumstance where a litigator switches to transactional practice after a few years. If you are concerned about being unsure of what you want to do, there are firms that let you, or force you, to rotate through their practice areas during the SA program.

I meant switch from IP litigation to general civil litigation or even criminal litigation, in government or small practice. I've heard of people switching from civil to criminal, but they seem like different practices so I'm not sure how that worked out.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:If you do IP litigation at Quinn or any other firm, are you too specialized to really exit into another practice later?

I am not in practice or anything, but from what I understand it is a relatively special circumstance where a litigator switches to transactional practice after a few years. If you are concerned about being unsure of what you want to do, there are firms that let you, or force you, to rotate through their practice areas during the SA program.

I meant switch from IP litigation to general civil litigation or even criminal litigation, in government or small practice. I've heard of people switching from civil to criminal, but they seem like different practices so I'm not sure how that worked out.

Ahh, gotcha. Well, again, I don't have any personal information in this respect (so please, someone else chime in), but my understanding is that to some degree litigation is a set of skills somewhat on its own. I'm sure there are limits, particularly as you become more experienced (and thusly you are hired/paid with greater expectation of proficiency), but otherwise I imagine that a place like Quinn you'll have no choice but to get experience in both at some point in the first few years.

I think this is the right type of question to contact a few attorneys about and see what you can gather from their personal experience.

Is Quinn Emanuel a bad idea if i want litigation, but not specifically IP litigation?
I was looking more into financial/bankruptcy/antitrust.

Anonymous User wrote:Is Quinn Emanuel a bad idea if i want litigation, but not specifically IP litigation?
I was looking more into financial/bankruptcy/antitrust.

No, it's not a bad idea for that reason. If you want to do any kind of litigation, and you want a firm that goes to trial a lot, Quinn is probably the best there is.

Lieut Kaffee wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Is Quinn Emanuel a bad idea if i want litigation, but not specifically IP litigation?
I was looking more into financial/bankruptcy/antitrust.

No, it's not a bad idea for that reason. If you want to do any kind of litigation, and you want a firm that goes to trial a lot, Quinn is probably the best there is.

depends on the office though. SF has a ton of patent work, and i think people are likely to get at least some patent work even if its not their interest.

Anonymous User wrote:

Lieut Kaffee wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Is Quinn Emanuel a bad idea if i want litigation, but not specifically IP litigation?
I was looking more into financial/bankruptcy/antitrust.

No, it's not a bad idea for that reason. If you want to do any kind of litigation, and you want a firm that goes to trial a lot, Quinn is probably the best there is.

depends on the office though. SF has a ton of patent work, and i think people are likely to get at least some patent work even if its not their interest.

what about NY office?

Anonymous User wrote:

Lieut Kaffee wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Is Quinn Emanuel a bad idea if i want litigation, but not specifically IP litigation?
I was looking more into financial/bankruptcy/antitrust.

No, it's not a bad idea for that reason. If you want to do any kind of litigation, and you want a firm that goes to trial a lot, Quinn is probably the best there is.

depends on the office though. SF has a ton of patent work, and i think people are likely to get at least some patent work even if its not their interest.

What about LA office?

I met quite a few attorneys at the LA office that do no patent work.

Lieut Kaffee wrote:I met quite a few attorneys at the LA office that do no patent work.

Did you express an interest in something other than IP?? Are you saying that they don't do all that much IP work in LA?? Please elaborate!!

Also, anyone interview with Bill Urquhart? Apparently he's interviewing me and as you might imagine, i'm pretty freakin nervous!!

Anonymous User wrote:

Lieut Kaffee wrote:I met quite a few attorneys at the LA office that do no patent work.

Did you express an interest in something other than IP?? Are you saying that they don't do all that much IP work in LA?? Please elaborate!!

Also, anyone interview with Bill Urquhart? Apparently he's interviewing me and as you might imagine, i'm pretty freakin nervous!!

I would say IP is at least half their practice in LA. Definitely the biggest area of growth. What I said was that I also met several attorneys who did no IP work at all, which is to say it's definitely a good firm if you want to do lit and trials but NOT IP. In my interviews, I expressed way more interest in everything BUT IP.

Lieut Kaffee wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Lieut Kaffee wrote:I met quite a few attorneys at the LA office that do no patent work.

Did you express an interest in something other than IP?? Are you saying that they don't do all that much IP work in LA?? Please elaborate!!

Also, anyone interview with Bill Urquhart? Apparently he's interviewing me and as you might imagine, i'm pretty freakin nervous!!

I would say IP is at least half their practice in LA. Definitely the biggest area of growth. What I said was that I also met several attorneys who did no IP work at all, which is to say it's definitely a good firm if you want to do lit and trials but NOT IP. In my interviews, I expressed way more interest in everything BUT IP.

I see. Thanks so much for elaborating.

Did you end up with an offer? Are you accepting?

Anonymous User wrote:

Lieut Kaffee wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Lieut Kaffee wrote:I met quite a few attorneys at the LA office that do no patent work.

Did you express an interest in something other than IP?? Are you saying that they don't do all that much IP work in LA?? Please elaborate!!

Also, anyone interview with Bill Urquhart? Apparently he's interviewing me and as you might imagine, i'm pretty freakin nervous!!

I would say IP is at least half their practice in LA. Definitely the biggest area of growth. What I said was that I also met several attorneys who did no IP work at all, which is to say it's definitely a good firm if you want to do lit and trials but NOT IP. In my interviews, I expressed way more interest in everything BUT IP.

I see. Thanks so much for elaborating.

Did you end up with an offer? Are you accepting?

I am turning down the offer and going elsewhere because of the following belief:

Lieut Kaffee wrote:So if you find yourself on the fence about whether Quinn is right for you, you're probably not a gung-ho-for-trials kind of person. So go somewhere else.

I was impressed with Quinn in a lot of ways, but I'm going to a bit more traditional firm. I'll be doing Lit but with (I assume) much less trial experience. Also working slightly more predictable hours for the same money, which was important to me. Part of my thinking is that if I decide as a midlevel that I do want more trial focus after all, perhaps I can lateral to a place like Quinn down the road.

hows the prestige of Quinn?
I've talked to a few non-big law attorneys, and when i mention Quinn, they've never heard of it. is this b/c its a relatively new firm?

Well, the point of Vault is that it tries to capture firms' "prestige," so by that measure Quinn is up to #16 I believe. That me be even more impressive when you consider, as you mentioned, how relatively new the firm is. It's also behind only Wachtell in PPP and has a pretty good nationwide profile with big offices in both NY and LA and emerging offices in SF, Chi, DC, etc. Add to that a very strong niche reputation (i.e. in terms of pure trial advocacy, they may be second to none), and I'd say Quinn is quite prestigious for what it is.

When I was considering them, I was a bit surprised how low they were on the "Southern California Prestige" ranking on vault, behind Irell and O'Melveny.

Anyone know why QE is not included in the American Lawyer Associate surveys?

Summer: http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTA ... 2515106839
Midlevel: http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTA ... 2512157508

Does NY give out offers only during the day after CB? If not received on that day = ding?

Anonymous User wrote:Does NY give out offers only during the day after CB? If not received on that day = ding?

got mine like 30 hours after, the next day. don't worry yet.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Does NY give out offers only during the day after CB? If not received on that day = ding?

got mine like 30 hours after, the next day. don't worry yet.

Finished my callback around 2 or so yesterday. So I will wait then...

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Does NY give out offers only during the day after CB? If not received on that day = ding?

got mine like 30 hours after, the next day. don't worry yet.

Did the office manager or one of the partners give you a call?

Anyone here get an offer more than a day after callback?

Anonymous User wrote:Anyone here get an offer more than a day after callback?

I did, but that seems to be (a lot) more the exception than the rule.

Also waiting for results here. How many days after callback did you get yours?

Just turned down an offer. Here's to hoping one of you get it...

did you get your offer a day after CB as well

Anonymous User wrote:did you get your offer a day after CB as well

Yes.