Gibson Dunn or Munger Tolles (see within for details) Forum

[chrisihat]

---

[NoleinNY]

MTO is supposedly less conservative and better for having a social life.

[Anonymous User]

Unless you want entertainment transactional work, I cannot think of a single reason why you would go to GDC over MTO.

[rayiner]

Hi all,

I am at a T20 law school and am deciding between MTO and GDC.

I think I want to go into litigation, but am not entirely sure. The social aspect of the firm is important to me-- I am a young guy and want to be with similarly sociable people at the firm. Exit options are also important -- I'm not sure that I will be doing law extremely long term, and eventually think I may go into business or consulting.

Any thoughts on which to choose? Things I might not be thinking of?

Thanks for your help in advance.

Litigation for business or consulting?

[UCLAtransfer]

If you want to do litigation, I vote MTO. Especially for the west coast, you can't beat it in my opinion.

However, if you already kind of know you want to go into business or consulting later, going into litigation makes very little sense and will likely make it quite difficult to do so down the road. I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "business," but even going in house from a litigation practice is tough, and in doing so you would still be working on litigation matters, just for the company as opposed to a firm. Very little about litigation practice would help you in any way to have the necessary skills to get higher level positions in most types of "business or consulting."

[Anonymous User]

Munger is less leveraged (it currently has more partners than associates), gives better experience to young associates, has an intellectual culture, has a shorter partnership track, offers higher odds of making partner (something like 50% of associates stay with the firm for 20 years), requires less hours, provides a transparent firm structure (you have access to the firm's financial information from day one), and offers a unique democratic culture. Everyone at Munger could have worked at Gibson. Very few at Gibson could have worked at Munger.

I'm not sure why people are voting for Gibson. If you want a fratty firm, go to Latham.

[Anonymous User]

MTO is known for having a rather low offer rate for its summer associates. I recall hearing a percentage around 75-80%. Worth keeping in mind.

[Anonymous User]

MTO has a rather low offer rate for its summer associates. I recall hearing a percentage around 75-80%. Worth keeping in mind.

It's higher - low 90's. OP, I am considering a Munger offer as well, but even if I were in your shoes (uncertain about lit/corp long term), I would not for a moment consider GDC over MTO. Exit opportunities won't be richer elsewhere...it's one of the best-respected firms in the country.

[Anonymous User]

you have to be crazy to take GDC over MTO

MTO is one of the very finest firms in the country for a young associate. If your interested in litigation, the only firm that is even in the same league is Williams & Connolly.

[quakeroats]

MTO has a rather low offer rate for its summer associates. I recall hearing a percentage around 75-80%. Worth keeping in mind.

It's higher - low 90's. OP, I am considering a Munger offer as well, but even if I were in your shoes (uncertain about lit/corp long term), I would not for a moment consider GDC over MTO. Exit opportunities won't be richer elsewhere...it's one of the best-respected firms in the country.

Exit options will be essentially the same. If you're concerned about them then litigation is the wrong practice area. Exit options would be better at any number of firms.

[Anonymous User]

I'm making a similar choice (plus Irell). A few points:

Whoever said that MTO's offer rate is "low 90's" - I'd love to see data. The only real data I've seen is NALP, which puts last year below 80%, and I heard anecdotally that the year before that was around 80%. If I had some reason to count on it being in the low 90's, I'd be happy.

Despite what everyone is saying, there are definitely reasons to pick GDC over MTO. You said you wanted to have a social life - if that means lots of opportunities to socialize with your co-workers and a firm culture that fosters a social life between associates, then MTO is not the right place. If that means you want to spend every hour outside of your 2200ish billables with your family or whatever other socializing you do outside of work, then GDC is not the right place. They seem to be polar opposite firms in that respect - lots of people at GDC who I met said that many of their good friends are GDC lawyers, and they'll get drinks after work all the time. Not so at MTO.

Also, if you're not certain you want to be a litigator, MTO might not be the best choice. GDC has a broad range of excellent practices, whereas MTO has one absolutely stellar practice area and a few good practice areas.

Whoever said everyone who goes to Munger could have gone to Gibson probably has absolutely no experience with law firm hiring. It's not like law school admissions, people. Gibson has a type - it's significantly more in-your-face gregarious intellectual, whereas Munger is more reserved, nerdy intellectual. All of this was blatantly obvious at the callback stage. Even in my tiny sample size of people I know who interviewed at both, a few people got Munger and not Gibson.

With all that said, I think I'm leaning toward Munger, for two reasons - first, I'm a nerd, and I think I'd fit in, and second, the associate-to-partner ratio all but ensures that you'll be getting significant responsibility very early.

[Anonymous User]

Few people choose Gibson over Munger because it is difficult to articulate a clear reason for doing so. Gibson may have a wider variety of niche practice areas, but few 1Ls know (or should know) which particular area of law they're interested in. I would choose Munger even for corporate. The practice group is small, but it does top-notch work (for example, the firm does Berkshire's deals).

Frankly, the likelihood you'll get drinks after work a few times a week is a poor criterion. And anyway, you'll likely have more social interactions with attorneys at Munger since it holds firm-wide lunches three times a week.

[Anonymous User]

For all the Munger offer people ITT, how long did the offer come after the callback?

[snailio]

You have an abundance of riches here, congratulations. Both GDC and MTO are “best of breed” firms, particularly in Southern California, to say one is better than the other is a ridiculous statement, they are …different.

MTO has 150ish in the LA office with 25ish in SF, Gibson has more than that in just their LA office alone. One is a premier lit boutique with a nice little corporate gig with Berkshire, the other an international firm, with their fingers in almost everything.

The poster above with the additional Irell offer has it about right, there are a myriad of reasons to pick one over the other.

To your specific question as to the social aspect, Gibson is more social by far, as for the culture, as the poster above said, Munger is a more reserved type of intellectual, some might say pretentious, I prefer cerebral, and yes Gibson is a gregarious engaged type of intellectual, neither is bad just different.

This is more about you, it’s about fit, yes Munger is less leveraged, does have a shorter partner track and better odds of making partner, great transparency, but the offer rate is lower.

Gibson has no debt with stunning numbers last year, supremely well managed, offer rate relatively high, has great geographical reach if you decided to stay with the firm and wish to move around and probably better in house opportunities a few years out just because of their client base being larger.

There are people who have gotten offers from one but not the other; this happens in both directions because of the type of person the two firms are looking for. You are fortunate, have you considered splitting the summer?

The accolades for these two firms are littered over the internet, I’m sure you’ve been to Chambers and Partners, Vault, Am Law and others. TLS even has a pretty good synopsis of these two firms under the Law Students header in the Articles for Students section.

You say you might like to do consulting, have you been approached by McKinsey, BCG or others? If not you might want to look at that.

Look you can’t really make too bad of a decision here, both have interesting work, exit opportunities are excellent from both firms, although you state you might want to do litigation, if that’s the case, those exit opportunities will be less so.

You have to remember what your daily life will be like at these two firms, which is a better fit is the most important consideration.

I recommend you read Charlie Mungers book “Poor Charlie’s Almanac” it may help you with the prestige disease prevalent on these boards.
Good Luck.