Firms to avoid Forum
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.
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.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Firms to avoid
Some people have been no-offered, some deferred and some work for firms they know are in trouble. ITT, we discuss firms 2Ls might think twice about, if they are lucky enough ITE to have multiple offers. Obviously, Winston is at the top of the list after today, but I'm sure people have other gossip that isn't substantiated enough to warrant ATL coverage. Let's hear it here. I've also heard unsubstantiated chatter about Kelley Drye, White & Case, Fish & Richardson, Nixon Peabody, Squire Sanders, and an unidentified large firm in Texas.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
I have a Winston screener tomorrow. Totally don't care/gonna bring up the Chicago mess.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Interested in what you heard about Squire Sanders.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
If by the Texas firm you mean T&K, then yes, I've heard this too.Anonymous User wrote:Some people have been no-offered, some deferred and some work for firms they know are in trouble. ITT, we discuss firms 2Ls might think twice about, if they are lucky enough ITE to have multiple offers. Obviously, Winston is at the top of the list after today, but I'm sure people have other gossip that isn't substantiated enough to warrant ATL coverage. Let's hear it here. I've also heard unsubstantiated chatter about Kelley Drye, White & Case, Fish & Richardson, Nixon Peabody, Squire Sanders, and an unidentified large firm in Texas.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Greenberg Traurig.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
I know they didn't show up to my school (MVP) because they claimed they were "filling their class with 1L SAs".Anonymous User wrote:Interested in what you heard about Squire Sanders.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Doesn't seem clear that Greenberg is in trouble...unless you know something new...
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
I have heard T&K also, no offered a bunch. Also, I would stay away from Fulbright in Texas. Rumblings from high ups at other firms in town is that they have been shopping around to try to merge the firm and aren't doing well.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Capital call is never a good thing. Just because partners say things are fine and that it's normal doesn't mean it is. If everyone were really doing it, G&T doing it wouldn't be news.Anonymous User wrote:Doesn't seem clear that Greenberg is in trouble...unless you know something new...
-
- Posts: 5923
- Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
Curious as to what they say.Anonymous User wrote:I have a Winston screener tomorrow. Totally don't care/gonna bring up the Chicago mess.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Frankly, at this point, you might as well. They aren't going to hire you, anyway. It's almost disingenuous to even have a screener still.Anonymous User wrote:I have a Winston screener tomorrow. Totally don't care/gonna bring up the Chicago mess.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Knobbe Martens - there was a thread on here about them not long ago
Troutman Sanders did a bunch of deferrals according to the Atlanta thread
Troutman Sanders did a bunch of deferrals according to the Atlanta thread
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Anonymous User wrote:Frankly, at this point, you might as well. They aren't going to hire you, anyway. It's almost disingenuous to even have a screener still.Anonymous User wrote:I have a Winston screener tomorrow. Totally don't care/gonna bring up the Chicago mess.
It's coming at the very end of OCI for me and I already have enough CBs to feel comfortable. I agree any chance at getting hired is next to nill (and I'd only take it if I had nothing else). I'll be sure to let everyone know what they have to say.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Depends on what office the interview is for. DC/NYC might still be doing fine.Anonymous User wrote:Frankly, at this point, you might as well. They aren't going to hire you, anyway. It's almost disingenuous to even have a screener still.Anonymous User wrote:I have a Winston screener tomorrow. Totally don't care/gonna bring up the Chicago mess.
-
- Posts: 18203
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
They'll still have a class, it'll just be tiny. I would only fuck with them if you have enough CBs that you think you willt have another offer.Anonymous User wrote:Frankly, at this point, you might as well. They aren't going to hire you, anyway. It's almost disingenuous to even have a screener still.Anonymous User wrote:I have a Winston screener tomorrow. Totally don't care/gonna bring up the Chicago mess.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
TBF, Winston basically told the class in the beginning of the summer that they received more acceptances than they wanted/expected. They were aiming for 22 SAs, and got 31. They gave 22 offers.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
I know Paul Hastings no-offered a not-insignificant number.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- fatduck
- Posts: 4135
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
how generous.Anonymous User wrote:TBF, Winston basically told the class in the beginning of the summer that they received more acceptances than they wanted/expected. They were aiming for 22 SAs, and got 31. They gave 22 offers.
- bjsesq
- Posts: 13320
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:02 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Source or GTFO.Anonymous User wrote:They gave 22 offers.
- NinerFan
- Posts: 482
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:51 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
I'm sure those SA's wish they knew that before they accepted/started the summerAnonymous User wrote:TBF, Winston basically told the class in the beginning of the summer that they received more acceptances than they wanted/expected. They were aiming for 22 SAs, and got 31. They gave 22 offers.
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Well word from my CSO is that Fulbright no offered its entire Dallas summer class. However, that might be more an issue with Dallas than Fulbright. I wouldn't be surprised if 1/3 or more of all SAs in Dallas were no offered.Anonymous User wrote:I have heard T&K also, no offered a bunch. Also, I would stay away from Fulbright in Texas. Rumblings from high ups at other firms in town is that they have been shopping around to try to merge the firm and aren't doing well.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- sunynp
- Posts: 1875
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
Surely no one is naive enough to believe this (the idea that oops we didnt realize how popular we were so now a third of you dont have jobs) is true.Anonymous User wrote:TBF, Winston basically told the class in the beginning of the summer that they received more acceptances than they wanted/expected. They were aiming for 22 SAs, and got 31. They gave 22 offers.
The firm just fired 30 associates, and possibly more stealth layoffs had been happening.
I'm sure they hire the class they wanted and then realized that they over estimated how much work they would have.
This firm sounds full of lying liars who lie to protect their image. (not that they are alone in that.)
-
- Posts: 428548
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
I can semi-verify that at least FJ Dallas is in crappy financial position. I summered at another TX office for the firm and there were rumblings among the associatesAnonymous User wrote:Well word from my CSO is that Fulbright no offered its entire Dallas summer class. However, that might be more an issue with Dallas than Fulbright. I wouldn't be surprised if 1/3 or more of all SAs in Dallas were no offered.Anonymous User wrote:I have heard T&K also, no offered a bunch. Also, I would stay away from Fulbright in Texas. Rumblings from high ups at other firms in town is that they have been shopping around to try to merge the firm and aren't doing well.
- sunynp
- Posts: 1875
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
What? Can you elaborate? I thought Texas was booming?Anonymous User wrote:Well word from my CSO is that Fulbright no offered its entire Dallas summer class. However, that might be more an issue with Dallas than Fulbright. I wouldn't be surprised if 1/3 or more of all SAs in Dallas were no offered.Anonymous User wrote:I have heard T&K also, no offered a bunch. Also, I would stay away from Fulbright in Texas. Rumblings from high ups at other firms in town is that they have been shopping around to try to merge the firm and aren't doing well.
- Richie Tenenbaum
- Posts: 2118
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:17 am
Re: Firms to avoid
This sounds like bullshit to me. It's not like all 31 people immediately accepted. If they're like any other firm, the hiring partner and others were still trying to recruit people that had been given offers. If they had only wanted 22 SAs, they could have mentioned that to law student #23-31 before they accepted. What looks worse? Giving law students a heads-up that they should maybe should explore their other options or no offering those people after not telling them anything, spending thousands of dollars on them during the summer, and then potentially ruining their legal careers?Anonymous User wrote:TBF, Winston basically told the class in the beginning of the summer that they received more acceptances than they wanted/expected. They were aiming for 22 SAs, and got 31. They gave 22 offers.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login