Firms to avoid

(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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:12 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Interested in what you heard about Squire Sanders.


I know they didn't show up to my school (MVP) because they claimed they were "filling their class with 1L SAs".



Thats is not good news as they did hired 1L SA but not a lot. Cant imagine them having a summer class only of previous 1L SA. Also, my friend was telling how he/she is afraid the firm will have significant no offers. Any confirmation on this rumor?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:23 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Interested in what you heard about Squire Sanders.


I know they didn't show up to my school (MVP) because they claimed they were "filling their class with 1L SAs".



Thats is not good news as they did hired 1L SA but not a lot. Cant imagine them having a summer class only of previous 1L SA. Also, my friend was telling how he/she is afraid the firm will have significant no offers. Any confirmation on this rumor?


Interested in this as well.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Anyone hearing anything about Pillsbury? There was some mumbling last year about them.

I have a CB with them and I'd like to know about this too.

MVPBDCNG_Anon
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 7:00 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby MVPBDCNG_Anon » Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:40 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Anyone hearing anything about Pillsbury? There was some mumbling last year about them.

I have a CB with them and I'd like to know about this too.


Bumpity Bump.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:55 pm

dresden doll wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Doesn't seem clear that Greenberg is in trouble...unless you know something new...


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.

They said that they hadn't done it when everyone else did, in which case they'd now be merely catching up, no?

All I can say is that they offered to move up my boyfriend's start date to August when he contacted them about a salary advance and that someone from a client firm remarked that they were busy as fuck right now (which certainly seems consistent with offering to start the incoming first year associate as early as August).


I just received an offer from one of their smaller offices in my hometown. Honestly, from the lawyers in other firms I've spoken to, GT is doing just fine. Yeah, capital calls are bad, but there's the whole TD Bank ALAS fiasco and they are likely going to have to put money into that. That doesn't mean they're sinking. I'm not sure if I'll accept my offer, but I'm not worried about GT's financial health.

Edit: By offer, I mean SA offer.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:15 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Not sure if this has been posted yet, but Paul Hastings ATL no-offered roughly 40% of their summer class.


Details?
Across the firm or office specific?

User avatar
chadwick218
Posts: 1337
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 10:15 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby chadwick218 » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:29 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Not sure if this has been posted yet, but Paul Hastings ATL no-offered roughly 40% of their summer class.


Details?
Across the firm or office specific?


While this is higher than normal, this isn't uncommon with a handful of firms in ATL.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:32 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Not sure if this has been posted yet, but Paul Hastings ATL no-offered roughly 40% of their summer class.


Details?
Across the firm or office specific?


Don't have any other details except it was no-offers for ~3 of 8 summers. But apparently, that is par for the course down in Atlanta according to another poster. Seems like a pretty SPS market to me.

This info is specific to that office; I don't know anything about their other offices.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:45 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
dresden doll wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Doesn't seem clear that Greenberg is in trouble...unless you know something new...


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.

They said that they hadn't done it when everyone else did, in which case they'd now be merely catching up, no?

All I can say is that they offered to move up my boyfriend's start date to August when he contacted them about a salary advance and that someone from a client firm remarked that they were busy as fuck right now (which certainly seems consistent with offering to start the incoming first year associate as early as August).


I just received an offer from one of their smaller offices in my hometown. Honestly, from the lawyers in other firms I've spoken to, GT is doing just fine. Yeah, capital calls are bad, but there's the whole TD Bank ALAS fiasco and they are likely going to have to put money into that. That doesn't mean they're sinking. I'm not sure if I'll accept my offer, but I'm not worried about GT's financial health.

Edit: By offer, I mean SA offer.


FWIW, They have no debt. Like 0. They have substantial lines of credit that lay unused. If it was just about creating more liquidity, they could rely on their lines of credit. Obviously this is more about building capital that can be used for something. Whether that's the TD Bank thing or continued growth, I don't know.

TL;DR: I have no concerns about GT's financial stability. Obviously a partner exodus would kill them like any firm, but there have been no signs of that.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 29, 2012 12:34 pm

Baker Botts (Houston). No offered approximately 20% of the 2L class, no-offers came apparently came as quite a shock. Reasons included "lacking in confidence, poor fit, etc ..." I also met a number of associates who seemed to be exploring opportunities with other firms in town. While the firm seems to be financially sound, some have suggested that the mangement change has led to a change in culture.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby rayiner » Wed Aug 29, 2012 1:14 pm

Isn't 80% offer rates common in Texas because everyone splits summers?

nonprofit-prophet
Posts: 844
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:10 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby nonprofit-prophet » Wed Aug 29, 2012 1:26 pm

rayiner wrote:Isn't 80% offer rates common in Texas because everyone splits summers?


Not really. usually people have 2 offers, due to the split. VE usually has close to a 100% offer rate. Of course theres a bad apple every once in a while.

User avatar
chadwick218
Posts: 1337
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 10:15 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby chadwick218 » Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:33 pm

nonprofit-prophet wrote:
rayiner wrote:Isn't 80% offer rates common in Texas because everyone splits summers?


Not really. usually people have 2 offers, due to the split. VE usually has close to a 100% offer rate. Of course theres a bad apple every once in a while.


Such offer rates were more common when everyone in Texas was able to split, but is less common these days. Texas is very slowly becoming like any other market. There are only a handful of firms that really offer second half programs making it possible to split.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:18 am

dresden doll wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Doesn't seem clear that Greenberg is in trouble...unless you know something new...


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.

They said that they hadn't done it when everyone else did, in which case they'd now be merely catching up, no?

All I can say is that they offered to move up my boyfriend's start date to August when he contacted them about a salary advance and that someone from a client firm remarked that they were busy as fuck right now (which certainly seems consistent with offering to start the incoming first year associate as early as August).


Which office?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:29 am

Thoughts on these LA firms:

OMM (LA & CC)
Latham
Gibson
Sheppard Mullin
Mitchell Silberberg

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:46 am

MVPBDCNG_Anon wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Anyone hearing anything about Pillsbury? There was some mumbling last year about them.

I have a CB with them and I'd like to know about this too.


Bumpity Bump.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 8:32 am

Reed Smith NY shortened its summer program to 8 weeks this past summer, much to the surprise of the summers who had been told it would be a 10-week program.

Baker Hostetler NY is rumored to have no-offered a number of their NY summer associates.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 9:21 am

Anonymous User wrote:Thoughts on these LA firms:

OMM (LA & CC)
Latham
Gibson
Sheppard Mullin
Mitchell Silberberg


I've been told by multiple former summers that OMM CC is an awful sweatshop, even by LA biglaw standards. I think OMM is doing fine financially these days, especially in its LA offices. Have heard only good things about the other firms.

LawIdiot86
Posts: 1159
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:21 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby LawIdiot86 » Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:43 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Thoughts on these LA firms:

OMM (LA & CC)
Latham
Gibson
Sheppard Mullin
Mitchell Silberberg


From what I understand Gibson is shooting like gangbusters and OMM and Latham have bounced back financial. I don't know about Sheppard Mullin, but they did upgrade to a suite at my OCI this fall, which they did not have last fall.

Anonymous User wrote:Reed Smith NY shortened its summer program to 8 weeks this past summer, much to the surprise of the summers who had been told it would be a 10-week program.

Baker Hostetler NY is rumored to have no-offered a number of their NY summer associates.


I know of good associates at Reed Smith DC who struggled to make their hours last year and have heard rumors to try and avoid them if possible.

I also know that Baker Hostetler, especially in NY, is pretty much afloat only because of the fees from the Madoff litigation. Without those fees they would be showing large declines in revenue and I assume the lucrative part of the Madoff litigation is already over.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:49 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I have a Winston screener tomorrow. Totally don't care/gonna bring up the Chicago mess.


Update - Brought up Winston's layoffs in my non-Chicago screener. Interviewer told me the numbers were exaggerated and that the particular office I was interviewing for wasn't affected.

Got a CB.


Which office? And true brass balls would have also inquired about the alleged "choke out" lists that the firm keeps.



NY, Chi, Houston all had low rates -- not sure about DC, LA, SF. Winston did make it fairly clear that they over-hired this year, and seemed to attribute it to the Dewey laterals, which if true, is almost excusable because who could have predicted that opportunity would come along?

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby 09042014 » Wed Sep 05, 2012 6:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I have a Winston screener tomorrow. Totally don't care/gonna bring up the Chicago mess.


Update - Brought up Winston's layoffs in my non-Chicago screener. Interviewer told me the numbers were exaggerated and that the particular office I was interviewing for wasn't affected.

Got a CB.


Which office? And true brass balls would have also inquired about the alleged "choke out" lists that the firm keeps.



NY, Chi, Houston all had low rates -- not sure about DC, LA, SF. Winston did make it fairly clear that they over-hired this year, and seemed to attribute it to the Dewey laterals, which if true, is almost excusable because who could have predicted that opportunity would come along?


Why would Dewey laterals take a 2L's job?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 09, 2012 9:12 pm

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.



just an fyi, this is wildly inaccurate with respect to kelley drye. all summers were offered and none deferred, and the firm is in no foreseeable "trouble".

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 09, 2012 9:19 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
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.



just an fyi, this is wildly inaccurate with respect to kelley drye. all summers were offered and none deferred, and the firm is in no foreseeable "trouble".


Kelley Drye pulled out of at least one OCI at the last minute.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 09, 2012 9:35 pm

Edelson McGuire apparently milked 70-90 hours/week out of their 4 SAs and then no-offered 2 of them.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 09, 2012 9:42 pm

Has anyone heard anything about Dorsey & Whitney? I did a CB for one of their offices and am very interested. However, I saw on several law websites that they laid off 20 staff in July.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.