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.
User avatar
los blancos
Posts: 7112
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:18 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby los blancos » Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:34 pm

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


Pretty much every firm every year no-offers 40% of their class in ATL. That's just how they do things down there.



Is this fairly common in the Southeast in general? The "300-ish lawyers/smaller classes/more no-offers/almost everyone makes partner" model?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273121
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 09, 2012 10:52 pm

Anyone have any info on Reed Smith? Preferably the CA offices, but I'll hear anything about any office. Seriously considering taking them, and their $145K salary, over a $160k firm that is notorious for being a sweatshop.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273121
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:48 am

Anonymous User wrote:
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.


los blancos wrote:
Pretty much every firm every year no-offers 40% of their class in ATL. That's just how they do things down there.



Is this fairly common in the Southeast in general? The "300-ish lawyers/smaller classes/more no-offers/almost everyone makes partner" model?[/quote]

The Southeast in general is far less hesitant to no-offer someone. Here's my list why:

(1) While you're far from guaranteed partnership, many southeast firms are more midlaw than biglaw -- smaller offices and not as much turnover. It is easy to give out 100% offers when you're expecting the attrition rate you see at NY firms, but it doesn't scale down to 50 attorney offices.
(2) Southeast is far more dependent on real estate (and lit based on RE) than finance. IDK if you noticed, but there's not a lot of construction or RE transactions going on.
(3) Easier to piss off an attorney in a smaller office and their vote counts more. I know for a fact a big reason why I didn't get an offer because I pissed off an associate due to my personality. In a larger office, the partner would likely just say, "lol that's cute, here's 15k documents for you to review this weekend I make decisions bitch," but one voice counts for a lot more when it's one of 25-50.
(4) SE firms do not have the monstrously huge cases with banker boxes of docs as far as the eye can see. It's easier to staff a case with 1 partner / 1 or 2 junior associates if the petty stuff is mostly going to be small motions and hearings. If I wanted to, I could fit all the docs from "big" cases at the firm I worked for in my office without too much effort. There's a reason why firms like Quinn say junior associates handle "all things discovery," because there's so much of it to do.
(5) SE firms tend to be a small to medium satellite office if they're not standalone shops. PH Atlanta bills the same rates as NY, likely because 75% of their work emanates from NY. A satellite office likely does not have as good of a hold on the work flow as a primary office because they are not actually originating much business. That's also why some prominent SE firms (Alston/K&S) almost always give out 100% offers; they're also more NY style than a lot of other southern firms too.

I know lots of sociable and cool people with good grades who got no offered, it's not nearly as much of a lock for an associate position as NY is. I hope this doesn't come across as bitter; a lot of the things I wrote were reason why I was more attracted to a southern firm. They make for great associate life, but it's definitely tougher to get into the door.
I could write more but holy shit it's almost 3 am.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273121
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Sep 10, 2012 7:46 am

Anonymous User wrote: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.


The explanation was that younger attorneys use their secretaries a lot less than the older guys, so staffing levels needed to be adjusted. No way to know for sure if that's honest, but it seemed to fit with reality.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273121
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Sep 10, 2012 7:58 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: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.


The explanation was that younger attorneys use their secretaries a lot less than the older guys, so staffing levels needed to be adjusted. No way to know for sure if that's honest, but it seemed to fit with reality.


that seems ridiculous

User avatar
los blancos
Posts: 7112
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:18 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby los blancos » Mon Sep 10, 2012 9:44 am

Anonymous User wrote:They make for great associate life, but it's definitely tougher to get into the door.


Yeah, this definitely seems to be true. Good points all around.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273121
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Sep 10, 2012 10:17 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: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.


The explanation was that younger attorneys use their secretaries a lot less than the older guys, so staffing levels needed to be adjusted. No way to know for sure if that's honest, but it seemed to fit with reality.


that seems ridiculous


The premise or the conclusion?

To clarify, there were certainly people who questioned the wisdom of the move, but the reasons for the disagreement had to do with loyalty, reputation, morale, etc. I never heard anyone dispute that the support staff had excess capacity.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273121
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Sep 10, 2012 10:26 am

SNR Denton... heard terrible things from an associate there

Anonymous User
Posts: 273121
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:29 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
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.


that just means they are having a smaller hiring class, not that the firm is "in trouble."

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

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby LawIdiot86 » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:45 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
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.


that just means they are having a smaller hiring class, not that the firm is "in trouble."


Generally, a firm that shrinks its class size implies that it has less legal work in the pipeline then it previously predicted and therefore will need fewer new hires to do the legal work. It may also indicate that attrition is lower than the firm expected. But, if there is less work expected in the future then was previously expected, that is generally a sign that the firm has not performed as well as planned. Not a sign they are in trouble, but it can be a sign they are heading into trouble (or just that they suck at planning).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273121
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:43 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Thoughts on these LA firms:

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


OMM LA and CC are very different, CC is very entertainment focused and more of a sweatshop. I have a couple friends who are young associates at LA and absolutely love the place, I'd recommend OMM LA based on that.

Latham is supposed to be very well run, a little fratty but it's more prestigious than OMM.

I would rank them: Gibson, Latham, OMM LA, OMM CC, Sheppard Mullin, Mitchell Silverberg. Skadden and Munger still better than all of them. But if you want entertainment and don't mind the sweat, CC is the ticket.

Also Irell is bad*** if you want to do IP lit.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.