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
bjsesq
TLS Poet Laureate
Posts: 13383
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 3:02 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby bjsesq » Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:54 pm

bjsesq wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:They gave 22 offers.


Source or GTFO.

User avatar
Richie Tenenbaum
Posts: 2162
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:17 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Richie Tenenbaum » Wed Aug 22, 2012 11:01 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
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.


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.


Your CSO is wrong. I know at least one SA who got an offer there. (Or at least I am 99% sure they did.)

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 22, 2012 11:04 pm

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
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.


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.


That is an entirely false statement.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 22, 2012 11:07 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Richie Tenenbaum wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
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.


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.


That is an entirely false statement.


I did not make that statement but can verify that FJ Dallas is struggling. One of my buddies there did get an offer to return though

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 22, 2012 11:48 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
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.


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.


New Anon here: Statement about Dallas seems way too panicky. Weil's Dallas office gave 100% offers. Would be surprised if Gibson Dunn Dallas was hurting. Latham in Houston is booming. Maybe it's just an issue with some Texas firms not being as healthy as they thought.

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

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby 09042014 » Wed Aug 22, 2012 11:51 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
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.


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.


New Anon here: Statement about Dallas seems way too panicky. Weil's Dallas office gave 100% offers. Would be surprised if Gibson Dunn Dallas was hurting. Latham in Houston is booming. Maybe it's just an issue with some Texas firms not being as healthy as they thought.


I've heard Dallas firms are doing bad, very slow.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:00 am

Desert Fox wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
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.


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.


New Anon here: Statement about Dallas seems way too panicky. Weil's Dallas office gave 100% offers. Would be surprised if Gibson Dunn Dallas was hurting. Latham in Houston is booming. Maybe it's just an issue with some Texas firms not being as healthy as they thought.


I've heard Dallas firms are doing bad, very slow.


I haven't heard any of this-wow. Had 4 CB in Dallas and (suprisingly!!) all indicated they were doing fine. I also had a CB at Fulbright (Dallas) that I thought went very well. But this is scaring the shit out of me.

User avatar
joeshmo39
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 5:15 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby joeshmo39 » Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:20 am

I heard Dechert no-offered around a third of their Philly summer class. Bear in mind they are
headquartered in Philly. They also pulled a "don't call us, we'll call you" move with their summers from a couple years ago.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:25 am

I haven't heard any of this-wow. Had 4 CB in Dallas and (suprisingly!!) all indicated they were doing fine. I also had a CB at Fulbright (Dallas) that I thought went very well. But this is scaring the shit out of me.


It should be obvious that no one who you interview with is going to ring the alarm during a CB. Recruiting sets you up with people who are billing a lot and appear to be happy at the firm. Do you think anyone told the Dewey summers during their CBs that the partners hadn't gotten paid?

Anyway, heard of a couple of Latham no offers.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby IAFG » Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:32 am

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:
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.


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?

That would be a good way of going about it, but I haven't heard of any firm ever doing this, no matter how over-subscribed.

igo2northwestern
Posts: 255
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:07 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby igo2northwestern » Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:36 am

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:
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.


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?


Heads up: http://abovethelaw.com/2012/08/nationwi ... on-strawn/

lukertin
Posts: 775
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:16 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby lukertin » Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:40 am

IAFG wrote:
Richie Tenenbaum wrote:
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.


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?

That would be a good way of going about it, but I haven't heard of any firm ever doing this, no matter how over-subscribed.

Indeed, thinking that firms give a shit about you is hilarious

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

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby chadwick218 » Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:41 am

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.


Furthermore, I've heard some rumblings that certain "rainmakers" are may be considering informal offers to join other firms in town.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18407
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby bk1 » Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:41 am

IAFG wrote:That would be a good way of going about it, but I haven't heard of any firm ever doing this, no matter how over-subscribed.


I've been told one firm that did this in a previous year but I don't know exactly how they went about it.

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

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby chadwick218 » Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:45 am

Desert Fox wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
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.


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.


New Anon here: Statement about Dallas seems way too panicky. Weil's Dallas office gave 100% offers. Would be surprised if Gibson Dunn Dallas was hurting. Latham in Houston is booming. Maybe it's just an issue with some Texas firms not being as healthy as they thought.


I've heard Dallas firms are doing bad, very slow.


It seems to be more firm/practice area specific. On the whole, I think that Dallas is fine and no different than any other city. I do know that IP is way up. Firms that have traditionally focused more on middle-market corporate work (i.e., Andrews Kurth) also seem to be doing very well.

User avatar
Richie Tenenbaum
Posts: 2162
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:17 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Richie Tenenbaum » Thu Aug 23, 2012 1:02 am

lukertin wrote:
IAFG wrote:
Richie Tenenbaum wrote:
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.


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?

That would be a good way of going about it, but I haven't heard of any firm ever doing this, no matter how over-subscribed.

Indeed, thinking that firms give a shit about you is hilarious


Newsflash: It's better for the firm too. No offering a third of your class looks way worse than telling 2Ls to consider their other acceptances. It's also just a complete waste of money to feed and entertain 10 SAs for the summer you know will be dumped.

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

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby rayiner » Thu Aug 23, 2012 1:04 am

Firms to avoid: law firms. Also, investment banking firms.

lukertin
Posts: 775
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:16 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby lukertin » Thu Aug 23, 2012 1:19 am

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:Newsflash: It's better for the firm too. No offering a third of your class looks way worse than telling 2Ls to consider their other acceptances. It's also just a complete waste of money to feed and entertain 10 SAs for the summer you know will be dumped.

Looks worse to whom, and to whom does this matter, exactly? It's a buyer's market out there, if you haven't realized.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 23, 2012 1:21 am

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:Newsflash: It's better for the firm too. No offering a third of your class looks way worse than telling 2Ls to consider their other acceptances. It's also just a complete waste of money to feed and entertain 10 SAs for the summer you know will be dumped.


The problem with this is that as word gets around that the firm recommends this to Jane Doe, others who would have accepted and who the firm actually wants to get will act based on the advice given to Jane Doe, and the firm can end up undersubscribed.

It may also just be that firms would rather not employ this strategy when there is at least the chance that they could take the vast majority of their SAs. This is obvious, but it's quite difficult to assess business needs 2 years ahead of time.

Younger Abstention
Posts: 335
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Younger Abstention » Thu Aug 23, 2012 1:22 am

joeshmo39 wrote:I heard Dechert no-offered around a third of their Philly summer class. Bear in mind they are
headquartered in Philly. They also pulled a "don't call us, we'll call you" move with their summers from a couple years ago.


Completely untrue. 100% offer rate last year (at least in Philly).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 23, 2012 2:20 am

Desert Fox wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
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.


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.


New Anon here: Statement about Dallas seems way too panicky. Weil's Dallas office gave 100% offers. Would be surprised if Gibson Dunn Dallas was hurting. Latham in Houston is booming. Maybe it's just an issue with some Texas firms not being as healthy as they thought.


I've heard Dallas firms are doing bad, very slow.


Weil's Dallas office was not. They had a ton of litigation work and I think fairly busy with corporate. The only slower section was bankruptcy--they had stuff going on with a few huge cases, but it wasn't as predictable if the work was going to be steady in the next year or two. This was only my impression of things though. But seems accurate since they were adding laterals (one in lit, one in corp) during the summer to keep up with the work.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:56 am

Anonymous User wrote:
I haven't heard any of this-wow. Had 4 CB in Dallas and (suprisingly!!) all indicated they were doing fine. I also had a CB at Fulbright (Dallas) that I thought went very well. But this is scaring the shit out of me.


It should be obvious that no one who you interview with is going to ring the alarm during a CB. Recruiting sets you up with people who are billing a lot and appear to be happy at the firm. Do you think anyone told the Dewey summers during their CBs that the partners hadn't gotten paid?

Anyway, heard of a couple of Latham no offers.


Which Latham office?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:57 am

Anyone hearing anything about Pillsbury? There was some mumbling last year about them.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:03 am

Latham no offered two in its NY class but it was entirely related to those two people not the firms health.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:09 am

Younger Abstention wrote:
joeshmo39 wrote:I heard Dechert no-offered around a third of their Philly summer class. Bear in mind they are
headquartered in Philly. They also pulled a "don't call us, we'll call you" move with their summers from a couple years ago.


Completely untrue. 100% offer rate last year (at least in Philly).


No idea about Philly, but Dechert did no offer 5 of their 50 summers in NY this year.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.