.

(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: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

.

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:10 pm

.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Gibson v. Latham: Los Angeles Corporate

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:13 pm

Gibson: top of their building. Better views, but scarier in an earthquake.
Latham: bottom of their building. Worse views, but less scary in an earthquake.

I would pick GDC if I had offers from both, but I would also consider other LA corporate firms as well (Skadden, S&C, Kirkland, etc.).

Anonymous User
Posts: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Gibson v. Latham: Los Angeles Corporate

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:16 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Gibson: top of their building. Better views, but scarier in an earthquake.
Latham: bottom of their building. Worse views, but less scary in an earthquake.

I would pick GDC if I had offers from both, but I would also consider other LA corporate firms as well (Skadden, S&C, Kirkland, etc.).


True, but views from DTLA aren't overly spectacular

Anonymous User
Posts: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Gibson v. Latham: Los Angeles Corporate

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:21 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Gibson: top of their building. Better views, but scarier in an earthquake.
Latham: bottom of their building. Worse views, but less scary in an earthquake.

I would pick GDC if I had offers from both, but I would also consider other LA corporate firms as well (Skadden, S&C, Kirkland, etc.).


True, but views from DTLA aren't overly spectacular


Depends what side of the building your on.

Also, I know someone who lateral'd from Latham LA and s/he felt like s/he was really overworked there. S/he told me that s/he pulled all nighters at the office more times than s/he could count. Doesn't sound like a great environment to me.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Gibson v. Latham: Los Angeles Corporate

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:24 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Gibson: top of their building. Better views, but scarier in an earthquake.
Latham: bottom of their building. Worse views, but less scary in an earthquake.

I would pick GDC if I had offers from both, but I would also consider other LA corporate firms as well (Skadden, S&C, Kirkland, etc.).


True, but views from DTLA aren't overly spectacular


Depends what side of the building your on.

Also, I know someone who lateral'd from Latham LA and s/he felt like s/he was really overworked there. S/he told me that s/he pulled all nighters at the office more times than s/he could count. Doesn't sound like a great environment to me.


Would I not be overworked at Gibson too? Latham has a 1900 minimum, and it seems like if you hit 1900 you're pretty solid.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Gibson v. Latham: Los Angeles Corporate

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Gibson: top of their building. Better views, but scarier in an earthquake.
Latham: bottom of their building. Worse views, but less scary in an earthquake.

I would pick GDC if I had offers from both, but I would also consider other LA corporate firms as well (Skadden, S&C, Kirkland, etc.).


True, but views from DTLA aren't overly spectacular


Depends what side of the building your on.

Also, I know someone who lateral'd from Latham LA and s/he felt like s/he was really overworked there. S/he told me that s/he pulled all nighters at the office more times than s/he could count. Doesn't sound like a great environment to me.


Would I not be overworked at Gibson too? Latham has a 1900 minimum, and it seems like if you hit 1900 you're pretty solid.


I'm not sure. I just know what the Latham lateral told me. FWIW, the Latham person was billing much more than 1900, I believe.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Gibson v. Latham: Los Angeles Corporate (with poll)

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:25 pm

Mind sharing school/grades? Thx

Anonymous User
Posts: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Gibson v. Latham: Los Angeles Corporate (with poll)

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:27 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Mind sharing school/grades? Thx


Who are you talking to?

Anonymous User
Posts: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Gibson v. Latham: Los Angeles Corporate (with poll)

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:27 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Mind sharing school/grades? Thx


Who are you talking to?


OP. Sorry

Anonymous User
Posts: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Gibson v. Latham: Los Angeles Corporate (with poll)

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Mind sharing school/grades? Thx


Who are you talking to?


OP. Sorry


.

Anonymous User
Posts: 301253
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: .

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:58 pm

For LA, these two are top at corporate right? Arguably SuLCrom, Munger, or Skadden next?




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.