Irell Exodus

(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: 273184
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Irell Exodus

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jan 08, 2015 11:31 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
KM2016 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:wow. one of the partners leaving was my OCI interviewer just a few months ago, another was a CB interviewer. pretty surprised by this and honestly disturbed given how close I came to choosing them


Just be glad you didn't choose them. Who knows what's going to happen over there...


No joke. I was pretty strongly considering them along with another LA firm and ended up accepting at the other place. Feel like I dodged a huge bullet.

Wonder how much writing on the wall there was during OCI/CB season. Everyone I talked to seemed exceptionally rosy about the firm compared to my other CBs.


I had a partner at another firm warn me about considering Irell b/c of the uncertainties regarding Chu but I dismissed that as an aggressive Quinn hard sell. I talked to an Irell partner during a CB who stressed that Irell was full service before Chu and was moving towards to being full service again - didn't they just pick up a bunch of corporate entertainment lawyers and etc to round out their practice groups? This is a huge surprise for me.

I mean, Hueston had only been there like 6 years. And the partners he took with him were all recently made partners. I'm guessing the clients he's taking with him are the clients he brought in. It's not like the firm is splitting in half. It sucks if you were planning on working for Hueston but that's the risk of counting on a single partner (same as with Chu, or Boies, etc).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273184
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Irell Exodus

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jan 08, 2015 1:32 pm

Irell summer-->associate, happy to answer questions on the ordeal.

Overall, the media hype surrounding the situation has been pretty awful.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273184
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Irell Exodus

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jan 08, 2015 2:44 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Irell summer-->associate, happy to answer questions on the ordeal.

Overall, the media hype surrounding the situation has been pretty awful.


How screwed are summers and incoming associates who wanted to do non-IP litigation work?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273184
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Irell Exodus

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jan 08, 2015 3:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Irell summer-->associate, happy to answer questions on the ordeal.

Overall, the media hype surrounding the situation has been pretty awful.


How screwed are summers and incoming associates who wanted to do non-IP litigation work?


It depends what you mean by "non-IP work." If that means Entertainment, then you are fine. If it means anything that Hueston brought in (General WC, Securities, etc.), then that work is unlikely to be available. Also, it depends on how Irell responds. They could focus more on IP, or try to bring in some new rainmakers to generate non-IP business. Time will tell.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.