Anonymous User wrote: rpupkin wrote: AspiringAspirant wrote: rpupkin wrote: cron1834 wrote: runinthefront wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Where you want to lateral is important to consider. PW places a lot of people as AUSAs, especially in SDNY/EDNY. A lot of their partners participate in the revolving door between firms/DOJ, and so have connections that can be useful for getting associates jobs at the latter. Boies will probably make it easier to lateral into another litigation boutique.
Not that you can't go Boies to AUSA or PW to boutique -- I'm sure many people do that each year -- but there is also a discernible trend.
Also, one thing that was useful to me when making a similar decision was a v10 partner telling me that you can always go v10 to Boies/Susman/Munger/etc. but rarely if ever the other way around. Going to PW doesn't close doors in the same way starting at Boies does. Of course he had a stake in the game, but I got the sense that his advice was accurate.
You drank the shit out of his Kool-Aid.
There may be another reason why you rarely see people go from Susman/Munger/Boies to a "V10."
Yeah, that seems backwards.
It does (as everyone is saying), though you could make an argument that Boies is closer to PW than it is to Susman/Munger. Boies isn't old-school big law, but I think of it more as a Quinn/PW kind of shop (albeit with better compensation) and less of a Susman/Keker/W&C/MTO kind of place.
Could you explain more about what you think distinguishes these two groups of firms?
The firms in the latter group have low leverage, invest in associate development in a meaningful way, and offer a non-negligible chance of making equity partner after a few years. None of those things are really true of Boies Schiller.
Are we talking about the same firm? As a recent SA, I can tell you that Boies staffs its cases very leanly (the "learning-by-doing" model for new associates in the same vein as Susman, Keker, W&C, MTO, and--admittedly--Quinn), and has extremely low leverage. Just based on their website directory, they actually have more partners than associates, equity notwithstanding. While having the bulk of the partnership as non-equity is a different firm model for sure, even if that's what you're focusing on, Boies still isn't leveraged in the same way that Quinn/PW are. Much closer to a standard lit boutique than a hulking BigLaw behemoth.
In 2016, the American Lawyer reported Boies (using 2014 data, albeit) as being the 9th most leveraged biglaw firm (5.56 non-equity lawyers per equity partner).Only Squire Patton, Lewis Brisbois, DLA Piper, Cadwalader, K&L, Fragomen, Paul Weiss, and White & Case were ahead (in that order). I'll try to find current data.
Update: I found a good link with updated data. http://www.americanlawyer-digital.com/a ... pg=80#pg80
On May 1 of this year, the American Lawyer listed the top 100 firms in terms of revenue per lawyer. Boies Shiller's leverage was good for 22nd on that list. For comparison's sake, Williams and Connolly was ranked #94 (1.77 lawyers per equity partner); Cadwalader was ranked #1 (8.73 lawyers per equity partner); Paul Weiss was #8 (5.88 lawyers per equity partner); Cravath was #25 (4.71 lawyers per equity partner); Skadden was #43 (3.69 lawyers per equity partner).
Quinn was 40th in 2014 and 50th in 2016.
I think rpupkin's right.