Paul Weiss Corporate Forum

[Anonymous User]

I have to say that I've been incredibly impressed by the firm's pitch on how the corporate department is exploding. They pulled in some of the big OMM corporate partners (and now one of the top hedge fund lawyers from Schulte) and the work seems to be overflowing, with a lot of responsibility early on for junior associates and plenty of top-level work going their way. Can anybody offer thoughts on joining PW for transactional work? Good idea / bad idea / only a good idea if you don't have anything else lined up?

[Anonymous User]

I have to say that I've been incredibly impressed by the firm's pitch on how the corporate department is exploding. They pulled in some of the big OMM corporate partners (and now one of the top hedge fund lawyers from Schulte) and the work seems to be overflowing, with a lot of responsibility early on for junior associates and plenty of top-level work going their way. Can anybody offer thoughts on joining PW for transactional work? Good idea / bad idea / only a good idea if you don't have anything else lined up?

+1. Also interested in this.

[imchuckbass58]

I have to say that I've been incredibly impressed by the firm's pitch on how the corporate department is exploding. They pulled in some of the big OMM corporate partners (and now one of the top hedge fund lawyers from Schulte) and the work seems to be overflowing, with a lot of responsibility early on for junior associates and plenty of top-level work going their way. Can anybody offer thoughts on joining PW for transactional work? Good idea / bad idea / only a good idea if you don't have anything else lined up?

Definitely not a bad idea. The one thing I would consider is that they're really strong in a few practices - they don't have an across-the-board corporate offering in the same way some of the big NY corporate firms do. They're really good at bankruptcy, fund formation (PE and HF), and real estate. But they have never had a really top-flight capital markets, finance, or M&A practice (M&A is maybe different now with OMM partners, but even then it's probably not on par with the top NY corporate firms). So if you're looking specifically at some of the former areas, I think it makes more sense than if you just have a general interest in corporate.

The other concern, which is harder to describe/consider, is being at a firm where litigation "drives" the firm. I have no reason to believe this is the case at Paul Weiss, but in many firms where one practice area dominates and most of the firms leaders come from one practice area, there are complaints that firm policies can neglect or unintentionally hamper the smaller practice area. I would find ways to probe about whether this is a problem at Paul Weiss to the degree you can.

[Anonymous User]

The other concern, which is harder to describe/consider, is being at a firm where litigation "drives" the firm. I have no reason to believe this is the case at Paul Weiss, but in many firms where one practice area dominates and most of the firms leaders come from one practice area, there are complaints that firm policies can neglect or unintentionally hamper the smaller practice area. I would find ways to probe about whether this is a problem at Paul Weiss to the degree you can.

Even though the litigation associates far outweigh the number of corporate associates, the number of partners out of the respective groups is nearly split 50/50. Does this make a difference, or do you think the issue of a lopsided power dynamic might still be a danger?

[Old Gregg]

If you're looking for a big New York firm where you want the highest chance partnership, Paul Weiss corporate is where it's at.

[itbdvorm]

I have to say that I've been incredibly impressed by the firm's pitch on how the corporate department is exploding. They pulled in some of the big OMM corporate partners (and now one of the top hedge fund lawyers from Schulte) and the work seems to be overflowing, with a lot of responsibility early on for junior associates and plenty of top-level work going their way. Can anybody offer thoughts on joining PW for transactional work? Good idea / bad idea / only a good idea if you don't have anything else lined up?

Definitely not a bad idea. The one thing I would consider is that they're really strong in a few practices - they don't have an across-the-board corporate offering in the same way some of the big NY corporate firms do. They're really good at bankruptcy, fund formation (PE and HF), and real estate. But they have never had a really top-flight capital markets, finance, or M&A practice (M&A is maybe different now with OMM partners, but even then it's probably not on par with the top NY corporate firms). So if you're looking specifically at some of the former areas, I think it makes more sense than if you just have a general interest in corporate.

The other concern, which is harder to describe/consider, is being at a firm where litigation "drives" the firm. I have no reason to believe this is the case at Paul Weiss, but in many firms where one practice area dominates and most of the firms leaders come from one practice area, there are complaints that firm policies can neglect or unintentionally hamper the smaller practice area. I would find ways to probe about whether this is a problem at Paul Weiss to the degree you can.

Personally, I'd be wary. I think imchuckbass is downplaying the degree to which PW is a litigation-driven firm - it really is their bread and butter and the firm is litigation first and foremost. Additionally, while I can't speak to the Schulte guy (and besides, he's a random HF guy - not a big deal), I would be very loathe to work for the OMM team that just came over.

If you are dead-set on corporate I'd generally look elsewhere...

[Anonymous User]

I would be very loathe to work for the OMM team that just came over.

Would you mind sharing a little more on this, please?

[itbdvorm]

I would be very loathe to work for the OMM team that just came over.

Would you mind sharing a little more on this, please?

I know people who have worked under them. Difficult personalities, to say the least. The old O'Sullivan firm (PE boutique which merged with OMM) was a very sharp-elbowed place.

[imchuckbass58]

The other concern, which is harder to describe/consider, is being at a firm where litigation "drives" the firm. I have no reason to believe this is the case at Paul Weiss, but in many firms where one practice area dominates and most of the firms leaders come from one practice area, there are complaints that firm policies can neglect or unintentionally hamper the smaller practice area. I would find ways to probe about whether this is a problem at Paul Weiss to the degree you can.

Even though the litigation associates far outweigh the number of corporate associates, the number of partners out of the respective groups is nearly split 50/50. Does this make a difference, or do you think the issue of a lopsided power dynamic might still be a danger?

Yes. First off, I'd note that's only for NY. DC is almost entirely litigation. Second, litigation brings in the lion's share of the revenue, precisely because it is so highly leveraged. Finally, if you look at the top leadership of the firm, it's very litigation heavy (Brad Karp, Ted Wells, Leslie [homophobic language redacted], etc). Paul Weiss is definitely a litigation-driven firm.

[Anonymous User]

Yes. First off, I'd note that's only for NY. DC is almost entirely litigation. Second, litigation brings in the lion's share of the revenue, precisely because it is so highly leveraged. Finally, if you look at the top leadership of the firm, it's very litigation heavy (Brad Karp, Ted Wells, Leslie [homophobic language redacted], etc). Paul Weiss is definitely a litigation-driven firm.

I don't understand how this works (sorry if it's a stupid question). I know leverage is associate/partner ratio and PW is like 6:1 which is a lot of associates to fewer partners, but how does that bring in more revenue?

[imchuckbass58]

Yes. First off, I'd note that's only for NY. DC is almost entirely litigation. Second, litigation brings in the lion's share of the revenue, precisely because it is so highly leveraged. Finally, if you look at the top leadership of the firm, it's very litigation heavy (Brad Karp, Ted Wells, Leslie [homophobic language redacted], etc). Paul Weiss is definitely a litigation-driven firm.

I don't understand how this works (sorry if it's a stupid question). I know leverage is associate/partner ratio and PW is like 6:1 which is a lot of associates to fewer partners, but how does that bring in more revenue?

Firms bill by the hour for both partners and associates. So a group with 5 partners and 15 associates will be billing for 20 professionals, whereas a group with 5 partners and 5 associates will be billing for 10 professionals. Assuming they bill roughly the same amount of time per professional, the first group will bring in significantly more revenue (not quite 2x, since partner rates are higher than associates, but not by that much).

So to take the Paul Weiss example, if litigation is 6:1 and corporate is 3:1 and there are an equal number of partners, there are almost double the number of lawyers in litigation (7/4). I wouldn't be surprised if litigation had at least 1.5 times the revenue of corporate.

[Anonymous User]

summered their this summer. their corporate dept is exploding and they are pretty serious about building it up. just looking at the strides they've made the past 10 years it is quite impressive. 10 to 15 years ago this question wouldn't even need to be asked. this summer the corp dept was extremely busy and worked summers pretty hard; they also were hiring laterals left and right throughout the summer, kind of unique in that most firms will have a boatload of people entering this september so may not want to hire but pw couldn't wait that long so they hired several associates during the summer. if they keep this up they will be an even more serious corprorate player in another 10 years, so the person who made the making partner comment may be right. and their ppp are really high and i believe lockstep.

people there were generally nice. nothing particularly good or bad to say about them. only saw one partner who was a really bad yeller (not at the summers but at the support staff and his associates). everyone else was great.

they are also in the process of renovating the entire office so it looks really nice.

however, i do understand that now most of the revenue does come from litigation.

i chose pw over several v20 vault firms - it has a great brand name and is known as "a new york firm." probably wouldn't choose it over a v10 but still think its better for corporate than lower ranked firms.