Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham Forum

(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.

Where should I work for DC litigation preftige/gov't connex?

Latham DC
25
28%
Hogan DC
65
72%
 
Total votes: 90

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Sep 04, 2017 7:33 pm

Bumping this topic. Dan anyone speak more about Hogan's hours requirement vs. Latham's?

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Sep 04, 2017 9:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Bumping this topic. Dan anyone speak more about Hogan's hours requirement vs. Latham's?
Close law school friend is at Hogan in DC. Hogan has a 2000 hours requirement, which can include a decent amount of pro bono. No real incentive to work more than that, or at least that is what my friend has experienced. Seems like a great place to work (at least on the lit/white collar side, I can't speak to the other groups).

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Bumping this topic. Dan anyone speak more about Hogan's hours requirement vs. Latham's?
Close law school friend is at Hogan in DC. Hogan has a 2000 hours requirement, which can include a decent amount of pro bono. No real incentive to work more than that, or at least that is what my friend has experienced. Seems like a great place to work (at least on the lit/white collar side, I can't speak to the other groups).

Thanks for the input. I've heard only good things about Hogan and I'm pretty sure I'm going with them now.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:10 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Bumping this topic. Dan anyone speak more about Hogan's hours requirement vs. Latham's?
Close law school friend is at Hogan in DC. Hogan has a 2000 hours requirement, which can include a decent amount of pro bono. No real incentive to work more than that, or at least that is what my friend has experienced. Seems like a great place to work (at least on the lit/white collar side, I can't speak to the other groups).

Thanks for the input. I've heard only good things about Hogan and I'm pretty sure I'm going with them now.
Latham has a 1900 requirement for bonus but don't believe that's all you'll be working.

If you want Lit, Hogan by a mile. If you're unsure or want corporate work, Latham by a mile. Regulatory practices - might be a closer call but I'd lean towards Hogan

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:10 am

Deleted
Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:13 am

Which firm provides the better exit options to Gov.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:50 am

Hogan DC no offered at least one person this year. Maybe not relevant to the decision making process, but something to be aware of.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:02 am

Anonymous User wrote:Hogan DC no offered at least one person this year. Maybe not relevant to the decision making process, but something to be aware of.
Wow, I was told everyone got an offer. Mind if I ask where you got this from?

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:43 am

Anonymous User wrote:Which firm provides the better exit options to Gov.
Depends what practice. Lit across the board - Hogan. Regulatory agencies like FCC, FTC - Latham. In-house? Possibly Latham from its M&A practice in DC.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:36 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Hogan DC no offered at least one person this year. Maybe not relevant to the decision making process, but something to be aware of.
Wow, I was told everyone got an offer. Mind if I ask where you got this from?
Roommate is friends with the no-offeree.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:43 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Hogan DC no offered at least one person this year. Maybe not relevant to the decision making process, but something to be aware of.
Wow, I was told everyone got an offer. Mind if I ask where you got this from?
Roommate is friends with the no-offeree.
Any particular reason? I think Vault also lists everyone as receiving an offer. This is a little alarming.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:44 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Hogan DC no offered at least one person this year. Maybe not relevant to the decision making process, but something to be aware of.
Wow, I was told everyone got an offer. Mind if I ask where you got this from?
Roommate is friends with the no-offeree.
Any particular reason? I think Vault also lists everyone as receiving an offer. This is a little alarming.
I have also heard about the no offer.

Also, Latham is still Latham, which should concern people.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:17 am

Anonymous User wrote: Any particular reason? I think Vault also lists everyone as receiving an offer. This is a little alarming.
That's 2016 info not 2017 (I think they do usually give 100% offers). I don't have a specific reason but it sounded like a combination of work product and fit? Then again there's probably something I don't know.

But yeah there is also a reason Lathaming is a verb.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:11 am

A single no-offer just means the person did something to lose the offer, same as any other firm. 100% offer firms still give cold offers if someone earns it.

dixiecupdrinking

Gold
Posts: 3436
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by dixiecupdrinking » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:55 am

Anonymous User wrote:A single no-offer just means the person did something to lose the offer, same as any other firm. 100% offer firms still give cold offers if someone earns it.
Yeah, unless you're planning on being the guy who jumps in the river at a firm event or completely fails to turn in his assignments, a single no offer shouldn't concern you.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:35 pm

The Hogan no-offer (cold-offer) was well deserved and earned, and was unsurprising to fellow Hogan summers.

HamlinMcgill

New
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 7:04 pm

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by HamlinMcgill » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:42 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Which firm provides the better exit options to Gov.
Depends what practice. Lit across the board - Hogan. Regulatory agencies like FCC, FTC - Latham. In-house? Possibly Latham from its M&A practice in DC.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but fwiw hogan lovells just hired the former FTC chairwoman under Obama: https://www.hoganlovells.com/en/news/fo ... an-lovells

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:27 pm

While it may not be ranked as high as Latham in the national Vault rankings, Hogan is definitely a top tier firm in DC.

Hand

Gold
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 11:33 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Hand » Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:26 pm

Anonymous User wrote:The Hogan no-offer (cold-offer) was well deserved and earned, and was unsurprising to fellow Hogan summers.
tell us more

don't tease us like that

ETA word on the street is that it was a straight-up no offer

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:30 pm

Hand wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:The Hogan no-offer (cold-offer) was well deserved and earned, and was unsurprising to fellow Hogan summers.
tell us more

don't tease us like that

ETA word on the street is that it was a straight-up no offer
Yeah the one I know about (and I assume there was only one) was a full no offer not a cold offer, though i guess the difference is not important. I do want to know what the real story is though.

FloridaCoastalorbust

Silver
Posts: 1362
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:43 pm

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by FloridaCoastalorbust » Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:40 pm

hogan not close

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:57 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:A single no-offer just means the person did something to lose the offer, same as any other firm. 100% offer firms still give cold offers if someone earns it.
Yeah, unless you're planning on being the guy who jumps in the river at a firm event or completely fails to turn in his assignments, a single no offer shouldn't concern you.
Oddly enough there was a guy my summer who literally jumped in the river at an event and he still got an offer.

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:38 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:A single no-offer just means the person did something to lose the offer, same as any other firm. 100% offer firms still give cold offers if someone earns it.
Yeah, unless you're planning on being the guy who jumps in the river at a firm event or completely fails to turn in his assignments, a single no offer shouldn't concern you.
Oddly enough there was a guy my summer who literally jumped in the river at an event and he still got an offer.
LOL I heard about this but thought it was fake!!!

Hand

Gold
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 11:33 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Hand » Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:48 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Hand wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:The Hogan no-offer (cold-offer) was well deserved and earned, and was unsurprising to fellow Hogan summers.
tell us more

don't tease us like that

ETA word on the street is that it was a straight-up no offer
Yeah the one I know about (and I assume there was only one) was a full no offer not a cold offer, though i guess the difference is not important. I do want to know what the real story is though.
Come on original anon, don't be a cock tease. I've heard about throwing up in the office elevator, but surely there is more

Anonymous User
Posts: 432508
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Prestigewhore DC Lit: Hogan v. Latham

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:30 pm

Hand wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Hand wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:The Hogan no-offer (cold-offer) was well deserved and earned, and was unsurprising to fellow Hogan summers.
tell us more

don't tease us like that

ETA word on the street is that it was a straight-up no offer
Yeah the one I know about (and I assume there was only one) was a full no offer not a cold offer, though i guess the difference is not important. I do want to know what the real story is though.
Come on original anon, don't be a cock tease. I've heard about throwing up in the office elevator, but surely there is more
I know that there is at least one person not returning to Hogan. I do not think there is any certainty that the person did not receive an offer. It is entirely possible that person simply decided not to return.

I would be curious to know if anyone knows, for sure, that it was a no offer and the reasons for that no offer.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Legal Employment”