Well-known lawyers - who lives up to the hype? Forum

[nixy]

what about transactional lawyers? most biglaw folks, particular partners, are transactional

kind of hard to "watch" transactional lawyers demonstrate their skill in any way to evaluate them, though.

[Anonymous User]

Whike I'm sure they're good, I feel like most of these people don't have hype they have to live up to. For me, as far as appellate attorneys go, Seth Waxman and Paul Clemente live up to the hype. Neither was the best appellate attorney I saw while clerking, but it would out me probably. For trial attorneys, David Boies is as good as people say (ignoring the other issues). I'd say Daniel Petrocelli and Beth Wilkinson are the best trial attorneys I've seen.

[Anonymous User]

what about transactional lawyers? most biglaw folks, particular partners, are transactional

kind of hard to "watch" transactional lawyers demonstrate their skill in any way to evaluate them, though.

Part of a good transactional skillset is a transactional partner extremely quickly pinpointing the issues for the client and laying them out in a way that will make sense for the client in 1-3 sentences.

Most TLS posters will go "lol that's obvious" but the difference between someone who's good and who is not is massive -- if you've ever been at a board meeting with a heavy hitter (senior partner/head of group) at a v10 and watched them manage a board, that's what I'm talking about -- even keel, quick on the core points to focus on, etc.

[Anonymous User]

Tom Melsheimer at Winston and Mike McKool were as good as advertised.

RIP the legend Steve Susman, but I saw him once at a hearing and it wasn't overly impressive. Had a similar experience with Boies.

[Anonymous User]

what about transactional lawyers? most biglaw folks, particular partners, are transactional

kind of hard to "watch" transactional lawyers demonstrate their skill in any way to evaluate them, though.

Part of a good transactional skillset is a transactional partner extremely quickly pinpointing the issues for the client and laying them out in a way that will make sense for the client in 1-3 sentences.

Most TLS posters will go "lol that's obvious" but the difference between someone who's good and who is not is massive -- if you've ever been at a board meeting with a heavy hitter (senior partner/head of group) at a v10 and watched them manage a board, that's what I'm talking about -- even keel, quick on the core points to focus on, etc.

Not naming names because it would instantly out me, but one of the partners in my PE group is both amazing at that, and I think the other thing she excels at is her ability in calls with opposing counsel to make the other side, no matter how reasonable their position, look ridiculous and dumb. And she does it in such a calm, non-aggressive voice. Half the time they start getting heated and just make things worse, the other half they just slowly give in to her.

[Anonymous User]

what about transactional lawyers? most biglaw folks, particular partners, are transactional

kind of hard to "watch" transactional lawyers demonstrate their skill in any way to evaluate them, though.

Part of a good transactional skillset is a transactional partner extremely quickly pinpointing the issues for the client and laying them out in a way that will make sense for the client in 1-3 sentences.

Most TLS posters will go "lol that's obvious" but the difference between someone who's good and who is not is massive -- if you've ever been at a board meeting with a heavy hitter (senior partner/head of group) at a v10 and watched them manage a board, that's what I'm talking about -- even keel, quick on the core points to focus on, etc.

Not naming names because it would instantly out me, but one of the partners in my PE group is both amazing at that, and I think the other thing she excels at is her ability in calls with opposing counsel to make the other side, no matter how reasonable their position, look ridiculous and dumb. And she does it in such a calm, non-aggressive voice. Half the time they start getting heated and just make things worse, the other half they just slowly give in to her.

Yep, we had a multi-V10 team on a transaction (different firms handling different components of the transaction--one firm advising the board, another the company, another doing cap markets work, etc.) and one of them had a rainmaker handle the board in a way that was just wild in how deft they were. Similarly can't name names because it would instantly out me but it was extremely impressive.

[nixy]

what about transactional lawyers? most biglaw folks, particular partners, are transactional

kind of hard to "watch" transactional lawyers demonstrate their skill in any way to evaluate them, though.

Part of a good transactional skillset is a transactional partner extremely quickly pinpointing the issues for the client and laying them out in a way that will make sense for the client in 1-3 sentences.

Most TLS posters will go "lol that's obvious" but the difference between someone who's good and who is not is massive -- if you've ever been at a board meeting with a heavy hitter (senior partner/head of group) at a v10 and watched them manage a board, that's what I'm talking about -- even keel, quick on the core points to focus on, etc.

I agree, but I don’t think there’s going to be a hype around that kind of skill the way there’s hype around litigators. (Not saying that’s fair or means anything about importance or skill.)

[Anonymous User]

Elizabeth Cabraser is a legend as an appellate litigator
James Wagstaffe is a very legit trial lawyer
John Quinn is a legend as a legal businessperson but not as a litigator

[Anonymous User]

Any takes on Morgan Chu or Bill Lee?

I'm not in IP but the whole VLSI v. Intel saga is pretty interesting to observe.

[Anonymous User]

Any takes on Morgan Chu or Bill Lee?

I'm not in IP but the whole VLSI v. Intel saga is pretty interesting to observe.

The DJ I clerked for said Bill Lee was by far and away the best trial lawyer he saw in 30 years on the bench.