Ranking the top litigation boutiques Forum
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 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.
-
Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
Re: Ranking the top litigation boutiques
I don't get bragging about letting all associates run cases. Um, that is essentially malpractice.
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
GOATlawman
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 9:40 pm
Re: Ranking the top litigation boutiques
I was fortunate enough to witness the 60 yr old boomer partners of my firm get fuckin schooled at claim construction by a team of lawyers that had a age spread of like 25-29Desert Fox wrote:I don't get bragging about letting all associates run cases. Um, that is essentially malpractice.
and then blame getting schooled on the 7th year who got to argue 1 throwaway term for the first time in his career
-
fats provolone
- Posts: 7125
- Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 4:44 pm
Re: Ranking the top litigation boutiques
no one gets schooled at claim construction
-
GOATlawman
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 9:40 pm
Re: Ranking the top litigation boutiques
SCHOOLEDfats provolone wrote:no one gets schooled at claim construction
-
arklaw13
- Posts: 1862
- Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:36 pm
Re: Ranking the top litigation boutiques
egregious yale trollingAnonymous User wrote:dovel and luner
We consider law students or attorneys with less than 2 years of experience with the following academic credentials:
Top 10% at Harvard Law School or Stanford Law School
Top 5% at all other top 10 law schools
We do not require (or give preference to) an engineering or science background.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
nothingtosee
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 12:08 am
Re: Ranking the top litigation boutiques
YHS now HS confirmedarklaw13 wrote:egregious yale trollingAnonymous User wrote:dovel and luner
We consider law students or attorneys with less than 2 years of experience with the following academic credentials:
Top 10% at Harvard Law School or Stanford Law School
Top 5% at all other top 10 law schools
We do not require (or give preference to) an engineering or science background.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432496
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Ranking the top litigation boutiques
Does anyone have any info whether Williams & Connolly will move its base salaries up now that its compensation falls well below the other firms' "base + bonus"? They may still be competitive for 1st and second years, but mid levels seem to be lagging now. If someone is going to sign on, it would bne nice to know what the total package will be.
Or whether clerkship signing bonuses at W&C will rise for the same reason? For example Kellogg is over 150 now for top COA clerks and WC is still below 100.
Bueller? Anyone?
Or whether clerkship signing bonuses at W&C will rise for the same reason? For example Kellogg is over 150 now for top COA clerks and WC is still below 100.
Bueller? Anyone?
