Top Law Schools

What are some of the elite plaintiffs' firms out there?

Coughlin Stoia?
Milberg?
Bernstein Liebhard?
motley rice?
Cohen Milstein?

I've heard some of these names but I have no clue how to distinguish between them.

Now this is an interesting thread.

I think Lieff Cabraser is pretty highly regarded.

A few notable ones, runs the gamut from securities, employment, mass tort, etc.

• Altshuler, Berzon, Nussbaum, Rubin & Demain.
• Baron & Budd.
• Barroway Topaz Kessler Meltzer & Check.
• Beldock Levine & Hoffman.
• Berger & Montague.
• Bernstein Liebhard.
• Bernstein Litowitz.
• Bondurant, Mixson & Elmore.
• Bredhoff & Kaiser.
• Clifford Law Offices.
• Cochran, Cherry, Givens, Smith & Montgomery.
• Cohen Milstein.
• Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy.
• Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd.
• Gibbs & Bruns.
• Girardi Keese.
• Grant & Eisenhofer.
• Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro.
• Kreindler & Kreindler.
• Labaton Sucharow.
• Leonard Carder.
• Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein.
• macdonald hoague and bayless.
• Milberg.
• Miner, Barnhill & Galland.
• Phillips & Cohen.
• Seeger Weiss.
• Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP.
• Susman Godfrey (yeah they do both but still a top plaintiff's firm based on jury verdicts).
• Vladeck Waldman.
• Watts Guerra Craft LLP.
• Whatley Drake.
• Wiggins, Childs, Quinn and Pantazis.
• Wilkes & McHugh.
• Woodcock Washburn.

What's the benefit of working at one of these firms in place of regular BigLaw?

spondee wrote:What's the benefit of working at one of these firms in place of regular BigLaw?

Higher earning potential, more interesting work (I guess that's subjective).

Starting salaries are typically a lot less, however.

I wish someone would compile a list of these firms and their starting salaries.

The big H provides their students with a much more comprehensive list of major plaintiffs firms...perhaps one of their students could share?

I'm not so sure a firm (Milberg) that paid kickbacks to named class plaintiffs can be called a "top" firm.

Aqualibrium wrote:The big H provides their students with a much more comprehensive list of major plaintiffs firms...perhaps one of their students could share?

It provides students with a list, but doesn't give much more than names. Hard to sort through which ones are legit and which ones are just kinda of sleazy PI firms.

Anonymous User wrote:

Aqualibrium wrote:The big H provides their students with a much more comprehensive list of major plaintiffs firms...perhaps one of their students could share?

The list I posted is the same list.

.

NYAssociate wrote:You can add Boies and Quinn to that list.

Frankly, it's not necessarily true that these "elite" plaintiffs firms actually get more interesting work. Your vanilla securities class action plaintiffs attorneys are nothing more than glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away.

Wow.

Holly Golightly wrote:

NYAssociate wrote:You can add Boies and Quinn to that list.

Frankly, it's not necessarily true that these "elite" plaintiffs firms actually get more interesting work. Your vanilla securities class action plaintiffs attorneys are nothing more than glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away.

Wow.

Do these firms typically hire 2Ls for summer programs?

.

aschup wrote:

Holly Golightly wrote:

NYAssociate wrote:You can add Boies and Quinn to that list.

Frankly, it's not necessarily true that these "elite" plaintiffs firms actually get more interesting work. Your vanilla securities class action plaintiffs attorneys are nothing more than glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away.

Wow.

As someone who has worked for a plaintiffs' firm, I find the assertion that class action attorneys are "glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away" ignorant and insulting. Everyone I worked with was dedicated and really believed in what they were doing. We didn't file bullshit cases.

Oh, and you know what? The cases WERE pretty damn interesting. I know a whole lot about things like pet food, drug pricing, funerals, how websites try to screw you over, and I once got to go to a music industry conference.

NYAssociate wrote:Key word in my post was "necessarily." I'm sure there is oodles of interesting work at these places, but plaintiffs are plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs could be worse. They could be defendants. Yuck!

Holly Golightly wrote:

aschup wrote:

Holly Golightly wrote:

NYAssociate wrote:You can add Boies and Quinn to that list.

Frankly, it's not necessarily true that these "elite" plaintiffs firms actually get more interesting work. Your vanilla securities class action plaintiffs attorneys are nothing more than glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away.

Wow.

As someone who has worked for a plaintiffs' firm, I find the assertion that class action attorneys are "glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away" ignorant and insulting. Everyone I worked with was dedicated and really believed in what they were doing. We didn't file bullshit cases.

Oh, and you know what? The cases WERE pretty damn interesting. I know a whole lot about things like pet food, drug pricing, funerals, how websites try to screw you over, and I once got to go to a music industry conference.

thank you HGL, both for sharing your qualifications and experiences.

NYAssociate wrote:Frankly, it's not necessarily true that these "elite" plaintiffs firms actually get more interesting work. Your vanilla securities class action plaintiffs attorneys are nothing more than glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away.

What exactly are you basing this on? Have you actually worked in one? Have you met an attorney that works in public interest firms?

I'm a law student exclusively targeting these firms because I want to work with a purpose, not just for the money. Reading over the cases they've worked on and won, they do pursue justice, mostly on a contingency basis, in antitrust, securities fraud, employment discrimination, mass tort and some human rights cases. One case that really struck me as interesting was seeking declaratory judgment and punitive damages against Exxon for killing Indonesian citizens. I have a feeling that my research on these firms while applying for them is a lot more extensive than your cursory overview and impression of some of these firms, but hey I could be wrong - which is why I asked the first three questions.

.

2LLLL wrote:Do these firms typically hire 2Ls for summer programs?

You can try, but plaintiffs' firms don't generally have very well developed clerk programs.

Aqualibrium wrote:

2LLLL wrote:Do these firms typically hire 2Ls for summer programs?

You can try, but plaintiffs' firms don't generally have very well developed clerk programs.

That's not always a bad thing. While it's nice to be coddled by big fancy summer programs, it's hard to get a real feel of what it's like working there when you're being wined and dined nightly.

Anonymous Abuser wrote:

Aqualibrium wrote:

2LLLL wrote:Do these firms typically hire 2Ls for summer programs?

You can try, but plaintiffs' firms don't generally have very well developed clerk programs.

That's not always a bad thing. While it's nice to be coddled by big fancy summer programs, it's hard to get a real feel of what it's like working there when you're being wined and dined nightly.

What I meant by that is that most of these firms don't go into every year game planning to have a summer class. They don't really do clerk programs. A lot of them will consider you for a position if you apply, but it's not like a primarily defense firm that has a clerk program and a process for recruiting clerks every year.

Yes, it's also true that they don't generally wine and dine you, but my point, again, was more about the fact that they may not even have clerks at all.

NYAssociate wrote:

But, the goal of this litigation is the payout. It always is. These firms are profit-oriented, so they're definitely looking for the money.

Charging outrageous fees to defend sleazy corporate clients is not about the payout?

Holly Golightly wrote:

aschup wrote:

Holly Golightly wrote:

NYAssociate wrote:You can add Boies and Quinn to that list.

Frankly, it's not necessarily true that these "elite" plaintiffs firms actually get more interesting work. Your vanilla securities class action plaintiffs attorneys are nothing more than glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away.

Wow.

As someone who has worked for a plaintiffs' firm, I find the assertion that class action attorneys are "glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away" ignorant and insulting. Everyone I worked with was dedicated and really believed in what they were doing. We didn't file bullshit cases.

Oh, and you know what? The cases WERE pretty damn interesting. I know a whole lot about things like pet food, drug pricing, funerals, how websites try to screw you over, and I once got to go to a music industry conference.

Would you take a case being a plaintiff for RIAA?

Holly Golightly wrote:

aschup wrote:

Holly Golightly wrote:

NYAssociate wrote:You can add Boies and Quinn to that list.

Frankly, it's not necessarily true that these "elite" plaintiffs firms actually get more interesting work. Your vanilla securities class action plaintiffs attorneys are nothing more than glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away.

Wow.

As someone who has worked for a plaintiffs' firm, I find the assertion that class action attorneys are "glorified ambulance chasers hoping for massive corporations to give them big payouts just to go away" ignorant and insulting. Everyone I worked with was dedicated and really believed in what they were doing. We didn't file bullshit cases.

Oh, and you know what? The cases WERE pretty damn interesting. I know a whole lot about things like pet food, drug pricing, funerals, how websites try to screw you over, and I once got to go to a music industry conference.

This is fine, but a huge chunk of consumer class-action work is total strike suit crap. The PSLRA was enacted for a reason. Corporate derivative cases are entirely lawyer-driven, are generally nothing but a drain on company resources (i.e., the value the shareholders lose due to the litigation almost always surpasses whatever recovery the shareholders receive), and basically do nothing but spawn another reason to purchase insurance. Some of the class actions going on against banks right now are just ridiculous (see: In re Overdraft Fee Litigation, a MASSIVE MDL going on in Florida atm, and In re HELOC loan litigation).


Now, no doubt, some of the mass tort class action stuff has been quite important (the asbestos litigation, for example). But don't try to make it out as if plaintiff firms are hot stuff.

And truth be told, the quality of lawyering that goes on is simply lower. Read the briefs in any big plaintiff case - compare the plaintiff briefs to the defense briefs. While there are obviously exceptions, the difference in quality is really noticeable.