Poll: Irell v. Gibson Dunn Forum

[Anonymous User]

Prefer general litigation, but am interested in IP also (no technical background).

[heyyitskatie]

LA for both? Orange County for one or the other?

[Anonymous User]

LA for both.

[Anonymous User]

how would munger stack up against these? have you looked into them?

[Anonymous User]

Munger doesn't come to my school. Sent them an email but never heard back.

[Anonymous User]

Any previous Irell summers care to weigh in?

[Anonymous User]

I interviewed at Irell and spoke to a former Irell summer. She said it's a pretty intense place (of course, I've heard this about everywhere), but put a unique spin on this: she said people expect really, really top work out of you; she wasn't referring to an hours expectation. So that's cool or bad, whatever you think. She also said they do a great job of being interested in your development and it's easy to find a mentor.

[Anonymous User]

Bump.

[Anonymous User]

Bizzump.

[Anonymous User]

Did callbacks at Irell OC and Gibson LA. Irell didn't seem to care about my lack of a technical background. They seem to be of the opinion that non-technical people are needed in IP lit (for example, a jury might be able to understand an explanation of a patent/copyright/whatever better if it's coming from someone non-technical).

Since both firms are great and have great names in southern california, I think you should go with where you see yourself being happiest. I know that sounds like a lame answer, but unless your IP interest is strong enough to go to Irell because it's pretty much as good as you get for that, both firms are prestigious enough and (it seems) financially conservative/solid enough to be a wash.

At least in my impression, Gibson lawyers present very well, are almost "slick," and are very confident. Kind of seem to be cut from the same cloth. Irell lawyers seemed very eclectic (no two lawyers were similar that I met), nerdy-but-friendly types. I liked that Irell seemed to house attorneys of such varied personalities, so I went with them, but it totally depends on which environment better suits you.

[Anonymous User]

I am in the process of making this choice as well, and I have no idea how I am going to pick between the two (both LA offices).

[Anonymous User]

Irell is overrated. Go to Gibson.

[Anonymous User]

Irell is overrated. Go to Gibson.

What makes you say Irell is overrated?

[snailio]

This is really a wash here, you need to pick the firm you can see yourself at in the day to day thing, Irell if you really have a thing for IP, Gibson does more general lit, if you ever decide you'd like to try corporate then Gibson would get a nod.

Both are well managed financially, they are equivalent in terms of prestige along with Munger in So. CA.

Gibson attorneys are friendly gregarious types, whereas the Irell people are a little more of the nerdy type, both are cool, it's really just a preference thing at this level in So. CA.


This is really about fit now for you, go where you felt most comfortable.

[Anonymous User]

Irell is overrated. Go to Gibson.

What makes you say Irell is overrated?

Also curious.

[Anonymous User]

Of the two firms, I think Irell is probably a bit more prestigious in LA. That said, Gibson is definitely the best of the "Big 3" firms in LA.

[Anonymous User]

Is Irell really that much more stressful? Does anybody know which firm seems to be doing better ITE?

[Anonymous User]

Irell has no "unique" problems that are not general big-law problems.

I cannot think of one way in which going to Irell is a negative for someone interested in any type of litigation.

Contrary to popular opinion, Irell does not just do patent litigation. Just because a firm is exceptional in an area of practice doesn't mean it isn't stellar in other practice areas as well.

Lifestyle-wise, I'm not sure I've ever actually heard of a firm as good as Irell. I mean, these people at Irell don't really care where you work from, or where you are for that matter during the day. As long as you get your work done. It is the purest form of meritocracy.

If there's any stress unique to Irell, my best guess would be that it is the stress that comes with knowing that the people you turn in your assignments to expect every single memo/brief to be your best work product. I think that's a good type of stress for a lawyer. And if that deters you from going to Irell, then I'm not sure the legal profession is the ideal choice of career.

I'm a huge fan of Irell, so take that as my source of bias maybe.

[Anonymous User]

Irell has no "unique" problems that are not general big-law problems.

I cannot think of one way in which going to Irell is a negative for someone interested in any type of litigation.

Contrary to popular opinion, Irell does not just do patent litigation. Just because a firm is exceptional in an area of practice doesn't mean it isn't stellar in other practice areas as well.

Lifestyle-wise, I'm not sure I've ever actually heard of a firm as good as Irell. I mean, these people at Irell don't really care where you work from, or where you are for that matter during the day. As long as you get your work done. It is the purest form of meritocracy.

If there's any stress unique to Irell, my best guess would be that it is the stress that comes with knowing that the people you turn in your assignments to expect every single memo/brief to be your best work product. I think that's a good type of stress for a lawyer. And if that deters you from going to Irell, then I'm not sure the legal profession is the ideal choice of career.

I'm a huge fan of Irell, so take that as my source of bias maybe.

Agreed. Irell is a great place that does incredible work. The firm is filled with superstars from top to bottom, and you will be learning from the best.

[Anonymous User]

Irell has no "unique" problems that are not general big-law problems.

I cannot think of one way in which going to Irell is a negative for someone interested in any type of litigation.

Contrary to popular opinion, Irell does not just do patent litigation. Just because a firm is exceptional in an area of practice doesn't mean it isn't stellar in other practice areas as well.

Lifestyle-wise, I'm not sure I've ever actually heard of a firm as good as Irell. I mean, these people at Irell don't really care where you work from, or where you are for that matter during the day. As long as you get your work done. It is the purest form of meritocracy.

If there's any stress unique to Irell, my best guess would be that it is the stress that comes with knowing that the people you turn in your assignments to expect every single memo/brief to be your best work product. I think that's a good type of stress for a lawyer. And if that deters you from going to Irell, then I'm not sure the legal profession is the ideal choice of career.

I'm a huge fan of Irell, so take that as my source of bias maybe.

Agreed. Irell is a great place that does incredible work. The firm is filled with superstars from top to bottom, and you will be learning from the best.

I have heard, though, that associates at Irell generally work very long hours, even beyond firms known for intense hours like Quinn.

[Anonymous User]

I just got done with my CB at Irell recently. I asked every associate what kind of hours they bill annually, and I got responses from 2000-2200. One associate says he knows someone that did 2300, but had not heard of more than that. Take it with a grain of salt, of course, but said associates were very frank on some other questions I asked.

As far as IP litigation goes, I was told about 40%, with maybe another 40% general litigation (of course leaving 20% for corporate work). I specifically asked if anecdotal evidence of new associates going into IP lit at a disproportionate level were true and was told that perhaps around 50% of new associates (from the last couple years) are in IP lit.

As far as stress goes, associates mentioned that the early pressure is from doing real work (leanly staffed cases) off the bat. One told me the shock is similar to jumping in cold water, but that partners are generally very supportive. It's cliche, but I believed it when they say their new associates get early responsibility.

[Anonymous User]

Irell has no "unique" problems that are not general big-law problems.

I cannot think of one way in which going to Irell is a negative for someone interested in any type of litigation.

Contrary to popular opinion, Irell does not just do patent litigation. Just because a firm is exceptional in an area of practice doesn't mean it isn't stellar in other practice areas as well.

Lifestyle-wise, I'm not sure I've ever actually heard of a firm as good as Irell. I mean, these people at Irell don't really care where you work from, or where you are for that matter during the day. As long as you get your work done. It is the purest form of meritocracy.

If there's any stress unique to Irell, my best guess would be that it is the stress that comes with knowing that the people you turn in your assignments to expect every single memo/brief to be your best work product. I think that's a good type of stress for a lawyer. And if that deters you from going to Irell, then I'm not sure the legal profession is the ideal choice of career.

I'm a huge fan of Irell, so take that as my source of bias maybe.

Agreed. Irell is a great place that does incredible work. The firm is filled with superstars from top to bottom, and you will be learning from the best.

I have heard, though, that associates at Irell generally work very long hours, even beyond firms known for intense hours like Quinn.

This is not my impression. Opposite, actually.

[Julio_El_Chavo]

I know two associates who work at Irell and they work A LOT. This may be by choice, however.

[Anonymous User]

I know two associates who work at Irell and they work A LOT. This may be by choice, however.

Yeah. Because they likely get insane responsibility. Irell associates are expected to basically develop as their own pace. But the expectation is that they won't be mucking around. And there's tons of brilliant people there, rapidly developing at "their own (blistering) pace." So if there's any pressure, its to basically be perpetually motivated to be a better lawyer.

Not a bad place to be at all as a young attorney. Sure, not as much "hand holding" - but if you're the "hand holding" type, you need to basically get lucky and find a mentor crazy enough to invest his own time on you. And you'll likely come out less hardened v. a firm where you basically learn by doing. Not because they "let" you do stuff. It's because they staff lean and have no choice - they only hire people who meet grade cutoffs. So they're generally understaffed by choice.

The whole firm is structured to essentially focus on work product quality above everything else. All the incentives are geared to that. And all disincentives to quality work ("two tier partnerships," "comps tied to billables," "face time requirements") are eliminated. The disincentives simply do not exist at Irell.

[Anonymous User]

There has been a lot of pro-Irell posting on this thread. Anybody care to point out the strengths of Gibson?