White Shoe NY Firm Satellite Offices for Bay Area Litigation
Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 6:00 pm
I'm interested in Bay Area IP or commercial litigation, and I was hoping to get some feedback on the advisability of working at the Bay Area office of a big-name NY firm with a shallow Bay Area litigation practice (i.e. STB, DPW, Weil) vs. a native-California firm with a larger Bay Area litigation presence (i.e. WSGR, Cooley, Latham, MoFo, Fenwick).
More specifically, DPW has ~16 litigators in its SV office, Weil has ~31 litigators in SV (minus their biggest IP lit partner now, apparently), and STB has about ~30. Latham, MoFo, WSGR, Cooley, and Fenwick easily have litigation departments 2-4x the size of the NY satellite offices I just mentioned.
What are the downsides of working in a smaller satellite office - does the brand name from NY translate over to a smaller Bay Area practice in terms of exit options, availability of litigation work, etc, or is it generally more advisable to go with the firm that has the bigger presence in the Bay?
edited for geographical sloppiness.
More specifically, DPW has ~16 litigators in its SV office, Weil has ~31 litigators in SV (minus their biggest IP lit partner now, apparently), and STB has about ~30. Latham, MoFo, WSGR, Cooley, and Fenwick easily have litigation departments 2-4x the size of the NY satellite offices I just mentioned.
What are the downsides of working in a smaller satellite office - does the brand name from NY translate over to a smaller Bay Area practice in terms of exit options, availability of litigation work, etc, or is it generally more advisable to go with the firm that has the bigger presence in the Bay?
edited for geographical sloppiness.