Latham LA vs. Bingham LA
Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 pm
Any general TLS wisdom on helping someone decide between these two firms for a SA position. Litigation focused.
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=193106
Latham. No brainer.Anonymous User wrote:Any general TLS wisdom on helping someone decide between these two firms for a SA position. Litigation focused.
The fuck? Unless you like fratty, sweat-shopish, environments with a chance of being no-offered after your summer, why would ever pick Latham, let alone consider it one-sided? Bingham's got one of the best QOL's on the West Coast, and that's saying something.anon168 wrote:Latham. No brainer.Anonymous User wrote:Any general TLS wisdom on helping someone decide between these two firms for a SA position. Litigation focused.
Let's put it his way.Tanicius wrote:The fuck? Unless you like fratty, sweat-shopish, environments with a chance of being no-offered after your summer, why would ever pick Latham, let alone consider it one-sided? Bingham's got one of the best QOL's on the West Coast, and that's saying something.anon168 wrote:Latham. No brainer.Anonymous User wrote:Any general TLS wisdom on helping someone decide between these two firms for a SA position. Litigation focused.
anon168 wrote:Let's put it his way.Tanicius wrote:The fuck? Unless you like fratty, sweat-shopish, environments with a chance of being no-offered after your summer, why would ever pick Latham, let alone consider it one-sided? Bingham's got one of the best QOL's on the West Coast, and that's saying something.anon168 wrote:Latham. No brainer.Anonymous User wrote:Any general TLS wisdom on helping someone decide between these two firms for a SA position. Litigation focused.
99.9999% of the posters on this sub-board, when asking a question like this, are asking about which firm to go to vis-a-vis their long-term career prospects. Few, if any, are picking a SA firm with the intent on staying forever and making partner, which is why this whole QOL bullshit is, well, bullshit.
So, all of that said, for the purposes of long-term career prospects (read: exit options) as well as training and work experience, Latham is a no-brainer.
The only person who would choose Bingham over Latham in this situation is a person who does not have an offer from Latham.
QOL comes into play if you are deciding between Latham (LA) and GDC (LA), or Bingham and Winston, for example. Not otherwise.Tanicius wrote:anon168 wrote:Let's put it his way.Tanicius wrote:The fuck? Unless you like fratty, sweat-shopish, environments with a chance of being no-offered after your summer, why would ever pick Latham, let alone consider it one-sided? Bingham's got one of the best QOL's on the West Coast, and that's saying something.anon168 wrote:
Latham. No brainer.
99.9999% of the posters on this sub-board, when asking a question like this, are asking about which firm to go to vis-a-vis their long-term career prospects. Few, if any, are picking a SA firm with the intent on staying forever and making partner, which is why this whole QOL bullshit is, well, bullshit.
So, all of that said, for the purposes of long-term career prospects (read: exit options) as well as training and work experience, Latham is a no-brainer.
The only person who would choose Bingham over Latham in this situation is a person who does not have an offer from Latham.
Associates have QOL concerns too, you know...
And getting no-offered really ought to factor into this question of long-term career prospects.
where are you getting this no offer business? Hasn't Latham had a 100% offer rate since 2010 and Bingham has not?Tanicius wrote:
And getting no-offered really ought to factor into this question of long-term career prospects.
Here's the thing about a post like this (and I also disagree about the "sweatshopy" comment earlier, like I'll disagree about the fratty one too, because that's not the case in every office at all) -- Unless you know exactly why those people were no offered, tossing out the no offer bullshit means nothing. Because as much as we'd all like 100% offers (and it was 100% in both NY AND DC last year), there very well could be extremely legitimate and not business (read: revenue) related reasons that those people were no offered. If the summer was producing shit work every day, or was inappropriate to other individuals, or belligerent all the time, etc., then the no offer is valid.This year Latham did not have a 100% offer rate in several offices. I don't know about LA specifically, but DC there were at least 2 and was told NY was the same.
Oh look, Latham just offered 100% of their class in LA:Anonymous User wrote:Here's the thing about a post like this (and I also disagree about the "sweatshopy" comment earlier, like I'll disagree about the fratty one too, because that's not the case in every office at all) -- Unless you know exactly why those people were no offered, tossing out the no offer bullshit means nothing. Because as much as we'd all like 100% offers (and it was 100% in both NY AND DC last year), there very well could be extremely legitimate and not business (read: revenue) related reasons that those people were no offered. If the summer was producing shit work every day, or was inappropriate to other individuals, or belligerent all the time, etc., then the no offer is valid.This year Latham did not have a 100% offer rate in several offices. I don't know about LA specifically, but DC there were at least 2 and was told NY was the same.
Latham DC (where I summered) made it a point while I was there to keep in contact with each person and let him or her know if any issues were arising. If there was a no-offer, barring a change in their policies/practices, the person knows exactly why it occurred and it should not have been unexpected.