Williams & Connolly, Susman Godfrey, or Boies Schiller?
Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 7:44 pm
Any thoughts would be helpful. Geography unimportant.
Law School Discussion Forums
What do you want to do.Anonymous User wrote:Any thoughts would be helpful. Geography unimportant.
Litigation seems like a reasonable assumption. This sounds like a hypo though; I doubt OP is deciding between offers this late in the game.rad lulz wrote:What do you want to do.Anonymous User wrote:Any thoughts would be helpful. Geography unimportant.
Boies is probably more traditional big law, but they do plaintiff's side lit and give more responsibility / experience to associates than most biglaw firms, although maybe not to the extent Susman does. They also pay outrageous bonuses that are heavily tied to hours; I know a fourth year who made around 300k last year, although he billed nearly 3k hours. Boies probably pays better money than Susman to the average associate, although Susman will still get you further since Texas cost of living is so cheap.bhan87 wrote:W&C is of course very well-known for white-collar lit. Susman is known for plaintiff-side litigation and insane compensation (also their partner-heavy business model). Boies is much more a traditional biglaw style firm, but also pays above market. So...
What are the hours like at Williams and Connolly?badaboom61 wrote:
Williams and Connolly for better hours . . . .
Pretty credited except for WC has no bonuses. They start you at > 160.anon168 wrote:You basically have two types of firms listed.
WC is your traditional biglaw, defense type firm. Bill your hours, get bonus, generally lockstep.
BSF and SG, on the other hand, are more non-traditional, boutique plaintiffs-type firms. The hours will be brutal at both shops, and at both places your career advancement will depend less on how many hours you bill (although that still matters) but more on the results you get on your cases -- in other words, don't lose or win (depending on the case). It's very very high pressure and intense. Not made for everyone.
I liken it like this. Say you're a druggie. WC would be like simply doing cocaine and getting generally good stuff from your "connection" in the Meat Packing District. If, on the other hand, you like doing Meth, chased by Bath Salts, then BSF and SG is your cup of tea.
One other point. Think about legacy and, to some lesser extent, exit options. Consider what will happen to BSF once David and/or Jon decide to retire. Will it still be there? Same is generally true with SG, although to a lesser extent, as the torch is already being handed off to some extent (but how that firm transitions into the next 10 years is something still be determined). And what are exit options for an associate from BSF or SG? Hard to say. You're not really going to another boutique because, well, that's sort of where you started. And, midsized defense firms may be very leery of hiring you because of your plaintiffs-side work.
Neither of those issues are extant with WC. But then you have to fucking live and work in the Beltway.