Another "Choosing Law Firms" thread Forum

[Anonymous User]

Largely deciding between two firms right now. Obviously there is a personal element that anonymous strangers online can't help me with, but I was wondering if anyone could shed light on more tangible benefits to either firm. The firms are Hogan Lovells and Willkie Farr. Both in NYC, and I am strongly leaning litigation right now. Can anyone weigh in on the pros and cons of either firm with this information in mind, such as the kind of work being done, exit options, etc.? Thanks so much!

[Anonymous User]

I think for NYC willkie farr is the definite answer. Do you have any interest in DC though? If that's the case, Hogan in NY might be a better option, they are far better than willkie in DC.

[Anonymous User]

I think for NYC willkie farr is the definite answer. Do you have any interest in DC though? If that's the case, Hogan in NY might be a better option, they are far better than willkie in DC.

Thanks for the input! Both offers are for NYC offices, and I would prefer to stay here at least for a few years (I prefer NYC over DC, though I do find some of the work that Hogan does out of DC to be pretty interesting. But I have no plans to move, and am not factoring that into my decision). Can you speak to how important it is to be working out of a firm's main office? Obviously that would be an advantage to Willkie in NYC, but just how much of a factor is it really?

[Borhas]

Is working for one big firm actually different than working for another?

[Anonymous User]

Is working for one big firm actually different than working for another?

Lol that's what I'm trying to figure out. Can anyone speak to Hogan's bonuses as well? I hear they're below market (not sure if Willkie's are market or not).

[Anonymous User]

It is different but it's hard to quantify, and hard to know before you work there. Everyone says it's the people that make them different, and they do. For some this makes them better, for others this makes them worse. Ultimately, you're guessing, because no interviewer can represent the entire firm.

Also, whether or not there's a rotational system makes a ginormous difference.

[Anonymous User]

It is different but it's hard to quantify, and hard to know before you work there. Everyone says it's the people that make them different, and they do. For some this makes them better, for others this makes them worse. Ultimately, you're guessing, because no interviewer can represent the entire firm.

Also, whether or not there's a rotational system makes a ginormous difference.

Can you explain this in a bit more detail? Are you referring to rotational systems during the SA time, or as an associate? Why does it make such a difference? Thanks!

[Anonymous User]

Wilkie without a doubt

[Anonymous User]

Wilkie without a doubt

Can you elaborate a bit more thanks!

[Anonymous User]

Wilkie without a doubt

Can you elaborate a bit more thanks!

Wilkie is a NY name with longstanding NY clients, while Hogan is a newer brand (their NY office is actually a hodgepodge of small law firms that they acquired under the Hogan banner). For your litigation interest, they have an all-star securities litigation practice (as well as white collar and general commercial lit). Hogan DC is the best for lit but since you want NY, it doesn't make a lot of sense to go with a DC satellite that does a lot of midlaw work over Wilkie.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the perspective! Any other thoughts? Would be curious to hear from anyone voting for Hogan Lovells

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the perspective! Any other thoughts? Would be curious to hear from anyone voting for Hogan Lovells

I doubt you'll find anyone other than 2Ls willing to do that. Wilkie is an excellent NYC firm - IMO inexplicably underrated by 2Ls (I'll say this, their marketing dept needs work, because their rep once you're practicing >> their rep when you were a student.) Terrific practices in a broad range of areas, stable partnership with few laterals . . . I mean you COULD pass up a Wilkie offer to work in a small, bit-player NY satellite office, but why would you?

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the perspective! Any other thoughts? Would be curious to hear from anyone voting for Hogan Lovells

I doubt you'll find anyone other than 2Ls willing to do that. Wilkie is an excellent NYC firm - IMO inexplicably underrated by 2Ls (I'll say this, their marketing dept needs work, because their rep once you're practicing >> their rep when you were a student.) Terrific practices in a broad range of areas, stable partnership with few laterals . . . I mean you COULD pass up a Wilkie offer to work in a small, bit-player NY satellite office, but why would you?

Thanks for the perspective. I do really like the people I met with at Hogan (although Willkie also has a strong reputation for being friendly and pleasant to work with, at least for NYC biglaw), but I'm trying to determine if Willkie's NYC headquarters, strong reputation in the city, and market bonuses really make a noticeable difference. How do people feel about the summer rotational system, considering I'm very strongly leaning towards litigation? And how about Willkie's policy of having you stay a generalist for your first few years?

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the perspective! Any other thoughts? Would be curious to hear from anyone voting for Hogan Lovells

I doubt you'll find anyone other than 2Ls willing to do that. Wilkie is an excellent NYC firm - IMO inexplicably underrated by 2Ls (I'll say this, their marketing dept needs work, because their rep once you're practicing >> their rep when you were a student.) Terrific practices in a broad range of areas, stable partnership with few laterals . . . I mean you COULD pass up a Wilkie offer to work in a small, bit-player NY satellite office, but why would you?

Thanks for the perspective. I do really like the people I met with at Hogan (although Willkie also has a strong reputation for being friendly and pleasant to work with, at least for NYC biglaw), but I'm trying to determine if Willkie's NYC headquarters, strong reputation in the city, and market bonuses really make a noticeable difference. How do people feel about the summer rotational system, considering I'm very strongly leaning towards litigation? And how about Willkie's policy of having you stay a generalist for your first few years?

These are the differences. You're whole life as an associate will be centered around the work a firm brings in (connected to reputation), the people who work there, and how much you are getting paid to work there.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the perspective! Any other thoughts? Would be curious to hear from anyone voting for Hogan Lovells

I doubt you'll find anyone other than 2Ls willing to do that. Wilkie is an excellent NYC firm - IMO inexplicably underrated by 2Ls (I'll say this, their marketing dept needs work, because their rep once you're practicing >> their rep when you were a student.) Terrific practices in a broad range of areas, stable partnership with few laterals . . . I mean you COULD pass up a Wilkie offer to work in a small, bit-player NY satellite office, but why would you?

Thanks for the perspective. I do really like the people I met with at Hogan (although Willkie also has a strong reputation for being friendly and pleasant to work with, at least for NYC biglaw), but I'm trying to determine if Willkie's NYC headquarters, strong reputation in the city, and market bonuses really make a noticeable difference. How do people feel about the summer rotational system, considering I'm very strongly leaning towards litigation? And how about Willkie's policy of having you stay a generalist for your first few years?

These are the differences. You're whole life as an associate will be centered around the work a firm brings in (connected to reputation), the people who work there, and how much you are getting paid to work there.

Thanks for the insight! So in terms of the work, Hogan is obviously a well-respected law firm internationally, but will the kind of work out of the NYC office lag behind a firm that is headquartered in NYC? And is there a huge difference in bonuses (still unclear about a lot in regards to those), enough so that it should be taken into account? Thanks again!

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the insight! So in terms of the work, Hogan is obviously a well-respected law firm internationally, but will the kind of work out of the NYC office lag behind a firm that is headquartered in NYC? And is there a huge difference in bonuses (still unclear about a lot in regards to those), enough so that it should be taken into account? Thanks again!

Wilkie is not just "a" firm headquartered in NYC. It's a really good firm with a very strong and stable practice. Hughes Hubbard is also headquartered in NYC but if you were comparing a Hogan offer to a Hughes Hubbard offer, people wouldn't be having this reaction.

Hogan is OK, but it ain't in the same ballpark as Wilkie, especially in NY.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the insight! So in terms of the work, Hogan is obviously a well-respected law firm internationally, but will the kind of work out of the NYC office lag behind a firm that is headquartered in NYC? And is there a huge difference in bonuses (still unclear about a lot in regards to those), enough so that it should be taken into account? Thanks again!

Wilkie is not just "a" firm headquartered in NYC. It's a really good firm with a very strong and stable practice. Hughes Hubbard is also headquartered in NYC but if you were comparing a Hogan offer to a Hughes Hubbard offer, people wouldn't be having this reaction.

Hogan is OK, but it ain't in the same ballpark as Wilkie, especially in NY.

Makes sense. Basically what I'm trying to figure out is whether there is an appreciable difference between Willkie NYC and Hogan NYC in terms of more tangible aspects, like work quality, brand name, exit options, pay, etc. or if I should just assume that all these firms are pretty similar, and that I would be doing similar work no matter where i went, and I should therefore go with my gut or where I like the people better. Thanks!

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the insight! So in terms of the work, Hogan is obviously a well-respected law firm internationally, but will the kind of work out of the NYC office lag behind a firm that is headquartered in NYC? And is there a huge difference in bonuses (still unclear about a lot in regards to those), enough so that it should be taken into account? Thanks again!

Wilkie is not just "a" firm headquartered in NYC. It's a really good firm with a very strong and stable practice. Hughes Hubbard is also headquartered in NYC but if you were comparing a Hogan offer to a Hughes Hubbard offer, people wouldn't be having this reaction.

Hogan is OK, but it ain't in the same ballpark as Wilkie, especially in NY.

Makes sense. Basically what I'm trying to figure out is whether there is an appreciable difference between Willkie NYC and Hogan NYC in terms of more tangible aspects, like work quality, brand name, exit options, pay, etc. or if I should just assume that all these firms are pretty similar, and that I would be doing similar work no matter where i went, and I should therefore go with my gut or where I like the people better. Thanks!

My god, everyones been telling you theres a tangible difference. Literally everyone. Lets run through the list:

1) Work quality is better at Wilkie because it has a
2) Better brand name in NYC which in turn means you will have
3) Better exit options and
4) Better compensation.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the insight! So in terms of the work, Hogan is obviously a well-respected law firm internationally, but will the kind of work out of the NYC office lag behind a firm that is headquartered in NYC? And is there a huge difference in bonuses (still unclear about a lot in regards to those), enough so that it should be taken into account? Thanks again!

Wilkie is not just "a" firm headquartered in NYC. It's a really good firm with a very strong and stable practice. Hughes Hubbard is also headquartered in NYC but if you were comparing a Hogan offer to a Hughes Hubbard offer, people wouldn't be having this reaction.

Hogan is OK, but it ain't in the same ballpark as Wilkie, especially in NY.

Makes sense. Basically what I'm trying to figure out is whether there is an appreciable difference between Willkie NYC and Hogan NYC in terms of more tangible aspects, like work quality, brand name, exit options, pay, etc. or if I should just assume that all these firms are pretty similar, and that I would be doing similar work no matter where i went, and I should therefore go with my gut or where I like the people better. Thanks!

My god, everyones been telling you theres a tangible difference. Literally everyone. Lets run through the list:

1) Work quality is better at Wilkie because it has a
2) Better brand name in NYC which in turn means you will have
3) Better exit options and
4) Better compensation.

Right, which is why I am appreciative of the perspectives offered here. To be fair, no one has really addressed compensation or exit options (though it seems like not many people on TLS can gauge exit options), but it's always helpful to get as many perspectives as possible since there are still people voting for Hogan (but no one has spoken to reasons for it yet).

[Anonymous User]

OP, seems like you're looking for a reason to choose Hogan, when everyone here is saying Willkie. Your gut feeling doesn't really matter, just because you think one firm has nicer people since your callback had nice people really isn't the most valid reason. NYC BigLaw is NYC BigLaw. Your hours and misery will be similiar. I'd go with the one that's probably going to lead you to better stuff down the road aka Willkie.

[Anonymous User]

OP, seems like you're looking for a reason to choose Hogan, when everyone here is saying Willkie. Your gut feeling doesn't really matter, just because you think one firm has nicer people since your callback had nice people really isn't the most valid reason. NYC BigLaw is NYC BigLaw. Your hours and misery will be similiar. I'd go with the one that's probably going to lead you to better stuff down the road aka Willkie.

Not necessarily looking for a reason to pick Hogan, I just want to make sure that the things weighing in favor of Willkie will lead to noticeable benefits. The consensus is clearly that they will. It makes sense, but I've also heard that it doesn't matter where you work because you will be doing similar work in similar conditions for similar exit options in the same general band of firms. But people here are making the case for something different, and I appreciate hearing that. Thanks everyone for the input.

[Anonymous User]

OP, seems like you're looking for a reason to choose Hogan, when everyone here is saying Willkie. Your gut feeling doesn't really matter, just because you think one firm has nicer people since your callback had nice people really isn't the most valid reason. NYC BigLaw is NYC BigLaw. Your hours and misery will be similiar. I'd go with the one that's probably going to lead you to better stuff down the road aka Willkie.

Not necessarily looking for a reason to pick Hogan, I just want to make sure that the things weighing in favor of Willkie will lead to noticeable benefits. The consensus is clearly that they will. It makes sense, but I've also heard that it doesn't matter where you work because you will be doing similar work in similar conditions for similar exit options in the same general band of firms. But people here are making the case for something different, and I appreciate hearing that. Thanks everyone for the input.

(a) Hogan is not in the same general band of firms as Wilkie in NY
(b) Why would you be doing similar work? Different firms have different practices and different deal/case flow.
(c) One key difference among "conditions" at firms is whether there is enough work to go around so that everyone can eat, versus a lord of the flies-style survival of the fittest. With that in mind, I present the following:
2014 RPL:
Wilkie: $1,065,000
Hogan: $745,000
Also, Hogan is gigantic, a Verein. Wilkie is a (relatively) small firm with a real partnership.