Wilson Sonsini (SF) v. Paul Hastings (SF) Forum

[Anonymous User]

Offers from both WSRG and PH in SF. I am interested in doing M&A work in tech (no preference for startups or large companies). Eventually, I am interested in working in-house. I really loved the people at PH, but there SF office is small and not as prominent. I worry that the SF office will have less exit options than WSRG. The work and clients for WSRG are exciting, but I hear the hours are bad compared to PH. Thoughts?

[Anonymous User]

I have a similar decision to make. One thing that I'm interested in knowing more about are people's thoughts on the economy and the potential tech bubble that is occurring. If the economy has a hiccup again, it seems that WSGR is more exposed to potential issues (and layoffs) as opposed to some of the other valley firms. Is that a reasonable fear or has WSGR done something as of late to diversify their book of business enough to prevent having to mass layoff attorneys if work slows with startups in the valley?

[Anonymous User]

Congrats on your offers. Good firms. I'm in the same process as you, so I can't say you should place much value in what I have to say. I have done a bit of research recently, as I'm sure you have. I've done a good number of call backs too. Anyway, I feel like there are valid arguments for both.

For Wilson Sonsini:
- They do tech. They're huge in Silicon Valley. Wilson Sonsini, Fenwick, and Cooley are really focused on their work with the tech firms in Silicon Valley. Which is the kind of work you are looking for.
- Don't know their billable hours and work/life balance situation. My understanding is that they don't have a minimum. But that doesn't necessarily mean they have good work/life balance.
- I've interviewed with a few IP / tech client heavy firms, and it seems like the firms take on a casual attitude that is reflective of their clients, so I assume the people at Wilson Sonsini are great people as well.

For Paul Hastings:
- I've heard the same good things about work/life balance.
- Better national brand.
- The S.F. office is employment, real estate, general litigation, and general corporate. My understanding is that there is not a lot of tech IP based work, but probably some M&A stuff. Not sure though.
- The people are great, as you said. I have met some of them. Very, very friendly.

As far as placing in-house. . . From what I've witnessed during my days as a paralegal, and confirmed by many other attorneys I've spoken with, your clients will be your route to in-house jobs. This kinda brings it back to Wilson Sonsini's clients as big tech and Paul Hastings's clients as being big in a lot of areas. If you're sure you want to go in-house and you're sure you like the tech companies who clearly need M&A help, since one company buys another everyday, maybe Wilson Sonsini is better. If you're sure you want M&A in tech and want in-house, I wouldn't worry a lot about hours, and go Wilson Sonsini. Wilson Sonsini has that huge Silicon Valley corporate presence. Paul Hastings overall does more, has a bigger national presence, and offers more to the average, unsure law student to be honest.

Anyway, sounds like you have some great choices. Congrats. I think it's a tough choice. Wish I had that choice. I'd say Wilson Sonsini if you're sure about the work you want to take on. Paul Hastings seems more practical overall, so if you want to explore practice areas, maybe them.

[Anonymous User]

I don't have much to add, but I've heard that WSGR (at least the PA office) is borderline sweatshop (source: in-house counsel). As the poster above said, however, if you know you want to go in-house and have any interest in tech, WSGR would be a great opportunity to set yourself up for the firm -> client move.

Congrats on a great outcome either way!