MoFo SF or Latham SF (or possibly Gibson SF or MTO) for Lit? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Trying to choose between MoFo SF or Latham SF for litigation. I'm also waiting to hear back from Gibson SF, so I'd be interested to get input on what I should do if Gibson becomes an option as well. I'm likewise waiting to hear back from MTO, which would make this a much harder choice–I'd much rather be in SF than LA, but MTO obviously has many, many other things going for it, and in theory I might be able to move to the SF office down the line.

Primary concerns: non-profit/government exit options in CA, work culture (i.e. working with mostly nice, friendly people–I'd ideally like to be friends with my coworkers, since I've previously been happiest in workplaces where that's the case), having some semblance of work-life balance (though I know that ranges from bad to nonexistent for biglaw), early responsibility/substantive work (in approximately that order).

I don't know what practice area within lit (other than not wanting to do much, if any, patent work) I want to do at this point, which makes this harder. I'm a bit concerned by how early it seems like people unofficially get slotted into practice groups at MoFo, and the unassigned/generalist systems for Latham, Gibson, and MTO appeal to me because I'm so undecided.

I probably preferred the people I met at MoFo over Latham, but not by a big margin. I've heard terrible things about Latham SV's culture, but I haven't heard anything (either negative or positive) about the SF office's culture. There is also the Lathaming fear, though I'm not sure how much credence to give that. If, say, the tech bubble bursts, I kind of doubt that MoFo is going to be materially less likely to lay people off than Latham. Gibson and MTO might be a bit safer in that regard–they allegedly weathered the recession better than most big firms (but again, no Gibson/MTO offers yet).

I'm not hoping to make partner or even go in-house–I'm looking to exit to non-profit or government work in California, and so the exit options into public interest work matter a lot to me. Vault rankings don't matter whatsoever to me, and preftige only matters to me insofar as it affects exit options.

[Anonymous User]

I'm an ex-MoFo litigation associate who once did an informational interview at Latham SF. Some thoughts:

MoFo:
- Strong gov't exit options. Relatively strong non-profit options, but keep in mind that you'll have the burden to convince public interest employers that you are serious about doing public interest despite having gone to a firm. Some PI employers won't be able to accept that. The thing with MoFo is that they really are diehard about their pro bono, so you can develop both substantive PI experience and connections to local PI organizations if you prioritize that. It is also very common for MoFo alums to be in public interest, so you might even be able to work the firm's alumni network to develop contacts. I think it will probably easier to do this at MoFo than any other large Bay Area biglaw firm, TBH.
- Most of the people I worked with were friendly and nice. There were a number of associate happy hours and informal socializing outside of work (brunches, etc.) at people's homes. I'm still friends with some of my former colleagues.
- Not much work-life balance. MoFo was pretty bad on requiring face time when I was there. Very little regard for people's personal lives or plans; attempts to "set boundaries" were often met with, "Cancel your Sunday evening plans and come into the office." I never saw concern expressed for my hours when they got crushing. While you are right that biglaw is always rough, there are firms where each of these things is less true than at MoFo.
- I didn't have problems getting early responsibility/substantive work at MoFo. You just have to be the squeaky wheel and seek it out aggressively, then show you're capable of it (which is probably going to require you to set aside your desire for work-life balance to some extent. If you want to distinguish yourself as a junior associate and show you're more more worthy of substantive work than your peers (who will be handling doc review, endless research assignments, and other grunt work as juniors), you're not going to be traipsing off to Napa or Carmel often on weekends.)
- I've been gone from MoFo for a while, but I didn't feel like there was excessive pressure to elect a practice area within litigation, and I was a generalist until I left, early into my time as a midlevel.

Latham SF:
- I asked my contact about the lathaming point a couple of years ago. He was surprised by the question and claimed that it was really not on current associates' minds at all. He pointed out, fairly enough, that all of the major SF firms ultimately had laid off significant numbers of attorneys in the recession and that Latham's severance packages were on the more generous side.
- Contact was very positive about the SF office's culture and maintained that most people worked hard and were very happy.
- My impression was that Latham slots people within litigation very early on - e.g., ATR, IP, etc., but that info is a bit dated, so disregard if you've heard differently while interviewing.

Good luck.

[Anonymous User]

I would go to MoFo in SF over Latham.

You should probably remove MTO from your poll; it's a clear winner for litigation, but that won't help you decide between offers in hand.

[Anonymous User]

Thank you so much for the replies (especially for the detailed response from the former MoFo associate!). It doesn't look like I'm able to change the poll options, unfortunately.

I'm leaning toward dropping my Latham offer, but before I do, I'd love to get more input on Latham SF if anyone out there has more firsthand or secondhand (or hell, even thirdhand) knowledge/gossip about the office. There aren't very many alumni from my school there, and no one from my school has summered there recently (which is somewhat surprising, and maybe that tells me something).

[Anonymous User]

I don't work at any of these firms, but have several friends that do.

MoFo SF is greatly lacking in diversity, if that's a thing that matters to you. WL balance is pretty nonexistent. But they are also an SF staple and are highly committed to pro bono work. My friends there rarely have any time off, but they have also all been involved in some interesting pro bono cases - although, that's probably largely a result of seeking those opportunities out.

In my opinion, Latham SF does some of the best work in the city. They are growing like crazy, and hired a TON of laterals over the last few months because they're incredibly busy with some big cases in the district. On the downside, this means that the hours are pretty crushing. I wouldn't entirely shrug off the danger of being lathamed - latham has a history of over-hiring during boom times and then engaging in mass layoffs when the economy tanks. Very few biglaw firms laid off as many junior associates as latham did, and almost nobody laid them off as quickly and callously. However, since the economy seems like it will probably be alright for the next few years, and you probably won't last more than a few years anyway, it shouldn't be a deciding factor.

My vote's for Latham SF, even if you get an offer from MTO. While purely anecdotal, everyone I know who summered at MTO hated it immensely.

[Anonymous User]

My vote's for Latham SF, even if you get an offer from MTO. While purely anecdotal, everyone I know who summered at MTO hated it immensely.

You probably go to YLS or the people you know do. This wasn't the general consensus, although it was vocal. Even those people liked the firm better than alternatives, though; they just weren't suited for private practice. Latham or Gibson wouldn't address those criticisms.

[WheninLaw]

My vote's for Latham SF, even if you get an offer from MTO. While purely anecdotal, everyone I know who summered at MTO hated it immensely.

MTO summer wasn't bad at all. It just lacked much of the summer events that other programs had.

[Anonymous User]

I don't work at any of these firms, but have several friends that do.

MoFo SF is greatly lacking in diversity, if that's a thing that matters to you. WL balance is pretty nonexistent. But they are also an SF staple and are highly committed to pro bono work. My friends there rarely have any time off, but they have also all been involved in some interesting pro bono cases - although, that's probably largely a result of seeking those opportunities out.

In my opinion, Latham SF does some of the best work in the city. They are growing like crazy, and hired a TON of laterals over the last few months because they're incredibly busy with some big cases in the district. On the downside, this means that the hours are pretty crushing. I wouldn't entirely shrug off the danger of being lathamed - latham has a history of over-hiring during boom times and then engaging in mass layoffs when the economy tanks. Very few biglaw firms laid off as many junior associates as latham did, and almost nobody laid them off as quickly and callously. However, since the economy seems like it will probably be alright for the next few years, and you probably won't last more than a few years anyway, it shouldn't be a deciding factor.

My vote's for Latham SF, even if you get an offer from MTO. While purely anecdotal, everyone I know who summered at MTO hated it immensely.

Thanks so much for the response, particularly re: being Lathamed. If it matters, I already have one clerkship lined up, and am in the process of applying for a second clerkship, so there's a real possibility that I may not be starting as an associate until 2019. Given that I have no idea what the economy will look like 4 years from now and Latham's tendency for overhiring, I'm thinking I probably shouldn't take the Latham offer. Obviously, I could apply to other firms coming out of a clerkship, but it'd be nice to summer somewhere I at least plan to come back to post-clerkship(s).

I've also heard mixed things about MTO's summer program. It definitely sounds like a "working summer," which has its pros and cons.

[Anonymous User]

Former MTO summer here. Program is not bad in terms of work. When I was there they requested you complete 3 writing assignments of at least 8 pages or so during your summer program so they could check out your writing. Obviously not every project will be a memo or something but still, 3 8+ page memos in 7+ weeks is not burdensome at all. It's going to be the cushiest job you ever have in the legal profession. In any event, choosing your firm based on very minor details like this isn't very wise. For one, you'd want to pick the place you like best and makes the most sense for you in terms of career not based on the cushiness of a summer position. For another, it's very likely that the amount you work on a summer program is going to depend a lot on what partners you work with and on what projects you ended up working on.

I also thought that the summer had plenty of fun stuff (for me at least, I'm not one who is looking for a work hard-play hard firm culture). Dodger games, a weekend retreat at a nice hotel on the beach, etc.

I split my time at MTO so I have one point of comparison at least.

[WheninLaw]

Former MTO summer here. Program is not bad in terms of work. When I was there they requested you complete 3 writing assignments of at least 8 pages or so during your summer program so they could check out your writing. Obviously not every project will be a memo or something but still, 3 8+ page memos in 7+ weeks is not burdensome at all. It's going to be the cushiest job you ever have in the legal profession. In any event, choosing your firm based on very minor details like this isn't very wise. For one, you'd want to pick the place you like best and makes the most sense for you in terms of career not based on the cushiness of a summer position. For another, it's very likely that the amount you work on a summer program is going to depend a lot on what partners you work with and on what projects you ended up working on.

I also thought that the summer had plenty of fun stuff (for me at least, I'm not one who is looking for a work hard-play hard firm culture). Dodger games, a weekend retreat at a nice hotel on the beach, etc.

I split my time at MTO so I have one point of comparison at least.

While I agree that it's dumb to choose a firm based on a summer program, there is no question that MTO's program is a little lackluster. It's not the horror story people think, but my friends at Irell/Gibson/Latham/Everywhere were doing less work and had a billion more events. To each their own.