Top Law Schools

Anyone know anything about plaintiff's side antitrust class actions? I'm talking about firms like cohen milstein, hausfeld, Kaplan fox, robins Kaplan, Labaton, etc. I'm curious about how this world operates and how cases are generated. Any information is appreciated.

I would be interested in this as well.

I practice antitrust primarily on the defense side but have some insight. Most cases are generated through aggressively following up on DOJ/FTC enforcement activities (mainly cartel but some merger). Once the agency announces that there is an inquiry the firms all rush to the courthouse and jockey for position to be lead counsel once it's MDL'ed. A few cases are generated through other channels though. These are more one off, but either the attorneys hear about something novel in the press/contacts that they think is anticompetitive and then file suit, or they think the law is ripe for change in a given area (think NCAA athletics). Those cases are much more the exception than the norm since they are much higher risk.

More of a general question, but what happens to firms not named lead of a class action/mdl? Are they typically out of the litigation completely, or do they still get some of the action, albeit a lesser piece?

Anonymous User wrote:More of a general question, but what happens to firms not named lead of a class action/mdl? Are they typically out of the litigation completely, or do they still get some of the action, albeit a lesser piece?

I think that most of the time the plaintiffs firms strike a deal among themselves about division of labor between firms. Lots more than just lead counsel contribute to the case and wind up putting in for fees when it comes time for the request. Not sure whether firms who bill more than their allotted share get a reduction or something (that part is all black box, behind the scenes).

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:More of a general question, but what happens to firms not named lead of a class action/mdl? Are they typically out of the litigation completely, or do they still get some of the action, albeit a lesser piece?

I think that most of the time the plaintiffs firms strike a deal among themselves about division of labor between firms. Lots more than just lead counsel contribute to the case and wind up putting in for fees when it comes time for the request. Not sure whether firms who bill more than their allotted share get a reduction or something (that part is all black box, behind the scenes).

I used to work as a plaintiffs' class action lawyer. The poster above covers it pretty well. Nobody really knows because the behind the scenes agreements are dependent on the specific case.

Also, sometimes if there's a big fight over leadership (the highest profile class actions) the small time players (solos, etc) will support one of the bigger players in exchange for good assignments/work. All this stuff happens behind the scenes.

Lexaholik wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:More of a general question, but what happens to firms not named lead of a class action/mdl? Are they typically out of the litigation completely, or do they still get some of the action, albeit a lesser piece?

I think that most of the time the plaintiffs firms strike a deal among themselves about division of labor between firms. Lots more than just lead counsel contribute to the case and wind up putting in for fees when it comes time for the request. Not sure whether firms who bill more than their allotted share get a reduction or something (that part is all black box, behind the scenes).

I used to work as a plaintiffs' class action lawyer. The poster above covers it pretty well. Nobody really knows because the behind the scenes agreements are dependent on the specific case.

Also, sometimes if there's a big fight over leadership (the highest profile class actions) the small time players (solos, etc) will support one of the bigger players in exchange for good assignments/work. All this stuff happens behind the scenes.

Any general advice on the practice? I'll be starting at one of the above firms and it's not everyday I see someone on these forums who has worked on this side of the v.

Anonymous User wrote: Any general advice on the practice? I'll be starting at one of the above firms and it's not everyday I see someone on these forums who has worked on this side of the v.

It's really hard to give generalized advice because firm culture and styles are so varied (unlike in Biglaw). Any specific questions?

Lexaholik wrote:

Anonymous User wrote: Any general advice on the practice? I'll be starting at one of the above firms and it's not everyday I see someone on these forums who has worked on this side of the v.

It's really hard to give generalized advice because firm culture and styles are so varied (unlike in Biglaw). Any specific questions?

So I worked at another plaintiffs firm my 2L summer and did mostly securities class action work, but the firm I'll be joining, which has a securities practice, is mainly an antitrust firm, and I've never taken a class in antitrust and know very little about the subject other than the basics.

Is it important to try and learn the practice before I start in September? If so, is there anything you suggest I check out that you found helpful?

Nothing I can think of really. Assuming you're going directly after law school, I'd say this: Just know and understand the basics of civil procedure (FRCP, motion practice, discovery) and be really good at legal research. You'll learn a lot about the substantive law in the first few years on the job.

can anyone shed light on how to get hired by one of these firms right out of law school (or for 2L summer) if they are not attending OCI?

Summered at one pl firm and starting at another.

There's really no one way but here's some tips:

Take applicable coursework: biz orgs/corps, sec reg, evidence, depos, antitrust, etc.
Try to get relevant experience: clinics, externships
Network

Most firms on this side of the v are MUCH smaller than their biglaw counterparts, and do not have a pipeline from law schools -- they may take summers every year, or they may take one every 3 years, or they may never take summers. As such, when applying, while there may be a contact listed, I found that directly mailing paper copies of my application to a managing partner yielded the best results in receiving an interview. Apply broadly. As firms on this side of the v work on contingency, their hiring is much more sporadic then biglaw. Expect to be learning of decisions closer to march-april rather than september-october like in biglaw. Similarly, while biglaw firms will typically make offers to summers at the end of the summer, pl firms will wait till they absolutely have to to make an offer.

Most associates who work at these firms first spent 3-5 years at biglaw. For firms, that means that they're taking in associates that have already been trained. What that means for you is that you need to be able to demonstrate that you know what the firm actually does and that you will be able to bring something to the table. For example, if you were interviewing for a securities boutique, I would want you to know that the PSLRA exists, and of recent landmark decisions, such as Halliburton II. That's not to say that you need to be an expert in the field, or be ready to draft a brief on day one, but you need to have a demonstrable interest. One way to get up to speed on the industry is to start reading websites like law360 regularly.

If you have any specific questions let me know.

Lexaholik wrote:

Anonymous User wrote: Any general advice on the practice? I'll be starting at one of the above firms and it's not everyday I see someone on these forums who has worked on this side of the v.

It's really hard to give generalized advice because firm culture and styles are so varied (unlike in Biglaw). Any specific questions?

Can you compare and contrast the styles and cultures of particular plaintiff's firms? I'm interested in plaintiff-side antitrust, but that aspect of comparing firms especially seems like a black box.

I wanted to bump this request and thread generally. I'd be interested in moving to a primarily plaintiff's side antitrust group, but it's hard to gauge if QoL, hours, etc would improve or not. Would really appreciate anyone recommending firms by name or naming some to stay away from in major markets.

Anonymous User wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 16, 2022 11:20 am

I wanted to bump this request and thread generally. I'd be interested in moving to a primarily plaintiff's side antitrust group, but it's hard to gauge if QoL, hours, etc would improve or not. Would really appreciate anyone recommending firms by name or naming some to stay away from in major markets.

Definitely check out Chambers: https://chambers.com/legal-rankings/ant ... 52:12806:1. A number of biglaw/large boutique firms in New York have good plaintiffs side antitrust practices (Quinn Emmanuel, Robins Kaplan, Cadwalader, BSF). Unfortunately, I think culture varies a lot firm-to-firm rather than being uniform across plaintiff's side antitrust work (e.g., I certainly would steer away from BSF given their troubles), but I think, very generally, the people in plaintiffs side antitrust work tend to be very proactive and hardworking and seem to enjoy the work they do.

I also found the chambers bands to be helpful. I was more curious on non-biglaw antitrust plaintiff firms. I think the biglaw ones it's fair to imagine being consistent with prior biglaw experience, but for firms like DiCello, Constantine Cannon, etc. it would be interesting to hear some detail on. Thanks for the response!